[WTCC] New entrants in the championship

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by awrb

To be totally honest, that sounds to me like Gio was saying, "the team was great, but I didn't get on with the car, and BMW weren't prepared to modify the car so I did". Which is my exact point.

Imagine if Gio was doing the equalisation that year, the BMW would be running on -100kg or something, because he just couldn't get on with it, while Priaulx and the Mullers were very fast.

He actually says that with the 320i he could have worked on it, were it not for the BMW philosophy that the driver should suit the car and not the opposite. The rest of the teams, such as 888, help the driver by bringing in different setups and so on, so that the driver is more comfortable with it.
I think that if the driver doesn't come from an s2000 environment it will always be hard for him to adapt to the different cars. As I said, if you take Alessandro Balzan, he drove the AR 156 in the Etcc, but he also drove Superstars and now fights for the Italian Porsche Cup title against Rangoni, so he has a good experience with different types of cars. He would be the most neutral guy to do that job that I can think of. If you work a little bit, you can find a suitable driver.

[awrb]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

He actually says that with the 320i he could have worked on it, were it not for the BMW philosophy that the driver should suit the car and not the opposite. The rest of the teams, such as 888, help the driver by bringing in different setups and so on, so that the driver is more comfortable with it.
I think that if the driver doesn't come from an s2000 environment it will always be hard for him to adapt to the different cars. As I said, if you take Alessandro Balzan, he drove the AR 156 in the Etcc, but he also drove Superstars and now fights for the Italian Porsche Cup title against Rangoni, so he has a good experience with different types of cars. He would be the most neutral guy to do that job that I can think of. If you work a little bit, you can find a suitable driver.

But even then, every driver has their own driving style, and every driver will adapt differently to a race car. It would be impossible to find a driver and circuit that would be 100% fair. Just impossible. And to then restrict development throughout the year would just mean that, if a manufacturer is doing badly after the first event, they could just give up then, knowing there is no way to catch up, rather than working on the car and improving it.

What do you think this equalisation system would bring the WTCC? because, with the ballast weight system as it is right now, it would take a lot for one manufacturer to really run away with it. So what would it gain us?

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by awrb

On a side note, there isn't that much money coming in from sponsors to the series. Apart from Liqui Moly and a bit of money for Wiechers and Proteam, There aren't really that many major sponsors. How do they attract more sponsors and even manufacturers?

I think the coverage is a problem. It's not really on major TV in a lot of country's. But at the moment, there isn't really anything great to pitch to the TV channels, especially if they do their research and look at what happened in Pau.

Well, there also is Crowne Plaza for RBM, there used to be Dell for Schnitzer, Monroe for Corthals and there is the Moroccan Tourism Office. But it's true, there's a low concentration of sponsors in the Wtcc.
As for the coverage, unfortunately Eurosport holds the rights to the Wtcc because they have a share in the organization, if I understood correctly. What I can tell you for sure is that stopandgo.tv wanted to have the tv footage to do some tv service about the Wtcc, but we were stopped by Eurosport who asked us money to provide us the footage, and we couldn't go on the track to film our own images. That's pretty weird, since all we were going to do was promotion of the championship.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

When referring to a Wtcc project that costs a few millions I mean a BMW-SEAT-Chevrolet kind of thing. Have you ever wondered why TD and Arena chose the Btcc and not the pinnacle of the sport?

Given your approach the likes of TD and Arena would be unable to compete at WTCC level even if they wanted to.

You seem to be excluding anyone other than multi-million pount works teams, despite that fact that lower budget non-works teams can and do enter the WTCC. Russian Bears is a good example of that, when they first ran the Ladas they didn't have factory backing or a huge budget. To a lesser extent the Hotfeld Focus, Procar Toyota or Polestar Volvo. Likewise the N-Tech Accord which may have started as an ex-works project but still started the season off the pace and developed through the season. Under your rules they wouldn't be allowed any mid-season development - if that's not enough to put off any potential team then I don't know what is.

Even a big works team will tell you that the first season is a development year, but you are saying that no development work would be allowed.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

As for the coverage, unfortunately Eurosport holds the rights to the Wtcc because they have a share in the organization, if I understood correctly. What I can tell you for sure is that stopandgo.tv wanted to have the tv footage to do some tv service about the Wtcc, but we were stopped by Eurosport who asked us money to provide us the footage, and we couldn't go on the track to film our own images. That's pretty weird, since all we were going to do was promotion of the championship.

Not that weird. Why would they give away footage and rights to a potential rival TV service?

[werner]

@ Redshoes: offcourse the lack of developmentpossibilities would be traded off against the advantage off getting a very low weight if you start the season with a poorly developed car.

@ Helterskelter: In GT3 and GT4 it is easy: A GT3 car of a certain brand weighs x kilo's, and that is for every SRO-organised GT3 or GT4 championship. But several championships, at least the Belgian GT3 and the Dutch GT4-championship also give penalty's for individual teams, with systems a bit like the former wtcc-system.
It can give problems in small countries. For instance in the Dutch championship, 5 out of 8 races are driven at Zandvoort. If one car happens to be suited to Zandvoort, it has a great advantage.
I think manufacturers do not compete so much on speed with other manufacturers on the GT3 or GT4-market. More important to potential buyers (more often than not amateur drivers) is the price of the car, the service in terms of technical assistance, delivery of spare-parts etc, the status of the car and maybe most important of all, the fun it is to drive. Speedadvantage is ballasted away anyway, so just being able to sort of keep up with the other cars is enough.


Having said that: I'm not in favor of pre-season equalisation. As I've said before: it is of the most importance that regulations are written, with witch several manufacturers who have sporty versions of large hathcbacks or mid-size saloons, given a proper (= not astronomical, but not on a shoestring either) developmental budget and a talented developer, can built a competitive car. A car that is still very recognizable in both looks and character as the roadcar it used to be. I think S2000-rules are quite suitable for this purpose. The last small pieces of inequality can be ballasted away with a system like we have today. And NOT with changing the rules every race.
If 1 car starts to dominate the series despite carrying the most ballast, and it is suspected that is is due to an advantage of it's configuration (for instance for having a dieselengine, or RWD) and not because of having the best engineers, racingteams or drivers, some bright independent minds at the touringcarbureau can start thinking about changing the regulations (for instance lowering turbopressure on turbodiesels, or adding extra weight to rwd-cars) for next year.

Edit: very talented teams who can develop a competitive car on a shoestring can only be applauded for offcourse.

[helterskelter]

While we were talking the Wtcc rules changed again... 2.7 turbo pressure.

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by redshoes

Not that weird. Why would they give away footage and rights to a potential rival TV service?

Well no, we are a TV magazine and they are a TV broadcaster. There's a huge difference
What we do is tv services, like video news, and this raises awareness of the championship (we are the official WSK series TV partners, so imagine the 350,000 who watch our services about that championship coming in and also having a look at the Wtcc service and 10% of them start watching the races on Eurosport...)

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by redshoes

Given your approach the likes of TD and Arena would be unable to compete at WTCC level even if they wanted to.

You seem to be excluding anyone other than multi-million pount works teams, despite that fact that lower budget non-works teams can and do enter the WTCC. Russian Bears is a good example of that, when they first ran the Ladas they didn't have factory backing or a huge budget. To a lesser extent the Hotfeld Focus, Procar Toyota or Polestar Volvo. Likewise the N-Tech Accord which may have started as an ex-works project but still started the season off the pace and developed through the season. Under your rules they wouldn't be allowed any mid-season development - if that's not enough to put off any potential team then I don't know what is.

Even a big works team will tell you that the first season is a development year, but you are saying that no development work would be allowed.

Yeah but Russian Bears are at the back of the grid even with works backing and Thommo said in an interview that, without the success ballast, he'd have ended up in the back of the grid, too, fighting with the Ladas. Maybe that's a bit too much, but certainly the car was not that good. Were it not for James, I don't know if the Accord would have ever seen the podium...
Yes, the first season is designed to be a learning one. But with those rules, you either choose to go in with a slow car or you sit back for one year, bring the car up to speed and then show up in the Wtcc the next year, if you're a manufacturer. I don't see the problem, TBH.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

stopandgo.tv wanted to have the tv footage to do some tv service about the Wtcc, but we were stopped by Eurosport who asked us money to provide us the footage, and we couldn't go on the track to film our own images. That's pretty weird, since all we were going to do was promotion of the championship.

That is how FIA championships works in general unfortunately. Just try to eg put up a 30s personal video of the latest F1 race on youtube. It doesnt take long to get axed, because since the 1980ies (?) all moving picture rights belong to FOM. And since that way of business earns a few people a LOT of money, that is the road most FIA picture rights are handled nowadays, sadly.

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by stedevil

That is how FIA championships works in general unfortunately. Just try to eg put up a 30s personal video of the latest F1 race on youtube. It doesnt take long to get axed, because since the 1980ies (?) all moving picture rights belong to FOM. And since that way of business earns a few people a LOT of money, that is the road most FIA picture rights are handled nowadays, sadly.

Strangely enough, we do have permission to reproduce F1 videos! If you go to www.stopandgo.tv you will find a lot of F1 videos. The problem is not FIA or KSO, it's Eurosport that doesn't allow us to air tv footage. The reason why we can air F1 videos is that the teams provide us the footage. With Wtcc, it isn't possible, though I'm still trying to negotiate a deal to be able to do it.
I am perfectly aware of the fact that Eurosport hold the rights and can do wathever they want. The question is: if we use footage in a tv magazine watched by thousands of people every week, and therefore perhaps make someone get interested in it and watch the races on Eurosport, in what way do we do them harm?

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

in what way do we do them harm?

No way what so ever. Exactly like putting 30s of F1 on youtube can only promote F1. It's counter productive to block it, but not all economists understands it since when they got their degrees 20-30 years ago internet promotion wasn't mentioned in their books. :P

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by stedevil

No way what so ever. Exactly like putting 30s of F1 on youtube can only promote F1. It's counter productive to block it, but not all economists understands it since when they got their degrees 20-30 years ago internet promotion wasn't mentioned in their books. :P

I think they are so closed in their own world, like 'the footage is ours, only we can use it', forgetting that their goal is to increase the audiences, and therefore getting people to buy commercial spots.