KVRG - Double Majors Invitational - HPT July 14-15

[cbovis]

Kevin-

I believe these are your words- Surely the Office and the BOD wouldn't expand a failed concept putting club funds at risk, if the "pilot" had failed. You would have to be a business/marketing idiot.

If you are serious, would you like to reconsider them in light of the fact that they voted to expand the Majors program before they got the P&L from the first event?

Chris

 

[KDENNIS]

Kevin-

I believe these are your words- Surely the Office and the BOD wouldn't expand a failed concept putting club funds at risk, if the "pilot" had failed. You would have to be a business/marketing idiot.

If you are serious, would you like to reconsider them in light of the fact that they voted to expand the Majors program before they got the P&L from the first event?

Chris

Planning to expand and actually expanding are two different things. Has the pilot officially failed? I would think if the program struggled but showed promise they would perhaps expand it to one or two more areas and then gauge interest for another year. To roll it out club wide it must have been a rousing success. Whats the other explanation? Complete disregard for emperical evidence and disregard for sound business and marketing practices?

 

[Scott Sanda]

Exactly!

Surely 57 cars at the Grand Culmination Event must be considered a rousing success! Yes? No? Anyone? Bueler?

So when it is forced on the rest of us, what top ten classes are going to get the boot because they "don't fit" like they did to T2 for the pilot?

I understand GT1 and AS are both firmly in the top 10 Nationally right now. GT1, AS, EP, FP?

 

[cbovis]

So for the record, you DO support making national structural changes and fundamental changes to the business model of the club without any financial data from the trial designed to generate the financial data required to make that very decision...

You can think rationally, or you can rationalize thought. Depressions and recessions are what you make of them. Businesses succeed and fail based on their response to adversity and opportunity. Take a look at the industry leaders before and after the Great Depression. You will see a lot of brands you know (after depression) and a lot you've never heard of (before).

Competing against the Regions for the same scarce customer dollars is a change to the business model. I believe there is a major conflict of interest, but that's another topic. The Majors makes it more expensive to compete, far less convenient, and significantly more confusing. The ethical side of the Majors is unacceptable to me. If my corner McDonalds stopped serving women, I would not support it either.

This really doesn't matter to me, aside from the insanity surrounding the discussion. This is like an obsessed fan defending his hero's coke/wife beating/drunk driving habit. The psychology of the "pro" argument is interesting. It fails every basic logic test, all the data says its a disaster, SCCA has failed at every attempt to promote events, and its brought to you by a team that has historically stumbled on every strategic decision. We have recreated the federal government. Perhaps I should give you a copy of Atlas Shrugged.

I believe the 20+ Sports 2000 vintage entries and my future tube-frame vintage entries are meaningful losses to SCCA. The fact that a vintage race and/or Grand Am race has more SCCA drivers in it then an SCCA National/Major is a sign of a failed strategic plan.

Chris

 

[KDENNIS]

Exactly

Wow, If the majors pilot wasn't a 2012 success, maybe they are hoping the new Director of Club Racing can help the Program Manager, 2 Club Racing Managers, Vice President of Club Racing and 5 Marketing staff to make this program a huge success in 2013. Maybe they can get the outside Marketing consultant they hired to help as well. Fingers crossed, now is probably not the time to engage in known failed and risky fiscal maneuvers. We must be getting something on the back end, maybe sponsorship money?

 

[JessePrather]

I hesitate to get into this but wanted to add some insight on the side of someone who has been in the majors races this year, not just outside looking in.
In EP, I got to have great races with great people. Good fields, etc. Most everyone at the event really enjoyed themselves and the atmosphere. Yes, I'm in a class that has good participation and would change classes if the case wasn't so, but there's no way this kind of an event could be special if all of the classes were invited. It was a case of quality over quantity I think. This was the goal of the program.

You'll never find me in a vintage car until I'm done wanting serious competition. As someone who has been there done that, I know that this is fact. The great event at Elkhart Lake last weekend is probably the best event for a vintage driver all year. Just the Friday night drive into town is worth the trip but you have to take it for what it is. A great party, great cars, and getting them out on the track is what vintage is for. If you want to be a serious club racer, there's nowhere I'd rather race than in the SCCA.

That's all for me. Thanks!

 

[KDENNIS]

I hesitate to get into this but wanted to add some insight on the side of someone who has been in the majors races this year, not just outside looking in.
In EP, I got to have great races with great people. Good fields, etc. Most everyone at the event really enjoyed themselves and the atmosphere. Yes, I'm in a class that has good participation and would change classes if the case wasn't so, but there's no way this kind of an event could be special if all of the classes were invited. It was a case of quality over quantity I think. This was the goal of the program.

That's all for me. Thanks!

Why do you think more people aren't attending? I looked at the results. There were 3 SM's there, 1 FF and 1 STU. There are more than 3 Miatas in my parking lot at work.

 

[Scott Sanda]

Chris,

I think kevin is being Sarcastic, in a British, understated way.

Specialty events are great things, look at the Prod fest, look at the Sm fest-thingy Milwaukee used to run for Sm before it was national, etc.

I just don't want to subsidize it, see it as a tool to disenfranchise a large portion of the club, see it justified with smoke and mirrors, be deliberately misled on it, or have the limited invitation participation results used in determining what the "special" classes are next year.

I'll bet if you reversed the program, took the bottom 10 classes, invited only them, made them feel special, you would see an increase in participation.

 

[Don Walsh]

I have been keeping quiet on this to see how it played out. I get that the concept was to create "special" events and increase participation. I just never understood how disenfranchising a large number of your active racers would accomplish this. I'm in EP. so I guess I'm in the lucky group, but I still don't see any real attraction for me. What would be wrong with trying to raise the profile of Club Racing overall, instead of a select group of classes. Aren't we telling the left out classes that they aren't important/wanted?
Maybe I'm just dense, but I just don't see the point/justification for this program. Color me confused.

 

[KDENNIS]

Chris,
I just don't want to subsidize it, see it as a tool to disenfranchise a large portion of the club, see it justified with smoke and mirrors, be deliberately misled on it, or have the limited invitation participation results used in determining what the "special" classes are next year.

Can it also be looked at as the top 10 are subsidizing the bottom 10 now. Without the revenue generated by the top ten could a region put on a race? Is the majors program any less fair than a National where SM and SRF get the same track time as 2 CSR's?

 

[Scott Sanda]

That depends on if the top 10 are in fact enough entries to cover costs. If they are not, then the bottom 10 allow the top 10 to race, and visa versa.

I'd say, based on results so far, top 10 do not cover expenses, and the membership at large is subsidizing them.

Those 2 csr's are in a group with 20 odd other cars, so its not 2 vs SM

 

[Mazda Jon]

Can it also be looked at as the top 10 are subsidizing the bottom 10 now.

True, the Double National Showcase that was scheduled at PPIR for the other 19 classes was cancelled because of lack of entries. Then again, having 5 double nationals in Rocky Mountain is crazy when a non-Supertour event draws 50-60 cars. The entry for the Pueblo invitational, IMHO, was a great success and had about the same turnout as a regular double national.


Everyone complains because the National office doesn't do anything, then when they try something everyone complains more.

If you're so smart, run for the BOD and fix everything. :boohoo:

 

[KDENNIS]

That depends on if the top 10 are in fact enough entries to cover costs. If they are not, then the bottom 10 allow the top 10 to race, and visa versa.

Good point. So we all need each other? There is a novel concept.

 

[JessePrather]

I hesitate to get into this but wanted to add some insight on the side of someone who has been in the majors races this year, not just outside looking in.
In EP, I got to have great races with great people. Good fields, etc. Most everyone at the event really enjoyed themselves and the atmosphere. Yes, I'm in a class that has good participation and would change classes if the case wasn't so, but there's no way this kind of an event could be special if all of the classes were invited. It was a case of quality over quantity I think. This was the goal of the program.

That's all for me. Thanks!

Why do you think more people aren't attending? I looked at the results. There were 3 SM's there, 1 FF and 1 STU. There are more than 3 Miatas in my parking lot at work.

The SM guys are protesting against Heartland Park, period. There's a certain driver with influence in the class who has stated he won't go back there and the sheep are following. All of the STU cars from last year, aka spec miata's, have moved on to STL. We don't have many FF's around here. Maybe like any finale series most people who came had a chance to win the series or it was a more local race for them.

 

[Scott Sanda]

Maybe like any finale series most people who came had a chance to win the series or it was a more local race for them.

And there you have the other truth spelled out.

I think most drivers have 1, or at best 2 "long" pulls in them a season. The definition of long varies, but for the sake of this lets call it more than 8-10 hours on the road.

So, they set up tentative schedules late in the prior season, finalize them over the winter, and adjust if necessary. So the "majors" running at what are not "premier" tracks. (RA, RA, Sebring, WG, Mido, etc.) aren't in the picture as a "long pull" destination.

My epiphany (yes, it hurt): get rid of the whole "majors" program. If the goal is to create some special races, dust off the old Showcase national name, and create the ability for each Division to hold one limited class participation national with a special format. Say top 10 nationally ranked classes plus 2 "promoters option" classes so that the division can put in a couple who might not be top 10, but are significant to the division.

Now here is the key: they have to be IN ADDITION TO the normal national schedule, so you do not disenfranchise the rest of the club.

Then it needs to be announced at the runoffs, to be effective not the upcoming season, but the next. This gives time for planning, scheduling, etc.

Now you have the BFG series running within the normal national program, and a special Showcase race in each division that is a bonus.

Or I could be full of Bovine Feces.

 

[disquek]

The SM guys are protesting against Heartland Park, period. There's a certain driver with influence in the class who has stated he won't go back there and the sheep are following. All of the STU cars from last year, aka spec miata's, have moved on to STL. We don't have many FF's around here. Maybe like any finale series most people who came had a chance to win the series or it was a more local race for them.

One driver's agenda is keeping an entire class away? Even with the superior format of the Majors program? Really?

If there are no FFs, how did they end up in the top 10?

-Kyle

 

[blamkin86]

Now here is the key: they have to be IN ADDITION TO the normal national schedule, so you do not disenfranchise the rest of the club.

Scott I respectfully disagree. As someone else on here said - most folks can afford to go to a certain number events - no more.

Attending an added event means I just skip some other event.... meaning no net gain. I attended only the SuperTour event this year at HPR, which was exactly the same as the event the prior year (except the food wasn't as good...)

Anyway I just keep going back to the same question: what is the goal of the Majors? What is the intent?

I remember hearing something about national events vs the runoffs. Maybe it's to increase participation away from the runoffs? Maybe it's to have a different strategy for the runoffs? Does anyone else remember hearing that?

 

[KDENNIS]

Now here is the key: they have to be IN ADDITION TO the normal national schedule, so you do not disenfranchise the rest of the club.

Anyway I just keep going back to the same question: what is the goal of the Majors? What is the intent?

I was under the impression is was to appease the larger subscribed class competitors who were complaining about the amount of track time they got at a national.

 

[disquek]

I was under the impression is was to appease the larger subscribed class competitors who were complaining about the amount of track time they got at a national.

You mean the classes that didn't show up in any numbers at any of the Majors events so far?

-Kyle

 

[Scott Sanda]

Kyle,

You may be 100% correct in that assessment. My thought was that the "special" race would be worthy of a additional outlay by the drivers invited. But, especially in tight economic times, this could be impossible.

Now you have the distasteful option of reducing the nationals available to all for the sake of a 'special' race, which causes all sorts of havoc. Especially if, Like GLD and Cendiv have done, the nationals have been whittled down to a sustainable number.

I never once heard about drivers complaining about wanting more track time SPECIFICALLY RELATED to the number of classes for normal nationals. Isn't that a GCR mandated minimum number that has been in place forever?

The only race that number of classes affects track time is the runoffs.