prodracing.com

Unofficial SCCA Production Racing Forum
It is currently Mon Jun 25, 2018 5:49 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 13, 2018 6:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:47 pm
Posts: 14
About this time every year, I waste a little of my time inquiring about SCCA finances.

And since its no secret that I don't like the way SCCA has been run for a long time, I will guess you know which way this is going.

The SCCA BOD lost over 3/4 of a million dollars on Pro racing in 2017, added to the 1/2 million lost in 2016 and that is the bulk of the 2 million dollar debt owed to SCCA [i.e. you] by pro racing. Generally speaking, Did you all get your monies worth? Did you benefit from SCCA having pro racing programs in any way at all? I don't think I did and I also don't think the people involved in pro racing look like they need me to subsidize them and their racing activities. But it seems the BOD thinks the poor "pro racers" need your money to keep them interested in driving race cars.



SCCA enterprizes note is officially down to $150,000.00 and the financial report shows a small profit from year to year. What it doesn't show is an ongoing short-term line of credit with SCCA for over $200,000.00. Long, short, call it what you want it is still a 35-year-old unpaid debt to SCCA. I thought for years that any SCCA director would think about this as I do- that SCCA enterprises needs to become solvent and repay its debt. However, I have stopped believing that and occasionally I read something to reinforce this. In the Dec 2017 Sportscar mag, BOD chairman Lee Hill wrote "There were 188 cars in SCCA Enterprises class's [at the runnoffs] - A very strong demonstration of the value enterprises brings to the club." Lee's statement presumes that these people would not be racing if SCCA didn't build them a car, however, I disagree with lee



In the past, there were no, or not as many enterprise supplied cars and drivers still found a car to race in some class with race cars built by themselves or by race car builders that don't seem to be around anymore. Could it be that the availability of subsidized cars from SCCA might have had an effect on that present situation? And is racing, in general, better for it? I resent subsidizing all 188 of them and all the racers that came before them. And I don't delude myself anymore thinking Lee Hill and the rest of the BOD care if the Enterprise debt is ever paid off either.



Oh- did I mention that Lee Hill is an arrive and drive racer with an SCCA subsidized Enterprise built car? Good for him... But why did I get to pay for any part of it?



By way of some crude figuring, [entry fee x's 250 entries over the 800 break-even number] I think SCCA made a windfall of about $250,000 on the runoffs at Indy last year. Do you think we, the dues and entry paying SCCA members, will see any of it? Or will it just go to fill a new rat hole the BOD comes up with? The BOD lost 3 times that amount in pro racing in just 1 year. Money out of your pocket and into someone else's and I bet you didn't even know it.





The BOD recently hired a new president at a total price to the club that is unavailable to the people that pay him: us. I don't think this club needs a president, I am sure Mike Cobb is a nice person but he says nothing of value to SCCA auto racing in his sports car column every month. He could be saying the same thing if he was selling gym memberships or used cars. We don't need bold strategic leadership and I do not need my SCCA experience improved by the national office, all the club needs is someone to answer the phone and pay the insurance bill. And once a year organize the runoffs. [all right maybe a little more than that but not as much as it is now] The regions in SCCA do most of the work (I remember when the Atlanta region did the bulk of the work putting on the runoffs at RA every year) that benefits the racers and we do not need what has become a top-heavy bloated money pit in Kansas sucking millions of dollar out of the club every year.



I understand that the view you get depends on where you are standing but the view I get is this club is being run for the few at the expense of the many. But despite the appearance of it all the BOD isn't a bunch of fools. There is a line on the yearly financial report for travel and entertainment that is about 1/3 of a million dollars every year, and it is not possible to get an itemized accounting of this expense. After all it isn't called the Secret Club of America for nothing. Draw your own conclusions. No, they are not the fools- we are.

.

Is anyone but me outraged and offended by all this? I have to guess not because we keep electing people to the BOD that do the same thing over and over year after year. I refuse to believe this cannot be improved, but it will take some new area directors with a backbone and no fear of offending anyone and everyone if that is what is required- and a motivated membership to see it is done.



I did what I could to keep Marcus Merideth from becoming a director again, but I didn't have any luck. He was a director before and did nothing to fix the problems and therefore is part of the problem. Below is the e-mail exchange I had with him, you have to read from the bottom up.





Marcus



No reply, is there no information available to one of the members that pay the bills?

This is not personal but it is why you are unsuitable to be a director. You are

dedicated to secrecy and the idea of the Secret Club of America.

The arrogance that implies is appalling, that only we [you] few can be trusted with such

sensitive information and the minions need to trust us by blind following.

How do you and the others on the BOD do that and still face the membership

year after year with the incompetent way you manage this "club"



You have a chance to defend your actions as this will all be printed



Rick Haynes







On Saturday, February 10, 2018, 9:35:23 PM EST, rick haynes <rickhaynes3@yahoo.com> wrote:





Marcus



I am happy to hear that , but it would be better to see it in reality. Pro racing has been a loser for decades and Enterprises from day one.

and yet the loss to SCCA and to the detriment on the membership gos on year after year. And we get nothing but the assurances repeated time after time it is getting better, but it never does. Nothing good ever comes out about what you plan to do about it , just the same result at the end of the year.

How about telling dues paying members what you all have in mind this time? what was said during the long debate on the 2018 budget and 2016-2017 performance of Pro Racing. Its clear from past years that keeping it all a secret is no sure path the success. What is going to be done in the coming years to change this pathetic situation?

rick



On Saturday, February 10, 2018, 9:15:43 PM EST, Marcus@merideth.us <marcus@merideth.us> wrote:





Rick,



I do not see it that way and given the long debate on the 2018 budget and 2016-2017 performance of Pro Racing I am pretty sure I am not alone on the BOD in that feeling.



Marcus E. Merideth

734-776-7799



From: rick haynes [mailto:rickhaynes3@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2018 9:08 PM
To: marcus@merideth.us
Subject: Re: RE: Area 4 SCCA Newsletter 02/10/2018



Marcus

I have been coming to the conclusion over the past years and it has been reinforced by some things that BOD chair Hill has written latelythat the club does not care about about the continued subsidizing of pro-racing and enterprises' ventures by the members duesand other cost levied on the membership. They see it as a necessary cost for the good of the club and if the membership has to pay the way for others that is just too bad. Is that the way it is ? Do you see it that way?



rick



On Saturday, February 10, 2018, 7:33:59 PM EST, Marcus@merideth.us <marcus@merideth.us> wrote:





Rick,



The final financials for 2017 should come out pretty soon. I was kind of waiting on them and the Convention survey results before I sent this out but the Training meeting is coming up too soon to wait any

Ventures (Pro Racing and Enterprises) lost money last year. To my knowledge at this time, all the other areas of the Club exceeded budget.



Marcus E. Merideth

734-776-7799



From: rick haynes [mailto:rickhaynes3@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2018 5:41 PM
To: Marcus Merideth - Area 4 Director SCCA <scca_marcus@merideth.us>
Subject: Re: Area 4 SCCA Newsletter 02/10/2018



Marcus



How much did Pro racing lose in 2017 and did SCCA Enterprise's repay any money to SCCA inc? In the way of Principle or interest?

And also what about solo? in the black, red or what? Whats being done with the windfall profit for the runoffs last year? Any thought

about it being used to subsadized the 2018 runoffs so it will directly benafit the people that supplied the money to the club in the 1st place?



thanks

rick haynes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2018 5:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 8:01 am
Posts: 191
I hear you. It will be interesting to see how SCCA manages the Sonoma Runoffs. With half the number of entries will they bring half the number of officials/hangers on? I'm willing to bet that with the legacy of SCCA being a wine and cheese club the lure of a nice cozy B&B in Napa will be too much to resist. At the club members expense, of course...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2018 6:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:33 am
Posts: 285
Rick - Where are you seeing the financials?
ez


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2018 6:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 4:54 am
Posts: 1737
Erick, financials are reported in SportsCar annually, IIRC. I can't pull them up immediately, but I remember reading through them not long ago.

Also a quick search on Google came up with some other information, including 2016 IRS form filings.. https://projects.propublica.org/nonprof ... 332/IRS990

It's out there if you look..

_________________
Matt Blehm
Houston Region
EP 1st Gen RX7
STU Nissan 240SX


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2018 8:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:47 pm
Posts: 14
Sign in on the scca page
click on your profile
go to the 'file cabinet' on left of the page
got to 'Audited Financial Statements'
pick your year
Ist time I found it I felt a little like Indiana Jones.
2017 isn't out yet so I had to make some inquiries about it

Not a lot of detail in them, it is in accounting speak and keep in mind, I think bookkeeping was invented to
keep others from knowing what is going on with the money.

rick haynes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2018 8:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 10:34 am
Posts: 2811
Location: Wauwatosa, WI
rick haynes wrote:
Not a lot of detail in them, it is in accounting speak and keep in mind, I think bookkeeping was invented to keep others from knowing what is going on with the money. rick haynes


And the long standing final question for an accountant is. The questionnaire asks the perspective accountant, how much is 2 cents plus 2 cents, the perspective accountants response, how much do you want 2 cents plus 2 cents to be.

Rick, I'm with you on this one. Question, how may were on the payroll in Denver versus how many are on the payroll in Topeka?

_________________
Have Fun ; )

David Dewhurst
CenDiv Milwaukee Region
F Prod #14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2018 10:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 3:31 pm
Posts: 652
Well there should be a second name for the club, the Apathy Car Club of America. Rick, I agree that something should be done. But as long as its a volunteer organization, it won't happen. Only thing that would work is if some entity bought the club and restructured it. You know, fire the Bums. Its all a pipe dream. I figure next year after the runoffs I'll head to NASA or some other group or just go back to time trial events. I to am tired of piss poor management. Evan the crap I've seen with Stewards in recent years is just ridiculous. Sometimes you get what you pay for. Its amazing how people with axes to grind are attracted to positions of power. Kinda like child molestor Priests and the Catholic church. Tired of having to watch my ass.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2018 11:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2015 8:12 am
Posts: 127
In speaking with my Area 8 Director last week he said that the BOD is happy with Mike Cobb's performance and is especially proud all of the "Hires" the club has made staffing important new positions!!! There does seem to be a big disconnect somewhere!!!

The issues with Pro Losses are entirely the result of poor decision making and lack of oversight by the board over the years. Most recently; with the F4 debacle, a series of bad contracts were entered into that has led to these losses. IMHO Pro should be a licensing body and provide Sanctioning of Events and Series that need it, for a fee. It should definitely be a profit making endeavor. It should not be a promoter; Race Promoters incur great risk and are open to taking big losses. The licensing and sanctioning that we have lost in the past three years has been picked up by USAC and Indycar and they are "making money" off of those racers and series we no longer service.
An example of the poor management; World Challenge left us because we could not figure out how to offer online registration for their events!!! USAC stepped up and said, "sure we can do that". Absolutely insane to loose the licensing and sanctioning of this series for such a reason. This is just one example.

Majors Racing in the Midwest is in big trouble, Iowa has 30-32 entries for next weekend. Pueblo in two weeks is at about the same level. With breakeven numbers probably in the 50-60 entrant area this is a big problem.
Here in Colorado our SOLO and Rallycross programs are going gangbusters, TNIA entries at High Plains are Large (80+ per event), and all the other racing organizations in Colorado NASA, WRL,RMVR, and MRA are doing really well. Meanwhile we keep loosing club racers and keep raising entry fees to make up for the smaller pool of entries.
The Club's new National Time Trial Championship is just a reaction to the success of other groups like Global Time Attack, Red Line Time Attack and Grid Life. In Colorado PPIR has started their own Time Attack series that had 186 entries for their first event of the year! Again, we are late to the party! With the late announcement of the rules for this new program we haven't even scheduled one in our division.

I agree that a big shakeup and restructuring may be necessary to save the club. I don't see our current board having the Cojones to do anything about these issues.

My fixes would be to task the new President to double the number of dues paying members under his term in order to even consider renewing his contract. Set a long range (ten year) goal of 500,000 dues paying members. There is strength in numbers, and that is where the club needs to go! We will have to become a lobbying entity in the future to ensure the viability of competing with internal combustion motor powered race cars. Oh, and joining the club needs to be easy and we need to cut the dues for a non-competition member by about half!
Eliminate the three levels of Club Racing; excuse me, Road Racing. Make the Road Racing series rules and point system easy to understand, and make it encourage competition and not merely minimum participation.
Turn the Runoffs into a Destination Event like the Oshkosh Annual Fly-In is. It needs to be at a facility that could handle something like this (700-800 racers and a 1,000 show cars, and 50,000 spectators) All of those spectators will be incentivized to join the club as well. All 24 races need to be on TV, it would be our number one membership recruiting tool. Rallycross, SOLO, Time Trial Championships all need to be on TV too. If people don't see it on their TV screens it does not exist in their world!
Forget the bucket list tracks, moving every year costs us way too much and not just in dollars, it costs us in other ways too. The one Runoff's Facility needs to become the Mecca for all gearheads like Oshkosh is for Pilots. Oskosh in the annual gathering of pilots and sport aviation enthusiasts that attacts a half million attendees over the course of a week in a little Wisconsin town. The Experimental Aircraft Association has over 200,000 members, Do they all own Experimental Aircraft? No, of course not, but they all have at least a passing interest. Their membership fee is only $40 and includes a subscription to Sport Aviation magazine. A good model to follow I would think. We have the advantage of most of our members already owning and driving cars and many in sports cars.

Just my thoughts.

_________________
FP Miata #88


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2018 12:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 3:31 pm
Posts: 652
Noble made almost $270k that year. She was laughing her ass off all the way to the bank. OMG. No wonder why they had to increase my membership fees.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2018 1:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 5:51 pm
Posts: 676
So; if Prod car drivers are about 20% of the field and racers are about 20% of the membership,

How are you going to motivate the other 96%??

RJS


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group