Major Assessment Fee

[Hardingfv32]

There is now a Majors Assessment Fee of $60. Has anyone formally heard what this is to be used for. Is this the main element of the new Runoffs business model? If they average 166 cars per event that works out to $250,000 for the year.

Is this getting close to anyones next incremental cost breaking/tolerance point? This represents a good 10% entry fee increase over one year.

What is the Tow Fund fee going to be?

Brian

[Steve Demeter]

Seems pretty silly to me. Majors entry fee at MO last year was close to $700. I was told that the national office took $50 of that. Now another "majors tax" is way over the top.

Anyone talk to Butch about this?

Being in charge of it he should be able to shed light on it.

[sccadsr31]

Brian,
Can you tell me where you saw this assessment fee announced, I have not been able to find it?

Thanks,
David

[G.B.]

It appears on the entry for both Sebring and Palm Beach.

[reidhazelton]

How much is the entry?

[sccadsr31]

Thanks, I did not see one for California Speedway.
David

[reidhazelton]

So.....I just tried to go to motorsportsreg.com to see what the entry fee is. I got as far as being required to pay $100 for a car number for Majors events? Seriously? They are charging for numbers now???

[AlBerto]

Entry fees can be found on SCCA's site under the Major 2014 Event List page (link below). You have to click on the event and open the Supps.
http://www.scca.com/events/news.cfm?eid=6551&cid=51604

Sebring = $570
Palm Beach = $595
Auto Club = $540

That is all SCCA has posted now.

[dc]

At least ApexSpeed is still free.







Maybe we should charge $100 to register.

[RussMcB]

So.....I just tried to go to motorsportsreg.com to see what the entry fee is. I got as far as being required to pay $100 for a car number for Majors events? Seriously? They are charging for numbers now???

It's optional.

[Steve Davis]

There are three options for Majors Permanent Numbers from SCCA. See this...
http://www.scca.com/clubracing/news.cfm?cid=51665

Of course, these are IN ADDITION to the per race increase in sanctioning fees.
Steve, FV80

[Hardingfv32]

Brian,
Can you tell me where you saw this assessment fee announced, I have not been able to find it?

David

I saw it in the Oct Broad minutes in the latest Sports Car Mag. I am embarrassed to say that I missed it in Oct when it came out in Fast Track, so it is a couple months old.

What is sad is that there is no explanation about how it is to be used. All these puff articles from our SCCA leaders in the pages of 'Sports Car' and never a discussion about what really is going on with club administration.

The minutes discuss the net income loss for the year. They mention the cost of the Majors program. Damm, these are just Dbl Nationals that have calendar scheduling restrictions applied to them. I believe all the date schedulers and event officials are volunteers. What is going on?

When I entered Fontana it seemed a little expensive. This new cost is going to affect my event decisions. If the net combination of weather, tow distance, interesting competitors and track are not just right, I will stay home. Absolutely no tolerance for a poor event.

Brian

[Steve Davis]

I believe that National is sending at least 3 people to each (and every) Majors event. I would assume that this new fee is to cover that cost. However, although it might be 'flashy', I cannot think of any reason why whatever they provide could not be handled by the sponsoring region at a considerably lower cost to the entrants.

My thinking is that National has been watching the fact that the Pro events are having good turnouts at considerably higher entry fees (though I do NOT know what the pro events are charging). The only real difference being that the pro events are actually PAYING $$$ for positions... which I doubt has a great deal to do with the attendance figures. It's the SINGLE CLASS GROUPINGS that's drawing the entries IMHO... The money only affects part of the field.. the groupings affect EVERYONE.

The additional cost is also affecting MY attendance decisions....

Steve, FV80

[Speed Sport Engineering]

I would GLADLY pay the extra fee if it was used to support the regions hosting "invitational" majors. I'd pay more for the entry if it allowed for say the top 10 classes only at majors events, which I thought was the whole point of them in the first place. Maybe it's a stepping stone towards that goal.

[Hardingfv32]

I will make an effort to fined these three SCCA representatives at Fontana and see what they are doing.

As a side note, what relative SCCA department could have three people to send to a Major event?

Brian

[rickb99]

.....I will make an effort to fined these three SCCA representatives at Fontana and see what they are doing......

I'd guess the same thing the three people from headquarters did/do at National Events of the past. NOT MUCH except socialize with the local staff and drink a couple of wines around the motorhomes in the evening.

All of the real race related functions are handled by the four or five people sent BY headquarters from other regions to oversee the event. All of which as far as I could ever see seems to be to make sure nobody has a 'home court' advantage or bias in the decisions that are made by to local club staff.

[Jnovak]

I would GLADLY pay the extra fee if it was used to support the regions hosting "invitational" majors. I'd pay more for the entry if it allowed for say the top 10 classes only at majors events, which I thought was the whole point of them in the first place. Maybe it's a stepping stone towards that goal.

I suspect that this may be what the eventual goal will be. Reduce the number of classes that attend the majors until there are just enough classes left for pretty much single class races.

Might even wind up being semi pro with 8 to 10 races.

Then the rest of us will race regionals.

PS: I have zero knowledge of anything.

[Hardingfv32]

...Reduce the number of classes that attend the majors until there are just enough classes left for pretty much single class races.

1) If this is the plan or even if there is some other financial plan, why not give the membership some heads up?

2) Reducing the class count is a dream. On the West Coast there was almost no sign of competitors changing their event choices from previous years. They simply are not traveling any farther than they did in years past. The Regions are not going to buy into an event with fewer classes unless they see an increase entry level in the proposed remaining classes.

Brian

[butch deer]

New points system. More points than old national points. Maybe they are charging by the point.

[Purple Frog]

I saw a T-shirt the other day...

"If you have to ask why, then you aren't going to understand the answer"

The Rand Series entry fees are around $1,000 per weekend. For that you get single class racing, lots of track time, and a staff of racers putting on races.

If Club is going to create a high quality experience such as that then the economics of the situation will require the costs to go up. There is no free lunch. Let's just say there are efforts Topeka is taking to try to ensure certain standards, and those efforts cost money.

Each person questioning should sit in on some of the board meetings where
the regions are trying to figure out how to stay afloat. I feel for the board members trying to make ends meet.

You read it here, it won't be long before club race entrys are at the $1,000 level.

[Terry Hanushek]

Steve

I believe that National is sending at least 3 people to each (and every) Majors event. I would assume that this new fee is to cover that cost. However, although it might be 'flashy', I cannot think of any reason why whatever they provide could not be handled by the sponsoring region at a considerably lower cost to the entrants.

In 2014, there will be three individuals - the Series Chief Steward, the Series Administrator and the Series Scrutineer - attend all of the races in a conference in order to provide continuity and consistent officiating. These individuals will be highly qualified members in their respective conferences, not employees of the Club. The assessment fee, in part, covers their travel expenses.

BTW there was a similar (slightly lower) Majors Assessment Fee in 2013

HTH

Terry

[dick patullo]

To add to what Terry said this is a $10 per double weekend increase over last year. last year National sent the series chief steward, and the series administrator who are field staff not central office employees and a publicity person who is a full time person. this year we also hope to send a series tech person to the larger events.

If Terry O, Jeff or Butch were at an event last year that is not part of the three.

[Brett Lane]

Seems pretty silly to me. Majors entry fee at MO last year was close to $700. I was told that the national office took $50 of that. Now another "majors tax" is way over the top.

Anyone talk to Butch about this?

Being in charge of it he should be able to shed light on it.

$570 for Sebring, and $595 for PBIR, especially Palm Beach is not bad. I don't think $60 is "another majors tax" but maybe ten bucks more than last year.

I'm Ok with it as I thought Palm Beach was going to be north of $700... I've been saving for this one. $60 is just a drop in the bucket and I live an hour away...

BTW- went to the supps, and didn't see where this money is part of the entry fee.

[cory mcleod]

Entry fees can be found on SCCA's site under the Major 2014 Event List page (link below). You have to click on the event and open the Supps.
http://www.scca.com/events/news.cfm?eid=6551&cid=51604

Sebring = $570
Palm Beach = $595
Auto Club = $540

That is all SCCA has posted now.

I ran the FL races last year, and these entry fees don't seem much different than last year. Is this much ado about (almost) nothing?

That being said, almost $600 for a race at PBIR still seems high. To me, it's just a small club track like so many others, but maybe their rental fees are high.

Cory

[Dave Welsh]

I just checked the entry fees for the Jan 2013 Florida races.

Sebring, Majors, $515
Palm Beach, Double National, $595


Since the merger of Grand Am and ALMS, ISC (NASCAR) has taken over the management of the Sebring facility. CFR has not had an easy time getting contracts signed by IMS for use of Sebring.

[Hardingfv32]

1) A couple of classes have compliance fees. Those fees were clearly explained to the membership. Why is it that most the membership have no knowledge the Majors Assessment Fee when it was in use during 2013?

2) "the Series Chief Steward, the Series Administrator and the Series Scrutineer - attend all of the races in a conference in order to provide continuity and consistent officiating." This is costing $8-10k per event! Can anyone tell me some of the actual issues that these people will solve for me as an event competitor? The cost vs benefit is way off on this expense.

Entry costs are a major concern for me personally. Poor event officiating is not even a consideration.

Brian

[Terry Hanushek]

Brian

1) A couple of classes have compliance fees. Those fees were clearly explained to the membership. Why is it that most the membership have no knowledge the Majors Assessment Fee when it was in use during 2013?

The compliance fees for SRF and FE are differential fees (not charged to all competitors). They are normally listed on the entry form because they impact a subset of the competitors. Note that these fees apply to all Regionals and Majors.

The Majors Assessment fee is only one line item for the fees and services provided by the Club. Others included the sanction/excess sanction, Runoffs travel fund and volunteer fund fees. In 2014, these fees will be consolidated into a single charge of $135 per car. These fees are based on all cars and are not normally broken out on the entry form any more than track rental or hospitality costs are itemized.

2) "the Series Chief Steward, the Series Administrator and the Series Scrutineer - attend all of the races in a conference in order to provide continuity and consistent officiating." This is costing $8-10k per event! Can anyone tell me some of the actual issues that these people will solve for me as an event competitor? The cost vs benefit is way off on this expense.

I'm not certain where your '$8-10k' originates. However, the discussion of event officials in Post 21, I stated "The assessment fee, in part, covers their travel expenses." emphasis added. Travel fees are only one part of the assessment; other services provided by the Club at Majors include event promotion, trophies, victory circle champagne and checker flags. Several of these items offset expenses normally paid by the Region.

Entry costs are a major concern for me personally. Poor event officiating is not even a consideration.

The primary definition of the Majors is that they are the highest level of competition in Club Racing. One way the Club has chosen to attain this high standard is to have the same highly qualified officials travel to all of the races in a conference.

HTH

Terry

[Steve Demeter]

What promotion???

I saw no promotion whatsoever for the Double Majors at MO last year and I live only 125 miles away. Nor did I see any in the media local to the track.

And what does promotion do for the guy paying the bill for it?

If an event is promoted as a spectator event, that should reduce the cost for a competitor because of increased revenues realized by the track and or sanctioning region (depending on the rental agreement)

How much money can one spend of checkered flags and winners circle champagne???

[DSPENCER23]

$60 dollars seems like a small price to pay to lend a hand to the future of the SCCA. SCCA is in trouble with most regions having declining number of racers and losing money on almost every race they hold. I think the Majors are a great idea to help revive the SCCA. Other racing groups are taking away our members and we can join them and be a track day organization or stay the ultimate road racing venue we have always been. SCCA is real racing and I think the other organizations just put on glorified track days.

[Amon]

The question is why is the SCCA membership declining and why are other racing groups
taking away our members. If DSpencer23 is correct, they're obviously doing something that's appealing and attracting new drivers?

Mark

[Steve Davis]

Are they attracting NEW drivers ... or SCCA drivers (away from SCCA) ?
THAT is a bigger question.
Steve, FV80

[B Farnham]

These days younger guys are into drifting and auto crossing/track days and know very little of club racing. IMO SCCA is failing to reach the younger generations and are failing in terms of marketing.....

[Amon]

Steve,

Regardless of where they're getting them, the fact remains they're getting them and the SCCA is not attracting them. Maybe the SCCA has grown too large and like our government, unable to
efficiently operate in today's world?? Topeka along with Enterprise may be too bloated but who
knows at this point??

Mark

88' Citation 002' FV

[Tiago Santos]

Are they attracting NEW drivers ... or SCCA drivers (away from SCCA) ?
THAT is a bigger question.
Steve, FV80

Indeed - yet despite the other clubs (it's really the Rand series' we're talking about, isn't it?) charging $400-500 more per weekend than SCCA, you don't see the competitors complaining about a $10 increase.

People need to decide what it is they want. We all seem to want SCCA to run their events like the Rand series, yet want them to cost less than half as much. I agree that would be ideal, but highly impractical.

There have been many threads here on Apexspeed about terrible costumer service experiences at a variety of tracks. It makes sense to me, that for something as important as the Majors are for the club, they would try to minimize those variables and figure out a way to make the experience consistent from track to track.

Like someone else said above - this is much ado about nothing..

[Hardingfv32]

One way the Club has chosen to attain this high standard is to have the same highly qualified officials travel to all of the races in a conference. Terry

First, thanks for continuing the conversation. Very enlightening.

1) I question the requirement for a higher level of officials at Major events. Was there some kind of survey that indicated a concern on the part of competitors with the standard level of SCCA officiating? I question the fact that these extra personnel bring anything to the event table.

2) Can you expand on the "volunteer fund fees". Is this a fund for the workers at the Major event or the Runoffs? How is this distributed and it is publicly document?

3) The pool of money that the $135 charge creates will be about $506,000. (150 entries per event X 25 events) Has a document been drawn up that states how this money will be distributed or are the funds getting buried into some kind of general fund? Is there any minutes or documents available to the membership describing how this money is to be spent.

Brian

[Hardingfv32]

There have been many threads here on Apexspeed about terrible costumer service experiences at a variety of tracks. It makes sense to me, that for something as important as the Majors are for the club, they would try to minimize those variables and figure out a way to make the experience consistent from track to track.

1) These extra officials did nothing to fix the problems at COTA this season. What could be a more high profile event?

2) How often does one have an issue with an errant official that you do did not actually create yourself? For me I would say once every 25 events. Now if it takes about $3000 in expenses to have these special officials at an event, then that works out to about $20 per entrant. ($3000 / 150 entrants) So, for me that means I am paying $500 ($20 x 25 events) to protect myself from an official ass chewing. I will take the $500! Hell... what are the chances one of these special officials will be there when you need them?

Brian

[problemchild]

I am not yet convinced that the Majors Program is the best path for SCCA to take, but if that is the chosen path, then having continuity of your 3 prime officials is absolutely the appropriate approach to providing an improved customer experience for participating racers. The 2nd best thing about pro racing, after single classes, is having an established and consistent operational process. For a few bucks per racer, it may be the best money spent at the event.

[butch deer]

$60 dollars seems like a small price to pay to lend a hand to the future of the SCCA. SCCA is in trouble with most regions having declining number of racers and losing money on almost every race they hold. I think the Majors are a great idea to help revive the SCCA. Other racing groups are taking away our members and we can join them and be a track day organization or stay the ultimate road racing venue we have always been. SCCA is real racing and I think the other organizations just put on glorified track days.

I would agree that Majors could revieve SCCA. They were touted to us as a special event where the top 8-10 classes would get great run groups with more track time (somewhat approaching the pro expieriencde). They have morphed into a new name for the old nationals with 24 classes,tight schedules and a new points system. At the same time they have decimated the regional races to the point that many regional racers are forc3d to look to other sanctioning bodies so they have a place to race.
The idea that other sanctioning bodies are mostly track day orginizations simply is not true. This will be my 50th year racing with SCCA however it is my 55th year with the MCSCC which has a wheel to wheel program just as compeitiive and well run as most SCCA races. Some years some series have deep an competitive fields in both groups.I'm sure this happens in lots of different racing groups.

[reidhazelton]

If you are loosing customers (drivers/entries) you don't raise your prices in hopes to get your customers back.

I think a big problem is SCCA trying to be something it is not: pro racing. It is CLUB racing, for a market that does not have the time/desire/resources to go "pro" racing. There are already "Pro" series out there (Trans Am, Mx5 Cup, Grand Am, Rand Series Events) and trying to make SCCA a direct competitor of that is a double whammy to failure. One, the existing series offer a better "pro" experience than SCCA can offer and you won't get many (if any) people to leave and come to SCCA regularly. Two, you almost but guarantee you will loose the low-buck racer once you cross the tipping point. $700 entry fees are just about there. Before you even hit the track you have spent well over $1000 in entries and transportation. I really don't see how this is going to help SCCA by trying to be something it is not. Like Butch Deer said, this has all come at a cost of the regional racer and program as a whole. I hope for the good of road racing that the Majors program proves me wrong, but I just don't see it.

I still say getting rid of the 2.5 Rule was a huge mistake and has lead SCCA down this path.

So far, Majors events have increased the cost and tow distance for many, while still being the same Nationals program. I attended 3 majors last year, and saw zero difference from Nationals except I got a poster and a plastic pen in the shape of a femur (yeah, not making that up).

[rickb99]

ICSCC still puts on 14 races a year (including at Portland International) and all entry fees are below $300. The officials and key administrative people are ALL licensed race car drivers with a love of their sport and they do an exceptional job.

There's a constant flow of SCCA drivers into ICSCC membership but we fully support SCCA's efforts here in the Northwest to stay alive for the good of the sport as a whole.

The racing is excellent, the post race parties are great, the annual banquets are wonderful and the entire atmosphere is like the SCCA of 50/60 years ago!!

Come on out to the Northwest and enjoy road racing as it should and used to be Even if you just make a western tour (leaving trailer and car here while you fly home) some summer you can pack a lot of racing in to different periods of the summer. SCCA licenses are recognized as are ICSCC in SCCA events (we like each other).