US Grand Prix- Austin (USA)

[ujoint]

What other country would finance an event this way?

[chillibowl]

unfortunately the greenback is not quite what it used to be...which actually means if the sanctioning fees are fixed at US$25mill US in about 10 years this might become the cheapest sanctioning fee in the world.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by ujoint

What other country would finance an event this way?

Canada

[ujoint]

Looks like a done deal. The mayor wouldn't support it if he didn't think it was over with. Duh.


Final. Austin city council approved environmental contract. Should be F1 racing in Austin.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by ujoint

What other country would finance an event this way?

Australia (twice for F1 - both Adelaide and Melbourne have had government funding).

Not to mention Australian Rules Football, Rugby league, Rugby Union, Olympic Games, various world championships in different sports, cultural events etc etc.

Most have government support.

Also China, Germany, Holland, France, UK, Brazil, Mexico, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, India, Turkey etc have all had events fully or partially funded by governments (not necessarily motorsport).

[duke_toaster]

Most big sporting events involve some degree of public funding in one way or another. Case in point the typical NFL thing of "build us a new stadium or we're moving to Los Angeles" ...

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

Most big sporting events involve some degree of public funding in one way or another. Case in point the typical NFL thing of "build us a new stadium or we're moving to Los Angeles" ...

That was the Raiders and they moved from L.A. back to Oakland.

[willb]

In 2008 the raiders threatened to move again for a new stadium in Fremont. There are three big cities in the San Francisco Bay area and the one without any football or baseball team (San Jose) is trying to lure a team with the offer of building a new stadium for them.

I wonder how long the local government in Austin will be willing or able to subsidize an F1 event if they don't earn a profit? In a few years there could be an entirely new set of elected officials who have no desire to continue funding a race there.

[Texas]

Originally Posted by BobHWS

Here's a good summary:

F1: Robin Hood in Reverse
Austin Post
By Deb - Friday June 17, 2011

Seriously? There's so much bs in that article in just the little bit that I skimmed that I'm not going to address anything until you come up with something specific we've LIED about....not what Debbie Russel (LOL) pontificates about in her own misunderstand (or purposefully obtuse) way.

[Texas]

Originally Posted by ujoint

Looks like a done deal. The mayor wouldn't support it if he didn't think it was over with. Duh.


Final. Austin city council approved environmental contract. Should be F1 racing in Austin.

It might seem that way, but Mayor Leffingwell supported this project from the beginning and has been its most ardent backer of those in public office.

[Texas]

Originally Posted by willb

In 2008 the raiders threatened to move again for a new stadium in Fremont. There are three big cities in the San Francisco Bay area and the one without any football or baseball team (San Jose) is trying to lure a team with the offer of building a new stadium for them.

I wonder how long the local government in Austin will be willing or able to subsidize an F1 event if they don't earn a profit? In a few years there could be an entirely new set of elected officials who have no desire to continue funding a race there.

The local government in Austin is not subsidizing this event. They're putting no money into the METF deal. They reap the rewards of the project without risk and can pull out any time they so choose if things go south.

[Texas]

It was a long day today at Council Chambers, but it was definitely exciting and very much worth it to get to hear the mayor announce the final vote.

I want to thank everyone who helped in any way...and I think I can speak as well for Circuit of the Americas when I say that they thank you as well!

[Spritle]

Originally Posted by Texas

I want to thank everyone who helped in any way!

Thank you Tavo!

[Flyin Ryan]

Originally Posted by Texas

Yes, F1 & MotoGP have already signed 10 year deals. There have been strong rumors, another just yesterday, that Aussie V8s are coming.

Just yesterday? I saw it Sunday night on Wind Tunnel.

ALMS has also publicly expressed interest, and I believe they are a given.

http://www.murphythebear.com/

Personally I see no reason NASCAR couldn't run here, be it Sprint or Nationwide. A race here wouldn't pull fans from TMS. It may even build their fanbase.

"Seeing no reason they couldn't run there" is different from "they actually will". Nationwide could run there, provided the circuit is willing to pay the sanctioning fee. Are they? The sanctioning fee is already a known quantity if you're high up in the racing business. Cup will not run there, because the circuit is not owned by SMI or ISC.

This isn't exactly NASCAR country the way one might think it is.

Well from that standpoint it's not F1 country either.

IndyCar? Who knows.

Curt Cavin, the beat writer for Indycar in the Indy Star, has said previously on his radio show Trackside on 1070AM in Indianapolis it will never happen because Eddie Gossage will never allow it. And considering the Texas race gives Indycar one of its largest non-Indianapolis crowds, I don't see why you'd want to dilute it.


Best of luck to you on this project though.

[Marbot]

Is there demand for another US GP?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92737

[Born Racer]

If Spain can have two, so can America (in place of two in Spain). It's much bigger territory.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Is there demand for another US GP?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92737

Interesting Whitmarsh mentions Long Beach. It is a well established venue, having hosted races for a number of major series over the years. The East coast is a problem.

[Texas]

Originally Posted by Flyin Ryan

Just yesterday? I saw it Sunday night on Wind Tunnel.

Winner.

Congratulations.

http://www.murphythebear.com/

Is there some point there?

"Seeing no reason they couldn't run there" is different from "they actually will". Nationwide could run there, provided the circuit is willing to pay the sanctioning fee. Are they? The sanctioning fee is already a known quantity if you're high up in the racing business. Cup will not run there, because the circuit is not owned by SMI or ISC.

Please point me to where I said "will".

At any rate, wewillsee. From what I've heard, I feel good about the chances.

Well from that standpoint it's not F1 country either.

Yet.

There are a lot of fans of F1 and other series here. I've met them by the truckload in the last year. Still, that's not the point. The crowd will come from all over.

Of course, my point wasn't that this was F1 country. It's just that this area is a relatively untapped market for NASCAR (as it is for F1). That presents an opportunity to grow your fanbase (your market). It's not a negative. Surely the Frances, Smiths & Gossages of the world see that, too.

Curt Cavin, the beat writer for Indycar in the Indy Star, has said previously on his radio show Trackside on 1070AM in Indianapolis it will never happen because Eddie Gossage will never allow it. And considering the Texas race gives Indycar one of its largest non-Indianapolis crowds, I don't see why you'd want to dilute it.

OK...wow. Is that supposed to be some kind special insight? I remember hearing and reading the EXACT same perception from Joe Schmoe fans all over the internet within hours of the announcement that F1 was coming here.

He's merely spouting the conventional wisdom, which is often neither.

Best of luck to you on this project though.

Uh huh.

[Spritle]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Is there demand for another US GP?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92737

I doubt there is much demand for one, let alone two.

But in Martin's dream scenario, what becomes of Austin?

How would it look to potential east cost/west coast suitors if they saw the plug being pulled on Austin after only 10 years, provided it is viable for that long? I guess the "it won't happen to us" optimism may work on some but there are only so many flammable bridges out there.

If you want to "conquer" the US, you have to be successful SOMEWHERE for more than a few years by building an initial base of new fans, growing that base by keeping them interested, providing a show that entertains compared to other options AND offering value if you want to compete against other series or sports. Not pillaging your venues by extortion helps a lot too.

While I am not a fan of the Austin choice, it needs to be successful both attendance-wise and financially for everyone not named Tavo or Bernie for at least 5-7 years before anyone even dreams of adding more US venues. Only time will tell what will happen but history has a funny way of repeating itself.

[Marbot]

Does anyone know if the average Texan race goer is likely to spend the required $700 to make the event a sustainable proposition?

[Texas]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Does anyone know if the average Texan race goer is likely to spend the required $700 to make the event a sustainable proposition?

The average race goer won't be a Texan. They're estimating that probably 25k-35k of the crowd will be from Texas with the rest coming from outside the state.

I haven't done that math, but I've heard a lot of different estimates of how much money needs to be spent. Also, by whose method are you calculating "sustainability", and do you mean $700 a day, or $700 total? Either way, I doubt most people will be in Texas only for the race days.

[Texas]

OBTW: Aussie V8 Supercars to Austin


It's official boys.

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/conte....html#comments

Holy ****.

[Flyin Ryan]

Originally Posted by Texas

[URL="http://www.murphythebear.com/"]

Is there some point there?

Yeah. What would they really be buying considering what it's looking to be like next year?

Please point me to where I said "will".

At any rate, wewillsee. From what I've heard, I feel good about the chances.

For you to feel good about the chances of getting a Cup date at this track, unless this track is partially owned by SMI or ISC or the track owner plans on spending mega bucks to buy another track from one of those two companies, you are completely out of touch with reality when it comes to the politics of NASCAR. The NASCAR race date for Cup and its availability is controlled by who owns the track, see the 2nd Atlanta date (SMI track) moving to Kentucky (SMI track) and the 2nd Fontana data (ISC track) moving to Kansas (ISC track). What else are you going to do? Buy Pocono from the Mattiolis when they're not selling? They already have 38 race weekends a year, they're not about to go to 39.

OK...wow. Is that supposed to be some kind special insight?

Yes. Unless you likewise have the horn of someone in a decision-making capacity in the series telling you otherwise, which you can then share what you've been told. I know this is auto racing, I've been following multiple forms of it for 23 years now, and the people at the top of the sport are some of the lowest forms of life you'll ever find, but why would Indycar screw over one of their best promoters when he pays the sanctioning fee and gets a better crowd than this Austin track ever would for an Indycar date (due to the fundamental differences between an oval and a road course)?

I remember hearing and reading the EXACT same perception from Joe Schmoe fans all over the internet within hours of the announcement that F1 was coming here.

Because Indianapolis got more than 100000 people to show, a good size of them were Colombians cheering for Montoya at the cheapest ticket on the schedule, and when I went to the USGP in 2004 (thank God I didn't go in 2005, I'd've been ****ed) I paid $115 per ticket in comparison to me in 2010 paying $80 for a good seat at the Indy 500, which is far greater value for money as I have 50% more cars and double the racing of a 90-minute F1 race and the Porsche Supercup, NASCAR likewise for a decent seat is about $80. Austin will have less attendance than Indianapolis simply down to the difference between an oval and a road course. So Indy had the largest attendance of any F1 race in the world multiplied by the lowest price of any F1 race in the world but at the very high end for races in the U.S., and it still could not break even.

Bernie Ecclestone is on record once saying that the problem with American promoters is they want to make money. For the United States Grand Prix in Austin to have any long-term stability, the race has to at some point break even. How does it do that when Bernie's company keeps the TV rights money (it did for Indianapolis' entire run), and ticket sales revenue as I demonstrated above will not cover the sanctioning fee either and will in fact be far less than Indianapolis. Sponsorship levels for both races will probably be more or less the same I'd imagine. The travel bills then were even shared with the Canadian Grand Prix as they did a North American swing, not sure that's possible this time, Austin in June or July isn't the most comfortable unless you're a native Southerner or a Mexican and are just used to it (a Pan-Am swing with Interlagos isn't as much in the way of savings as Montreal would be). One of the best things about auto racing in contrast to other sports in this country is it's not dependent on public financing like sports teams do with arenas and stadiums, so I'm against that just on principle. And to be successful long-term it can't be dependent on state sponsorship from the government because governments and politicians and their budgets come and go. All of this I stated is simple logic here. What is coming in in revenues has to match what is going out for this race to have a sustainable future. I am not a troll, I'm laying out all facts in these past two paragraphs. So where am I wrong in my analysis?

[Texas]

Ryan, the answer is in what you posted. I'll let you figure it out.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Is there demand for another US GP?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92737

No because you need one well promoted and attended event... I do not agree with Martin Whitmarsh this time..

The facility here will make Long Beach look like a kart track...