Cost of Majors

[farrout]

We are all trying to lower the cost of racing but here are some facts. Our 2 day Double SECS, Double SARRC and a TT at Barber carries an expense budget of $58K. There is no fat in that because I took it all out when I took over as Race Chair. Given an average of 115-120 race entries, you can do the math.

Forget a Test Day. Barber does not do one itself like Road Atlanta does. We would have to rent the track and all the other fees which is about a $18K budget. At the usual ~40 cars, you can do the math.

I started doing a Time Trials Level 3 giving the TT 45-50 minutes of track time each day. Encouraged the Racers to use the track time as practice sessions. 50% of the TT entries were SECS/SARRC drivers. Without the TT, we would not have made it financially. Incorporating the TT is a great idea to gain entries.

Even with all the above, we are on the borderline financially. It takes 2 Regions together to finance this because of the cash flow issues inherent with MSR not paying until 3 weeks after the event when 80% of the bills are due before then. SCCA does let us be late beyond the 2 week window for filling the audit report. The first year, SEDIV gave us a loan which made the cash flow issues transparent.

We are a small Region who are trying to maintain its Road Racing Program. Most of us are racers who give it up to put on the race. Yes, we would rather be racing than administrating.

I would invite all the racers to donate a weekend or two toward working an event. Many of my racing friends already do that.

All that said, if there is a better business model for our weekends I would be happy to hear it. Will incorporate the concept into the detailed Event Budget that I maintain and let you know if it works for us.

[Marshall Mauney]

With the overwhelming cost increase to conduct an event directly related to track rental, what can the SCCA do to reduce costs (and it looks like FF spec tires are already being considered by the club)?

Some "modest proposals"....

1) Mandate pump street gas - no race fuel. Pump-around with a tracer to enforce.
2) Tire rules (compound, one set per event, etc.).
3) Claimer rules. Engines or whole cars.
4) Limit all events to two days.
5) Try some single-day events. Qual in morning, race in afternoon.
6) Ban carbon fiber and titanium.
7) Schedule the Majors and double events at the cheapest tracks instead of the most expensive.

Flame away.

[Peter Olivola]

Alright, Mike, get specific. What specific things need to change and how do we change them?

Many Regions don't have the funds to start anything new within the club racing programs. They are doing their best to stay alive.The costs of putting on races is ever climbing because of the business model they must follow. Budgets with insurance, worker incentive costs, sanction fees and track costs make the entry fees where they are at. Why do tracks rent their facilities cheaper to other organizations? I am not pointing fingers but I have seen the inside of the beast. I still support this club but the numbers continue to fall and other organizations numbers continue to rise. You cannot argue the numbers Peter. I am willing to discuss the issues on how to change them for the better
but facts are facts.

[Peter Olivola]

Here it is, Cory:

If the SCCA used the series sponsor's cash to lower entry fees, that would hopefully raise participation.

So I'll ask again: If there were no entry fees, how many more races would you enter? The point being, entry fees are a relatively minor part of a racing budget, not the cost prohibitive bug-a-boo you seem to be making them out to be.

Please don't put words in my mouth. Reread my post and you will note that I never said I would enter more races if the entry fees were less. I didn't even give an opinion on whether current entry fees are too high. All I did was express my opinion that if SCCA uses a series sponsor's cash to lower entry fees for SCCA Club Racing, it will not materially increase the cost to compete.

[Keith Carter]

Actually, for us, on any given race weekend tires, entry fee, and fuel are our biggest expenses in that order.

[Peter Olivola]

1) For all classes? Let's consider the engines that are already installed that can't live on pump gas. You've just cost those competitors a significant bundle. Then there's the problem of enforcement. Care to provide the specifications for every possible formulation of pump gas?
2) I understand it's being worked on for FF. The challenge here is not running off vendors who've supported the club.
3) This is not what you want in Club Racing. What works down on the plantation at some local bull ring will only serve to create a hostile environment when people figure out all the ways to beat the system.
4) I don't see this as an answer to anything. Certainly there are events that shouldn't be more than two days, but the size of an event controls that more than anything. Are you advocating a two day only June Sprints?
5) Single day events can work where there is an established regional racing program. Assuming, of course, the track will allow a Sat or Sun only rental. Spent a lot of time at Saturday only events at Lime Rock, but they were all regionals. Nationals were always a Friday/Saturday or Saturday/Monday (with Sunday idle.)
6) Again, for all classes? SCCA has always be an inclusive organization, with classes for a wide range of interests (including financial.) Where/how are these two items impacting costs?
7) Not the philosophy behind the Majors program. I bet you could get a real cheap rate from Sandia, and maybe a decent turnout the first time. After that, it would be a ghost town. One of the attractions of the Majors program is running on iconic tracks. What you're suggesting is dumbing down Club Racing's top level program.

Some "modest proposals"....

1) Mandate pump street gas - no race fuel. Pump-around with a tracer to enforce.
2) Tire rules (compound, one set per event, etc.).
3) Claimer rules. Engines or whole cars.
4) Limit all events to two days.
5) Try some single-day events. Qual in morning, race in afternoon.
6) Ban carbon fiber and titanium.
7) Schedule the Majors and double events at the cheapest tracks instead of the most expensive.

Flame away.

[mousecatcher]

The above is a much better thought process IMO.

We do not need prize $$$$ in Club racing. We need lower costs and corporate sponsorship could do just that.

We already have that. SafeRacer and Goodyear. Now imagine the cost WITHOUT those corporate sponsors.

[Keith Carter]

I'm sure there are more than two that would be willing to sponsor.

[Peter Olivola]

I'm sure you could make a commission deal with the club to bring them on board.

I'm sure there are more than two that would be willing to sponsor.

[Keith Carter]

With the sponsors I would bring in, it would no longer be a family friendly environment.

[Terry Hanushek]

Keith

I'm sure there are more than two that would be willing to sponsor.

I would certainly like to meet these companies willing to sponsor our racing. The SCCA staff has expended considerable effort trying to attract sponsorship to our flagship events - the Majors. For the fourth year in a row they have been well under budget. No title sponsor, a few contingency sponsors. I can assure you that this shortfall is not from lack of trying. There is not really that much sponsorship out there and there is a lot of competition within motorsports and across all leisure activities.

Terry

[Marshall Mauney]

1) Mandate pump street gas - no race fuel. Pump-around with a tracer to enforce.

For all classes? Let's consider the engines that are already installed that can't live on pump gas. You've just cost those competitors a significant bundle. Then there's the problem of enforcement. Care to provide the specifications for every possible formulation of pump gas?

Existing cars in certain classes with race-built engines would be a real issue, but I think that this would work for SM, SRF, Touring, B-Spec, FB, FF (Fit engine) and a whole bunch more. Enforcement could work the same as it has worked at the Sprints and Runoffs in the past - add a tracer. Every engine that has a closed-loop control system should be able to adapt, and that's nearly anything in recent production.

2) Tire rules (compound, one set per event, etc.).
I understand it's being worked on for FF. The challenge here is not running off vendors who've supported the club.

Legitimate point, but getting more competitors on-track would mitigate at least some of their lost revenue. Additionally, knowing that you're going to get all of a given class' business allows you to run higher volumes at lower mix, which increases margins. I believe it's worth continuing to explore.

3) Claimer rules. Engines or whole cars.
This is not what you want in Club Racing. What works down on the plantation at some local bull ring will only serve to create a hostile environment when people figure out all the ways to beat the system.

Why would it work in one venue and not another? I tossed this out as little more than an "outside of the box" thought experiment, but it seems to have a positive impact on a lot of local series.....

4) Limit all events to two days.
I don't see this as an answer to anything. Certainly there are events that shouldn't be more than two days, but the size of an event controls that more than anything. Are you advocating a two day only June Sprints?

My thinking is that 2 days' track rental is 33% less than 3 days' rent. It also significantly reduces the costs to both competitors and club staff in vacation use, lodging, food, crew expense, etc. It's a real cost shift.

As for the Sprints, it's a single race this year. Why do we need three days to run one race per run group?

5) Try some single-day events. Qual in morning, race in afternoon.
Single day events can work where there is an established regional racing program. Assuming, of course, the track will allow a Sat or Sun only rental. Spent a lot of time at Saturday only events at Lime Rock, but they were all regionals. Nationals were always a Friday/Saturday or Saturday/Monday (with Sunday idle.)

Again, I think it's worth a shot to reduce all of the ancillary costs. I've seen doubles that were effectively scheduled as two one-day events, so why not split that? The track could sell Saturday as a test day to offset their one-day weekend rental.

6) Ban carbon fiber and titanium.
Again, for all classes? SCCA has always be an inclusive organization, with classes for a wide range of interests (including financial.) Where/how are these two items impacting costs?

How many old CSR/DSR cars are now sidelined or relegated to track day cars because they just can't compete with the new all-carbon tub cars? What has that done to the cost to compete in P1/P2? When was the last time a tube frame FA won the Runoffs?

Yes, the all-inclusive philosophy is our heritage, but it's also the reason that we have an alphabet soup of classes.

7) Schedule the Majors and double events at the cheapest tracks instead of the most expensive.
Not the philosophy behind the Majors program. I bet you could get a real cheap rate from Sandia, and maybe a decent turnout the first time. After that, it would be a ghost town. One of the attractions of the Majors program is running on iconic tracks. What you're suggesting is dumbing down Club Racing's top level program.

I'm not certain I agree. Yes, I spent the $$$ to go run the COTA major, but I probably won't ever go back. Why not? Too much money to run with the same guys I can race at Road America, Blackhawk, or even Grattan or Nelson Ledges. It's a "bucket list" item like dining at Paul Bocuse - but that doesn't mean that we can all afford it every weekend.

IMO, the core value of the Majors program isn't the tracks. It's the competition - and the competition is better when we have more competitors. If a less-expensive Major at Grattan or Nelson Ledges drew as many cars as at Road America, it would be a great race. Do I enjoy having raced at Watkins Glen, COTA, Road America, et al? Sure! In the end, though, most of us only have a certain budget each year; lower costs per weekend = more weekends of racing = higher car counts = healthier club.

If we want to reverse the downward trend, we need to be open to discussing new ideas and challenging our core assumptions, wouldn't you think?

[Peter Olivola]

1) When you say add a tracer do you understand that's furnished by the fuel supplier, not the club and it's proprietary. The Sunoco testing device is essentially a black box. And again, if you're talking pump gas how is the tracer going to get in the gas from multiple sources?

2) The business supplying racing tires to SCCA isn't big enough to sustain any but a small number of companies. I don't think it sustains more than two or three. The once ubiquitous Goodyear is all be gone from the sport.

3) You're assuming a claiming rule works where ever it's been tried. It hasn't.

4) What is your assumption based on? Total cost of 3 days? For many tracks, it's a minimum of two days rental and the third day isn't always the same per day cost as the weekend rate, which is increasingly a premium due to other organizations willingness to pay the same or higher fees.

Prior to the Runoffs boosting all entries at Road America, and the subsequent drop in entries when it left, the June Sprints saw entries above 400. The schedule was a practice, two qualifying sessions and a race. The amount of track time worked out to a significant value propostion. The June Sprints runs a minimum of 8 race groups and as many as 10 to due to the size of the entry. Try working up a schedule that provides the same amount of track time for 8-10 race groups in two days as it does in three.

5) For most tracks, a weekend rental is a take it or leave it proposition. If the club wants to sell the second day off it then incurs the expenditure of time, talent and treasure to pawn off the unused day. Single day events can certainly work for regionals. Majors are out of the question.

6) Carbon fiber and titanium are the not what parked those older cars. Prior to Stohr, most CSR/DSR's were home builts or limited run garage specials. If you check with those working with the materials you'll find carbon fiber is no longer a premium cost material compared to the alternatives. CSR/DSR evolved quite naturally into a much more serious and professionally designed chassis paradigm because someone was and is willing to pay to go faster. That's the nature of competition.

The last time a tube framed FA won the Runoffs was so far before the current economic crisis it's rather disingenuous to even bring it up. Probably sometime in the 1970's. FA isn't a class for dilettantes. FB already satisfies your requirements and is growing. Why the need to tear down a class that's outside a self imposed cost limit?

7) I've stated why I challenge the notion that anything you've proposed would result in lower costs to compete in the Majors. There is another aspect of the Majors that many are just not willing to confront: They're not for everyone. They are premised on the idea that there are two kinds of competitors in SCCA Club Racing. Those with the means and interest in chasing the best competition and those who are primarily interested in competing on their local track(s.)

This isn't a new idea. It is as old as the club itself. It was never more evident than the era of restricted Runoffs entry qualifications and rotating the Runoffs every year has already shown it still applies. Almost every discussion about where to hold the Runoffs is characterized by those wanting it at their local track. Combined with the reflexive reaction to reduce classes, but not my class and you have the manifestation of what I call SCCA membership's My Garage Syndrome; what's in it and where is it located.

Existing cars in certain classes with race-built engines would be a real issue, but I think that this would work for SM, SRF, Touring, B-Spec, FB, FF (Fit engine) and a whole bunch more. Enforcement could work the same as it has worked at the Sprints and Runoffs in the past - add a tracer. Every engine that has a closed-loop control system should be able to adapt, and that's nearly anything in recent production.



Legitimate point, but getting more competitors on-track would mitigate at least some of their lost revenue. Additionally, knowing that you're going to get all of a given class' business allows you to run higher volumes at lower mix, which increases margins. I believe it's worth continuing to explore.



Why would it work in one venue and not another? I tossed this out as little more than an "outside of the box" thought experiment, but it seems to have a positive impact on a lot of local series.....



My thinking is that 2 days' track rental is 33% less than 3 days' rent. It also significantly reduces the costs to both competitors and club staff in vacation use, lodging, food, crew expense, etc. It's a real cost shift.

As for the Sprints, it's a single race this year. Why do we need three days to run one race per run group?



Again, I think it's worth a shot to reduce all of the ancillary costs. I've seen doubles that were effectively scheduled as two one-day events, so why not split that? The track could sell Saturday as a test day to offset their one-day weekend rental.



How many old CSR/DSR cars are now sidelined or relegated to track day cars because they just can't compete with the new all-carbon tub cars? What has that done to the cost to compete in P1/P2? When was the last time a tube frame FA won the Runoffs?

Yes, the all-inclusive philosophy is our heritage, but it's also the reason that we have an alphabet soup of classes.



I'm not certain I agree. Yes, I spent the $$$ to go run the COTA major, but I probably won't ever go back. Why not? Too much money to run with the same guys I can race at Road America, Blackhawk, or even Grattan or Nelson Ledges. It's a "bucket list" item like dining at Paul Bocuse - but that doesn't mean that we can all afford it every weekend.

IMO, the core value of the Majors program isn't the tracks. It's the competition - and the competition is better when we have more competitors. If a less-expensive Major at Grattan or Nelson Ledges drew as many cars as at Road America, it would be a great race. Do I enjoy having raced at Watkins Glen, COTA, Road America, et al? Sure! In the end, though, most of us only have a certain budget each year; lower costs per weekend = more weekends of racing = higher car counts = healthier club.

If we want to reverse the downward trend, we need to be open to discussing new ideas and challenging our core assumptions, wouldn't you think?

[Marshall Mauney]

1) When you say add a tracer do you understand that's furnished by the fuel supplier, not the club and it's proprietary.

No, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for clarifying. That said, though, fuel has been a cost issue in club racing for a long time, and we still haven't completely solved it.

2) The business supplying racing tires to SCCA isn't big enough to sustain any but a small number of companies. I don't think it sustains more than two or three. The once ubiquitous Goodyear is all be gone from the sport.

Sure, but again, the goal is to get more cars/drivers back out onto the track. In the end, there's a finite amount of racing money in the market to be spent; IMO, we're doing the best job when we get the highest entry counts within that available market spend.

4) What is your assumption based on? Total cost of 3 days? For many tracks, it's a minimum of two days rental and the third day isn't always the same per day cost as the weekend rate, which is increasingly a premium due to other organizations willingness to pay the same or higher fees.

The extra night in a hotel costs the same (often more for business hotels, as they have lower weekend rates). Extra day of food costs the same. An extra day of vacation has a higher cost to participants, as Saturday and Sunday are "free" for most, while the Friday has to be taken as vacation. I'll buy that the Friday track rental may cost less than the Saturday and Sunday, but the total cost to participants doesn't follow that model.

The schedule was a practice, two qualifying sessions and a race. The amount of track time worked out to a significant value propostion. The June Sprints runs a minimum of 8 race groups and as many as 10 to due to the size of the entry. Try working up a schedule that provides the same amount of track time for 8-10 race groups in two days as it does in three.

In effect, this means that we are adding a day for one extra qualifying session. I'm in for the Sprints, but it's a REALLY heavy time commitment for the amount of track time.

5) Single day events can certainly work for regionals. Majors are out of the question.

Sure - I wasn't suggesting that a major should try a one-day schedule. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

6) Carbon fiber and titanium are the not what parked those older cars. [...] CSR/DSR evolved quite naturally into a much more serious and professionally designed chassis paradigm because someone was and is willing to pay to go faster. That's the nature of competition.

[...] FA isn't a class for dilettantes. FB already satisfies your requirements and is growing. Why the need to tear down a class that's outside a self imposed cost limit?

OK, fair enough - but understand that P1, FA, and GT-1 will always have very limited attendance due to the cost. With all of the discussion around car counts and class proliferation.....

7) I've stated why I challenge the notion that anything you've proposed would result in lower costs to compete in the Majors. There is another aspect of the Majors that many are just not willing to confront: They're not for everyone.

Certainly - but they can't be for a continually diminishing audience, either, if they are to survive and compete with NASA, LeMons, Chump Car, ProF2000, etc.

What share of the total driver/team population are the Majors intended for? 25%? 10%? 5%? 1%? Race drivers are a fairly small, elite group to begin with - how small can you sub-divide before there's not enough of an audience left to support a program?

They are premised on the idea that there are two kinds of competitors in SCCA Club Racing. Those with the means and interest in chasing the best competition and those who are primarily interested in competing on their local track(s.)

I believe that there are a good number of drivers who are fully willing to chase that competition - but if the cost is so high that their budget only covers one or two events per year, they are likely to go somewhere else. Would you rather have those guys for 3-4 events per year, or lose them entirely?

[Jnovak]

The only reason a tracer is added to the fuel is to prove that the fuel was purchased at the track.

There are many fuels that are commercially available on the street that pass the dielectric test. Thus you should be able to use any fuel that passes the dielectric test. And I believe this is the case for most races.

If not then this policy is screwed up. Why should I have to pay $9 or $10 for a gallon of gas when I can purchase a dielectrically legal fuel for $4 per gallon?

[Peter Olivola]

Jay,

Besides the Runoffs, what other events have you been required to use track fuel?

[Jnovak]

Jay,

Besides the Runoffs, what other events have you been required to use track fuel?

That is what I am saying peter, you do NOT have to use track fuel as long as it passes the dielectric test. However I believe that there is a common perception that you need to run track fuel.

We have purchased and used non track fuel many times. The first thing we do is get it checked at tech. If it passes we use it. If not it goes in the street car.

Now tech has complained to us on occasion that it would be easier if we used track fuel.

[grapefarmeral]

I used to worry that using pump gas would taint my cell, but two weeks ago I purchased track gas at Mosport and it worked out to $20. per gallon. A half dozen weekends like that and I can buy a new cell... I'm just glad the exchange rate was in my favor...

[Marshall Mauney]

Jay,
Besides the Runoffs, what other events have you been required to use track fuel?

Didn't they require track fuel for some classes at the Sprints a couple of years ago?

[Peter Olivola]

Yes and it was driven by the competitor community through Enterprises.

Didn't they require track fuel for some classes at the Sprints a couple of years ago?

[Jnovak]

Fact of life, no competition = higher prices, just like everything else.

[Peter Olivola]

Jay, the SRF community requested this through Enterprises. They felt there was a problem with undetectable hot fuel and saw this as a way to correct the problem. Was it a good decision? You'd have to ask them.

Fact of life, no competition = higher prices, just like everything else.

[Jnovak]

Jay, the SRF community requested this through Enterprises. They felt there was a problem with undetectable hot fuel and saw this as a way to correct the problem. Was it a good decision? You'd have to ask them.

I certainly have no problem with the competitors wanting a true spec fuel. 20 gallons of fuel over a weekend is a lot of $$$ at track prices.

[Matt King]

Didn't they require track fuel for some classes at the Sprints a couple of years ago?

Yes. I used it at the Sprints in 2010 and it jacked up the carb in my FV when the car was sitting between races after the Sprints with some residue that clogged all the jets and air bleeds. The only time I ever had fuel trouble with the car, which I used 100LL Avgas in every other time I ran it.

[Tony Sleath]

7) I've stated why I challenge the notion that anything you've proposed would result in lower costs to compete in the Majors. There is another aspect of the Majors that many are just not willing to confront: They're not for everyone. They are premised on the idea that there are two kinds of competitors in SCCA Club Racing. Those with the means and interest in chasing the best competition and those who are primarily interested in competing on their local track(s.)

I would contend there is at least a third type of competitor. One with the means and interest in chasing the best competition but can't afford the time commitment of a three day Majors weekend. In order to be ready for the race weekend in order to compete against the best competition I would run the test day as often as possible because you generally got more quality track time in one day then you did all weekend. When I did that for a Majors that would mean leaving on Wednesday and coming home late on Sunday. Not possibly much anymore with a family. That one extra day is a big deal on vacation time and for the family over the course of a calendar year.

I have an S2 and since SCCA killed our class I'm trying Vintage this summer. Although we have all the parts to convert our car to a P2 we have no plans to do this. We are trying to determine what we want to do going forward (Vintage, SCCA or ????) and in which class of car (formula or sports racer). My favorite racing is with the maximum number of cars in my class which generally only happened at the Runoffs and the June Sprints.

Personally I think the top level SCCA weekends should generally be 2 day events with testing on Friday. Either 1 race with the existing number of classes or 2 races with a lot less classes.

[problemchild]

Personally, I believe the limited number of Majors events will actually STRENGTHEN the local programs for those divisions/regions that are willing to adapt. Being from SEDiv I was a long-time participant in the (very successful) SARRC series, so I was surprised when I went to work for the National Office and found out most areas of the country have no divisional championship program for those who don't care about Nationals and/or the Runoffs! SARRC and similar programs like MARRS provides an opportunity for those that want to venture outside their own region yet still contend for a season-long championship while running 4-6 (two day) weekends a year. As I said before, if your division doesn't have such a program get involved and help them create one.
..

With due respect Butch, perhaps the SEDIV situation is a big reason why you like the Majors concept. Your seasonal schedule is also suited to attracting many entries from other Divisions, further aiding the Majors concept. Perhaps the Majors format is much more suited to your area than any other area in the country. The "National" scene that remained so strong well into the 21st century in the NorthEast/Great Lakes area has now been destroyed beyond repair. I used to be able to do a dozen quality National events per year on a 2-day weekend and now there are two Majors within a days drive. Twenty-plus regional events have been reduced to a handful. I really have no idea how to fix it at this point, but telling people to adapt and start building Regional Championships up, probably won't go too far. They were not the ones that replaced a functional process with the failed process in place now. Peter can blindly defend SCCA "leadership" forever, but the only way to turn this around is to see some real leadership make some real decisions to best utilize the dates we still have. I think Jay is being generous with his 10 year window. How about 5?

[Jnovak]

Me thinks that the majors program is not well loved.

[Steve Demeter]

Amen Jay.

Lots of more cost to the competitors for not much track time.

Do I care about getting a free towel or whatever. Not for the added cost of the Majors?

Do I care about "news coverage" that is only on the SCCA web site?

Do I care about a podium ceremony largely for the benefit of SCCA staff to use as a photo opp?

Heck no to all the above.

Do I care about fun events that don't require a day driving each way?

Do I care about double events that run in two days?

Do I care about reasonable entry fees?

Heck yes to all the above.

The Majors has not been a good thing for club racing at any level.

[Jnovak]

Amen Jay.

Lots of more cost to the competitors for not much track time.

Do I care about getting a free towel or whatever. Not for the added cost of the Majors?

Do I care about "news coverage" that is only on the SCCA web site?

Do I care about a podium ceremony largely for the benefit of SCCA staff to use as a photo opp?

Heck no to all the above.

Do I care about fun events that don't require a day driving each way?

Do I care about double events that run in two days?

Do I care about reasonable entry fees?

Heck yes to all the above.

The Majors has not been a good thing for club racing at any level.

Sports Car CLUB of America not Sports Car $$$$ of America

[Purple Frog]

I believe there are three completely different segments of SCCA Club racers.

1. regional guys that are just starting or budget minded. ($)
2. the more serious national level competitor ($$$)
3. the folks that can afford to play in one class only events (aka the pro series, F2kCS, Trans-Am, etc)($$$$$)

You will see group #1 occasionally dabble in #2.
You will see group #2 occasionally dabbling in #3 and using #1 to test.
You will see group #3 racing anywhere they damn well please

When reading web forums it would be best if those posting had the appropriate number of dollar signs attached to their avatar so that we can understand from where they come.

Realize of course those that play in group #1 seem to be the most vocal on the forums.
Those in group#2 read forums and occasionaly post.
Most in group #3 could care less about what goes on in the forums.

That said, if one is a promoter of racing events you must identify your audience and communicate with them and ignore the "noise".

Just saying.

[problemchild]

I believe there are three completely different segments of SCCA Club racers.

1. regional guys that are just starting or budget minded. ($)
2. the more serious national level competitor ($$$)
3. the folks that can afford to play in one class only events (aka the pro series, F2kCS, Trans-Am, etc)($$$$$)

You will see group #1 occasionally dabble in #2.
You will see group #2 occasionally dabbling in #3 and using #1 to test.
You will see group #3 racing anywhere they damn well please

When reading web forums it would be best if those posting had the appropriate number of dollar signs attached to their avatar so that we can understand from where they come.

Realize of course those that play in group #1 seem to be the most vocal on the forums.
Those in group#2 read forums and occasionally post.
Most in group #3 could care less about what goes on in the forums.

That said, if one is a promoter of racing events you must identify your audience and communicate with them and ignore the "noise".

Just saying.

SCCA was founded by group #3, but it prospered and thrived for both groups #1 and #2 for the first 35-40 years. I consider myself a combination of #1 and #2, as many of my friends would. As club racing numbers have fallen, it has become apparent that a new business model is needed. The Majors program has failed. The "Concord" agreement is a joke. We need leadership to create a plan that will service a large segment of the community and let other groups service the balance. Trying to service everybody with a 20th century business model just is not working.

[Daryl DeArman]

What works down on the plantation at some local bull ring will only serve to create a hostile environment when people figure out all the ways to beat the system.

Local short tracks aren't hostile environments? People club racing don't figure out ways to beat the system?

Let's not make any rules because people will find a way to beat them, resulting in a hostile environment. Brilliant.

Let's just keep doing what hasn't been working for years and hope we get different results. If we don't we'll just point the finger at everybody else for not coming up with a solution.


Cheaper entry fees.
Fewer paid support staff relative to the number of entrants.
Fewer classes.

A bit outside the box-----reserve entry-level classes for those who haven't placed top 3 at the runoffs in said class.

[Purple Frog]

Post #121 explains why group 1 is disappearing.
The costs to put on a weekend, when divided by the number of entries, results in a number out of the budget reach of group #1.

Years ago many tracks were built by a wealthy guy with a passion and no need to make it profitable, or even break even. Now the investors in tracks demand a ROI.

Corner workers used to volunteer to wave flags, now they expect expense money.

Doctors would donate time to work in the quack shack. The local tow truck guy would hang around for fun.

The business model has changed.

[Daryl DeArman]

Corner workers used to volunteer to wave flags, now they expect expense money.

Doctors would donate time to work in the quack shack. The local tow truck guy would hang around for fun.

The business model has changed.

Yes, it most certainly has. Those costs aren't going away, neither are the other folks competing for those entry dollars. The only feasible way to change the impact of all those costs is to increase the number of entrants.

If you want to increase the number of entrants, you must deliver better value.

If the per-race weekend total expense was cut in half most people would race twice as often. More entries brings more entries.

[Purple Frog]

"If the per-race weekend total expense was cut in half most people would race twice as often. More entries brings more entries. "


Never going to happen. Dream on.

Engine builders are not cutting their charges in half.
Gas stations are not going to cut their charges in half for the hauler fuel.
Car insurance for the hauler isn't dropping to half.
Motels are slashing their prices to 1/2.
Tire suppliers are lowering race tires to 1/2 price.
Race tracks are not reducing their charges to 1/2.
Safety gear companies are not lowering their prices.
Race fuel isn't going down to $5 a gallon.

If you believe the 70's were the heyday of formula racing I believe if you look at the value of the 1970 dollar as compared to today, racing costs about the same. What hasn't gone up in proportion is middle class incomes. Thus the growth in group 3 and the drop in group 1.

Economics 101

[f500racer]

My unique perspective is that I live/have live literally 2 miles from Mid-Ohio for the better portion of my life. I was a club racer ever since 1999 but stopped several years ago as life and other responsibilities got in the way. Now I'm ready to come back. What I have noticed is that the sounds across the valley are mostly Porsche/audi/nasa/bmw club weekends and the SCCA events total 4 with one major, one restricted closed wheel regional, and two regionals. In my heyday, I could claim to run 7 weekends between nationals, regionals, and runoffs. I hope it returns to that.

I can only conclude that the cost per fun is drying up as a small formula car group,that once had 50+ cars in 2001 now had 7 last year. When I talk to the people that can afford to race, they go car club racing as "scca only crashes". NASA seems full, but that style of organization is not for me. I remember at Mid-Ohio we had a national with AMLS and every group was full, even f5 had 20 cars and ff was out the false grid.

The answer seems to be to find some way to subsidize the track rental and make an affordable entry price in front on people to try and justify a sponsorship. Easier said than done but the trans am national at mid ohio always had a lot of people.

As an idea, NASCAR xfinity at mid ohio has no Sunday event. How about a one day deal?

However, I think all road racing is suffering as even the vintage folks are having a tough time drawing entries here. Maybe I just need to get an M3.

Jns

[Jnovak]

One thing that confuses me is how the entries in FV have fallen in the last 10-15 years. You cannot go racing for less $$ than with a Vee.

Is it because it cost too much to run at the front?

Race costs in general?

Not fast enough?

Not modern enough?

Do we need a new super low cost class that is faster than Vee?

Please help me understand.

[butch deer]

I ran FV for 50 years. While the cost of cars has gotten cheaper because of poor resale value and a bloated market of used cars the cost of a new car has risen substantially. (That is if you can even find the parts to build a new car.) The % of your racing budget that goes for travel,entry fees,club membership ,etc. is much greater in the less expensive classes.
A second reason why Fv and other open wheel classes are less popular is the perception that they are not as safe as fendered cars. With the aging of the club I believe lots of new racers are excluded from considering open wheel by their wives. The last runoffs I was at with a FV the cost of Travel was 75% of our budget. That was with bonly a 7 hour tow.

[DanW]

I ran FV for 50 years. While the cost of cars has gotten cheaper because of poor resale value and a bloated market of used cars the cost of a new car has risen substantially. (That is if you can even find the parts to build a new car.) The % of your racing budget that goes for travel,entry fees,club membership ,etc. is much greater in the less expensive classes.
A second reason why Fv and other open wheel classes are less popular is the perception that they are not as safe as fendered cars. With the aging of the club I believe lots of new racers are excluded from considering open wheel by their wives. The last runoffs I was at with a FV the cost of Travel was 75% of our budget. That was with bonly a 7 hour tow.

Butch,

I agree completely about the entry fees, travel, fuel make up the majority of my expenses in club ford as well. Entry, $600 a weekend. Travel and motel $200. Race gas $90. I get three weekends on a set of tires for $580. Reserve for engine rebuild is $300/weekend.

Of course, racing DFL, I don't crash much.

[Purple Frog]

Dan,
I know that your $1,400 per weekend is pretty low cost in the scheme of things.
(My average was $1,750, mainly because every track is at least a 5 hour tow.)

But, $1,400 per weekend is getting out of reach for most of my afore mentioned "group 1" racers.