2022 RSC Silly Season (WITH POLL)

[one five five]

Originally Posted by Mixer

20 years since we had a reverse grid
Please don't mention Penske's 30 million dollar raid on our sport.
Fuel drop was to give a sporting equality to teams that had worse fuel economy.
Again, you mention the same thing twice.

Penske, as he does in most series, found a loophole and exploited it to the maximum, breaking the rulebook rather than the rules.

If the sport had not reacted and equalised the cars it would not exist now. It was bad enough that Lee Holdsworth could pass the entire field while Scotty Mac was driving around at half throttle for 6 months.

Look at the ebb and flow of the 2021 season and tell me there was any car advantage over any other? SVG was fast, Cam Waters was fast, Anton was fast, Chaz was fast. Someone was unbeatable on any given day but it wasn't always a Mustang like the previous 2 years.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Nothing to do with Penske, all my points happened long before they joined.

Compulsory 4 pitstops at Bathurst including compulsory brake pads change came into effect in the inaugural Primus 1000 Classic in 1997.

Holden’s we’re their wings clipped in 1998 because they were winning too much

Ford got a new front air dam in 2000 because they weren’t fast enough

Reverse grids were first used in 2000 and last used in 2006

Project Blueprint in 2003 and then COTF in 2013 was another way of artificially dumbing down the competition

Minimum fuel drops and increased minimum pitstops at Sandown 500 & Supercars 1000 at Bathurst were brought in for 2013 to artificially help thirsty engines

Jungle Juice was allowed at Winton in 2013 to help the Nissan’s because they were off the pace

And these are just off the top of my head….

“Creating sporting equality” is still not a pure sporting contest, it is artificially played with for entertainment purposes.

Supercars are no better (and certainly no worse) than BTCC, GT3, TCR etc etc… in these regards

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by benny41

How about different race formats ?
Passing points? Joker laps ? Send the fast guy to the rear and give bonus points for the positions they gain.

Have you seen the way rally cross is presented is overseas. Create some excitment in the broadcast.

At the moment it looks and feels like supercars lite and it doesnt really appeal to new fans and i cant see it being sucssesful if its trying to draw fans from the same.

The racing and mix of cars is good but it will fade into oblivion if something isnt done differently

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

I would've gone with reverse grids and success ballast like in BTCC.

And than people whine it's a lottery or circus instead of real racing.

SC has so many race formats you will never get something unique.

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Really!

TCR cars are meant to be available at a fixed price within 90 days or competition.

Nobody could buy a Lynk and Co for more than 2 years and even that first "sale" was to a Chinese team.

Not allowing the car to run in National Series undermined the BoP process and should not have been allowed for so many years while Lynk and Co refused point blank to sell cars to customer teams. Hyundai very nearly walked away over it. They probably should have been suspended from championship points until they were in compliance. Really it has also been run as a full factory team, which isn't meant to be allowed either.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Quantity AND quality of current WTCR is better compared to 2011-2015 WTCC.

And show me the source for your Lynk & Co story.

[Mixer]

The source? Watch the sport for the last 3 years and show me any cars in National competitions until 2021 season.

Hyundai raged and raged about it all 2020.

Cyan is down the side of the cars, so it's quite clear who is paying the entire bill, and the whole team is the former Polestar/Volvo factory team.

Meanwhile Honda and Hyundai play by the rules and lose their ability to manipulate BoP.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by one five five

So what exactly should a top world championship of touring cars resemble?

Ideally it would be Alfa Romeo Giulia GTAm vs BMW M4 CS vs Jaguar XE Project 8 vs Audi RS5 vs Shelby Mustang GT350R vs Camaro ZL1 1LE vs Infiniti Q60 Red Sport vs Lexus RC-F etc.

The basic requirements being, perhaps, the engine in the front, 2WD only (AWD road cars can race as RWD), and four nominal seating positions (to exclude supersportscars as opposed to touring passenger cars)?

The American cars would be in there, but so would all the relevant European and Asian touring cars. It would be good to see DTM, ATCC etc racing under a common set of regulations. Perhaps even the WTCC and JTCC?

Originally Posted by one five five

Project Blueprint in 2003 ... was another way of artificially dumbing down the competition

Holden entrants wanted to have the Falcon double wishbone front suspension and wanted to have replica Ford cylinder heads without normal Chevrolet Siamese ports IIRC. It wasn't forced on them as a means to dumb down the competition if I am not mistaken, even if it was a departure from purer Group A regulations of retaining road car pickup points etc.

Not that VP through VX era Commodore were ever sold with 1960's Chevrolet small block engines anyway...

Originally Posted by Mixer

If the sport had not reacted and equalised the cars it would not exist now. It was bad enough that Lee Holdsworth could pass the entire field while Scotty Mac was driving around at half throttle for 6 months.

Utter nonsense. Ford Performance should have been rewarded for building a better car as Roland Dane had instructed them to do. To change things mid-season instead of waiting for Holden Motorsport to homologate a new aero kit at the start of the 2020 season was totally wrong.

Pro-Holden bias is untenable. If the superior Mustang had encouraged some of the Holden teams to switch to Ford that would have been good for the sport. The unbalanced grid is very, very unfortunate.

[Sandgroper]

This has seem to gone off topic.

[one five five]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

Ideally it would be Alfa Romeo Giulia GTAm vs BMW M4 CS vs Jaguar XE Project 8 vs Audi RS5 vs Shelby Mustang GT350R vs Camaro ZL1 1LE vs Infiniti Q60 Red Sport vs Lexus RC-F etc.

The basic requirements being, perhaps, the engine in the front, 2WD only (AWD road cars can race as RWD), and four nominal seating positions (to exclude supersportscars as opposed to touring passenger cars)?

The American cars would be in there, but so would all the relevant European and Asian touring cars. It would be good to see DTM, ATCC etc racing under a common set of regulations. Perhaps even the WTCC and JTCC?.

Pretty good outline there

Hopefully cars wouldn’t have a common chassis and few control components too.

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by Sandgroper

This has seem to gone off topic.

Apparently TCR is the more relevant series.

But I agree let's use this topic for VASC.

[Sandgroper]

Originally Posted by FIRE

Apparently TCR is the more relevant series.

But I agree let's use this topic for VASC.

Seperate thread for that.

This is for the MAIN GAME

[Mixer]

Anybody else feel like Fabs has inked a deal with DJRTP and isn't saying it yet?

Surely otherwise he'd instantly grab the plumb co-drive with Chaz. Surely the best way to get back into a full time seat is to lead sessions with potentially win Bathurst.

[Matt K]

Can imagine this happen (btw DJR, no longer DJRTP ), although I wouldn't rule out the possibility of him joining Chaz or anything else really.
Another thing is, I have my doubts if he can really come back full time in a top team. At least not DJR (nor 888 obviously).

[Jack65]

WAU would be the more likely option, too much blood on the walls for a DJR comeback.

[Matt K]

Originally Posted by Jack65

WAU would be the more likely option, too much blood on the walls for a DJR comeback.

Also true, especially considering that, according to some information, it was Roger Penske who supported Fabian, not Dick Johnson or Ryan Story. They didn't hesitate to part ways with Coulthard so it doesn't seem very obvious to welcome him back. Can happen as Coulthard would be a very solid co-driver but that's not something very very likely.

[GTRMagic]

It would be nice if the language were more correct with some of these new livery launches. Whilst probably technically correct that a brand may be taking the space regularly ascribed to naming rights sponsorship on a car or team or driver.. the media conversation never seems to bother to extend to contract length, or quite what the sponsor intends doing with the branded asset.

When you look at some brands taking up space akin to a naming rights partner, it is probably safer, on reflection of the likely actual financial contribution, to call them a branding partner.. that their brand is on the car.. not that they are fully funding the car.

As in years gone by, looking at some brands that show up, their businesses do not usually have $3m in lazy cash to take a full car at full commercial rates.

Patrons are clearly still well alive and ticking..

[bathurst77]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

It would be nice if the language were more correct with some of these new livery launches. Whilst probably technically correct that a brand may be taking the space regularly ascribed to naming rights sponsorship on a car or team or driver.. the media conversation never seems to bother to extend to contract length, or quite what the sponsor intends doing with the branded asset.

When you look at some brands taking up space akin to a naming rights partner, it is probably safer, on reflection of the likely actual financial contribution, to call them a branding partner.. that their brand is on the car.. not that they are fully funding the car.

As in years gone by, looking at some brands that show up, their businesses do not usually have $3m in lazy cash to take a full car at full commercial rates.

Patrons are clearly still well alive and ticking..

The teams are privately owned commercial businesses. As with any such, where they get their cash, how much they are paid for their service (advertising space) is between them, the client, the accountants and tax department.

It is not our business if coke sponsorship is 5 million bucks or a free coke machine in the workshop or pit. As long as the sponsor and the team are good with it, they can call it team coke or fred nurk coke racing or team fred (with some coke stickers)

[chavez]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

It would be nice if the language were more correct with some of these new livery launches. Whilst probably technically correct that a brand may be taking the space regularly ascribed to naming rights sponsorship on a car or team or driver.. the media conversation never seems to bother to extend to contract length, or quite what the sponsor intends doing with the branded asset.

When you look at some brands taking up space akin to a naming rights partner, it is probably safer, on reflection of the likely actual financial contribution, to call them a branding partner.. that their brand is on the car.. not that they are fully funding the car.

As in years gone by, looking at some brands that show up, their businesses do not usually have $3m in lazy cash to take a full car at full commercial rates.

Patrons are clearly still well alive and ticking..

A serious and proper review of costs would consider what a naming rights sponsor would pay for twelve months and use that as a starting point for a budget cap.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by chavez

A serious and proper review of costs would consider what a naming rights sponsor would pay for twelve months and use that as a starting point for a budget cap.

But some of the most innovative arrangements with Supercars sponsors were outside of this direct cash model. Otherwise how many brands do you think have $4m cash sitting around to drop? Not many. Sponsorship at this level is a more complex game and some teams do better than others at leveraging the sponsors to gain more B2B engagements and deliver value within the sponsors customer or stakeholder relationships.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Otherwise how many brands do you think have $4m cash sitting around to drop?

A lot more if the ATCC wasn't a niche sport mostly on Foxtel with only one race that most people bother to watch!

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by bathurst77

The teams are privately owned commercial businesses. As with any such, where they get their cash, how much they are paid for their service (advertising space) is between them, the client, the accountants and tax department.

It is not our business if coke sponsorship is 5 million bucks or a free coke machine in the workshop or pit. As long as the sponsor and the team are good with it, they can call it team coke or fred nurk coke racing or team fred (with some coke stickers)

Whilst all of these things are correct, it doesnt do the purveyors of news articles much good to talk about a different brand coming to the sport when they have no understanding of the quantum of the involvement.

A cheap round deal isnt quite the same as a full house multi year deal, yet the motor noters seem to lump the deals into the same category. Is it lazy journalism, or as Mr Cadogan from AutoExpert often says, that the opening of dialog around such things may limit future access or involvement in promotional events

The deal with Mobil & WAU is case in point. The team points to 3 decades of support. Which is true.. and at least at the initial stage, the sponsorship when brought from Mr Brock's involvement was the whole of one car and ended up as co-branded sponsor of two. Now its a bonnet sponsor, and co-naming rights... suggesting the contribution to the budget has changed, either in outright dollars, and more likely too as a percentage of overall operating costs.

Motor noters dont ask... they are blinded by the press launch and being invited to go, or being on the mailing list of same. They have an embargo, which gives them plenty of time to research, and ask questions.

Not a word was said about Penrite taking on 2 cars at Grove. yet it should have signalled a couple of million dollars of commercial sponsorship increase, and if it is a multi year deal, its kind of a big deal and a win for not only the team but the sport. yet we dont actaully know that, because they didnt ask.

We will see some rearrangement of truck sponsors this year for example. BJR's Stax seems to have been required to trade in his Freightliner for what seems to be a rented Adaptalift-sourced Mercedes Benz prime mover. And equally MSR's deal with Daimler Trucks Gold Coast appears to have been replaced by a direct importer deal with DAF. If I can see it... surely the motor noters can to... and actually create a story around it... they whys/whens/how longs/benefits/activations etc.

Isnt it really their responsibility (on the official site or over at AdCafe) to help the sport along, to maintain the focus on the companies and people who support the very sport their livelihoods are based on?

Or am I missing something..?

[one five five]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Whilst all of these things are correct, it doesnt do the purveyors of news articles much good to talk about a different brand coming to the sport when they have no understanding of the quantum of the involvement.

A cheap round deal isnt quite the same as a full house multi year deal, yet the motor noters seem to lump the deals into the same category. Is it lazy journalism, or as Mr Cadogan from AutoExpert often says, that the opening of dialog around such things may limit future access or involvement in promotional events

The deal with Mobil & WAU is case in point. The team points to 3 decades of support. Which is true.. and at least at the initial stage, the sponsorship when brought from Mr Brock's involvement was the whole of one car and ended up as co-branded sponsor of two. Now its a bonnet sponsor, and co-naming rights... suggesting the contribution to the budget has changed, either in outright dollars, and more likely too as a percentage of overall operating costs.

Motor noters dont ask... they are blinded by the press launch and being invited to go, or being on the mailing list of same. They have an embargo, which gives them plenty of time to research, and ask questions.

Not a word was said about Penrite taking on 2 cars at Grove. yet it should have signalled a couple of million dollars of commercial sponsorship increase, and if it is a multi year deal, its kind of a big deal and a win for not only the team but the sport. yet we dont actaully know that, because they didnt ask.

We will see some rearrangement of truck sponsors this year for example. BJR's Stax seems to have been required to trade in his Freightliner for what seems to be a rented Adaptalift-sourced Mercedes Benz prime mover. And equally MSR's deal with Daimler Trucks Gold Coast appears to have been replaced by a direct importer deal with DAF. If I can see it... surely the motor noters can to... and actually create a story around it... they whys/whens/how longs/benefits/activations etc.

Isnt it really their responsibility (on the official site or over at AdCafe) to help the sport along, to maintain the focus on the companies and people who support the very sport their livelihoods are based on?

Or am I missing something..?

Agree with all of this. Especially the journalistic angle, Motorsport media in Australian motor racing is in such a sad place nowadays compared to 20-30-40-50 years ago. All the current ones just stick to the “script” and sell the “vision” so they keep getting invited back.

People seemed to complain about Pete McKay because he wasn’t positive about Supercars, yet he was happy to ask the curly questions.

As was Mark Fogarty, but he seems to have disappeared without a trace…..

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by one five five

As was Mark Fogarty, but he seems to have disappeared without a trace…..

Foges is around on "new media" but I think AA is sufficiently gone now that they can't afford the salary...

[Umai Naa]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Whilst all of these things are correct, it doesnt do the purveyors of news articles much good to talk about a different brand coming to the sport when they have no understanding of the quantum of the involvement.

A cheap round deal isnt quite the same as a full house multi year deal, yet the motor noters seem to lump the deals into the same category. Is it lazy journalism, or as Mr Cadogan from AutoExpert often says, that the opening of dialog around such things may limit future access or involvement in promotional events

The deal with Mobil & WAU is case in point. The team points to 3 decades of support. Which is true.. and at least at the initial stage, the sponsorship when brought from Mr Brock's involvement was the whole of one car and ended up as co-branded sponsor of two. Now its a bonnet sponsor, and co-naming rights... suggesting the contribution to the budget has changed, either in outright dollars, and more likely too as a percentage of overall operating costs.

Motor noters dont ask... they are blinded by the press launch and being invited to go, or being on the mailing list of same. They have an embargo, which gives them plenty of time to research, and ask questions.

Not a word was said about Penrite taking on 2 cars at Grove. yet it should have signalled a couple of million dollars of commercial sponsorship increase, and if it is a multi year deal, its kind of a big deal and a win for not only the team but the sport. yet we dont actaully know that, because they didnt ask.

We will see some rearrangement of truck sponsors this year for example. BJR's Stax seems to have been required to trade in his Freightliner for what seems to be a rented Adaptalift-sourced Mercedes Benz prime mover. And equally MSR's deal with Daimler Trucks Gold Coast appears to have been replaced by a direct importer deal with DAF. If I can see it... surely the motor noters can to... and actually create a story around it... they whys/whens/how longs/benefits/activations etc.

Isnt it really their responsibility (on the official site or over at AdCafe) to help the sport along, to maintain the focus on the companies and people who support the very sport their livelihoods are based on?

Or am I missing something..?

It's not like they have to fear the wrath of Cocho anymore.

How long did we have to put up with Lapdog Phelps for?

"We can reveal..." No James, you're 6 months late.

[one five five]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Foges is around on "new media" but I think AA is sufficiently gone now that they can't afford the salary...

What new media? Other than one story for motorsport.com I haven’t heard from him in months.

AA seemingly could afford Paul Gover to replace Foges. Bruce Newton seems to have departed too

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by one five five

What new media? Other than one story for motorsport.com I haven’t heard from him in months.



AA seemingly could afford Paul Gover to replace Foges. Bruce Newton seems to have departed too

Podcasts.

And really I haven't bought AA in a long time. The Motorsport eNews was excellent and I miss that but otherwise now we have so many other ways to get this content.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[Jack65]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

The deal with Mobil & WAU is case in point. The team points to 3 decades of support. Which is true.. and at least at the initial stage, the sponsorship when brought from Mr Brock's involvement was the whole of one car and ended up as co-branded sponsor of two. Now its a bonnet sponsor, and co-naming rights... suggesting the contribution to the budget has changed, either in outright dollars, and more likely too as a percentage of overall operating costs.

It can be taken as read that if a sponsor goes from having naming rights sponsorship with signage on the bonnet and side panels to only having the bonnet, then it will be contributing a smaller percentage of the budget. While the amount of signage it has had has fluctuated over the years, Mobil has rarely been a sole title sponsor of HRT / WR / WAU. Telstra in the early years and then Holden were co-namings rights sponsors for much of the journey.

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Motor noters dont ask... they are blinded by the press launch and being invited to go, or being on the mailing list of same. They have an embargo, which gives them plenty of time to research, and ask questions.

They can ask questions, but if told none of your business go away, then that is the end of it. Some teams choose to disclose how long deals with sponsors are for, but some don't, but there is no chance of them disclosing the commercial terms. Much the same way as some teams do and some teams don't when it comes to disclosing driver contract lengths. Although the number of contracts that have been terminated short of their announced dates with out clauses, suggests that it is often irrelevant.

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

We will see some rearrangement of truck sponsors this year for example. BJR's Stax seems to have been required to trade in his Freightliner for what seems to be a rented Adaptalift-sourced Mercedes Benz prime mover. And equally MSR's deal with Daimler Trucks Gold Coast appears to have been replaced by a direct importer deal with DAF. If I can see it... surely the motor noters can to... and actually create a story around it... they whys/whens/how longs/benefits/activations etc.

The arrival and departure of minor sponsors is fairly trivial, and rarely attract much interest.

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Isnt it really their responsibility (on the official site or over at AdCafe) to help the sport along, to maintain the focus on the companies and people who support the very sport their livelihoods are based on?

Speedcafe is a business, not a charity, it need to generate an income stream to keep the lights on. Much as people might not like adverts,, its that or subscription fees.