Yeah, I've been following that.
Some good stuff, and some stuff that makes you scratch your head...
Some good stuff, and some stuff that makes you scratch your head...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cankles @ Jul 31 2009, 08:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yeah, I've been following that.
Some good stuff, and some stuff that makes you scratch your head...
Yeah same for me. I read the section about attracting Fortune 500 companies
It is a wonderful ambition and I know it will come true <span style="font-size:14pt;line-height:100%IF they can return sanity and reason to the disillusioned fanbase. However, I do worry that Edmondson will try to achieve his goals even if the fans refuse to come along. If that happens, the AMA will end up exactly like Grand Am---financially solid as a rock but with no soul b/c the fans really aren't that interested.
Same thing with his ambitions to move the sport into major populated areas that don't currently have tracks. Another brilliant idea, but as long as the participants and the media try to kick his ..., the faster Edmondson has got to get it done before the sport collapses financially.
I really wish people would go along with the guy and let him rebuild the sport and the tracks. Once he has done his work, he can retire in peace, and the new leadership can go about the business of making the AMA a world-class national series. The AMA isn't going to be fixed over night and it's not going to be fixed by the manufacturers.
Personally, I'm sick of seeing major racing teams operate at enormous losses. Series that rely on teams to take losses are just ticking time bombs. Bad rules, a bad "show", or an unfavorable economic climate will cause an early swan song. Even the great international racing series like MotoGP and F1 are starting to realize the folly of letting the teams operate at a loss.
Some good stuff, and some stuff that makes you scratch your head...
Yeah same for me. I read the section about attracting Fortune 500 companies
It is a wonderful ambition and I know it will come true <span style="font-size:14pt;line-height:100%IF they can return sanity and reason to the disillusioned fanbase. However, I do worry that Edmondson will try to achieve his goals even if the fans refuse to come along. If that happens, the AMA will end up exactly like Grand Am---financially solid as a rock but with no soul b/c the fans really aren't that interested.
Same thing with his ambitions to move the sport into major populated areas that don't currently have tracks. Another brilliant idea, but as long as the participants and the media try to kick his ..., the faster Edmondson has got to get it done before the sport collapses financially.
I really wish people would go along with the guy and let him rebuild the sport and the tracks. Once he has done his work, he can retire in peace, and the new leadership can go about the business of making the AMA a world-class national series. The AMA isn't going to be fixed over night and it's not going to be fixed by the manufacturers.
Personally, I'm sick of seeing major racing teams operate at enormous losses. Series that rely on teams to take losses are just ticking time bombs. Bad rules, a bad "show", or an unfavorable economic climate will cause an early swan song. Even the great international racing series like MotoGP and F1 are starting to realize the folly of letting the teams operate at a loss.
That's all well and good, but you have to have transparency in the rules. You have to have a set rule structure. This whole "we'll look at any package and decide if we will approve it" doesn't fly. That reeks of favoritism.
That's why nascar is the way it is. You keep getting people saying "so and so has an advantage!"
No, you just say "This is what the rules are. Build something according to these rules, or you don't play."
That's why nascar is the way it is. You keep getting people saying "so and so has an advantage!"
No, you just say "This is what the rules are. Build something according to these rules, or you don't play."
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cankles @ Jul 31 2009, 10:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No, you just say "This is what the rules are. Build something according to these rules, or you don't play."
And that's the way it's always been. So you end up with Japanese inline 4's
And that's the way it's always been. So you end up with Japanese inline 4's
Joined Feb 2007
11K Posts | 2K+
Tennessee
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jul 31 2009, 01:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yeah same for me. I read the section about attracting Fortune 500 companies
It is a wonderful ambition and I know it will come true <span style="font-size:14pt;line-height:100%IF they can return sanity and reason to the disillusioned fanbase. However, I do worry that Edmondson will try to achieve his goals even if the fans refuse to come along. If that happens, the AMA will end up exactly like Grand Am---financially solid as a rock but with no soul b/c the fans really aren't that interested.
Same thing with his ambitions to move the sport into major populated areas that don't currently have tracks. Another brilliant idea, but as long as the participants and the media try to kick his ..., the faster Edmondson has got to get it done before the sport collapses financially.
I really wish people would go along with the guy and let him rebuild the sport and the tracks. Once he has done his work, he can retire in peace, and the new leadership can go about the business of making the AMA a world-class national series. The AMA isn't going to be fixed over night and it's not going to be fixed by the manufacturers.
Personally, I'm sick of seeing major racing teams operate at enormous losses. Series that rely on teams to take losses are just ticking time bombs. Bad rules, a bad "show", or an unfavorable economic climate will cause an early swan song. Even the great international racing series like MotoGP and F1 are starting to realize the folly of letting the teams operate at a loss.
When 80% of the fan base says they dont like what your doing,you listen, weather or not you think they are insane and dillusional.THE CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT<EVEN WHEN HE ISNT. Why would we as fans,want to go along with something we care nothing about,so Roger can retire in peace. Roger needs to go now so we can go about the business of making AMA racing a world class series.As long as AMA runs under this format, i will never attend another event
It is a wonderful ambition and I know it will come true <span style="font-size:14pt;line-height:100%IF they can return sanity and reason to the disillusioned fanbase. However, I do worry that Edmondson will try to achieve his goals even if the fans refuse to come along. If that happens, the AMA will end up exactly like Grand Am---financially solid as a rock but with no soul b/c the fans really aren't that interested.
Same thing with his ambitions to move the sport into major populated areas that don't currently have tracks. Another brilliant idea, but as long as the participants and the media try to kick his ..., the faster Edmondson has got to get it done before the sport collapses financially.
I really wish people would go along with the guy and let him rebuild the sport and the tracks. Once he has done his work, he can retire in peace, and the new leadership can go about the business of making the AMA a world-class national series. The AMA isn't going to be fixed over night and it's not going to be fixed by the manufacturers.
Personally, I'm sick of seeing major racing teams operate at enormous losses. Series that rely on teams to take losses are just ticking time bombs. Bad rules, a bad "show", or an unfavorable economic climate will cause an early swan song. Even the great international racing series like MotoGP and F1 are starting to realize the folly of letting the teams operate at a loss.
When 80% of the fan base says they dont like what your doing,you listen, weather or not you think they are insane and dillusional.THE CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT<EVEN WHEN HE ISNT. Why would we as fans,want to go along with something we care nothing about,so Roger can retire in peace. Roger needs to go now so we can go about the business of making AMA racing a world class series.As long as AMA runs under this format, i will never attend another event
Joined Aug 2007
11K Posts | 3K+
Pomona NY
"RW: Mat Mladin has been critical of the track safety inspection process. What are your thoughts on the track safety inspection process and who should be involved?
RE: Let’s go back to the beginning. The sanctioning body ultimately has to make the decision whether or not to contract with the promoter, and that decision cannot be advocated to by people who are here today and gone tomorrow. You can’t ask a promoter to make the investment that is required to do what needs to be done to their racetrack nor the investment required to hold one of these events without some assurance that they’re investing in something that’s going to be there for years to come."
Translation: The track owners control x percentage of the money and they get first consideration regardless. The riders are come and go - and therefore are disposable.
Input from the actual riders who put their lives on the line - is inconsequential.
RE: Let’s go back to the beginning. The sanctioning body ultimately has to make the decision whether or not to contract with the promoter, and that decision cannot be advocated to by people who are here today and gone tomorrow. You can’t ask a promoter to make the investment that is required to do what needs to be done to their racetrack nor the investment required to hold one of these events without some assurance that they’re investing in something that’s going to be there for years to come."
Translation: The track owners control x percentage of the money and they get first consideration regardless. The riders are come and go - and therefore are disposable.
Input from the actual riders who put their lives on the line - is inconsequential.
Joined Mar 2006
1K Posts | 71+
US
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jul 31 2009, 11:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>...Grand Am---financially solid as a rock but with no soul b/c the fans really aren't that interested.
How is Grand-Am financially "solid as a rock" when it is kept going by way of France Family subsidy, instead of standing on its own two feet?
How is Grand-Am financially "solid as a rock" when it is kept going by way of France Family subsidy, instead of standing on its own two feet?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Keshav @ Jul 31 2009, 01:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>"RW: Mat Mladin has been critical of the track safety inspection process. What are your thoughts on the track safety inspection process and who should be involved?
RE: Let's go back to the beginning. The sanctioning body ultimately has to make the decision whether or not to contract with the promoter, and that decision cannot be advocated to by people who are here today and gone tomorrow. You can't ask a promoter to make the investment that is required to do what needs to be done to their racetrack nor the investment required to hold one of these events without some assurance that they're investing in something that's going to be there for years to come."
Translation: The track owners control x percentage of the money and they get first consideration regardless. The riders are come and go - and therefore are disposable.
Input from the actual riders who put their lives on the line - is inconsequential.
Did you read the part where he says there are only 3 tracks in America that are actually up to standards? At the current time and in this economy it is unfeasable to make all the tracks 100% up to safety standards. He says if they can't be up to safety standards then they are looking at what they can do and control to make it safer. LImit fuel, tire tech, etc.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>However, that doesn’t address to your real question, and the real question is our racetracks. John [Ulrich] and your team there at Roadracing World have done a great job at raising money for this Airfence program. We’ve got to work with our tracks and try to identify trouble spots and one by one, if that’s what it takes, try to come up with the money, whether it be with fundraisers or whether it be putting together a pool of all the promoters’ money, and then tracking problems one track at a time. We’ve got to solve those problems.
Sounds to me like it's out of his control but he is doing everything to get tracks ready. Ultimately the track owners have to make the necessary adjustments and if they don't have the money and they don't see a profit off of bike races then why the hell would they care if the venue came or not.
AND DON"T SO CONVENIENTLY LEAVE OUT THE REST OF THE QUOTE TO MAKE YOUR POINT
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Now somewhere along the line there has to be the ability for the long-term players to get the best advice, the best suggestions from those who are out there risking their lives and putting their butts on the line. No question about that. I do differ on this concept that the people who are fast automatically makes them the most qualified to express what needs to be done or what should be done. And I‘m certainly not implying that you can’t be fast and extremely intelligent at the same time. I’m saying that’s not a guaranteed combination.
So we tried to get a rider group together that represents some of the younger riders and some of those who have been there for a while. We tried to put together a group that included more than one class because we recognized the 600s have different cornering characteristics to the 1000s.
And we put together a small group and went to Heartland Park. We got good advice there. We have a promoter there who is new to the sport who is willing and able to make the investment, and I think everybody is going to be quite pleased in a few days when we get there. Now there may be unanticipated issues that come up. But I have every reason to believe that those people who tried to help us on the Safety Committee were responsible individuals who will make good common sense recommendations that I already know that this promoter is going to listen.
That’s the kind of relationships we want to build in the future. I don’t think you have to be a National Champion to make good recommendations. I don’t think National Champions always make good recommendations. <u>We’ve got to work this out together, but it’s clear we have to work together with our athletes.
</u>
RE: Let's go back to the beginning. The sanctioning body ultimately has to make the decision whether or not to contract with the promoter, and that decision cannot be advocated to by people who are here today and gone tomorrow. You can't ask a promoter to make the investment that is required to do what needs to be done to their racetrack nor the investment required to hold one of these events without some assurance that they're investing in something that's going to be there for years to come."
Translation: The track owners control x percentage of the money and they get first consideration regardless. The riders are come and go - and therefore are disposable.
Input from the actual riders who put their lives on the line - is inconsequential.
Did you read the part where he says there are only 3 tracks in America that are actually up to standards? At the current time and in this economy it is unfeasable to make all the tracks 100% up to safety standards. He says if they can't be up to safety standards then they are looking at what they can do and control to make it safer. LImit fuel, tire tech, etc.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>However, that doesn’t address to your real question, and the real question is our racetracks. John [Ulrich] and your team there at Roadracing World have done a great job at raising money for this Airfence program. We’ve got to work with our tracks and try to identify trouble spots and one by one, if that’s what it takes, try to come up with the money, whether it be with fundraisers or whether it be putting together a pool of all the promoters’ money, and then tracking problems one track at a time. We’ve got to solve those problems.
Sounds to me like it's out of his control but he is doing everything to get tracks ready. Ultimately the track owners have to make the necessary adjustments and if they don't have the money and they don't see a profit off of bike races then why the hell would they care if the venue came or not.
AND DON"T SO CONVENIENTLY LEAVE OUT THE REST OF THE QUOTE TO MAKE YOUR POINT
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Now somewhere along the line there has to be the ability for the long-term players to get the best advice, the best suggestions from those who are out there risking their lives and putting their butts on the line. No question about that. I do differ on this concept that the people who are fast automatically makes them the most qualified to express what needs to be done or what should be done. And I‘m certainly not implying that you can’t be fast and extremely intelligent at the same time. I’m saying that’s not a guaranteed combination.
So we tried to get a rider group together that represents some of the younger riders and some of those who have been there for a while. We tried to put together a group that included more than one class because we recognized the 600s have different cornering characteristics to the 1000s.
And we put together a small group and went to Heartland Park. We got good advice there. We have a promoter there who is new to the sport who is willing and able to make the investment, and I think everybody is going to be quite pleased in a few days when we get there. Now there may be unanticipated issues that come up. But I have every reason to believe that those people who tried to help us on the Safety Committee were responsible individuals who will make good common sense recommendations that I already know that this promoter is going to listen.
That’s the kind of relationships we want to build in the future. I don’t think you have to be a National Champion to make good recommendations. I don’t think National Champions always make good recommendations. <u>We’ve got to work this out together, but it’s clear we have to work together with our athletes.
</u>
Joined Feb 2007
11K Posts | 2K+
Tennessee
So we tried to get a rider group together that represents some of the younger riders and some of those who have been there for a while. We tried to put together a group that included more than one class because we recognized the 600s have different cornering characteristics to the 1000s.
Translation. We picked a group of sock puppets who are mouth pieces for DMG because the guys that are really fast have already voiced their concerns to riding on tracks that are dangerous. We can manipulate the sock puppets because we are all they have. Those ....... fast guys have options and that is something we here at Nascar,uhg DMG are not used to.
Translation. We picked a group of sock puppets who are mouth pieces for DMG because the guys that are really fast have already voiced their concerns to riding on tracks that are dangerous. We can manipulate the sock puppets because we are all they have. Those ....... fast guys have options and that is something we here at Nascar,uhg DMG are not used to.
Joined Feb 2007
11K Posts | 2K+
Tennessee
Now somewhere along the line there has to be the ability for the long-term players to get the best advice, the best suggestions from those who are out there risking their lives and putting their butts on the line.
Except a 6 time champion,his opinion means nothing and besides, he is mean to us
Except a 6 time champion,his opinion means nothing and besides, he is mean to us
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Jul 31 2009, 02:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Now somewhere along the line there has to be the ability for the long-term players to get the best advice, the best suggestions from those who are out there risking their lives and putting their butts on the line.
Except a 6 time champion,his opinion means nothing and besides, he is mean to us
Would you work with Mat?
Except a 6 time champion,his opinion means nothing and besides, he is mean to us
Would you work with Mat?
Joined Feb 2007
11K Posts | 2K+
Tennessee
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SackWack @ Jul 31 2009, 07:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Would you work with Mat?
Matt and i see eye to eye on just about any subject that comes up,so yes,i wouldnt mind working with him at all
Matt and i see eye to eye on just about any subject that comes up,so yes,i wouldnt mind working with him at all
Joined Mar 2006
1K Posts | 71+
US
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cankles @ Jul 31 2009, 12:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That's all well and good, but you have to have transparency in the rules. You have to have a set rule structure. This whole "we'll look at any package and decide if we will approve it" doesn't fly. That reeks of favoritism.
That's why nascar is the way it is. You keep getting people saying "so and so has an advantage!"
No, you just say "This is what the rules are. Build something according to these rules, or you don't play."
Roger mentions human triumph over financial/technological triumph, which means he wants to see the riders and people behind the team decide the winner instead of financial backing, etc. Well, with performance balancing, you're never sure who did the best job. Fans can't tell whether a certain team or rider has risen to the challenge or received a beneficial rules break.
Another thing, if DMG somehow gets the gravy train rolling and makes the AMA a big business, a profitable series, with all the desired markets being reached, who here really trusts DMG to tell the tracks to improve safety at that point? Would they really interrupt business in order to bring the circuits up to the level of safety seen at Moto GP and WSBK events? How many riders would boycott races at unsafe circuits and risk lucrative sponsorships and purse money?
That's why nascar is the way it is. You keep getting people saying "so and so has an advantage!"
No, you just say "This is what the rules are. Build something according to these rules, or you don't play."
Roger mentions human triumph over financial/technological triumph, which means he wants to see the riders and people behind the team decide the winner instead of financial backing, etc. Well, with performance balancing, you're never sure who did the best job. Fans can't tell whether a certain team or rider has risen to the challenge or received a beneficial rules break.
Another thing, if DMG somehow gets the gravy train rolling and makes the AMA a big business, a profitable series, with all the desired markets being reached, who here really trusts DMG to tell the tracks to improve safety at that point? Would they really interrupt business in order to bring the circuits up to the level of safety seen at Moto GP and WSBK events? How many riders would boycott races at unsafe circuits and risk lucrative sponsorships and purse money?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. Shupe @ Jul 31 2009, 08:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Roger mentions human triumph over financial/technological triumph, which means he wants to see the riders and people behind the team decide the winner instead of financial backing, etc. Well, with performance balancing, you're never sure who did the best job. Fans can't tell whether a certain team or rider has risen to the challenge or received a beneficial rules break.
Exactly.
Exactly.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SackWack @ Jul 31 2009, 07:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Would you work with Mat?
One of the best this series has seen? One of the most experienced guys on the grid? A multiple business owner? (bike dealership and accesories import business)
In a word...yes.
One of the best this series has seen? One of the most experienced guys on the grid? A multiple business owner? (bike dealership and accesories import business)
In a word...yes.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. Shupe @ Jul 31 2009, 12:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>How is Grand-Am financially "solid as a rock" when it is kept going by way of France Family subsidy, instead of standing on its own two feet?
I was under the impression that the sponsors and teams are relatively flush with cash. In other words it is a financially stable country club, not a sport that has more of a "public" viewership structure where the money comes from TV deals.
I was under the impression that the sponsors and teams are relatively flush with cash. In other words it is a financially stable country club, not a sport that has more of a "public" viewership structure where the money comes from TV deals.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Jul 31 2009, 10:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>When 80% of the fan base says they dont like what your doing,you listen, weather or not you think they are insane and dillusional.THE CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT<EVEN WHEN HE ISNT. Why would we as fans,want to go along with something we care nothing about,so Roger can retire in peace. Roger needs to go now so we can go about the business of making AMA racing a world class series.As long as AMA runs under this format, i will never attend another event
The customer is not right if he asks you to go bankrupt running your business. As a matter of fact, bankrupting yourself to capture market share is illegal---it's called predatory dumping.
The customer is not right if he asks you to go bankrupt running your business. As a matter of fact, bankrupting yourself to capture market share is illegal---it's called predatory dumping.
Joined Mar 2006
1K Posts | 71+
US
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Aug 1 2009, 02:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I was under the impression that the sponsors and teams are relatively flush with cash. In other words it is a financially stable country club, not a sport that has more of a "public" viewership structure where the money comes from TV deals.
Some of the teams do follow the usual sports car racing business model: a rich gentleman driver who funds the team with his own business (e.g. Bob Stallings and Gainsco). However, it has been reported that many teams received easy loans from Sun Trust.
Also, the big name sponsors that have been in the series, how did they get there? Why would Kodak sponsor a car that races in front of almost nobody? The answer is companies are led into the Grand-Am paddock by nascar connections. One of the first sponsors to come in was Kodak in 2004. The lucky recipient of the signage, Forrest Barber of Bell Motorsports, was approached in the garage area during the Rolex 24 weekend and asked if he would like Kodak on his car. This approach of potentially getting sponsors in the AMA paddock was mentioned in a soup interview with Colin Frasier last year.
Basically, Grand-Am is apparently financially solid as long as the Frances are willing to prop it up.
Some of the teams do follow the usual sports car racing business model: a rich gentleman driver who funds the team with his own business (e.g. Bob Stallings and Gainsco). However, it has been reported that many teams received easy loans from Sun Trust.
Also, the big name sponsors that have been in the series, how did they get there? Why would Kodak sponsor a car that races in front of almost nobody? The answer is companies are led into the Grand-Am paddock by nascar connections. One of the first sponsors to come in was Kodak in 2004. The lucky recipient of the signage, Forrest Barber of Bell Motorsports, was approached in the garage area during the Rolex 24 weekend and asked if he would like Kodak on his car. This approach of potentially getting sponsors in the AMA paddock was mentioned in a soup interview with Colin Frasier last year.
Basically, Grand-Am is apparently financially solid as long as the Frances are willing to prop it up.
