Fixing things

[cutta]

Originally Posted by Lew Silverman

I don't think you have to look any further back than the original ADRL to see why that scenario isn't practical from a "business" standpoint. It was a great idea for both the racers (who got free entry) and the spectators (who only paid for parking), but even a multi-millionaire like Sheik Al-Thani got tired of losing money every year.

IMHO, the NHRA has a very simple business model -

• Provide a safe venue for the racers (and spectators) to participate at -
• Provide a competition structure that is exciting for the casual fan, and -
• Deliver a plan to provide a decent return-on-investment for its business partners (the sponsors)

The reality is that the majority of the spectators at most National Events, and those who tune-in to the Fox Sports broadcasts, are there to see the competitors that make the most noise, smoke and flames. These are also the folks that spend their money on the products that NHRA's business partners sell, both on and off the property. That's what matters to the corporate bean-counters. Coca-Cola needs to sell a whole lot of Mello-Yello or they'll put their millions elsewhere.

The NHRA has had many, many opportunities to provide the sportsman classes the national exposure that they should be getting, and other than the Alcohol classes and maybe 5 minutes on the "other" broadcast each week, that's it! And it's not like Bob Frey, Alan Rinehart and Lewis Bloom haven't tried to spot-light some of us!

The bottom line is that the coverage (and the money) goes to the competitors the casual fans and sponsors want to see.



Drag Racing Online (www.dragracingonline.com) has been publishing the NHRA's tax returns for the last few years. They might answer a few questions.

In regards to financial breakdown, this is what I mean. The tax return identifies sum totals. What I want to see is the true economic value in dollars of the pro categories vs. that of the sportsman. So, this would include, financial investment from teams, sponsorship dollars from those teams, sales influenced by those teams(tickets, merchandise, parts, etc), exposure to the NHRA brand cause by those teams. This would identify. The sum total economic impact all of the categories.

This would answer this question of which brings more value and where marketing bias can be applied. It will either verify that a strategy has worked or that a strategy needs to be modified. At the end of the day, the marketing budget has to be allocated to bend towards the thing that brings the most value so the ROI is maximized. I'm not a business major but I would assume you would always place an emphasis on the things that maximize value. What's unclear to me is what actually brings more value?
We read opinions but I haven't seen or read many facts that validate one or the other. Regardless, it not about an us vs. them deal, but more so optimizing the strategy to maximize value.


As to my statement regarding an outside funding source. I just believe that it can't be NHRA's job alone to source funding. Their resources and ability only extend so far and the racing climate now seems to be proof of that. This is based on the assumption that no money is being wasted unnecessarily and that the budget they've allocated and put together is actually based upon the money available. Whether that is the correct assumption, I do not know. Regardless, to me it seems evident that the budget is tight. So how could one assume that purses should increase without a way to fund them? Or for their to be an increase in financial commitment when the commitment is probably near it's max? The only place I've seen a significant increase in payout is in some of the annual one race events. There aren't very many multi-race series that are increasing their financial commitment. I would even venture to say that those events with the most popular classes(ie today's outlaw racing classes), don't need to be included because its harder to do when your not the newest class on the block. How many series with classes that are 10yrs or older are able to increase their financial commitment? Simply put, that's hard, especially with an ever changing consumer base.

I guess to me and this may be naive, its not that simple. The problem is complex given today's economic climate and depending on NHRA has yielded a result that for most is below par. At least that seems to be the feeling from the comments I read. I guess I would like to see a different strategy of some sort utilized to help source more funding.


I don't have the answers nor am I the authority on all things drag racing, just another opinion, and another perspective to add his few cents whether right or wrong.