Should Supercars Expand Into Asian Markets? (With Poll)

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Thanks for that D.R.T - that's the "missing link" I hadn't seen. I can understand VASC not wanting to co-promote tbh. I don't believe they do that anywhere and adding another event onto their roster of self-promoted events would no doubt stretch staffing etc too far.

Do they not co promote with Bathurst City Council and Mount Panorama?

V8SA were only sprouting about their events team and promotion resources earlier in the year. The need for more events to support their events business was cited as the sole reason to pick up the 12 hour.

If V8SA are upping the sanction fee they obviously feel their is untapped $$$$ in the Winton round or that Winton are profiting un-proportionally from the event.

In upping the sanction fee and not seeming to interested in working with Winton with solutions (for example co promotion) doesn't inspire a lot of confidence.

I also do find it ironic that some posters who held Channel 7 responsible for screwing over V8SA with a lowball financial offer for 2013-14 - are now happy to support the hard line stance that its business and V8SC need to look after themselves without any consideration of Winton or Australian motorsport.

[Umai Naa]

I believe the sanctioning fee is to cover VASC's operating costs for that event.

If for instance, BAC have decided they're no longer providing the required security staff, toilets, bins, etc, Should VASC just bare the costs and write them off?

Perhaps naming rights sponsor for the event that is actually paying market rates, will make all the money issues go away for the meantime?

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

Do they not co promote with Bathurst City Council and Mount Panorama?

In upping the sanction fee and not seeming to interested in working with Winton with solutions (for example co promotion) doesn't inspire a lot of confidence.

VASC do not co-promote with BCC although they do have a joint venture arrangement - in that arrangement VASC is the event promoter. Might sound like splitting hairs but it is a fundamental difference. In the same way when IMG were the 3rd partner in the JV, IMG were the promoter of the event, same as I believe Yeehah was the promoter of the 12 hour in the JV agreement.

There are many reasons that any promoter might choose to not co-promote with another party - at the best of times such arrangements can be a bit messy. It could be as simple as 2 organisations operating in very different ways and viewed as not being compatible as co-promoters.

From the various articles linked, whilst it is clear from the article you linked that VASC had a starting point in negotiations of an increased sanction fee, it also sounded like VASC were in fact working with Winton and the Vic govt to deliver the round, whilst an increase in the sanction fee does sound harsh, I think to characterise the discussions as VASC not wanting to work with Winton is also harsh.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by Umai Naa

I believe the sanctioning fee is to cover VASC's operating costs for that event.

If for instance, BAC have decided they're no longer providing the required security staff, toilets, bins, etc, Should VASC just bare the costs and write them off?

In V8SA history, sanction fees have generally been a revenue raiser rather than merely covering costs.

Dont see V8SA providing any of the items you have listed as an example in previous or future events at Winton. Not sure of the relevance in the context of what we are discussing here.

Originally Posted by Umai Naa

Perhaps naming rights sponsor for the event that is actually paying market rates, will make all the money issues go away for the meantime?

Remember that V8SA take 50% of all commercial event sponsorship's. For example if Winton bring Tooheys on board in 2017 for $250,000. Before you do anything, V8SA take $125,000 and then Winton are left with $125,000 to service the sponsorship, put on the event and then try and draw a profit from.

[Compromised]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

What does 'help out' mean? Handout?

Why not? If one of you long running tracks needs financial help and you're coffers are just overflowing with cash from lucrative TV deals, cheaper COTF cars, bigger crowds etc it would be a nice gesture I reckon, letting regional fans catch a glimpse of a supercar

[one five five]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

What does 'help out' mean? Handout?

NASCAR 'helps out' the tracks they race on with 'Handouts'.

In fact the handouts come out of the TV money NASCAR gets

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by one five five

NASCAR 'helps out' the tracks they race on with 'Handouts'.

ISC (owned by NASCAR founders the France family) owns 13 venues that operate 19 out of 36 NASCAR rounds, so it is hardly a fair comparison.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by one five five

NASCAR 'helps out' the tracks they race on with 'Handouts'.

In fact the handouts come out of the TV money NASCAR gets

You'd need to look at the whole model to really compare the two series' commercial arrangements - clearly a different marketplace in Oz for example, revenue split on merch, sanction fee level and how it's calculated etc.

NASCAR takes over the entire infield at all tracks as one example, doing their own ticketing, holding that revenue and wth team hospitality part of it all. Here, all ticketing revenue goes to the track.

Would be an interesting case study actually.

[mayhem]

Good to see difficulties dealing with Asian promoters isn't restricted to VASC...
Thai WTCC round set to be cancelled

[Compromised]

Kinda begs the question, is chasing the lucrative Asian market really worth it when the region is/can be so volatile. You'd think looking for some stability would be a top priority, rather than a quick buck

[Average Punter]

Compromised. Try this edit of your comment. Says it all really.

...a top priority...a quick buck...

[Alan52]

Originally Posted by Tourer

You'd need to look at the whole model to really compare the two series' commercial arrangements - clearly a different marketplace in Oz for example, revenue split on merch, sanction fee level and how it's calculated etc.

NASCAR takes over the entire infield at all tracks as one example, doing their own ticketing, holding that revenue and wth team hospitality part of it all. Here, all ticketing revenue goes to the track.

Would be an interesting case study actually.

What do you mean "all the revenue goes to the track"?Winton has been the only track that keeps it's ticket revenue since 2012 and now it is getting flicked.The usual plan is that some level of government pays for track hire so that Supercars gets the venue for free.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Alan52

What do you mean "all the revenue goes to the track"?Winton has been the only track that keeps it's ticket revenue since 2012 and now it is getting flicked.The usual plan is that some level of government pays for track hire so that Supercars gets the venue for free.

When a track has a sanction agreement with VASA, the track retains all ticketing revenue. In recent times, Winton has been one of the few tracks to have a sanction fee arrangement (I think that Darwin is another, Barbagallo too off the top of my head).

When a govt or VASA hire the track and promote the event themselves, clearly the commercial arrangements would be quite different to the sanction fee model. Tracks such as QR, Townsville, Sandown, Gold Coast etc are run that way - far more common model in the current series than it was in the past.

This part of the thread was about Winton so the point on "all ticketing revenue" going to the track was and is valid.

[Number4]

Originally Posted by Tourer

You'd need to look at the whole model to really compare the two series' commercial arrangements - clearly a different marketplace in Oz for example, revenue split on merch, sanction fee level and how it's calculated etc.

NASCAR takes over the entire infield at all tracks as one example, doing their own ticketing, holding that revenue and wth team hospitality part of it all. Here, all ticketing revenue goes to the track.

Would be an interesting case study actually.

In stock-car racing, the track owners receive 65 percent of the TV money, followed by the drivers (25 percent) and NASCAR itself (10 percent).
http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte...-contract.html

The note estimates that Fox made $397.6 million and NBC made $297.4 million in ad revenue during Sprint Cup races in 2015. Based on the deals, Fox pays $380 million a year to NASCAR while NBC pays an average of $440 million.
This means that Fox is barely profitable through advertisements, and NBC lost around $140 million. However, the number does not include side-by-side promos and ads run during pre- and post-race coverage, or, of course, cable subscription revenues.
Cable networks make a bulk of their revenue in subscriber fees charged to cable providers to include the networks in their packages, and Quadrani argues that if more people add the smaller FS1 and NBCSN networks to their bundles to watch NASCAR, the revenue will make up for the current advertising dollar difference.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/nascar...etworks-2016-3

[Sandgroper]

1 word

NO

[Axeman444]

Unlikely for next year now...
http://www.speedcafe.com/2016/09/19/...rcar-calendar/

Contracts? Yeah we've got contracts. But...

[mayhem]

Is this good business from V8 Supercars? They often announce things to the sounds of trumpets and fanfare that never actually kick off or are at the very least delayed. I'm wondering the effect on their business model from sponsors, participants and fans?

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by mayhem

Is this good business from V8 Supercars? They often announce things to the sounds of trumpets and fanfare that never actually kick off or are at the very least delayed. I'm wondering the effect on their business model from sponsors, participants and fans?

It's a good point mayhem. In my view it ain't great business but maybe that's just me. My personal approach would be to not announce anything until the deal is done fully.

TC had a habit of announcing some things early - sometimes he delivered (well most times I guess) but they didn't always come off.

In this case, Warbo announced the agreements for asian races at the time a number of draft calendars were presented to the commission - in other words, before the calendar had been signed off or finalised internally. I suspect he may have been playing some politics to put pressure on commission members.

It's interesting to contrast the approach on the asian races with that of Newcastle. I don't think that VASA has had anything definite to say themselves on Newcastle but there have been stories on Speedcafe etc. Clearly in this case VASA aren't going to announce until the deal is locked - very different approach to the asian races.

[Compromised]

Nissan is uncertain on Supercars future.

"We've got multiple Asian races!!!!!!"

Nissan solidify it's position in Supercars.

"Yeah sorry, no Asia for now".

[Axeman444]

Its a bit like someone announcing they are pregnant while they are still in the line waiting to buy the pregnancy test