MSNZ & TMC - 'Wheels start to come off'

[raymond]

Originally Posted by Chappelli

Damn straight, what good can come from transparency and dialogue…

I understand the sarcasm Chappelli, but this was advice from a Govt advisors group to all Sporting Governance bodies. I think (and I may be wrong) it was as a result of the Yachting/Olympic selection court proceedings that happened 4? years ago.

By social media I don't think they discount a forum site on say the MSNZ Website, but I think the key was the administrator would be MSNZ (as an example) so the website forum would be for say "non-opinion" questions.

[raymond]

Originally Posted by Just Do It!

Unless something has changed, doesn't a promoter - V8ST, NZV8/MSNZ, or IRC as examples - pay the circuit for hireage or use of the circuit and facilities?
Based on this, why would the circuit owners not want to receive a chunk of revenue from V8ST and a second chunk of revenue from NZV8/MSNZ? Or is there some deal between MSNZ and it's member clubs - some of whom are the circuit owners - whereby MSNZ gets a discounted rate over fully commercial entities? If there isn't such a deal, then the COG stance is somewhat a weird one. Whether people come once to one meeting or attend two meetings is of little consequence to the circuit owner as the gate/ticket revenue goes to the promoter, not the venue.

You do sum up the role of MSNZ nicely, although this has been seemingly contradicted in the past.

Yes to your first sentence.
For the second paragraph I would assume that they do want two chunks of spectator fees but to ensure the maximum dollars, they want it further apart. IRC meetings don't draw a crowd as such, so maybe not a consideration?

I understand each circuit has different hire costs and such like, so not my place to comment

[raymond]

Originally Posted by CDM

That may be true, but I think it was pretty obvious that a low key club type meeting either side of a high profile Grand Prix/V8ST type meeting was never going to be an issue. Remembering that the circuit owners need to hire/use their facilities as often as possible to help make ends meet.

Agreed.

[raymond]

Originally Posted by Mark Petch

Raymond you are one of the two Vice Presidents of MSNZ, so when you express you personal opinion, it has a far greater reach than any non executive member of MSNZ that posts on this or any other thread.

You say quote "From my point of view, and from what the circuit involved indicated, THEY didn't want two high profile meetings within a short time span because it would affect the crowd numbers and financial viability. " So when you make such a statement it infers that you have some inside knowledge of the Manfield situation, as opposed to simply "as a paying spectator, television viewer and driver manager"

When I spoke directly to the CEO of the Manfield Trust at the recent Enduro round, Heather painted a very different picture of what you say is your point of view. When taken in context, your statements appear to be somewhat contradictory, would you not agree?

The fact is that Manfield takes no risk in hiring the circuit to two hi-profile race meeting, even if they are only a week apart, unless they agree to do so on a shared risk basis, which was certainly not the case with V8ST tentitive circuit booking for 2015.

I personally hired the Circuit in the first year of V8ST and it was the second most expensive circuit hire of the five circuits we hired that year, like Ruapuna [the highest cost] they did exceedingly well out of V8ST, at least in the first year.

It was also my decision not to run at Manfield again because of the circuit's hire cost's coupled with the inability to attract a decent gate at that circuit, and nothing has changed since to influence my opinion on the commercial viability of Manfeild from a promotors point of view.

As already indicated to you Mark, I am not allowed to comment.

[JamesK]

With all the NZ tracks being independently owned and outside of the control of MSNZ, why is MSNZ involved with who and when an organisation can hire a track.
If Manfield didn't want a meeting the week prior to GP, surely that is a issue between the track owner and the hirer, not MSNZ.
Same with the COG ban, why was this relayed via MSNZ, and subsequent statements made by MSNZ. Again, what did this have to do with them.

[raymond]

Originally Posted by JamesK

With all the NZ tracks being independently owned and outside of the control of MSNZ, why is MSNZ involved with who and when an organisation can hire a track.
If Manfield didn't want a meeting the week prior to GP, surely that is a issue between the track owner and the hirer, not MSNZ.
Same with the COG ban, why was this relayed via MSNZ, and subsequent statements made by MSNZ. Again, what did this have to do with them.

Hi James
The COG ban wasn't relayed via MSNZ, we were informed of it. The COG agreed to a signed statement that was sent via the MSNZ President.

The only time MSNZ has anything to do with hiring a track is when MSNZ takes out the permit for the event (like any other car club etc) The TRS series runs on a MSNZ permit.

It seems as though the GP example has become an example of "he said, she said" depending on the circumstances.

[Goat Boy]

Well from where I sit (on a deck chair at a Balinese holiday resort) (I wish) it all smacks of double standards to me.

I don't believe in grey areas, and I don't believe there was ever any justification for a ban for several weeks either side of an event except to help push someone's particular barrow. As has been pointed out here, the circuit owners do not generally take the risk of punters not turning up to meetings, that lies with the hirer.

Therefore it just looks like anti-competitive behaviour to me which was being pushed by someone at MSNZ who was trying to make life difficult for a particular group to organize their calendar at the time.

It doesn't really matter now since the classes have combined their calendar but it whichever way you paint it, somebody was out to make life difficult for someone here.

[JamesK]

Originally Posted by raymond

Yes, you are right James. It was lead by the circuit originally but then agreed to by parties at MSNZ. Apologies that I got that wrong

"Agreed to by parties at MSNZ."?
You have stated MSNZ has nothing to do with track hire so why was there an agreement required of MSNZ ?

[raymond]

Originally Posted by JamesK

"Agreed to by parties at MSNZ."?
You have stated MSNZ has nothing to do with track hire so why was there an agreement required of MSNZ ?

Sorry, not sure what you are saying?
MSNZ were informed and agreed to the stance.
Does that help? The point is it wasn't initiated by MSNZ as seems to be the thought.

Not sure if that's the explanation you are looking for?

[The Realist]

Well, now that the New Zealand Motorsport Tier One World is "united", here is the new Summer Series Challenge. Put on a show that meets everyones expectations;
Paying Spectators bums on seats, or better still standing room only,
Fierce competitive and entertaining races with large grids,
Happy promoters, competitors, spectators and track owners.
Here are a few tips;
Put on a day of entertainment that is perceived by the paying public to be value for money.
Not just a "Race Meeting", a day of non stop festivities and entertainment including racing. Everyone will benefit.

[GT 86]

Heres a bit of a riddle!

MSNZ, Manfield and Toyota or at least two of them tell ST they cant have a meeting 4 weeks either side of the NZGP.

MSNZ give a permit and allow the Hawkes Bay Rally and NZRC Canterbury Rally to run on the same day abiet in different Islands BUT NZRC does allow you to drop a round this year.

MSNZ give permit to run ST and Major V8 meeting on the same day in March.

MSNZ give a permit to have two opposition endurance championships run on the same day in June, one at Puke, one at Taupo.

Whats the answer? Dumb? Double standards? take any money you can?

[Southern Man]

Originally Posted by The Realist

Well, now that the New Zealand Motorsport Tier One World is "united", here is the new Summer Series Challenge. Put on a show that meets everyones expectations;
Paying Spectators bums on seats, or better still standing room only,
Fierce competitive and entertaining races with large grids,
Happy promoters, competitors, spectators and track owners.
Here are a few tips;
Put on a day of entertainment that is perceived by the paying public to be value for money.
Not just a "Race Meeting", a day of non stop festivities and entertainment including racing. Everyone will benefit.

What he says.

[raymond]

Originally Posted by GT 86

Heres a bit of a riddle!

MSNZ, Manfield and Toyota or at least two of them tell ST they cant have a meeting 4 weeks either side of the NZGP.

MSNZ give a permit and allow the Hawkes Bay Rally and NZRC Canterbury Rally to run on the same day abiet in different Islands BUT NZRC does allow you to drop a round this year.

MSNZ give permit to run ST and Major V8 meeting on the same day in March.

MSNZ give a permit to have two opposition endurance championships run on the same day in June, one at Puke, one at Taupo.

Whats the answer? Dumb? Double standards? take any money you can?

I'm sure you have asked this before and been answered. I will answer again to the best of my knowledge. So hopefully you wont have to ask again?

1. Permit on same day for two different Enduros. In reality we all know that is stupid. But what has been highlighted recently via court actions and circuit owners input is that MSNZ can only refuse to grant permits on grounds of safety and fairness. Unfortunately apparently some parties don't consider we should use common sense. We could say no as it patently isn't in the best interests of anybody, but do we risk members funds again by fighting a potential legal battle? Surely it would be easier for promoters to actually understand their market and competitors...or is it easier to just blame the tax dept. (MSNZ)

2. V8 meeting and ST. Not sure which particular example you are referring to but the message is loud and clear (see above) that circuits/promoters
want to be able to determine who makes the $$$. If both parties are happy and the circuits take on the hireage, then once again it seems "let market forces decide". Is this a dumb scenario to use your terminology? Well; it's not the best is it.

3. Two rallies on same weekend. These are different islands for two different markets. I'm sure there are race meetings in the north island when a NZ Championship round is run in the south. Do you suggest that scenario is dumb? Both rally organising clubs were aware of the date clash, and were happy with it as the window for road closures in some districts is small. There is an inability for some organisers to change, even if they could. Not sure what the dropped round has to do with your point. Competitors made the choice which event they went to.

Speaking from my NZRC Teams point of view; we don't use the dropped round to save money but not travelling, or so we can attend another cheaper cost event. We used the dropped round option as an insurance policy against any DNF we might get elsewhere.

Hope this satisfactorily answers your questions.

[Chappelli]

Originally Posted by raymond

I understand the sarcasm Chappelli, but this was advice from a Govt advisors group to all Sporting Governance bodies. I think (and I may be wrong) it was as a result of the Yachting/Olympic selection court proceedings that happened 4? years ago.

By social media I don't think they discount a forum site on say the MSNZ Website, but I think the key was the administrator would be MSNZ (as an example) so the website forum would be for say "non-opinion" questions.

Damn, must be another one of those “he said, she said situations”.

Be interesting to know the name of the “advisor group” who appear to be at odds with a Sport New Zealand commissioned “Introduction to Social Media” type guide to encourage Sports bodies to engage with Social Media (which ironically came out just after the Yachting issues you cite)….

It’d also be interesting to get your personal thoughts on why the New Zealand Rugby Union.... and Netball New Zealand…. and Bike New Zealand……… and Swimming New Zealand……. and Basketball New Zealand……… and Tennis New Zealand…….. and even good old Yachting New Zealand all seem to be pretty active in the non “non-opinion” social scene… Perhaps they just didn’t get the memo?

[flyingduck]

Originally Posted by raymond

Hi James
The COG ban wasn't relayed via MSNZ, we were informed of it. The COG agreed to a signed statement that was sent via the MSNZ President.

The only time MSNZ has anything to do with hiring a track is when MSNZ takes out the permit for the event (like any other car club etc) The TRS series runs on a MSNZ permit.

It seems as though the GP example has become an example of "he said, she said" depending on the circumstances.

OK now this is a joke so it wasn't relayed by MSNZ but it was sent out by the MSNZ president, with his title and letterhead of MSNZ but that's not relayed by MSNZ interesting. One would think official items from the president would be considered to be from MSNZ?

He says she says, so are there any other meeting that can't be over lapped against or is that just for MSNZ protecting there permitted events. E.G. is the ST's have a firm date at a track can a MSNZ permitted Tier one event run 3 weeks either side of it?

The Govt suggest no social media, maybe they should listen to themselves every party has bookface, twitter and a presences on every forum they can I'm waiting to see something on this site.

Crunch check out how many views the NZ Rally History page has (if your not on this page all ten-tenths users your missing out), you can spend hours looking at great photos, MSNZ could have been all over facebook with old racing and rallying photos but I suppose a Govt department would know better than me.

[JamesK]

Originally Posted by raymond

Hi James
The COG ban wasn't relayed via MSNZ, we were informed of it. The COG agreed to a signed statement that was sent via the MSNZ President.

The email I refer to was addressed to V8ST and TL class ,stated
"From the independent meeting and supported by a unanimous resolution held at the Circuit Commission Meeting, the circuit owners group has asked me to convey to you the following..."
Signed by Shayne as President of MSNZ
So in my interpretation this message was relayed, and as far as I am aware no signed statement was sent.

Originally Posted by raymond

Sorry, not sure what you are saying?
MSNZ were informed and agreed to the stance.
Does that help? The point is it wasn't initiated by MSNZ as seems to be the thought.
Not sure if that's the explanation you are looking for?

Not quite, my interpretation of your earlier statement.
"Its an agreement that both Manfield and MSNZ put together".
implies MSNZ had some input into some form of agreement not allowing this particular meeting.
Not just agreeing with a decision made by Manfield.

[JamesK]

Originally Posted by Chappelli

Be interesting to know the name of the “advisor group” who appear to be at odds with a Sport New Zealand commissioned “Introduction to Social Media” type guide to encourage Sports bodies to engage with Social Media (which ironically came out just after the Yachting issues you cite)….

http://www.sportnz.org.nz/managing-s...media-gameplan

Excellent document. Recommend to all clubs, associations and regulatory bodies. Please MSNZ read this

[Southern Man]

Appendix C is the one so many individuals have difficulty with.

Once all set up a plan of operation as suggested in the document for an organisation something like Motorsport NZ with the very wide range of activities covered from Clubsport to International level, how many man hours per week would it require to operate and maintain? I have no idea but it would be interesting to cost the operation out.

We (being all of us who comment and are interested in moving the idea forward) need to put heads together on here and work out staff requirements, cost of providing the service and funding of the service. Could it be fully sponsored with adverts on every page related to the number of hits the item received or should it be a fixed fee. What would be the value of these adverts and who/what/when/how would they be sold. What would be the cost of administering the collection of these advertising fees and who/how is it done.

If we want these services how are we going to make them happen, lets not knock the idea but rather use knowledge and energy to make it possible.

Get a think tank running here for together with shared knowledge we show how it can be done.

[raymond]

Originally Posted by JamesK

http://www.sportnz.org.nz/managing-s...media-gameplan

Excellent document. Recommend to all clubs, associations and regulatory bodies. Please MSNZ read this

Thanks, good document

[GT 86]

Originally Posted by JamesK

http://www.sportnz.org.nz/managing-s...media-gameplan

Excellent document. Recommend to all clubs, associations and regulatory bodies. Please MSNZ read this

Oh come on JK, you seriously dont think MSNZ will read this. This would mean they would have to update their Novapay system again cause they wouldnt have got IE9 with their lemon, refinace the building again for renovations for more staff and have to listen to someone else that knows what they are talking about. We wouldnt want to risk something breaking the mold here!

[JamesK]

Originally Posted by GT 86

Oh come on JK, you seriously dont think MSNZ will read this. This would mean they would have to update their Novapay system again cause they wouldnt have got IE9 with their lemon, refinace the building again for renovations for more staff and have to listen to someone else that knows what they are talking about. We wouldnt want to risk something breaking the mold here!

While we are all happy to criticise the actions of MSNZ and in a lot of areas quite rightly, the least we can do is publicly indicate what our expectations are.
I would suspect the majority of us don't consider the normal club channels to voice our concerns as being effective.
Hopefully they wouldn't follow V8ST's Facebook policy and only display posts that support the series, and delete any negative feedback.

[Goat Boy]

I think Facebook is not the greatest thing really in that respect. I would suggest that everyone does that - I keep posting on Simon Bridges' FB page that I want him to go and live in Afghanistan, but they keep deleting it...

[JamesK]

Originally Posted by Goat Boy

I think Facebook is not the greatest thing really in that respect. I would suggest that everyone does that - I keep posting on Simon Bridges' FB page that I want him to go and live in Afghanistan, but they keep deleting it...

There is a difference between being a nuisance and ignoring the truth.

[Ugy]

Originally Posted by Goat Boy

I think Facebook is not the greatest thing really in that respect. I would suggest that everyone does that - I keep posting on Simon Bridges' FB page that I want him to go and live in Afghanistan, but they keep deleting it...

You leave Simon alone...I believe he actually found his way home last night.

[Goat Boy]

Originally Posted by JamesK

There is a difference between being a nuisance and ignoring the truth.

I thought I was doing the public a service