Some interesting points have come out of this discussion. Seems I can't
keep my mouth shut (or fingers still....)
Sponsors of vintage events are spending piddling sums. Chrysler is
sponsoring all sorts of events around the world and as Jeremy mentions,
helping their image greatly. The total cost is probably less than the
engine development cost for their NASCAR truck program. Maybe less than
the catering/hospitality budget for one NASCAR event! Good payback.
Probably same for all the vintage sponsors, but they are promoting as
much to the participants as they spectators. They get good press in the
magazines by putting out small bucks for event advertisements. Actually,
sponsoring an event probably costs Rolex or Jaguar a bunch less than an
ad in a national magazine!
But getting a crowd to come to some out of the way track for a race is
unlikely. How many of you remember what the spectators were like at
Sebring and Watkins Glen 30 years ago? Remember the "bog" at the Glen?
Burnt cars and giant piles of beer cans at Sebring? Not enough
rent-a-cops to keep order so the crowd did whatever they wanted.
Most of the races I remember from the 60s had few spectators other than
crew and friends. Just like now.
We've actually got a good mix now. Several big spectator events spaced
around the country, close enough to draw the serious enthusiast as
spectators, enough exposure for the dilletante drivers hoping for some
ESPN airtime, and maybe even tempt them to bring the Megabuck cars we
don't see elsewhere.
Then we have lots of "grass roots" races for those of us what "just want
to have fun."
BTW, big spectator crowds means lots higher insurance costs, crowd
control costs, cleanup costs, etc.
The only thing that would pump $$$ in to any event (vintage racing or
otherwise) is television coverage. That is what drives NASCAR, F1,
football, basketball, baseball, soccer and "pro" wrestling. Uh, TV
coverage and gambling, but we won't talk about that!
Racing is "so popular" that ABC has passed on live coverage of CART Long
Beach next year for a ballgame! Boy, Chris Pook must be p*ssed! And F1
is shown only for the insomniacs or Sunday AM early risers on ESPN2
(gotta have that golf on the good channel, man. )
As an aside, I don't get TV. We have 100 channels and some of the
strangest "entertainment." Watching golf to me is as exciting as
watching grass grow. I guess I don't get it, cause I can't put up with
watching continual shows of amimals either mating or eating each other
on the Discovery channel either.
As for the idea of reducing competition by only having practice
sessions, my experience says this won't work. People who drive
agressively in races are driving as agressively in practice. The one
thing that works to calm down the overly agressive drivers is to have a
"name" give them some "advice." And in my opinion, many of these overly
agressive drivers are the least competent drivers. Competent, but very
fast drivers will not cause incidents because they know their limits,
how and where to pass and when to stay out of the way of the
incompetents. Ever been on the track with Bob Akin? Brian Redman?
Stirling Moss? Well, Stirling has been known to get carried away...
Having said all this, I think that having <appropriate> sponsorship has
some possibilities. Here in New England, Volvo is sponsoring vintage
classes at SCCA events and is subsidizing the entry fees (costs $75 a
race!) for some goodwill and publicity.
Clubs (as opposed to vintage racing businesses which already do this)
should look into some local sponsorship of appropriate companies. Give
them space for track banners and decals for the cars in exchange for
subsidizing entry fees and race parties. Ten $1000 sponsors would
subsidize a nice chunk of the costs of a 200 entrant event, and the
sponsors would be paying about $1/head for exposure to a very good
crowd. Do any clubs do this now?
Maybe the drug companies would be interested. They are spending ad money
like crazy now. Vintage racing has lots of doctors, and maybe they would
give free Prozac to the overly agressive drivers <g>.
(I'm sorry, I can't be serious for too long,,,)
--
Jim Hayes Winchester, MA, USA
hayes@mediaone.net http://www.fotec.com/jim.htm
jeh@fotec.com http://www.fotec.com/
All generalizations, with the possible exception of this one, are false!
|