|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
25 Jan 2012, 20:05 (Ref:3016997) | #501 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,667
|
is this still a NZV8 thread or a we hate MSNZ and TMC thread
|
||
|
25 Jan 2012, 20:33 (Ref:3017008) | #502 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 456
|
It is a fact that MSNZ, TMC and NZV8s are linked. It also appears that without MSNZ $$ assistance there would be no MRX car. Therefore it should be relevant to the NZV8 thread?
BTW, from my perspective it is not a "hate MSNZ". As I have said in previous posts I think MSNZ do a lot of things right and get unwarranted criticism. They do make mistakes (we are all human) but in my experience they are prepared to listen and things get sorted. However, where they have got it wrong is getting into commercial relationships with motor sport - that is not their job and they expose members to unacceptable financial risk. I will keep criticising them on this as I believe it is wrong in principle and wrong constitutionally. |
||
|
25 Jan 2012, 22:42 (Ref:3017088) | #503 | ||||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 48
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Not only does MSNZ have a majority shareholding in TMC they also have their GM Mr Budd as a Director of NZV8 Entrance group. |
||||
|
25 Jan 2012, 23:05 (Ref:3017107) | #504 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 940
|
I think the late, great Billy T would have said " Oh, it's all a bit inset.......insectu........insestu........ it's doesn't look too flash eh!
|
||
|
26 Jan 2012, 02:26 (Ref:3017167) | #505 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 48
|
Quote:
Facts: Within VEEGA 7 directors left within 1 month of each other (Feb & March 2011.) Of those directors, only two were in the position for longer than 12 months. Mark Petch being there since VEEGA's inception. 2 remained. 2 new were added in 2011, Tulloch 7/11 and just recently Budd 26/10/11. 3 current directors run a BNT V8 and 1 is obviously from MSNZ. Something to ponder on, Why did they all leave at once ? something or someone must have upset them. |
||
|
26 Jan 2012, 02:51 (Ref:3017172) | #506 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,667
|
|||
|
26 Jan 2012, 02:56 (Ref:3017177) | #507 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,667
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
26 Jan 2012, 03:29 (Ref:3017182) | #508 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,885
|
Quote:
It's an environment where free enterprise exists but has to compete with a government that parses out grants, regulations, investment, etc that benefits certain individuals or businesses. And once government entwines itself with private enterprise, it loses it's ability to be an impartial democratically elected judiciary, executive and regulatory body that serves the interests of all it's citizens. It can also result in it by default picking "winners and losers" in the marketplace. So in this case you have Motorsport NZ, which is essentially the government of motor racing in NZ and you have member clubs and license holders that are it's citizens. By choosing to support and favor the main enterprise that runs the "professional" side of motor racing, it has ended up losing it's impartial standing when it comes to serving it's clubs and members. However I think like many instances of "crony capitalism", the intentions were good. MNZ certainly did not get involved to be malicious or had malicious intent. They most assuredly got mixed up in this years ago because they thought it was for the good of the sport and a place where there could be some sponsor and manufacturer involvement. I am sure it was done with completely good intent and with MNZ backing in the background you had some reputable stature that it would not be a fly by night deal. But there is always the good ole "unintended consequences". And the unintended consequence is that they've been caught between their role of being the impartial government of motor sport in NZ all could turn to and their own commercial interests, investments and as always in motorsport, personal ego. So you have another group that has sprung up with another idea on how to run things and it's a clash, when really that clash should not exist. It's put a lot of people, tracks, clubs, sponsors and whoever else in the middle, when probably a lot of them don't want to be and a lot of people probably don't even want any part of it. In my opinion what should happen is the Summer Series should be spun off into it's own entity with no ties to MNZ and it will sink or swim on it's own merits. It might be possible they could do just fine with some well thought out plans and a package of series such as TRS, GT's, etc. So let free enterprise and the market figure it out and let it all work out the way it needs to. Personally I like both series, NZV8's and Supertourers, so if they both existed in peace that would be fine by me. |
||
__________________
Wolverines! |
26 Jan 2012, 04:12 (Ref:3017191) | #509 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,491
|
Quote:
I think TMC used to be Motor Race NZ did it not? I think that was a wholly owned subsidiary of MNZ at the time then it was "partly privatised" by selling 40% to others as stated above. I'm sure it seemed like a good idea at the time and I'm sure it wasn't about nest-feathering back then, but it surely looks an awful lot like it now. |
|||
__________________
Nice one, Centurion! |
26 Jan 2012, 04:16 (Ref:3017192) | #510 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,491
|
Also interesting to note that the old NZV8's will apparently now be allowed to run in the V8ST support class. Draw what conclusions you will...
|
||
__________________
Nice one, Centurion! |
26 Jan 2012, 04:20 (Ref:3017195) | #511 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 48
|
So, doesnt really answer my question.
And the absence of a number of NZV8's shareholders running in another series can be explained by ? Here's another question, VEEGA Constitution 25. TRANSACTIONS IN WHICH A DIRECTOR, OFFICER OR SHAREHOLDER HAS AN INTEREST 25.1 Restriction: The Company shall not enter into any transaction with any Director, officer of the Company or Shareholder or any nominee or Associate of a Director, officer of the Company or Shareholder other than in accordance with the restrictions set out in the Shareholders Agreement. Mr Budds statement "MSNZ owns the designs and jigs for the new car and will not release them for sale until satisfied they are ready for competition." This statement was made as the General Manager of MSNZYou would assume (either correctly or incorrectly) when available will be sold to the shareholders of VEEGA Mr Budd is a Director of VEEGA Conflict ? Constitution breach or something in the shareholders agreement that is not public knowledge ?Just dont look good. |
|
|
26 Jan 2012, 04:28 (Ref:3017196) | #512 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 456
|
Quote:
However, as you say, it has created an unsatisfactory situation where conflicts of interest arise and MSNZ has lost sight of what they are meant to be all about. A good idea to caste off TMC and let them sink or swim without their favoured status. I think they may have got a bit fat and lazy thinking they had a monopoly in running premier level motor sport. If they survive on their merits then well and good but they shouldn't survive just because MSNZ members keep propping them up or regulations are changed just to favour them. Interestingly MSNZ's other commercial involvement (51% shareholding in Rally NZ Limited) has also lost big money in the past - you would think MSNZ executive would have learnt by now to leave these commercial ventures alone. |
|||
|
26 Jan 2012, 05:44 (Ref:3017202) | #513 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,667
|
|||
|
26 Jan 2012, 06:23 (Ref:3017205) | #514 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 498
|
I also like your view of things Mountainstar.
I suspect some of the posters here don't have much sense of history or are choosing not to see. The situation we are currently in has not happened overnight. It has developed over the space of a few years. I know of member clubs questioning the behaviour of TMC and requesting (as shareholders) to see the financials but the request has been refused. The timing of ST acts as a catylst. The status quo is untenable. And unlike NZ utes I'm certain NZST won't change their view about TMC |
||
|
26 Jan 2012, 06:43 (Ref:3017209) | #515 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,667
|
|||
|
26 Jan 2012, 07:20 (Ref:3017213) | #516 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 519
|
Yep, that's a nice looking car, I have been around looking at some of the new cars over the past two weeks.
Seeing them dressed up in their war paint, they are seriously a very cool looking car. Bring on round one. The difference between this car and the MRX car, is that there will be 20 of these and there will not be one MRX NZV8 sold commercially here. |
|
|
26 Jan 2012, 09:26 (Ref:3017239) | #517 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,491
|
They never were mate, they just sometimes get a rush of blood to the head, then later reassess and change their minds when logical thought regains control.
Do you remember the time a few years back when they sent out a hastily released statement saying categorically that contrary to popular belief, A1GP was not coming to NZ. A week later they had to backtrack after they had all the facts. That was the old administration, for sure, but the current ones have been known to do it on occasion too.. |
||
__________________
Nice one, Centurion! |
26 Jan 2012, 09:48 (Ref:3017247) | #518 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,391
|
|||
__________________
Tranquillity - What happens inside Shane's race car. Chaos - What happens outside Jamie's race car. |
26 Jan 2012, 10:02 (Ref:3017250) | #519 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,491
|
|||
__________________
Nice one, Centurion! |
26 Jan 2012, 10:58 (Ref:3017265) | #520 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 456
|
It's correct that the Official Information Act relates to only Government entities so it wouldn't help here.
The issue with the TMC accounts is not that they are not supplied (they are presented at the annual MSNZ Council meeting) but that they are presented in such a way that there are unanswered questions that are either ignored or declined. I understand the TMC accounts are prepared by a firm associated with a director of TMC. |
||
|
26 Jan 2012, 18:49 (Ref:3017414) | #521 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 48
|
Only if someone can categorically state that no part of my, club fees, race entry fees, nor licence fees are used in the procurement of the design and jigs for a V8 car that I, and I doubt the greater portion of the motorsport community have any interest in.
Now TMC is a different story. |
|
|
26 Jan 2012, 18:57 (Ref:3017417) | #522 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 48
|
Quote:
11.3.1 Appointment by Shareholders ..... Every director shall hold office subject to the provisions of this Constitution and may at any time be removed from office by special resolution of the shareholders ................ Solution is easy, just needs those shareholders to grow balls. |
||
|
26 Jan 2012, 19:47 (Ref:3017433) | #523 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 456
|
Quote:
There is also a risk that the MRX car won't be successful and if they don't sell then MSNZ members will face another loss. |
|||
|
26 Jan 2012, 19:56 (Ref:3017437) | #524 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 849
|
||
|
26 Jan 2012, 20:26 (Ref:3017453) | #525 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 456
|
I don't know what actually happened but I doubt if there would be any claim against ST - if there was a strong case that ST stole the design then you would have expected injunctive proceedings to have been already issued to stop the ST guys. That fact that this hasn't happened raises the question that the claim of stealing the design may be lacking a bit of credibility??
|
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
IRISH CSHIP 2011/12 | Ramah | Rallying & Rallycross | 13 | 12 Oct 2011 11:14 |
2011 Bathurst 12 Hour | Belly13 | Australasian Touring Cars. | 773 | 28 Feb 2011 07:19 |
Bathurst 12 Hour Race 2011 | Acid09 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 19 | 6 Feb 2011 09:31 |