Matt Murray wrote:
> As I am to understand, Steve presented a program to SCCA that may
> have similar to this current program, or a closer match to what
> he ran previously. SCCA declined.
If it happened that way, I could understand SCCA responding in the negative.
Clearly, what Steve set out to do would have required substantial funding.
> Perhaps a simple agreement to
> disagree, but perhaps what Steve is putting out now.
I'm not clear on what you're saying. Is Steve now telling folks he was treated
rudely and/or threatened by SCCA?
> I am sure
> the success of the Rev-It-Up
Let's be careful what we define as "success" here. If, by "success," you mean
"program revenue (entry fees, ticket sales, concessions, sponsorships, etc.)
exceeds expenses," then RIU was anything but. It was a marketing program for
Mazda. As such, it was neither expected nor required to make a profit. SCCA
could ill afford to take the same approach to a National competition series.
> Rev-It-up is over, so Car & Driver in
> conjunction with Steve's programs and ideals, can be activated.
Agreed. It's still not autocross, though. That's not a Bad Thing, but it does
mean that Steve's program will appeal to a different market.
> SCCA knew this demographic is important to the Club. Steve knew
> it had potential in revenue generation.
If and when it becomes clear that the PRO series is economically viable, Steve
can say "I told you so." IMO, it can't ever replace Solo, unless the format
changes.
> Steve has a partner with C&D. SCCA has a partner with, .... who?
How's about Tire Rack? What are they, chopped liver?
;<)
Jay
|