Tony George wants to take over IndyCar

Keep one thing in mind gentlemen. The owners also escalated the costs. Big ego's and this "win at all cost" attitude sent CART off the deep end in budgets. One needs to look no further than chassis wars of the late 80's and early 90's. When Penske racing failed to make the 500 in 95. 3 chassis were in play for that team. They started with the Penske chassis, moved to the Lola and then the Reynard. Now calculate the cost of that and tell me that RP didn't go overboard spending on that. That was a personally decision, not a business decision. When do they stop spending mega dollars and come to their own senses of spending to the value the series has? RP will out spend everyone for two simply reasons....A) He can & B) It is all about winning and nothing else. Same for Chip Ganassi. The rest are trying to keep up and can't. Even in today's "spec" environment, Penske and Ganassi still have won the majority of the races since the move to Indy Car from CART. The only way for someone to break that cycle is to "innovate" something no one else has. One only has to look at how Jim Hall beat everyone in 1980 with the Chaparral 2K. Team only consisted of a handful of people and they won 5 races that year.

 

What gets me is THEY have the final say in how much they spend. Wouldn't it suit their needs to do something that most of us do on a day to day basis, live within your means? Try cutting internal cost and streamline operations so you can maintain a profit.If you don't have the resources to compete against RP,CG,MA, etc, then trim the sails so you can at least pay the bills.

 

Racing for 99 percent of the teams is about ego not profits. Very few teams make money. It's a place where people who can't afford an NFL franchise play. Don't forget that. (Quote from Davis Atlas) Penske's lawyer).

Art

 

That is any excellent quote and one I will put that one in the memory banks. And with that statement it just pretty much defeats their statements of "cost control" doesn't it!

 

It depends.

As far as a spectator goes, it can depend on who is driving what car, ie I don't really follow any Indycar anything these days, but as a loose example, I would follow any car Rick Mears, Tom Sneva or Mark Donohue got in, no matter what the series, and I would follow whoever stepped into a Penske car, no matter who it was.
Back then drivers didn't swap out like they do today, and I also think that is a major drawback of the NBA, MLB and the NHL - we fans cannot keep up - players change teams so much we can't keep track of who is where, today. That drastically dilutes the product.
Whatever car Mario Andretti got in, we followed, but whatever car MICHAEL Andretti got in, we didn't. And Nico? I have no response.

Roger has the gold, where is CART?

But Penske and Ganassi are on a level above the rest, they HAVE to be up front or, like EVERYONE else, they will lose sponsors. Penske is smart enough to know that few watch an open wheel race outside of Indy, so he does what it takes to excel there.
And you cannot compare a 1980 team to a 2012 team, too much has changed, and unless the rules change (which they won't), that will never happen again.
Folks used to design and build cars in their garages and show up at Indy, Daytona and Sebring and compete - good luck with that today!

How do you do that and not affect ALL teams?
What I mean is, you slow down the top teams by 20 mph, you will slow ALL teams by 20 mph, and aside from going a tad bit slower, nothing changes.
I have been in series where you have to run spec-this and spec that, and it doesn't contain costs OR development because you then just divert money to other parts of the car. As a prime example, look at restrictor plate racing - designed to slow cars down - which it did - but teams have spent millions developing plate motors - so what was the point? It slowed cars down, but not the costs, in fact it RAISED the costs because now you have crews dedicated to just the plate motors.

One series I followed specified 'crate' motors. So guys went from spending $25-35,000 on a motor to $9,000-12,000. Then they went overboard on TUNING said crate motor, spent a TON on a carb, and I have heard stories of guys spending $5,000-8,000 just on headers. Why? 5 horse here, 10 horse there, 15 horse somewhere else, all of a sudden you have 30 more horse than someone else, and if the tuning gets you 20-25 horse, now you have 50 more HP than your opponents, and you are getting close to spending the same on an crate motor that you would on an 'open' motor.

Bottom line is I don't know how you put controls into racing to cut costs, because you don't cut costs, you simply allocate capital differently. Find me a team that is as fully sponsored today (and for the future) as it was a year ago, and I bet they spend more today than they did a year ago trying to accomplish the same thing.

 

Lets take these one at a time:

"It depends.

As far as a spectator goes, it can depend on who is driving what car, ie I don't really follow any Indycar anything these days, but as a loose example, I would follow any car Rick Mears, Tom Sneva or Mark Donohue got in, no matter what the series, and I would follow whoever stepped into a Penske car, no matter who it was.
Back then drivers didn't swap out like they do today, and I also think that is a major drawback of the NBA, MLB and the NHL - we fans cannot keep up - players change teams so much we can't keep track of who is where, today. That drastically dilutes the product.
Whatever car Mario Andretti got in, we followed, but whatever car MICHAEL Andretti got in, we didn't. And Nico? I have no response."


This is you. You prefer to follow the drivers. Nice choice, but not my choice. I prefer to follow the cars. I don't care who's butt is in the seat, but I do care what is under the drivers butt. Engines,Trans etc.....is my driving force. Point is, that most people that go all have different reasons. Most of those have been wiped out because of "spec" racing and ride buying. Your point on NBA,NHL is right on point. If you don't know who the players are you lose interest very fast!


"Roger has the gold, where is CART?"

The same place all other series are when the "greed" factor steps in. Roger is one of many players who tanked CART. Roger is just smart enough to know when to quit. He bailed just before it tanked. Same for Ganassi. Power players know when the train ride is over and when to get off. I can't say the same for Forsythe or Kalkhoven.



"But Penske and Ganassi are on a level above the rest, they HAVE to be up front or, like EVERYONE else, they will lose sponsors. Penske is smart enough to know that few watch an open wheel race outside of Indy, so he does what it takes to excel there.
And you cannot compare a 1980 team to a 2012 team, too much has changed, and unless the rules change (which they won't), that will never happen again.
Folks used to design and build cars in their garages and show up at Indy, Daytona and Sebring and compete - good luck with that today!"


True, but in their efforts to maintain the status quo they effectively kill all the small teams and only upset the fans. Running everyone into the ground is like WW2. The German Tanks were far superior to anything the US had, we simply built more of them and for every Panzer there was at least 20 Sherman's. Hard to over come obstacles like that when you can't do something different. Small teams live on innovation. One only needs to look at Jim Hall to know that a well funded small team can compete. But as noted, as long as the rules remain intacted in this manner.nothing changes and the fans stay away.


"How do you do that and not affect ALL teams?
What I mean is, you slow down the top teams by 20 mph, you will slow ALL teams by 20 mph, and aside from going a tad bit slower, nothing changes.
I have been in series where you have to run spec-this and spec that, and it doesn't contain costs OR development because you then just divert money to other parts of the car. As a prime example, look at restrictor plate racing - designed to slow cars down - which it did - but teams have spent millions developing plate motors - so what was the point? It slowed cars down, but not the costs, in fact it RAISED the costs because now you have crews dedicated to just the plate motors.

One series I followed specified 'crate' motors. So guys went from spending $25-35,000 on a motor to $9,000-12,000. Then they went overboard on TUNING said crate motor, spent a TON on a carb, and I have heard stories of guys spending $5,000-8,000 just on headers. Why? 5 horse here, 10 horse there, 15 horse somewhere else, all of a sudden you have 30 more horse than someone else, and if the tuning gets you 20-25 horse, now you have 50 more HP than your opponents, and you are getting close to spending the same on an crate motor that you would on an 'open' motor. "



And who's fault is that? If owners want to spend mega money at all levels in an effort to win, then neither you, I, the sanctioning body, The President of the USA or God himself is going to stop it. You can't, It is called competition. All you can do is give someone a rule book that allows them to find a better way to overcome the obstacles in front of them.

Do you have a rule book that you have to play by to run your business? Or does your company innovate and succeed against your competition? Racing is no different. The only difference is power. RP, CG and the rest aren't going to give that up either, so you get what you have now.

Until a new sanctioning body comes along offering a level playing field, you will continue to have the status quo. History has shown that it repeats itself. Indy Car racing and its success and failures is no different.

 

Maybe he's Jay Gatsby?

 

No, the word "sport" means many things. My reason is not to insult but to offer a bit of jest so an argument does not become heated. When people toss words out like moron or idiot, then they insult not only the individual, but the conversation itself. I enjoy the conversations about Indy Car and if I do call you sport....it is simply my way of being polite even if we disagree. The British use it quite often for the same reasons. So shall we continue with the discussion of a failing series?


http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/sport

see under: informal

 

Nothing to speak of except.......Princess Sparkle Pony won't be racing in the Indy 500 this year. I can only offer this comment in regards to this annoucement.........YEEEEEEEEEEEHAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

Thank you!!!

 

New CEO of Hulman and Company Today, Belskus to retain IMS and IRL CEO responsibilities, looks to take full IRL responsibilities.

Excellent if you ask me, enables him to focs on the league. Maybe they hire a commissioner or something.

Digging the move.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/motor/2012/11/20/mark-miles-ceo-hulman-indianapolis-motor-speedway/1716733/

 

A good read.......http://gordonkirby.com/categories/columns/theway/2012/the_way_it_is_no363.html

 

An old saying fits in regards to this matter........"you can't polish a turd". If people won't watch the racing, then who will be going to a movie based on a series no one is watching? Nice try Indy Car!!!

 

Time will tell. If this season draws more attendance & tv ratings, then yes it needs to be further investigated and acted upon if it can draw in new fans. But the core product has to be the reason people want to attend. "Spec" racing never has had a major draw anywhere except for NASCAR and even they are changing up specs to keep their market share.