Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland
If you could do away with NHRA's slush fund from the sponsors, that would change the sponsor's attitude a lot. The fact that they pay for singles is one thing, but posting money that does not get paid to a racer and ends up in NHRA's pocket is another. NHRA claims it the extra money covers the administration of the program and it does, plus a lot more. If this is an area that was and is planned to be a profit center for them (non-profit??) then make it known. Accountability is important and is part of what Jim is talking about. If there really is validity to the ROI for posting contingency that can be proved for the sponsors, then let it be clearly shown. There are no records of what happens in the sponsorship program, but we see NHRA's bottom line and behavior in other areas and that makes us suspect. One benefit of their position as a privately held non-profit entity is that they do not have to disclose such details. If they were true to their "association" title, then those details would be available to the supporting membership. Anytime men can hide their activity from scrutiny by peers, an opportunity for corruption exists. And when an opportunity for corruption exists, someone will come along to take advantage of it.
|
Dwight you are right on the money with this. The sponsors have been enhanced over the years just like the racers. Back in the early 90's I got $5-600 for a class win. The Ford and Chrysler guys got quite a bit more. The fact that NHRA keeps what money that doesn't go to the racers makes it unlikely to attract more sponsors. I have to think if a sponsor posts money they want it to go to racers and not to NHRA.
Another important thing in your post is the lack of transparency. They don't want anyone to know where the money is going. A non profit like NHRA should be transparent. Why are they being secretive?