CAMS - where to now?

[NewsStalker]

275 = yes they probably would have - but to then turn around and say 'Oh you're going with someone else - we assumed you were gonig with us. Here's a bill for a cancellation fee of $93,000'

[911Porker]

Originally Posted by 275 GTB-4

So...I assume the same club would have called for quotes from a number of providers....it is not unheard of for EOI, RFQ or RFPs to be funded...after all, putting a bid together DOES cost money

I used the words "sanctioning body" with a touch of irony.

The people who organise events sort them out and run them. They come up with the rules (supp regs), get them signed of by the insurered (CAMS) and this then crystalises cover and causes the policy to respond in the event of a claim. I know its more involved in the detail but thats about it.

I understand that in many industries putting together a bid costs money. Thats called a business expense. Expecting the person who lets a tender to think about funding the cost of the bid is, to say the least, highly unusual.

CAMS is a convenient conduit for the insurance cover.

However, the underwriters know the risk. As a consumer of insurance I can tell you that risk premium quotes are not that involved. The insurance provider knows the risk, claims profile and payout history in the sector.

Get them fighting for business and watch the premiums tumble. I have had 5 price responses in one day from a Lloyds underwriting syndicate. Each was lower than the previous one. Not much work there I'd suggest.

Individual organisations such as clubs could seek and get competive cover. More work granted but thats what brokers are for.

Insurance cover is a part of the "service" CAMS provides but it also provides training, official training and accreditations, licencing etc. Were it not to be the conduit for cover, that would and could continue. Other industries operate that way every day.

Nero, I'm interested in understanding what you say AASA's product is and what it does not have that CAMS has.

As for a cancellation fee, I'd love to see the basis for that. In some places that could be called a penalty and not be recoverable. I'll wait for the detail but I'm curious as to the basis for CAMS claiming that one.

[NewsStalker]

According to Octagon themselves, the change from CAMS to AASA was simply to get cheaper insurance and thus was a business change to maximise profits. The emails are currently doing the rounds so no doubt you will see them soon, and Mark Perry has assured those who have been concerned that the issues with Rally Tas insurance will not afflict the Targa.

Re-reading this, this statement isn't cirrect as can be seen in this thread: http://tentenths.com/forum/showthread.php?t=104046

To reflect this point, we would again have had to pass on an Insurance Levy of $600 per entry if we renewed in line with our previous arrangements and we felt that this could only have had a negative impact on entry numbers and hence put further pressure on the event.

...

We are also pleased to advise that we have negotiated an “introductory price” licence fee of $75 inc GST (Tour $25 inc GST) with the AASA combined with Vehicle Passport’s being issued free of charge, which is a saving of $450 per entry on the Insurance Levy that was due to be applied for the upcoming event. Naturally, the licence is valid for 2008 at all AASA Rally Events.

(Note - my emphasis - they state very clearly WHY they went with AASA and this has nothing to do with maximizing profits but is clearly stated as reducing competitors costs.

[Nero]

911 perhaps we can go into this in another thread in a few weeks. I do not have enough time ATM to give a good response, but I will say that I have no preference in my own motorsport
News...of course they are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts!...pfft! The statement acknowledges that they would have expected less cars/crews/drivers with the additional cost (given the comments on discounts would there really have been such an increase?), which would have had a negative impact on the events profitability. With many competitors spending at least $25,000 to run the Targa I wonder how many would have baulked at the additional cost?
I cannot legally post the emails I am referring to onto a forum, so perhaps they will get to you in time.

[ssracer]

The big question.
Does CAM'S have deep enough pockets to weather the storm of AASA buying events??????

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by ssracer

The big question.
Does CAM'S have deep enough pockets to weather the storm of AASA buying events??????

The is a bit of a uneducated comment. AASA buy their insurance at the start of the year, then they on-sell it to people in need, so I don't how you get "AASA buying events" from that.

[cavvy]

Originally Posted by Nero

911 perhaps we can go into this in another thread in a few weeks. I do not have enough time ATM to give a good response, but I will say that I have no preference in my own motorsport
News...of course they are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts!...pfft! The statement acknowledges that they would have expected less cars/crews/drivers with the additional cost (given the comments on discounts would there really have been such an increase?), which would have had a negative impact on the events profitability. With many competitors spending at least $25,000 to run the Targa I wonder how many would have baulked at the additional cost?
I cannot legally post the emails I am referring to onto a forum, so perhaps they will get to you in time.

Nero, you appear to be moving about - what Octagon referred to as a saving for competitors you have represented as 'increased profits' - are you able to substantiate your claim? It looks like spin on your part.

[NewsStalker]

I find it kind of amusing that nero can claim to have emails that - in his words - state increased profits for Octagon but then claim he cannot legally post them - he has, if he is to be believed, already breached the 'legal issue' by merely mentioning them.

That is - if they exist??

[Trevor]

So what was Nero (of Roman fame) famous for again?

[NewsStalker]

Twiddling?

[Uncle Cranker]

Originally Posted by NewsStalker

Twiddling?

Not quite NS !

Nero was famous for Fiddling, whilst the empire burned down around him.

Not that I'd ever be so cheeky as draw any similarity

How apt that this person has made 17% of their total posts in a thread about CAM$:

[Nero]

You know one of the chief reasons I am hesitant to comment in any 'AASA' thread is amply demonstrated by the above posts. It is this perhaps this ignorant tribalistic attitude on both sides of the AASA/CAMS divide that continues to weaken Australian Motorsport most, well done gentlemen, well done.

FWIW my sig is an anagram of my name, however since the same level of clear thought has been addressed to this as well you might benefit from the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nero
No doubt we shall also get some feeble witticisms from this as well, but at least it will be based on fact and no doubt you will learn that a 'fiddle' had not even been invented at this stage in history and also, curiously, as with the CAMS/AASA, separating fact from public opinion is a considerable struggle.

NS, the emails clearly state at the bottom that they cannot be shared - I am sure you have seen this before. However given your apparent attempt to cast aspersions and have misconstrued my position I cannot think why I would bother sharing any information with you at all!

Cavvy, the original email stated "we felt that this could only have had a negative impact on entry numbers and hence put further pressure on the event", what do you suppose this means?

[NewsStalker]

NS, the emails clearly state at the bottom that they cannot be shared - I am sure you have seen this before. However given your apparent attempt to cast aspersions and have misconstrued my position I cannot think why I would bother sharing any information with you at all!

Yes I see this all the time - especially on media releases sent out by major Australian teams and, in particular, by CAMS on their media releases! (go figure).

However - as I stated - you have already alluded to their contents so, technically, aren't you already breaking this 'disclaimer'?

Cavvy, the original email stated "we felt that this could only have had a negative impact on entry numbers and hence put further pressure on the event", what do you suppose this means?

Certainly not the spin you put on it. The way I would take it is that it would put the whole event into question because it simply isn't being supported - certainly NOT that it is a simple case of profits (look at how many events such as this DO run at a loss over a number of years (eg Octagon and the Melbourne F1 Grand Prix Rally for instance).

[911Porker]

[quote=Nero]You know one of the chief reasons I am hesitant to comment in any 'AASA' thread is amply demonstrated by the above posts.

Nero, not sure that this thread is a "AASA" thread. It is critical of CAMS for sure but that doesn't swing it one way or the other.

separating fact from public opinion is a considerable struggle.

In this case, public opinion is also a fact (as well as a symptom)

NS, the emails clearly state at the bottom that they cannot be shared - I am sure you have seen this before.

Just because someone says something is confidential doesn't always make it so. Come on, be brave. Share.

[Nero]

No I am not in breach, not even close.
Good grief, you are suggesting that Octagon are in the same position WRT corporate governance and profitability at the F1GP? Frankly I would expect Octagon to be a monumental paragon of efficiency when compared to the GP!
I begrudge them none of the benefits of their work.
911, I have no problem with a post critical of CAMS or AASA, I have no personal affiliation.
WRT the email it has nothing to do with bravery as you well know.
'Fact' is usually debatable...ask any barrister.

[NewsStalker]

Nero - suggest you get some glasses - WHERE did I compare Octagon to the Grand Prix? I referred to the Grand Prix RALLY which, until a few years ago, Octagon ran inconjunction with Tom Snooks. or the last two years Octagon ran it it was at a massive loss (to Octagon)

[911Porker]

Originally Posted by Nero

No I am not in breach, not even close.
Good grief, you are suggesting that Octagon are in the same position WRT corporate governance and profitability at the F1GP? Frankly I would expect Octagon to be a monumental paragon of efficiency when compared to the GP!
I begrudge them none of the benefits of their work.
911, I have no problem with a post critical of CAMS or AASA, I have no personal affiliation.
WRT the email it has nothing to do with bravery as you well know.
'Fact' is usually debatable...ask any barrister.

Not sure about the debatable fact thing. Still, I'm not a lawyer ...

In any event, it seems we're wandering a little here.

I started the thread with news of an impending announcement by CAMS and what?! Nothing.

Seems that if one doesn't admit it, it doesn't exist. Doesn't bode well at all I would think.

Administration of motorsport and covering the risk by insurance are not necessarily linked.

[Nero]

I was informed two weeks ago that staffing changes have created a shortfall in skills in some areas. Personally I am interested to see what changes occur following the management review, but I also hope they appoint a NSW manager ASAP as getting the Vic person to cover the role is asking a lot of one person. A agree that lack of communication is not good and wonder at cause.
Agree re administration and risk coverage.
There is a greater challenge for the future with running events, not so much with the debatable value of events at current cost structures, but more so with the reliance on volunteers in important roles. There are only so many people suitably qualified to run events and some of these are getting very tired of the hours/responsibility for little in return. My research so far suggests that Australia has the highest ratio of unpaid officials when compared to UK/USA.

[bludvl_x19]

Originally Posted by Nero

I was informed two weeks ago that staffing changes have created a shortfall in skills in some areas. Personally I am interested to see what changes occur following the management review, but I also hope they appoint a NSW manager ASAP as getting the Vic person to cover the role is asking a lot of one person. A agree that lack of communication is not good and wonder at cause.
Agree re administration and risk coverage.
There is a greater challenge for the future with running events, not so much with the debatable value of events at current cost structures, but more so with the reliance on volunteers in important roles. There are only so many people suitably qualified to run events and some of these are getting very tired of the hours/responsibility for little in return. My research so far suggests that Australia has the highest ratio of unpaid officials when compared to UK/USA.

Normally I'd feel bad hijacking a thread, but seeing as its already so far off track, i don't mind.

Paid officials? I haven't met one, and i guess that the ones that are keep it pretty quiet, so the rest of us don't kick up a fuss. I'd love to be just reimbursed for expenses like fuel getting to an event, but people making a profit off it? Fair enough if it's the person's job, not a hobby however.

Mick

[Uncle Cranker]

Originally Posted by bludvl_x19

Normally I'd feel bad hijacking a thread, but seeing as its already so far off track, i don't mind.

Paid officials? I haven't met one, and i guess that the ones that are keep it pretty quiet, so the rest of us don't kick up a fuss. I'd love to be just reimbursed for expenses like fuel getting to an event, but people making a profit off it? Fair enough if it's the person's job, not a hobby however.

Mick

Mick, no hijack at all, in my humble opinion it is a perfect dovetail.

After close to 20 years as a volunteer official, it frightens me to think how much better off I'd be FINANCIALLY if I'd chosen to either work overtime, or stay home on race weekends......

BUT, I and the thousands of others that do it (between one & fifty times a year) do it because we have no life: sorry, BECAUSE WE LOVE IT....



To the race fan:

From the person who makes sure you park in that tight spot, to the Clerk Of Course, no-one gets anything more than a cold snag & a hot beer at day's end.....

So next time you and your pi55ed mates are leaving a V8 round, how bout a "well done Mate" to the officials ?

And just to slide this back to topic, CAM$, take note, the sooner you start to appreciate the official a bit more, the better off things will be.

Oh, back to the average race fan..... you have my permission to key Tim Schenken's car if you see it in the carpark, cause he does get paid........

And get's it wrong more times than the bloke that doesn't.......


.

[NewsStalker]

It also depends on what meetng you are talking about when referring to 'volunteer' and 'paid' officials.

Scrutes, flaggies, firies, timekeepers - yes all unpaid - well, mostly.

But when you get to National and V8 rounds - the definition flies out the window (even club sprint, state meetings btw). CAMS appointed Stewards have some 'costs covered' - depending on who you talk to and how truthful they are (sort of like some of the decisions and judgements) they get travel and/or accomodation costs covered which is a lot more than most other officials. Stewards at the V8 meetings - well there are stewards and there are Stewards (btw, is payroll tax still paid these days??)

[Nero]

You are correct I have been tangential again. I will start another thread on this topic and leave the original one to the original topic.

[bludvl_x19]

Originally Posted by Uncle Cranker

Mick, no hijack at all, in my humble opinion it is a perfect dovetail.

After close to 20 years as a volunteer official, it frightens me to think how much better off I'd be FINANCIALLY if I'd chosen to either work overtime, or stay home on race weekends......

BUT, I and the thousands of others that do it (between one & fifty times a year) do it because we have no life: sorry, BECAUSE WE LOVE IT....



To the race fan:

From the person who makes sure you park in that tight spot, to the Clerk Of Course, no-one gets anything more than a cold snag & a hot beer at day's end.....

So next time you and your pi55ed mates are leaving a V8 round, how bout a "well done Mate" to the officials ?

And just to slide this back to topic, CAM$, take note, the sooner you start to appreciate the official a bit more, the better off things will be.

Oh, back to the average race fan..... you have my permission to key Tim Schenken's car if you see it in the carpark, cause he does get paid........

And get's it wrong more times than the bloke that doesn't.......


.

G'day UC, its not often I get accused if something like that, thanks, its much appreciated

Just a quick guessimate at how much I would have earned if I didn't 'do' motorsport, in 07 I rekon I lost around 22 days of work, I work around 12hrs a weekend (thats when racing happens) so 12x22x roughly $15 (i'm only 19) = $3960, and thats before I pay for fuel getting to a race, accomodation (only for PI) and the time spent driving.

One thing that AASA does better in my short experience is look after the official. I'm basing that on one CAMS event run at a non-AASA track (V8GF @PI) against the many good experiences where at Winton and this year Calder, where we have been addressed by the COC or his asst, been well fed (Winton Burgers still exist ) or even informed of who is leading the race.

Despite my loyalty to MOTORSPORT first and foremost, I am tending to choose an AASA event to a CAMS one just because of the way we are treated. That said, if CAMS offered to pay me to go and do the job that I do, I would change my mind (I AM a uni student after all)

/rant

Mick

[Uncle Cranker]

Originally Posted by NewsStalker

CAMS appointed Stewards have some 'costs covered' - depending on who you talk to and how truthful they are (sort of like some of the decisions and judgements) they get travel and/or accomodation costs covered which is a lot more than most other officials.

Indeed: Sadly I've been a witness for the prosecution in a number of (CAM$) Saturday Stewards hearings (fellow officials, take note; NEVER PUT YOUR NAME TO A REPORT) that, instead of a gentle "we suggest that you take more care" saw the average state round competitor have his wallet lightened to the tune of three to four hundred.

But to then hear them joke about the sudden improvement in the quality of the red wine they propose to consume that evening, because their 'dinner fund' had just increased, made me a little more dubious about their impartiality !


Now don't get me wrong, I understand the gravy train: heck I've even been known to drive it (especially that year @ Albert Park when we found the caterers truck left unlocked; I'm sure they didn't miss all that grog) but to see some of these parasites in action sure enough made me re-consider where I wanted to be in the scheme of officialdom.



.

[bludvl_x19]

Originally Posted by Uncle Cranker

Indeed: Sadly I've been a witness for the prosecution in a number of (CAM$) Saturday Stewards hearings (fellow officials, take note; NEVER PUT YOUR NAME TO A REPORT) that, instead of a gentle "we suggest that you take more care" saw the average state round competitor have his wallet lightened to the tune of three to four hundred.

But to then hear them joke about the sudden improvement in the quality of the red wine they propose to consume that evening, because their 'dinner fund' had just increased, made me a little more dubious about their impartiality !


Now don't get me wrong, I understand the gravy train: heck I've even been known to drive it (especially that year @ Albert Park when we found the caterers truck left unlocked; I'm sure they didn't miss all that grog) but to see some of these parasites in action sure enough made me re-consider where I wanted to be in the scheme of officialdom.



.

Why do you suggest that we not sign a report?

Mick