2013-2014 N.Z National Motorsport Classes..(Excluding NZV8 & ST please.)

[Swedish Brick]

Originally Posted by Icarus_nz

I feel that largely, if left alone, the top can sort itself out. Underneath that the focus needs to be by the competitors, for the competitors.

Also something people want to compete in, will be something others will want to watch. So if you worry about the above, the bums on seat will follow.
So yeah, I agree, sort things out for the competitors and the rest of the problems will be mostly sorted as a result.

[Alpina107]

Originally Posted by Swedish Brick

Also something people want to compete in, will be something others will want to watch.

Do you really think that, Brick?

I’m not asking that in a nasty way, but I would have thought there were plenty of classes of racing that had no problems attracting competitors, but had little appeal for spectators. I won't name any of them, as that will probably just start a fight.

Fortunately it really doesn't matter, as for 80 or 90% of race meetings it's bums in car seats that balances the books, rather than bums in grandstand seats. For rally events, with little or no opportunity to get paying spectators, the percentages would be even higher.

The Clubs who organise almost all of the race & rally events are doing it for their own members and members from other clubs, all of whom are affiliated to MNZ. It is in this area where I think MNZ needs to have a greater emphasis, as this in turn will attract more participants and the sport will grow. Yes, premier classes have their place, but not at the "expense" of the vast majority. If the sport is strong at the grassroots level, then the upper levels will be similarly strong. Right now, the pyramid is starting to crumble because of the disproportionate effort (people and money) being put into the races for less than 50 drivers.

[Swedish Brick]

Yeah I think that mostly.
But I guess it can depend on what level of bums on seats. People who will pay $10 to watch a club day? Or people who will pay $50 for a big event.

[Woolley]

Originally Posted by Icarus_nz

the focus needs to be by the competitors, for the competitors.

Very much agree, with one proviso. As a marshal, don't forget that you need to entertain the officials because that's the only way you'll get them there. You need them and they need you.

[socram]

Originally Posted by Woolley

Very much agree, with one proviso. As a marshal, don't forget that you need to entertain the officials because that's the only way you'll get them there. You need them and they need you.

Spot on Woolley.
When I am accused of being overly pragmatic by allowing cars to run that others have an issue with, I remind them of my abject boredom when as a flaggie, I was stuck on Pukekohe's long back straight in stinking hot (or miseraby wet) weather, with a high profile grid of single seaters - all nine of them, for what I think was a NZ GP. Boring.
We always consider the flaggies and the officials and my mantra has always been larger grids are good for everyone.
As Alpina points out, NZ motorsport at the supposed pinnacle has had miserably small grids and that alone has put off more paying spectators than any other single factor. That it has also been televised has merely compounded the problem.
We don't try to attract spectators and are happy enough if any come along to watch, but even if we had six full grids of 40 cars per grid, (I wish...) I doubt that it would affect the majority of potential spectators as the number of true enthusiasts is remarkably small. The majority only really turn out for one or two highly marketed, high profile meetings a year.

It is rather like those who will make the effort to go to an All Blacks rugby match, but won't even turn a head to watch a local rugby match just around the corner, even if it is free and the playing standard is very high.

[Goat Boy]

I agree with what has been said with regard to competitor numbers vs spectator numbers, and let's face it, car clubs, who run the majority of events, are there for their members and that's why they put on the events. Even the NZFMR, which IMO is probably the best event on the NZ calendar, only has modest spectator numbers but HUGE grids.

Interestingly though, if you hold a Wings and Wheels weekend at Ardmore, for instance, you are pretty much guaranteed to get over 30,000 per day in the gate. I suppose much of that attraction must come from the aircraft, but nevertheless those with classic cars to show off will be doing so in front of a lot of people!

[Icarus_nz]

Originally Posted by Swedish Brick

Yeah I think that mostly.
But I guess it can depend on what level of bums on seats. People who will pay $10 to watch a club day? Or people who will pay $50 for a big event.

The $10 for a club day one is interesting. There is one point of view that anything free is of low quality and worthless therefore an entry charge to a club day is a good thing.

Socrams views about the cost of collecting the (gross) $10 as opposed to its (nett) value have certainly sharpened my opinion on this.

I think you'd be far better to take the stance of free entry and encourage people along.

Marshalling is an extremly important form of participation.
Perhaps the low income bum on the bank could be encouraged to sit in a windy cold marshalls post and get sworn at by ungrateful competitors.
In all seriousness tho - why not?

Many competitors seem to take the view that the crowds should be there. They all want free tickets for their mates on a promoted meeting. How much effort do they make to encourage family, friends, workmates and strangers on the street along? Word of mouth is the cheapest form of promotion.

Developing a casual interest and knowledge of the sport is the seed that leads to bigger things

[Swedish Brick]

The $10 comment was kinda off the cuff to differentiate between 2 variables, not nessicarily meaning you should charge for a basic day. I guess at some level you need to start charging though

[Goat Boy]

A good example of a well-attended free event was the annual Domain Hill Climb in Auckland - you couldn't get near the place for spectators, it was a great fun day. Then Auckland Council ruined it by imposing a whole lot of extra costs which HRC couldn't afford to meet, so it got canned. Pity.

[Icarus_nz]

Originally Posted by Swedish Brick

The $10 comment was kinda off the cuff to differentiate between 2 variables, not nessicarily meaning you should charge for a basic day. I guess at some level you need to start charging though

All good. You actually triggered a train of thought in me. The post wasn't intended as a rebuttal.

I guess its up to the promotors to decide when to start charging and how much.
The financial risk/benefit analysis decides who, what, why, where and when.

[smokin'joe]

Originally Posted by Icarus_nz

All good. You actually triggered a train of thought in me. The post wasn't intended as a rebuttal.

I guess its up to the promotors to decide when to start charging and how much.
The financial risk/benefit analysis decides who, what, why, where and when.

when i was actively involved as an organiser of clubsport events, we run 2-3 days where 'gold coin' entry netted a few $2-3K days on the gate, and these were only sprints and 1/4 mile type days. funnily enough, the Drift South round netted similar money for a higher entry fee

[NZSTfan]

Ah the good old gold coin trick. Always works a treat that one. I remember being part of an event (non motorsport) that required a 'koha' as they called it of gold coin and the uptake was huge. To most people its just some loose change jangling around in your pockets, and it gives the punters two options as to how much they want to pay without the need to judge them or make them feel judged.

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by Icarus_nz

The $10 for a club day one is interesting. There is one point of view that anything free is of low quality and worthless therefore an entry charge to a club day is a good thing.

Socrams views about the cost of collecting the (gross) $10 as opposed to its (nett) value have certainly sharpened my opinion on this.

I think you'd be far better to take the stance of free entry and encourage people along.

Marshalling is an extremly important form of participation.
Perhaps the low income bum on the bank could be encouraged to sit in a windy cold marshalls post and get sworn at by ungrateful competitors.
In all seriousness tho - why not?

Many competitors seem to take the view that the crowds should be there. They all want free tickets for their mates on a promoted meeting. How much effort do they make to encourage family, friends, workmates and strangers on the street along? Word of mouth is the cheapest form of promotion.

Developing a casual interest and knowledge of the sport is the seed that leads to bigger things

I am of 2 minds about the whole "free" thing. One of which, yes, you want to encourage people to get involved so making it free is easy for them to do so. On the other hand, realistically it is true that people perceive free or cheap things as having little or no value.

The big issue I see at NZ tracks and tracks in Australia and other parts of the world like the USA, is that very few people I find running road course race tracks as managers or administrators come from a customer service oriented background and I find very few tracks have it together on what I would consider to be an acceptable level when it comes to customer service.

[RogerH]

I suppose all of this just shows the issues facing NZ motor sport.

The vast majority of events are put on by clubs on the basis that they are primarily for the benefit of competitors. Usually the entry fee for a competitor is worked out to cover costs without the need of spectator revenue.

On the other hand, the (so-called) pinnacle of NZ motor sport can usually generate no more competitor entries than the average club meeting. With all of the hype, PR, hangers-on, TV, demands for sponsor exposure etc etc the whole thing becomes such a burden that the financial implications end up poisoning the whole thing. If you look back at the problems that have plagued the top end of NZ motor sport it usually has a financial root.

It makes you wonder if the "pinnacle" model isn't inherently flawed?

[Swedish Brick]

Gold coin is a good idea for club days I think. Even tell the gate keeper that if ma and pa turn up with 5 kids tow that a fiver is fine. Gold coin each or $5 per car.

But we're a little carried away, need to sort classes for them to watch first!

Maybe what we need is the aforementioned MSNZ forum with different access and levels depending on who you are.
And maybe a template on the make up of the club, and how it should be run? Ie meetings you need to have, what you need to report etc.
That way everyone is basically on the same page

[socram]

Roger's point is the valid one. If you are super competitive, an elite sports person or even promoting elite events, then you are naturally only interested in the 3 or 4% at the very top, as rightly or wrongly, the Murphs, SVG's, Jonny Reids, Evans', etc are the people in the public eye and are perceived as draw cards. To promote their attendance requires a massive PR machine and budget.

If the paying spectators seduced by that PR hype turn up to find mediocre support grids, then they have every right to feel cheated and may well not bother returning.

Although Tier 1 doesn't have those star drivers and may have those one step below international star status, the McIntyres, Foggs, et al, they aren't quite at the level of attracting the crowds but the support programmes - apart from an occasional boost from Muscle cars possibly, have been a total disaster and enough to put anyone off.

In truth, I am a great believer in most aspects of my commercial, sporting and private life, of the Pareto theory - or the 80/20 rule.

That is, for example, 80% of the effort by MSNZ is aimed at just 20% of the competitors. Just 20% of the race meetings will attract 80% of the total spectator income.

Just 80% of the communications on this board will come from just 20% of the active readers. I'd even go as far as to say that 80% of the clubs at AGM will only represent 20% of the active members, but that is straying from the topic...

It therefore behoves series organisers and maybe even promoters, to accept that if your rules and entry criteria are accepted by 80% of your members, then you are probably on the right track, but you may have to increase the base rather than try and appease the minority.

If you have a viable class or grid, and outsiders point the finger and try and tell you that your rules need to be tightened, in line with a perceived international standard, then you can only suggest to them that to do so will generally reduce the grids not increase them.

For classes to be viable, they have to be inclusive and designed to attract, not be aimed at exclusion. Some people see some form of "purity" as the holy grail, but as has been said elsewhere, enforcing clean driving standards is now seen as far more important than technically pure cars, especially when many of those so called "pure" cars are anything but pure.