I agree with Jay(!) factually and philosophically, though not attitudinally
this time. (He was the voice of total reason during PF's last round of goo,
nobody's perfect:)
There's NO need to involve SP in any SM discussions. That just promotes an "Us
vs Them" attitude.
Build your new category and leave us to live or die on our own merits.
And I add too: What's the median age of ST or SM car? Most cars are on a 5
year payment, with 3-4 years of warranty. Ergo, I love SP but ain't cutting on
my new Impreza till about 2006 because the credit union will flip out!.
All classes in SP are at least as big as they ever have been in spite of the
'brain drain' that ST might be causing.
ASP has grown especially well even without the Carvettes. BSP seems to be
accepting the C4s and CSP is doing OK too. Bunches of new CSP cars in the
pipeline, as soon as they're paid off. FSP is very strong, and the new DSP
population base is far newer than the winning X1/9.
Kimball Ayer
(was DSP X1/9, now GS WRX, future CSP??)
---------------------------------------------------------
Jay wrote:
the (currently two if you stretch the point quite a bit) SM "classes" would be
combined with the SP classes they most closely resemble (in Dennis' opinion) in
terms of performance.
I don't see any upside for any of the SP competitors who get "consolidated" -
the classes he names are doing OK without his help, thank you - nor for the
sport as a whole.
SM hasn't been around for long enough to acquire a base of fully-developed
car/driver combinations, or even...
|