ALMS 2011 Discussion

[Speed-King]

GT3 has wiped out GTE in all none ACO series

Well, GT2 is still somewhat stable in Italian GT and GT-Open, proportionally also in Spanish GT, but then that series is weak in all classes...

[TWK]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I don't think that Penske had anything to do with the Audi ALMS back out--Audi of America and their bean counters (inspite of record profits) played Judas Iscerot there.

Audi of America didn't get to record profits by spending stupidly. They got there by making good spending decisions across their functional area of responsibility.

Audi of America is a marketing and sales organization. Their principal purpose is to spend their marketing dollars where they get the most exposure and do themselves and their dealers the most good. That's exactly what they did when they cut out a racing program that was contributing very little to their mission in favor of advertising and marketing initiatives that radically increased their exposure in North America.

The math isn't really very difficult. One Super Bowl ad reached 111 million viewers and was leveraged by buzz that went on for weeks before and after. Production costs can be spread over ads for the next six months at least on cheaper - but still highly-rated - programs.

An entire season of racing in the ALMS delivers a about 3 million total viewers, including live attendance at tracks and assuming 20,000 internet viewers per event (far more than was delivered at any time in 2010).

Any marketing executive who would ditch mass market advertising in exchange for those kind of numbers in a racing program would be fired and deserve it.

If the American Le Mans Series ever intended to deliver professional-level race that was "World Class" and "For the Fans," it's principal responsibility was to build a "media platform" that would ensure at least competitive numbers for the manufacturer/marketing-oriented constituency they said they were after. They couldn't get "Super Bowl numbers" of course, but perhaps they might be able to achieve "skate boarding numbers?" They never did. In fact for a variety of reasons, they plateaued, then regressed after 2006.

I come down on the side of Judas Iscariot this time.

[TWK]

Originally Posted by JAG

It wasn't too long ago some were saying let GT1 head up the ALMS, afterall Corvette, Aston, Maserati, Ferrari and Saleen had cars, since there's been an LMP boom and now GTE, it shows how volatile manufacture support can be.

I don't remember any such argument. One writer suggested (not recommended) that GT1 might replace prototypes based on observations primarily in Europe of manufacturer interest. He found little agreement from others at the time, and the record since is clear.

Interestingly, the demise of GT1 is not believed by many to have been because of some explosion of growth in manufacturer interest in prototypes (three isn't much of an "explosion" and Cadillac exited while Peugeot entered, net zero) but rather by a transfer of manufacturer interest in GT2.

That reinforces, not conflicts with, the idea that prototypes may not be "the way forward." For many years of its existance Le Mans - and the rest of sports car endurance racing - had nothing like the purpose-built prototypes we say today. Even the "one-offs" were recognizable as "GT-type" cars if their day. So the idea of GT-based racing is the real tradition.

To your point about GT1, it was never very healthy in ALMS...the series that is subject of this thread.

Typical number of GT1 entrants Entrants at rounds after Sebring:

2002 - 7
2003 - 6
2004 - 4
2005 - 5
2006 - 4
2007 - 3
2008 - 2
2009 - 0 (after Le Mans)

This is one more place series management shot itself in the foot by waiting too long to make a decision, and in the meantime hurt the ALMS. In 2007 GT(2) teams were calling for the elimination of GT1. Because of the ACO and support from GM, they refused to move, and GT1 lingered reducing the exposure and sponsorship potential of the GT2 teams. That was a decision made for short-term cash benefit of the Panoz Group, that did damage to most of their ALMS participants.

I think they are in the same place again...holding on to a weak prototype field that contributes little value and damages the highly competitive and healthy GT2 field. To add insult to injury, they "dilute" that GT2 field by throwing a pack of single-make racers (GTC) out there. That just makes it that much more difficult to follow the GT2 racing. The dilution of LMP with the single-make LMPC's similarly "diffuses" the racing, making it incoherent to observers.

Continue down this path and decisions by other participants like that made by Audi of America are inevitable.

[Lola T70]

Originally Posted by TWK

I think they are in the same place again...holding on to a weak prototype field that contributes little value and damages the highly competitive and healthy GT2 field. To add insult to injury, they "dilute" that GT2 field by throwing a pack of single-make racers (GTC) out there. That just makes it that much more difficult to follow the GT2 racing. The dilution of LMP with the single-make LMPC's similarly "diffuses" the racing, making it incoherent to observers.

Continue down this path and decisions by other participants like that made by Audi of America are inevitable.

Crikey, you are Mr Positive.......

Do you think ALMS have done a bad job in the last few years?

I think that a grid of probably 50 cars this year for the first race, which is up by about 35% is actually quite positive. Not perfect but a reasonable navigation through the current times.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by JAG

I do want to see prototypes but I'm more interested in the ALMS fulfilling it's potential rather than being railroaded into a potentially disastrous direction.

What potential is that? How is this achieved? What is the rational behind manufacturers spending millions of dollars to run cars, AND sponsor the ALMS to run Prototypes? How is this better for the manufacturers, than running in ILMC?

If you want it to fulfill whatever you feel it's potential is.. hope for a new ownership group. Management is the key to everything.

I think some NA fans have convinced themselves GT3 is the future before actually seeing it in action or taking account of how it will affect the GTE field. GT3 has wiped out GTE in all none ACO series, unless something was done to lower entry costs and increase the size of the second hand market the class was going the way of GT1.

We haven't seen GT3 type cars in action? What is Grand AM GT? Same approx speed, same price, same cars are available.. What is Speed GT? Same approx speed, same prices... same cars + available. What is GTC. We've somehow had 50-60 cars+ running at this speed, price point, same as GT3... for what a decade in North America. Is GT2 dead yet?

Every major brand other than Mercedes and Audi are in GTE, if your going to propose a GT only series at least think it through and have GTE-Pro/Am plus GT4, ensure there's a major performance/cost difference and strengthen the top class rather than leave it wide open to cannabalism from GT3.

First... We are talking about the ALMS here. There is no GTE. It is GT.

Second, performance difference is easy enough, there are these things called restrictors. That has been discussed previously, I suppose you glossed over that?

You are dead on when suggesting strengthening the top class. By making GT the lead class, that is exactly what you are doing. Providing those manufacturers and entrants the greatest exposure, where many are currently exploring their options after this year.

As for the nightmare scenario changes have already been made but time needs to be given to allow these to take effect. I fail to see how anyone can look at P1 and P2 chassis/engine developments and not think these will make there way to the ALMS yet the already close to bursting GTE bubble is meant to continue growing with GT3 happily sat alongside.

Field of Dreams? Build it and they will come?

I mean really, this is laughable. How have these P1/P2 chassis/engine developments lead to the machines being more marketable and getting greater exposure?

They are going to make their way to the ALMS... just because??

It wasn't too long ago some were saying let GT1 head up the ALMS, afterall Corvette, Aston, Maserati, Ferrari and Saleen had cars, since there's been an LMP boom and now GTE, it shows how volatile manufacture support can be.

Ok, outside of Supercars Maxwell, who always.. umm thought a bit "differently".. I can't recall anyone saying such a silly thing.

Manufacturer support depends on Marketability and ROI. Few manufacturers believe there is such a thing in Prototypes. They'd prefer to race cars they sell. There aren't any manufacturers currently interested in ALMS protos, and those in the fourth class... GT, are wavering because of a lack of exposure... that sounds like a great formula doesn't it?

Mullti-class racing is the essence of the ALMS, remove that and it won't be long before there are calls to have a sprint format. Single class endurance racing, or in this case two classes with similar speeds, can become tedious.

It is entertaining that you've defined what the ALMS is... This is what the ALMS calls themselves.

Premium manufacturers, world-class teams and the greatest drivers in the world...all pushing the limits of automotive innovation and technology. Welcome to the American Le Mans Series presented by Tequila Patrón – where we contest the race to tomorrow ... faster.

So... let's list the premium manufacturers entries in the top categories.

Umm.. that's right Bob... zero.

World Class Teams... I like some of the teams participating, some very nice people, and all around good folks. World Class Teams? I guess, still batting zero in the top classes.

The Greatest Drivers in the World.

Chris Dyson, Jon Fields, Clint Fields, Greg Pickett, Scott Tucker..

again, some real nice guys, but... which of these guys gets picked up by Audi, Peugeot or any other factory team, to be one of the Greatest Drivers in the World?

By the ALMS definition, they are no longer what they propose to be. Their identity is LOST.

Returning to GT and you end up with Premium Manufacturers, World Class Teams and some of the Greatest Drivers in the world of Sportscars. Isn't this what the ALMS claims to be?

Right now, we have Engines you've never heard of, with teams you've never heard of, and a cast off old Factory car, with some Private teams, all run by amateur drivers/owners. Heck of a series tagline.


It is easy enough to have a GT(2), GT3 (not identical to FIA GT3 in case you've glossed over above, and are confused) and a GT4, if desired. That seems like multiclass racing.

Regarding calls for sprint race formats... now you are just reaching... although truth be told, I have suggested such things in the past. I've said dump the 2:45 format altogether.

Run races in either 1:45, or 4 hours plus. The 1:45 races, your Long Beach type races, and you fit perfectly in a two hour network window. The enduros reserved for something like Speed, back when the series had live TV coverage, but make them real enduros.. not these 2:45 things...

Maybe you like glorified club racing? If that is the case, then I can understand why the differences in opinion. Club racing doesn't need to make economic sense, it's just a hobby.

If you truly believe that keeping the exisiting class structure, with deteriorating exposure, and same management and marketing strategy is somehow the key to a successful future...

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results" Albert Einstein

In conclusion, I appreciate that it appears that the business side, and the way sportscar racing works in North America is something foreign to you. It is nice to have anorak fantasies, but when there is no ground for them, and no sound reasoning... well they are just anorak fantasies. There are many who have pointed out the flaws in your thinking, but those qualified opinions have been brushed aside, as they don't justify the fantasy. There isn't much point in debating this further, as the conclusions we have reached based upon what we are willing to learn about, are great differing.

Those who show leadership, and an understanding of the North American sportscar racing entrants, manufacturer and sponsor needs, will prevail. 2011 is a critical year, and the leader will make great strides. The dogmatic belief that status quo will win... is simply wrong. A large catalyst is needed here.... will it come?

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Lola T70

Crikey, you are Mr Positive.......

Do you think ALMS have done a bad job in the last few years?

I think that a grid of probably 50 cars this year for the first race, which is up by about 35% is actually quite positive. Not perfect but a reasonable navigation through the current times.

The first race of the ALMS season is actually Long Beach. Sebring is an ILMC race, by nearly all definitions.

Long Beach will feature an embarrasing Prototype entry list, in terms of quality and quantity.

Judge the series by their entry list in actual ALMS races, and what their "TV media" viewers are.

[TWK]

Originally Posted by Lola T70

Crikey, you are Mr Positive.......

Do you think ALMS have done a bad job in the last few years?

I think that a grid of probably 50 cars this year for the first race, which is up by about 35% is actually quite positive. Not perfect but a reasonable navigation through the current times.

The "nearly 50 cars" at an ILMC race is an ALMS accomplishment? Hardly. The ALMS "accomplishment" will be on view at Long Beach, Road America, and Mosport, etc., not at races in which the entries are largely result of the participation of the Intercontinental Le Mans Cup field.

[JAG]

Fogelhund it looks like you made up your mind about the series some six months back when you thought the ACO had screwed up P1, constructors couldn't build P2 cars to the cost capped regs and the ILMC would be a failure.

That old line about manufacturer's only being interested in racing what they build is rolled out. Recently even Porsche and Chevy stated they will run factory teams in P1/F1 and Indy respectively.

Recent decisions by Cytosport, Highcroft, Dyson and Level 5 together with renewed interest in LMP racing from manufacturer's and constructors will be key in deciding the future of the series. I acknowledge the business of NA racing is different to Europe but it's not so different every manufacturer, team and sponsor can make a GT only series thrive and will ignore the developments in worldwide LMP racing.

[TWK]

Geez, if you're going to list every manufacturer who entered P1 or F1 in the past decade or two, go ahead and add Ford, Jaguar, Cadillac, Panoz, Chrysler, BMW...

But throwing in F1 is both disengenious and wrong in assessing manufacturer involvement since the other component (also much discussed here) along with cars being "what you build," is MARKETABLE VISIBILITY. F1 had a a television viewership of 527 million worldwide in 2010. As has been pointed out here before, the American Le Mans Series can hope for a total attendance + TV + web viewership of 3 million for its 2011 season. Apples and oranges (or chalk and cheese).

[Lola T70]

Originally Posted by TWK

The "nearly 50 cars" at an ILMC race is an ALMS accomplishment? Hardly. The ALMS "accomplishment" will be on view at Long Beach, Road America, and Mosport, etc., not at races in which the entries are largely result of the participation of the Intercontinental Le Mans Cup field.

I agree that the series need to be judged by more than one race, but it is the first one of the season and it seems the rest of the championship will also have higher entries than last year which I would say was positive...no?

But I assume by that answer though you don't think IMSA/ALMS do a good job so what would you do if you were at the steering wheel?

[extramundane]

Originally Posted by Lola T70

I agree that the series need to be judged by more than one race, but it is the first one of the season and it seems the rest of the championship will also have higher entries than last year which I would say was positive...no?

Yes, it's quite possible that there will physically be more cars at each round than last year. However, is 2 prototype classes with 3-4 cars (at most) apiece really better than one prototype class with 4 legitimate contenders and a couple of potential spoilers? 2010 was *far* from exceptional, yet it's looking like a golden era compared to what 2011 prototypes prospects.

GT looks, again, to be the Big Exception. Too bad that, between the poor excuse for a broadcast package and the likely focus on the single-digit prototype classes, nobody will get to see it.

[TWK]

Originally Posted by Lola T70

I agree that the series need to be judged by more than one race, but it is the first one of the season and it seems the rest of the championship will also have higher entries than last year which I would say was positive...no?

But I assume by that answer though you don't think IMSA/ALMS do a good job so what would you do if you were at the steering wheel?

Perhaps someone can give you a few links. Some have a problem with me quoting myself. I've written about 10,000 words in article over the past three years + in regard to "what they should do."

The short version (not hindsight, but before various ALMS decisions, like GTC).

1. Combine the LMP1 and LMP2 (they finally did, a year too late, then abandoned it).
2. Abandon GT1 (they finally did, at least two years too late).
3. Adopt GT3 (or GT3-like cars) as a second GT class behind GT2. (they adopted a Porsche-only "club class" instead).
4. Strengthen the financial footing for racing teams by ending the series competition for sponsors with their own teams (some call it a "raid").
5. Sign a title sponsor that contributes significantly to series marketing visibility. (never)
6. Partner with tracks in event marketing.
7. Instead of raking money from ALMS/IMSA into the Panoz group to finance losing business enterprises building road and race cars (most of which are now broke), invest in the series to make it a long-term success.
8. Upgrade the track infrastructure at Mosport.
9. Recognize that sports car endurance racing has no place in its main events for "single make racing" whether in GT or in prototypes.
10. Don't dump your best, most experienced, and brightest staff in favor of refugees who's principal experience is running parts of failed open-wheel racing series.
11. Hire a competent Vice President, Public Relations/Media Services. (Or at least someone not considered a joke.)
12. Don't build a business revenue model that's dependent for 60% of its revenue on four large contributors.

Need more?

[JAG]

Originally Posted by extramundane

Yes, it's quite possible that there will physically be more cars at each round than last year. However, is 2 prototype classes with 3-4 cars (at most) apiece really better than one prototype class with 4 legitimate contenders and a couple of potential spoilers? 2010 was *far* from exceptional, yet it's looking like a golden era compared to what 2011 prototypes prospects.

GT looks, again, to be the Big Exception. Too bad that, between the poor excuse for a broadcast package and the likely focus on the single-digit prototype classes, nobody will get to see it.

It's arguable what if any benefits a combined LMP class would have this year but now is the time to stop papering over the cracks and show clear direction for the next 3, 4, 5 years. P1 accepts all 2010 LMP entrants while P2 needs to stick to it's budget ways if it's to draw in new teams and LMPC runners.

[HJJ]

7. Instead of raking money from ALMS/IMSA into the Panoz group to finance losing business enterprises building road and race cars (most of which are now broke), invest in the series to make it a long-term success.

Your off on this one TWK. Seperate companies, different profit centers. Doesn't happen.

[chernaudi]

Even at that, they're owned by the same guy: Don Panoz. And with their road and race car side largely irrelevant (the Abruzzi will likely never be sold in America and is having problems with EU certifcation, and EMT only sell Ford V8s and GM LS3 crate engines, and spec-racing cars), that's not a very good sign for IMSA and the ALMS, though Grand Am isn't very much better off if at all--it only exists because of Jim France pumping NASCAR money into it and getting some media buzz because of NASCAR drivers running part time in the series, which is actually probably not much of a help.

But back to the ALMS. Dagys from Speed says that IMSA may be looking at slowing the LMPC cars based on times from the winter test because of the speed gap between LMP1 and LMPC being so small relative to last year.

[Lola T70]

Originally Posted by TWK

Perhaps someone can give you a few links. Some have a problem with me quoting myself. I've written about 10,000 words in article over the past three years + in regard to "what they should do."

The short version (not hindsight, but before various ALMS decisions, like GTC).

1. Combine the LMP1 and LMP2 (they finally did, a year too late, then abandoned it).
2. Abandon GT1 (they finally did, at least two years too late).
3. Adopt GT3 (or GT3-like cars) as a second GT class behind GT2. (they adopted a Porsche-only "club class" instead).
4. Strengthen the financial footing for racing teams by ending the series competition for sponsors with their own teams (some call it a "raid").
5. Sign a title sponsor that contributes significantly to series marketing visibility. (never)
6. Partner with tracks in event marketing.
7. Instead of raking money from ALMS/IMSA into the Panoz group to finance losing business enterprises building road and race cars (most of which are now broke), invest in the series to make it a long-term success.
8. Upgrade the track infrastructure at Mosport.
9. Recognize that sports car endurance racing has no place in its main events for "single make racing" whether in GT or in prototypes.
10. Don't dump your best, most experienced, and brightest staff in favor of refugees who's principal experience is running parts of failed open-wheel racing series.
11. Hire a competent Vice President, Public Relations/Media Services. (Or at least someone not considered a joke.)
12. Don't build a business revenue model that's dependent for 60% of its revenue on four large contributors.

Need more?

Thanks TWK, agree no point in talking with hindsight, but what would you do now to resolve specifically,

4, 5, 8. exactly how would you achieve/pay for these points?

9. What would you replace single make series with to achieve grid numbers for weekends?

10/11. I presume you would replace all staff mentioned and replace them, how many are we talking about in a total staff of ?

12. Which model would you put in place now in this current climate and how?

I think some of your points have merit but am interested to know how would achieve them which is much harder than recognising them.

[HJJ]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Even at that, they're owned by the same guy: Don Panoz. And with their road and race car side largely irrelevant (the Abruzzi will likely never be sold in America and is having problems with EU certifcation, and EMT only sell Ford V8s and GM LS3 crate engines, and spec-racing cars)

Danny Panoz owns PAD. It's his baby. Don is involved in the Abruzzi but any other projects are his. EMT has a very good business with defense/aerospace/aircraft. They are weathering the down turn in the racing industry and have been hiring people of late.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Even at that, they're owned by the same guy: Don Panoz. And with their road and race car side largely irrelevant (the Abruzzi will likely never be sold in America and is having problems with EU certifcation, and EMT only sell Ford V8s and GM LS3 crate engines, and spec-racing cars), that's not a very good sign for IMSA and the ALMS, though Grand Am isn't very much better off if at all--it only exists because of Jim France pumping NASCAR money into it and getting some media buzz because of NASCAR drivers running part time in the series, which is actually probably not much of a help.

But back to the ALMS. Dagys from Speed says that IMSA may be looking at slowing the LMPC cars based on times from the winter test because of the speed gap between LMP1 and LMPC being so small relative to last year.

I hope they don't slow the lmpc, because I don't want them tripping up the gts. I also can't wait to see what kind of sebring times the Level 5 cars can put in compared to the lmpc and restricted lmp1 cars.

[JAG]

What did the LMPC's run 1.54, that's compared to the 2m mark for GTE.

The R18 did 1.44-46 so a P2 should be around 1.50-52.

[JAG]

DP

[TWK]

Originally Posted by Lola T70

Thanks TWK, agree no point in talking with hindsight, but what would you do now to resolve specifically,

4, 5, 8. exactly how would you achieve/pay for these points?

4. is a "cease and disist." Suspend taking on useless series sponsors that contribute a bit of cash to the Series with no direct benefit to teams. You might have to cut a little further to do that...candidates are staff and programs like the invitation-only Vitesse program. I'd put a whole bunch of "green stuff" including conferences on the table, too. Take direct payments now gotten from those series sponsors and distribute them in some way to teams...purses or direct distribution.
5. Is Patron willing to become a "true" title sponsor? Find out. For now, its performance is all over the map with no clear leveraging of the series visibility. If not, go get one, take off the "conditions," and put someone to work on that as a primary focus. One year a Sebring - about three years ago, Scott told a press gathering that "the first thing I think of in the morning is getting a title sponsor," and "if we don't have one by next season, someone's job is in jeopardy." Hollow words, it turns out. Look at the organization "chart" (it's published in a document called "Resource Book") try to find someone responsible for actually selling the series.
8. With the attendence at Mosport, if the cash is staying in Canada, funding should be no problem. Consider the recent repaving at Road Atlanta, the seating developed on the terraces, the modern buildings (except the media center), consider the massive upgrades at Sebring. Mosport needs better communications, new garage/pit area/media center. It's a shabby eyesore. Consider that Laguna Seca, Lime Rock, and Road America have all made significant upgrades since anything was done at Mosport.

Originally Posted by Lola T70

9. What would you replace single make series with to achieve grid numbers for weekends?

First, the addition of such classes is not 100% efficient...without them a few of those entrants would likely have landed in an existing classes.....there are 15 in those classes now...I'll say that 2 would have added to the other classes...so that's a net loss of 13...and a total expected grid of 23 at non-ILMC races. Look at the history...the series has been in that territory before...but I don't recommend it. Make these changes that should have been the original plan. Open GTC to other "GT3-like" entries, or "Challenge/Cup" cars. Ferrari challenge comes immediately to mind, as does the R8 running elsewhere. There is no reason other than getting paid by Porsche to have it exclusive. Find cuts to balance that loss...actually, new entry fees will help. The cars are out there. "Performance balance?" You've got spec tires, keep them...and there are these little things called restrictors. As for LMPC, similarly....first, add engine options, then start a formal "phase into LMP2."

Originally Posted by Lola T70

10/11. I presume you would replace all staff mentioned and replace them, how many are we talking about in a total staff of ?

As for No. 10, we've lost the long-time Race Director/Chief Steward, the Pit Lane Supervisor, and now IMSA's Director of Operations. Each was (in my opinion) "pushed out." Each had been a sports car executive for decades. Each was replaced with a refugee from Champ Car, and just this week, one from Atlantics. What's the new hiriing criteria? Working for a failed series? Those are done now, but anyone who thinks that ALMS/IMSA is rationally staffed in my view has no realistic business background. Staffing doesn't match mission. As for No. 11...just one....that's a single title.

Originally Posted by Lola T70

12. Which model would you put in place now in this current climate and how?

Since the old model died with the recession, when three of those four contributors were lost, it's not an option to replace it or not. I think a complete reorganization is required. I think it needs to have at least some elements of being a team based structure. The fact that one such organization failed doing that (CART) doesn't mean it hasn't worked in some form around the world in many sports, including this one. But revenue has to come from a diverse base. The first step is learning to live efficiently within the current revenue base...entry, santion fees, etc. Smarter staffing would help. Bringing media production in house doesn't help...another non-core business enterprise to take away the focus on the real business. As long was we are talking about "real" business, the business of a racing series is entertainment, not solving global warming. The green crap is doing nothing good for this series...fine as a "sidelight," but it has become the reason d' etre...at the expense of the marketing and other attention to its entertainment values.

Originally Posted by Lola T70

I think some of your points have merit but am interested to know how would achieve them which is much harder than recognising them.

Most of the things that have needed to be done, had a time a place to do them...the current management missed the opportunity. Now it is in trouble. I think some things can be done now. Should this become GT only? Perhaps, but short of that, there are certainly some things that can happen.

[Lola T70]

You certainly have put some thought into it, more knowledge than me on the subject.

[JAG]

Are ALMS management incompetent or making decisions some disagree with because they have all facts at hand, a working relationship with the ACO and direct contact with manufacturer's, teams, sponsors, media etc.

The GT3 situation is the obvious one, what if the Porsche deal goes a good way to making up any income shortfall, linked to extra promotion or appearances by the hybrid. Perhaps other manufacturer's who've invested huge sums in GTE weren't too happy at the prospect of the class potentially being devalued or discussions may already be underway to bring more customer GTE's into the series.

One last point, it's said Sebring and PLM's grids aren't down to the ALMS but it's Panoz, Atherton and co. who stuck with ACO regs and sacrificed TV rights to ensure fans will see possibly the two greatest sportscar races held on NA soil.

Everyone can get too wrapped up with what's around the corner rather than enjoying what's in front of them.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I don't think that Penske had anything to do with the Audi ALMS back out--Audi of America and their bean counters (inspite of record profits) played Judas Iscerot there.

I think it had plenty to do with it. Just OPINION you doubt the Capt when it comes to putting something together? According to Marshall, Audi AG wanted singular focus that would eat, drink and sleep Audi. Penske was NOT going to give up his Indy Car and Nascar programs to run Audi's North American operations.

According to rumors he was the top team in consideration. The other was some Grand Am team never mentioned and Highcroft mentioned their involvement at the 11th hour when it became apparent they would not be involved.

If Audi NA's concern was funding, then why not go with a proven successful team owner?

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by Lola T70

You certainly have put some thought into it, more knowledge than me on the subject.

Which I'm afraid is the problem with most of the fan base. They aren't "tuned-in" to what's really happening with a series. For a series with a small loyal following/fan base, you'd would be forgiven to believe that most of the fan base is knowledgeable about its inner workings, that just isn't true.

This is why you see the "arguments" in here and its usually a few of us here that say -



While a majority of the others say Status Que is the only thing we understand and to change it sacrilege.

Gordon Kirby as some in the past have called for a "Come to Jesus" moment that the ALMS and Grand Am bury the hatchet. I would actually be fine with that IF, the ALMS was the team in a position to take over. I don't want what happen with IRL/CART where for all the correct moves made by Randy B the savior of Indy Car, the decision to limit chassis is still LOOMING large and ignoring the fan base that we don't understand the difference is ridiculous.

You should be offended that Chevy found "value" in Indy Car with dismal TV ratings. If anything the ALMS gives GM cover for other activities (NASCAR) and the only thing "Green" about Indy Car is smaller engines (2012) and ethanol fuel.

TWK is on target which I find interesting some in the media seem think LTC is the Doom Patrol and call some of what he's said a fabrication. LTC and Murphy are doing you a public service as much of what they have said would be in the communication ether and true shock/awe would have come over the entire fan base when "sudden" announcements happen.

There already was a meeting of the minds and they gave the ALMS another chance not so much because they wanted too, but the other options aren't great either.

You think if the ALMS just dried up all of us would move over to Grand Am?

Sorry but I don't buy that for a second.