MSNZ & TMC - 'Wheels start to come off'

[GT 86]

Originally Posted by HProject

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.........

Well the only people surprised about this it seems is tulloch Motorsport. I think they can thank their close family in Wellington for this as they are the ones that tried bulling the SI endurance series. I have heard second hand that next weekends MSNZ International championship Endurance Series is struggling for entries.

[smokin'joe]

they wouldn't allow a NZST car to enter either, i believe. unless the rule has been changed, they outlawed space-frame cars many years ago.

so, i'm thinking .....no conspiracy. MSNZ not to blame. TLX not to blame.

maybe point the blame stick at the Series Regs??

South Island endurance series has been running successfully for longer than many current NZ series/classes, with a formula that works.

[Goat Boy]

Well it looks to me that the ban is based on a personal issue rather than a technical one - I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to compete, especially as there seems to be a category that they fit into.

[BackSeat Driver]

When we brought a BMW Mini, many moons ago . . . we were only able to compete in the BMW Mini series. Me thinks it is possibly the same? We wanted to use it for Targa but the can-o-worms it began to open was very political.

In saying this I do realise that the Porsches were allways running in Enduro but not sure if they were current (at the time) Carrera Cup cars, or older Carrera cup cars that had moved on from the series.

[Bill Brown]

Originally Posted by Goat Boy

Well it looks to me that the ban is based on a personal issue rather than a technical one - I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to compete, especially as there seems to be a category that they fit into.

It is a sanctioned series there will be rules published for everyone to read

[CDM]

Originally Posted by Goat Boy

Well it looks to me that the ban is based on a personal issue rather than a technical one - I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to compete, especially as there seems to be a category that they fit into.

I can assure you and everyone else that there is no conspiracy, no personal vendetta (and I am actually personally offended by that accusation), nothing against NZV8's, MSNZ, V8ST or anyone else, but purely that the car doesnt meet our Sanctioned Series Articles that SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDES spaceframed vehicles. End of story.

And for the record there are at least two other cars that have asked to run but have been rejected by the committee (6 individuals) due to their spaceframed construction.

Personally I think the series did the Tulloch team a huge favour giving them special dispensation to run in 2012 to get some testing & race miles on their car & then they treat the series like this..... Shame.

[GT 86]

The ban could be on a personal issue but Im sure space frames were banned when Craig Gilbert hosed them years ago.

Seems weird that Tulloch now wants to enter his NZV8 in an endurance series that has nothing to do with MSNZ? Lets face it he was involved financially in the Veega court battle, the build of these cars and is very cuddly with Budd and Harris. Seems strange that he wants to now take it to another non aligned series unless he has had a fall out with MSNZ. Im surprised Budd and Harris would allow it as they own the IP and seem to pull the strings on TLX.

Any comment from Chris Dunn?

[HProject]

Quoting a response from the South Island Endurance Series' Facebook account, in response to the Tullock post above:

"The South island Endurance series probably have one of the most open eligability criteria in NZ, but unfortunately our rules specifically exclude spaceframed cars. However we are more than happy to accept an entry from your team with a car that meets our rules..."

[socram]

Good job I wasn't intending entering the Marcos then...

[Goat Boy]

Originally Posted by CDM

I can assure you and everyone else that there is no conspiracy, no personal vendetta (and I am actually personally offended by that accusation), nothing against NZV8's, MSNZ, V8ST or anyone else, but purely that the car doesnt meet our Sanctioned Series Articles that SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDES spaceframed vehicles. End of story.

And for the record there are at least two other cars that have asked to run but have been rejected by the committee (6 individuals) due to their spaceframed construction.

Personally I think the series did the Tulloch team a huge favour giving them special dispensation to run in 2012 to get some testing & race miles on their car & then they treat the series like this..... Shame.

Fair enough then - it might prove difficult to actually enter the TLX in any other class then - ironically you could probably run a V8ST in the series though...

Apologies for suggesting it was anything other than a technical issue

[DX20VT]

Originally Posted by Bill Brown

It is a sanctioned series there will be rules published for everyone to read

Last years rules are still there to look at too,
http://www.motorsport.org.nz/sites/d...es%20Final.pdf

[DX20VT]

Originally Posted by GT 86

The ban could be on a personal issue but Im sure space frames were banned when Craig Gilbert hosed them years ago.

Yes space framed cars were banned years ago, so nothing new.

The rule reads
(and has for a while as it is not highlighted in last years articles so was there for at least the year before that)

3.4 Eligible vehicles

are;
‘Closed’ Saloons, Closed GT variants and Closed Sports Cars,
all of Series Production manufacture with total monocoque construction.
Specifically exempted from this Series are ‘Open’ Sports Cars and ‘space-framed’ vehicles.

[Goat Boy]

Why doesn't anyone like space framed cars then?

[CDM]

Originally Posted by GT 86

The ban could be on a personal issue but Im sure space frames were banned when Craig Gilbert hosed them years ago.

The rules specifically exclude spaceframed vehicles so it is soley a technical issue. Yes I believe the rules were changed in about 1996 after Gilberts spaceframed TraNZam cleaned up, so its been the case for at least 15 years and well before my time...

Originally Posted by Goat Boy

Fair enough then - it might prove difficult to actually enter the TLX in any other class then - ironically you could probably run a V8ST in the series though...

No irony there as a V8ST is also a spaceframed vehicle...

[promax]

Originally Posted by GT 86

The ban could be on a personal issue but Im sure space frames were banned when Craig Gilbert hosed them years ago.

Seems weird that Tulloch now wants to enter his NZV8 in an endurance series that has nothing to do with MSNZ? Lets face it he was involved financially in the Veega court battle, the build of these cars and is very cuddly with Budd and Harris. Seems strange that he wants to now take it to another non aligned series unless he has had a fall out with MSNZ. Im surprised Budd and Harris would allow it as they own the IP and seem to pull the strings on TLX.

Any comment from Chris Dunn?

what's weird about a SI team wanting to run their new car in SI series during their off season?

[Goat Boy]

Originally Posted by promax

what's weird about a SI team wanting to run their new car in SI series during their off season?

Oh well, it doesn't seem that space frames qualify for whatever reason.

[GT 86]

I see as of yesterday all members have been notified of increases in most costs including licenses. I wonder if they will publish why everything has increased.

Veega Court battle.
TLX IP
MPL going broke
Running the summer series

[raymond]

Originally Posted by GT 86

I see as of yesterday all members have been notified of increases in most costs including licenses. I wonder if they will publish why everything has increased.

Veega Court battle.
TLX IP
MPL going broke
Running the summer series

Argh, ..here we go again.

1. Veega court battle did not involve MSNZ $$$
2. No
3. That did cost the sport as well as quite a few other creditors some $$$, fortunately ours is minimal
4. Summer series has not used any MSNZ $$$ and looks as though it actually made some money.

Reason for the costs being lifted 4% is solely cost of living type adjustments. You will note that these fees have not increased for the minimum last 3 years, whereas costs such as staff, buildings etc have all increased around 9-10% nationally in that time.

But you believe what you will....

[socram]

Tempting to respond! Has anyone given any thought to improving efficiency by 10% by REDUCING the amount of paperwork/emails/amendments to manuals/postage etc?

On line licence renewal is a breeze and a massive step forwards in efficiency.

Why not on line authority card renewals for example? Why post in the logbook and have it posted back again annually? Just to see if we have had the car scrutineered twice in the last 12 months?

The first rule about efficiency/productivity improvement is to challenge every step of every process to see first of all, if it is even necessary...

[Alpina107]

Originally Posted by raymond

Reason for the costs being lifted 4% is solely cost of living type adjustments. You will note that these fees have not increased for the minimum last 3 years, whereas costs such as staff, buildings etc have all increased around 9-10% nationally in that time.

I'm sure someone with far greater experience and/or knowledge will jump on me from a great height if my facts aren't right, but weren't race licence fees (and other charges) almost doubled in the aftermath of the Queenstown Street Race tragedy? And weren't those increases only supposed to be temporary as they were essentially to help MNZ pay legal bills? If that's the case, why are the "inflated" fees being used as a basis for cost-of-living increases, some 15 years later?

[RogerH]

Originally Posted by raymond

Argh, ..here we go again.

1. Veega court battle did not involve MSNZ $$$
2. No
3. That did cost the sport as well as quite a few other creditors some $$$, fortunately ours is minimal
4. Summer series has not used any MSNZ $$$ and looks as though it actually made some money.

Reason for the costs being lifted 4% is solely cost of living type adjustments. You will note that these fees have not increased for the minimum last 3 years, whereas costs such as staff, buildings etc have all increased around 9-10% nationally in that time.

But you believe what you will....

I suppose we can't let a good story get in the way of the facts.

The expenditure by MSNZ of $57,500 on the TLX IP is a direct cost incurred that will mostly end up in a loss. In order to recover this money there needs to be 29 TLX cars sold which is an unlikely scenario. As a result MSNZ will suffer a loss which will need to be recovered in some form.

The demise of TMC/MPL will cost MSNZ money which will also need to be recovered in some form. For a start, the capital investment MSNZ has in MPL ($90,000) will need to be written off as MPL has no worth. Additionally, MSNZ has some exposure to MPL as an unsecured creditor. Crunch states this is "minimal", however we have formally asked MSNZ how much the exposure was but were given a BS reply that the Liquidator's report was required. MSNZ should know from their own accounts how much exposure they have - nothing to do with a Liquidator.

Crunch advises the MSNZ fees have been lifted by 4% which seems consistent with the explanation given on the formal amendment promulgating the fee increases - that they are inflation adjustments.

Unfortunately both of the above statements are incorrect. There are 48 fee increases which are greater than 4%. The highest is 158% which interestingly is for a COD for Historic and Classic Vehicles (increased from $97 to $250). There are many other increases in the 10 - 25% range plus others of 100%, 47%, 46%, 37% etc.

It sounds like a pretty wholesale fee increase masquerading as an "inflation" adjustment.

[socram]

Originally Posted by RogerH

The highest is 158% which interestingly is for a COD for Historic and Classic Vehicles (increased from $97 to $250).

And people wonder why we won't insist on a CoD? However, NOT holding a CoD may then affect your roll cage application status...

Or, do we need a massive CoD document for a bog standard MGB anyway?

There is no historical importance or significance in such a mass produced car, unless it was formerly raced or rallied by Paddy Hopkirk for example.

This will see the death knell of CoDs for everyday cars - but maybe that is no bad thing.

Is there a hidden agenda here?

[sollitt]

Originally Posted by socram

... However, NOT holding a CoD may then affect your roll cage application status...

That is something that needs to be changed. Safety requirements should not be dependant on a vehicle's classic, or other, authenticity.
Nows the time to be preparing a remit for conference.

[socram]

I don't have a manual handy to read it up, but there is/was Schedule A & AA. Schedule AA supposedly having a lesser standard, but to be scrutineered to that, you had to have a CoD.

To get a CoD, your car has to be accepted by the H & C Commission.

It now seems that because you elect to run a classic, if you want it accepted by some groups, it is going to cost 158% more, but more to the point, a whopping $250. Nothing like fat fees and mountains of red tape to encourage newcomers into participation.

Sorry, but so many changes and problems regarding red tape at the moment, that I am no longer sure about anything. The waters in some areas are now so muddy that virtually no-one can give you a straight answer about anything - and justify it to any degree of satisfaction. I may now have to take extra morphine for a day or two.

I may even consider retiring from all aspects of the sport, including the organisational side, then just take the cars out for track days and switch to bowls instead. The wheels haven't so much fallen off MSNZ, but somehow, the brakes seem to be locking up in some sectors - and the skid marks are showing.

[sollitt]

Yes, I understand how it works Ray. What I'm saying is, if you want change now is the time to be bringing it.
It is unconscionable that two almost identical cars require two totally different levels of safety equipment simply because one has CoD eligibility and the other doesn't.
There has never before been the mood for wide spread change as there is presently. I would imagine a remit corecting this situation would be warmly received.