[DOF_power]

Motorsports Forum: Tony George Talks Open-Wheel Racing

registration required


Extract:


Day one of the ninth annual SportsBusiness Daily/SportsBusiness Journal Motorsports Marketing Forum at the Westin at Times Square in N.Y. yesterday featured a one-on-one with IRL CEO Tony George.

A few key quotes by George, including the fact that he is prepared to fold the IRL if it does not turn a profit by 2013:

Q: How many races will there be on the 2010 schedule?

George: Sixteen to 20 is a comfortable number for what we do. There will be opportunities for us to do more international outreach. ... Drivers want to drive every week. Assuming the operating budgets and sponsorships are there, we could do 20-22 races a year.

Q: Is IRL profitable as a stand-alone business?

George: Not yet.

Q: In 2013?

George: It has to be or there won’t be a 2013

[Racer Duck]

Sounds like a businessman talking...

'course, if IRL folks up, I doubt he can afford to keep Indy open .. they gotta make close to 50% of their revenue "in the month of May"...

[Bob Tanner]

Sounds like a guy with a firm grasp on reality (unlike the head of another well known American racing series I could name).

The American love affair with the automobile is now about twenty-five years dead. Big time racing, of all sorts, has transitioned from a past time to a business, and a mostly short-sighted and poorly run business at that.

I think Tony is pretty much right on the money, but I think 2015 will be a "drop dead" date.

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Sounds like a guy with a firm grasp on reality (unlike the head of another well known American racing series I could name).

The American love affair with the automobile is now about twenty-five years dead. Big time racing, of all sorts, has transitioned from a past time to a business, and a mostly short-sighted and poorly run business at that.

I think Tony is pretty much right on the money, but I think 2015 will be a "drop dead" date.

The only thing I could say is that it wasn't only an american love affair with the automobile and the same happened here in Europe.

That and the fact that I'm depressed, and also pissed of about "average guy in the street doesn't care how many cylinders the car has" speeches.
Prelude to ball games fans, not interested in motorsport, witch the business must attract.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

The only thing I could say is that it wasn't only an american love affair with the automobile and the same happened here in Europe.

That and the fact that I'm depressed, and also pissed of about "average guy in the street doesn't care how many cylinders the car has" speeches.
Prelude to ball games fans, not interested in motorsport, witch the business must attract.

I realized that it was an "American" and "European" love affair with the automobile. It probably would have been the same for Third World countries too, but economics pretty much stopped that. However, Tony George is/was concerned primarily with American racing. So, A addressed it as the "American Love Affair." No disrespect intended.

Automobiles, since the early 70's have become pretty generic. Yearly changes and improvement are just a fond memory. Brand identification by sight is becoming more and more difficult.

The average person can no longer work on their own car and maintain it, other than the simplest of task. They have become so technical that the average person can do little more than change oil or plugs.

Based on census figures and report from the Bureau of Economic Analysis personal incomes as risen 683% from 1960 to 2006. (from $5300 to $36,200)

In that same time frame the average cost of a new car has gone up 1076% ($2600 to $28000) and the cost of maintaining said car is up 742% ($700 to $5200). The average person no longer looks at his/her car as a treasured possession but rather as a necessary liability.

I can empathize with the person who no longer cares what kind of car he/she drives. It's "just a car," anyway. Believe me, if I should ever move to a place where the public tranportation is reliable, safe and economical, my vehicles will be the first things to go.

Add to all this the very obvious fact that the most prestigious racing bodies have changed from being sanctioning bodies to profit-oriented big business and virtually ignore the desires of the real racing enthusiasts.

Is it any wonder the love affair with the automobile and racing is about gone and divorce is clearly on the horizon?

[DOF_power]

Truth is depressive.
But for us motorsport fans what will be left ?!

I just can't bring myself on the superstar driver worshiping bandwagon.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

Truth is depressive.
But for us motorsport fans what will be left ?!

I just can't bring myself on the superstar driver worshiping bandwagon.

I'm with you, prima dona worship has never been my thing, and I just won't get interested in Stick&Ball again. I kicked that back in 1987 when they went on strike. Considering the way S&B has gone in the past 20 years, I miss it not a bit.

On the plus side, the small, local tracks which haven't sold their souls to the Gods of Late Models and other über expensive classes, but have multiple classes for cars which are in varying degrees of "stock" are holding their own, locally. It's not pretty or classy and the sponsors range from a local motel to a garage, and the drivers actually race.

These tracks will survive because they're reasonably priced, fun and it's still moderately affordable to compete, as long as you have some mechanical ability, a good friend at the local junk yard, and don't mind admitting your racing is a hobby and not a business.

Then I can always go back to shooting darts. That played in bars and gives me a reason to drink, any way.

[Syoung]

I have a friend who's a race official & sez the IRL mgt. group is unprofessional and runs the sanction like the SCCA; kind of a "club racing mentality". I'm a former race official, so I understand what he means.

[onearmsteve]

Originally Posted by Syoung

I have a friend who's a race official & sez the IRL mgt. group is unprofessional and runs the sanction like the SCCA; kind of a "club racing mentality". I'm a former race official, so I understand what he means.

could you elaborate on what he means for those of us who may not know.

[Bob Tanner]

Don't bother to read this, DOF. It will just irritate you, and 'tis the season to be jolly

Note To Tony George

T.G., old buddy, if you would have stayed away from the expensive, "touch-me-and-I-break" rear-engined, technological things that were part of the problem with CART, and made the made the IRL, and the Indy 500, a series running a car similar to the USAC Silver Crown Series (Low-tech, cheaper chassis and engines, etc., etc.)... If you would have gone with that option, I seriously doubt if you'd be issuing statements such as the one in the first post of this thread.

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Don't bother to read this, DOF. It will just irritate you, and 'tis the season to be jolly

Note To Tony George

T.G., old buddy, if you would have stayed away from the expensive, "touch-me-and-I-break" rear-engined, technological things that were part of the problem with CART, and made the made the IRL, and the Indy 500, a series running a car similar to the USAC Silver Crown Series (Low-tech, cheaper chassis and engines, etc., etc.)... If you would have gone with that option, I seriously doubt if you'd be issuing statements such as the one in the first post of this thread.

While I'm a fan of the mid-rear engine layout, if the front engined cars would be diverse, allow innovative thinking, benefit production cars and have good on track racing then I'd go for them.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

While I'm a fan of the mid-rear engine layout, if the front engined cars would be diverse, allow innovative thinking, benefit production cars and have good on track racing then I'd go for them.

Welcome to the club, my friend.

(a) Innovative thinking: I agree, IF they don't end up having a high-priced technological orgasm, as they have done with the F1-type cars.

(b) Benefit production cars: I see no reason why a rear engined car could/should have a better developmental relationship to production cars than a race car with the engine placed where it was meant to be. (Sorry, that was a cheap shot. I owe you one for that)

(c) Good on-track racing: Seen any Silver Crown, USAC Asphalt sprints or Modified races recently? I'll put the quality of those races up against anything rear-engined racers have to offer. It might be lower tech and the field might have an international flavour but Damn! It's good racing!

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Welcome to the club, my friend.

(a) Innovative thinking: I agree, IF they don't end up having a high-priced technological orgasm, as they have done with the F1-type cars.

(b) Benefit production cars: I see no reason why a rear engined car could/should have a better developmental relationship to production cars than a race car with the engine placed where it was meant to be. (Sorry, that was a cheap shot. I owe you one for that)

(c) Good on-track racing: Seen any Silver Crown, USAC Asphalt sprints or Modified races recently? I'll put the quality of those races up against anything rear-engined racers have to offer. It might be lower tech and the field might have an international flavour but Damn! It's good racing!

F1 is expensive because it isn't innovative thinking, like it used to be, it's super-optimization to squeeze fractions of seconds from the super tight specs.
As to the mid and rear engine layout cars, they pushed forward suspension design, even aerodynamics both for race cars and production cars (spoilers), because of their (initial) twitchy kamikaze behavior. And CAD-CAM tools used both by the auto industry and aero industry are essentially F1 tools, but that's an indirect effect and not related to engine layout.

Mid-engine spec/cookie cutter racertainment won't do it for me even if it's mid-engined.

[Racer Duck]

I'm probably like many of you: I like RACING .. it doesn't matter to me whether there's 2 wheels, 4 wheels or 10 wheels on the vehicle. I don't care whether the steering wheel is on the left side, the right side or in the middle and I don't care whether the engine is in the front, back or middle. if it runs on gasoline, ethanol, sunlight, diesel or chicken fat makes no difference to me. I do care that the rules allow for innovation and that drivers are allowed to have emotions (within bounds for both). But more than anything the cars/drivers need to have the ability to "overtake", i.e., "pass" in American parlance, and to "take a hit" without exploding.

unfortunately some of the best racing today is at the local track in production cars with minimal modifications, barely a roll cage, and untrained drivers who are racing for the fun of it and a $10 trophy, not for some multi-million dollar championship in a million dollar machine owned by a team with a budget that would feed most of a 3rd world country.

some think the excitement in racing is the wrecks, but that's not true. neither the true fan nor the true racer like to see wrecks: it slows down the show and usually messes up some pretty good equipment (and sometimes people.) yeah, sometimes the wrecks can be spectacular. but sometimes they can be deadly as well.

the excitement in racing is not which vehicle is the best looking car or has largest fan base or most t-shirts in the stands or even it it takes the checkered flag at the end. it's what happens in the span of time between the green flag and the checkered flag that makes a race interesting. if it doesn't have you on the edge of your seat, then there's no excitement in that race. but if you find yourself pulling for one driver to pass that one ahead of him/her, you're excited about the race and THAT race has excitement .. and that's why you're watching in the first place.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

F1 is expensive because it isn't innovative thinking, like it used to be, it's super-optimization to squeeze fractions of seconds from the super tight specs.
As to the mid and rear engine layout cars, they pushed forward suspension design, even aerodynamics both for race cars and production cars (spoilers), because of their (initial) twitchy kamikaze behavior. And CAD-CAM tools used both by the auto industry and aero industry are essentially F1 tools, but that's an indirect effect and not related to engine layout.

Mid-engine spec/cookie cutter racertainment won't do it for me even if it's mid-engined.

I can't add much to that. There isn't much which can be gained by the factories from race cars today. Also the tight specs take innovation by mechanics off the table and puts it squarely in the hands of engineers.

I believe our desire for non-cookie cutter race cars is a lost cause. The manufacturers themselves apparently care little for brand identification (can you honestly identify production car brands from a distance, today? I can't)and, as you point out, aero just exacerbates the problem.

I complain but in my heart I know it's a dream and this "Brave New Racing World we're in will probably just tailspin right into the ground.