Is $350 for a single day regional a record?

[Doc Bro]

NARRC needs to define a more limited number of races (no more than two) at each of the tracks that the drivers are interested in running. At the moment this is NHMS, NJMP (T and L), WGI, POC, and LRP. The NARRC drivers have previously expressed their opinion and wanted the diversity of tracks. I personaly would like to see no more than 10 races and 8 counted. No bonuses, no incentives.

Ladies and gentlemen we have a winner!!

The NARRC series has gone from a series about drivers to a series about regions. Everyone wants the NARRC moniker in hopes that it will draw cars. The fear of shortening or limiting the NARRC series is the same as the fear of dropping dates. Making business decisions based on fear (emotion) and not facts is very dangerous.

R

[Andy Bettencourt]

Ladies and gentlemen we have a winner!!

The NARRC series has gone from a series about drivers to a series about regions. Everyone wants the NARRC moniker in hopes that it will draw cars. The fear of shortening or limiting the NARRC series is the same as the fear of dropping dates. Making business decisions based on fear (emotion) and not facts is very dangerous.

R

The NARRC and Pro IT should merge, run an 8 race season and pay out cash. THAT will draw if its workable.

[dickita15]

The NARRC and Pro IT should merge, run an 8 race season and pay out cash. THAT will draw if its workable.

I like the idea of Narrc being 10 races two at each track(although if that means 4 trips to Millville that would be pretty unattractive to those in New England where most of the drivers are) making the Narrc pay like PRO IT has a problem. The only reason there is money available for the PRO IT is that the regions are giving up half the entry money. As said before they only agreed to do that because it was extra money. If people are only entering the money paying race whether it is Narrc or Pro IT the business model fails. The entry fees would have to double.

[jjjanos]

JJJ,

I am not sure you understand. Many HPDE clubs run at LRP. They do so at an 89dB limit. The rent for those days is roughly half of what it is per day of an SCCA weekend. So while Dave's idea has merit, it is not financially feasable for these clubs to rent at that rate. We just had a one day event at LRP that lost NNJR money...so it's not so much one day that makes it work there.

I realize the HDPE clubs cannot afford loud rent. They don't rent at that rate. They rent at a lower rate from you. What I'm suggesting is that a fee from them plus the revenue raised from entries might cover the two-day rental. Hell, organize your own PDX and charge an arm and a leg. I don't know whether it can cover the cost of a two-day racing event, but dismissing it without crunching numbers or seeing what they would pay seems.... well, dismissive.

You're not a local, so it's understandable how/why you would underestimate the draw of this place for HPDE/track time events. This place holds a "panache" to non-racers that really cannot be overstated. The opportunity for some of these groups to be "able" to drive LRP is a terrific draw, to both "regular" guys in street cars and rich guys in Ferraris and Porches, and is the primary reason why Skip has been able to sell memberships to his LRP Club at a rate far exceeding my - and many others' - expections. As such, Skip can make a helluva lot of revenue, at significantly-reduced expense and risk, through these avenues.

I understand the captivation with the track. I also understand that Wonder Bread seems pretty darn good until you've had a good loaf. Mystique be damned. At some point, folks will vote with their wallets and even the rich boys will go away. He can charge what he wants. He can charge more than the market will accept. At some point, the glitterati clubs aren't going to pay it because the clubs won't be able to get enough cars.

Then again, never underestimate the stupidity of someone who buys a Ferrari.

[Doc Bro]

The NARRC and Pro IT should merge, run an 8 race season and pay out cash. THAT will draw if its workable.

So how does that affect all the non-Pro-IT classes? They effectively have no championship. Or are you proposing opening Pro-IT to all classes?

Shorten NARRC, do something to add prestige back to it. Shorten Pro-IT (or eliminate it) so that it doesn't pull from the NARRC, but supplements it. Pro-IT seemed to better fulfill its intent when it was 6 races.

.02

R

[Andy Bettencourt]

So how does that affect all the non-Pro-IT classes? They effectively have no championship. Or are you proposing opening Pro-IT to all classes?

Shorten NARRC, do something to add prestige back to it. Shorten Pro-IT (or eliminate it) so that it doesn't pull from the NARRC, but supplements it. Pro-IT seemed to better fulfill its intent when it was 6 races.

.02

R

What I mean is consolodate the efforts. Run an 8-10 event schedule and pay out like NARRC used to.

[Dave Zaslow]

If national classes have their own races at each of the tracks in NEDIV, should the LRP regionals be structured to have longer races for IT and SSM run groups? Should this become the Pro-IT series? Say the IT (2 groups) and SSM (1 group) races are twice the length of the others in a two day regional. Perhaps two 30 minute qualifying sessions and a 45 minute race.

The entry fee would have to reflect this but if we think people are going to pay $350 for two 20 minute sessions on one day, how much for 105 minutes on two days?

If there are 9 slots per day and these 3 groups take 6 of them, then 2/3 of the $75K for LRP = $50K At 30 entries per group $50k/90 = $550; at 35 entries $475; at 40 entries $420. Is this a value proposition or is the initial entry fee just too much no matter the track time? The remaining three slots, if filled with 30 entries each, would need to pay $275.

Any sense in this?

DZ

[Doc Bro]

What I mean is consolodate the efforts. Run an 8-10 event schedule and pay out like NARRC used to.

Gottcha, makes sense.

[anthony1k]

Since math makes it highly improbable those events such as LRP are ever going to breakeven, here is a radical idea: subsidize money losers with proceeds from all NARRC races.

• Use recent history to get an accurate picture of profit/loss for all NARRC events.
• Come up with a realistic 2010 schedule. 10 races, 8 count sounds reasonable.
• Calculate the amount of money needed to keep all 10 events in the black.
• Add a “sustainability” fee on top of entry fees for all events.
• Use proceeds to offset loses as needed.

On their part, events that traditionally lose money need to come up with innovative ideas to contain the bleeding. For example, LRP should focus on value (more track time). Other tracks that starve for entries but have fewer time constrains maybe need to look at inviting other clubs (BWMCCA, PCA) to race. The series perhaps needs to look for ways to entice racers to race more often by offering multi-event discounts and other incentives.

Of course like everything else, it is easier said than done and the devil is in the details.

[ner88]

So, put a progam/series together, find the people to manage it, show me (PTB )who will particapate and how it will benifit our regions and we will be glad to run it.

[lateapex911]

Two thoughts. interrelated.

As I look at the actual car counts, I see certain groups are pretty poorly subscribed at regional.

Has there been discussion of eliminating those groups, running a restricted regional, and adding a regional only class (ITX) into that now empty group that would allow the popular cars to double dip?

An secondly, there currently exist double dipping possibilities for the SSM and SM cars into the IT group. Why hasn't this been encouraged with a discount on a second entry?

I know eliminating classes is tough medicine, and would bring complaints, but the Regions are losing money, and can'toperate as charities indefinately.

[anthony1k]

Has there been discussion of eliminating those groups....

The problem is too many races and too few racers. How would chasing away racers solve the problem? There are plenty of opportunities for Miatas to double and triple dip now. The focus should be on how to increase overall participation.

[zchris]

As I look at the actual car counts, I see certain groups are pretty poorly subscribed at regional.

Has there been discussion of eliminating those groups, running a restricted regional, and adding a regional only class (ITX) into that now empty group that would allow the popular cars to double dip?

An secondly, there currently exist double dipping possibilities for the SSM and SM cars into the IT group. Why hasn't this been encouraged with a discount on a second entry?

I know eliminating classes is tough medicine, and would bring complaints, but the Regions are losing money, and can'toperate as charities indefinately.
__________________
Ok Jake, this is an idea Andy B has been pushing also. Lets run with it and apply this to a recent NE race that had 6 ITA cars and 30+ SM's. Now in that race I would say that to make it fair, SM should have a 30+ lap race with similar amounts of P and Q. So I guess that would leave ITA with just a 6 lap race with 6 minute P and Q. Does this sound fair. After all why waste track time on just 6 cars. DUMB. You get the point I assume.

[dickita15]

Historically one of the ways to deal with a down economy and the resulting lower car counts is to combine groups as aggressively as possible so that you can increase track time. This provides an increase in value that helps combat the lower car counts. When you look at the race groups we have been using in the narrc area races the tough ones are the two open wheel groups. You need really small count before you can make them one group. FE’s and FV just do not belong together.
One of my more off the wall ideas was to combine closed wheel groups to get back up to 25 cars or so and then run a race schedule that gives the closed wheel groups 3 session on track a day and the two small open wheel groups two sessions a day. It seems fair to me that the groups with lots of cars get more time after all it is the fact that they are having to deal with more cars on track that is creating the extra time.

[ner88]

OK, hear is how we build a series,
1) 5 events, one at each track(NHMS, NJMP, Pocono, Glen and runoff at LRP), one event a month
2) Only 5 race groups, top five based on prior years particapation
3) It's a traveling event same format at each track
Sat. AM practice/qual.
Sat.PM Qual.race
Sun. AM Qual. race(best time from Sat. race)
Sun. PM Main Race (finishing position from AM race)
4) No throw away race but if you pay entry fee you can still receive points, same for DNF
5) LRP will be a shared event
Gold, Silver and Bronze Medals per event, no money

Lots of track time, have schedule out early so eveyone can plan ahead!

If other race groups want to play, they will need to get their numbers up!

[lateapex911]

As I look at the actual car counts, I see certain groups are pretty poorly subscribed at regional.

Has there been discussion of eliminating those groups, running a restricted regional, and adding a regional only class (ITX) into that now empty group that would allow the popular cars to double dip?

An secondly, there currently exist double dipping possibilities for the SSM and SM cars into the IT group. Why hasn't this been encouraged with a discount on a second entry?

I know eliminating classes is tough medicine, and would bring complaints, but the Regions are losing money, and can'toperate as charities indefinately.
__________________
Ok Jake, this is an idea Andy B has been pushing also. Lets run with it and apply this to a recent NE race that had 6 ITA cars and 30+ SM's. Now in that race I would say that to make it fair, SM should have a 30+ lap race with similar amounts of P and Q. So I guess that would leave ITA with just a 6 lap race with 6 minute P and Q. Does this sound fair. After all why waste track time on just 6 cars. DUMB. You get the point I assume.

It's not about class sizes, it's about group sizes. When you have 6 classes in a group, yet there are 5 or 7 cars circling around, it's not an efficient use of track time. The idea would be to give up those 7 entries, and use the group as an opportunity for cars to double dip. Other regions do this to great effect. It's grown to be that the Double Dip group is as large as any.

I suggest it, as I said, as a "restricted Regional". If it works, you get to keep the dates which nobody seems to want to let go of, AND keep the region solvent. It removes a race date for certain classes (which is currently being advocated now with the suggestion of dropping entire race dates) yet could keep us in the black.

[Andy Bettencourt]

__________________
Ok Jake, this is an idea Andy B has been pushing also. Lets run with it and apply this to a recent NE race that had 6 ITA cars and 30+ SM's. Now in that race I would say that to make it fair, SM should have a 30+ lap race with similar amounts of P and Q. So I guess that would leave ITA with just a 6 lap race with 6 minute P and Q. Does this sound fair. After all why waste track time on just 6 cars. DUMB. You get the point I assume.

WHAT? I am not sure restricted regionals has come up for a year or two. The only way it would work is if the resultant schedule provided more VALUE to the classes that were there and there were more ENTRANTS.

And Chris, no recent race had 6 ITA cars - unless you are talking about the Pro IT inside of a National at NHMS - which is not relevant. Besides, what you are saying is either disingenous or short-sited. It's not about class size, it's about RUN GROUP size. Nobody cares if a run group is made up of 25 1-car classes or 1 25-car class. But when a 6-8 car run group takes the green, that IS hard to swallow - especially when they complain that they can't be combined with any other group. This April, IIRC, the race chair combined all the open wheelers into one group, extended the race so that the slower groups got their laps and extended everyone elses day.

Again, our reginal execs put on great races at each of our venues. The issue is that people are voting with their entries (or lack therof) for LRP. WGI, NJMP, NHMS - they all stand on their own and seemingly do well...it's LRP that is always the issue. We all know why. I submit that we have too many events their for the market of drivers. Simple.

[zchris]

If thats the case Andy, mix the 2 or 3 GT cars in with the ITA cars. I personally do not mind driving with the moving chicanes. Hell, some GT1 cars move as slow as you guys. Then we all get more track time. I guess what I am saying is inclusion should be cosidered before you throw the baby out with the bath water.

[Andy Bettencourt]

If thats the case Andy, mix the 2 or 3 GT cars in with the ITA cars. I personally do not mind driving with the moving chicanes. Hell, some GT1 cars move as slow as you guys. Then we all get more track time. I guess what I am saying is inclusion should be cosidered before you throw the baby out with the bath water.

I have no issues with that Chris if it made sense for the event. Except Big Bore closed wheel is never an issue in terms of run group size. It's the open wheel guys that historically have less than desirable group sizes at regionals - and the issue is compunded by the lack of willingness to combine the 'big bore' and 'small bore' open wheelers. I understand the issues, but we can all understand why it hurts 'event value'.

I can't stress this enough - increasing VALUE in non-traditional ways is really only an LRP issue. Yes we want as much value as we can get at any track - but we either have to dump some of these events or try something new while we keep them...no?

I like inclusion. If I were an open wheel run-group guy (I have dreams of a Stohr/DSR someday), I would be trying to increase the participation within my run group! Let's just drop an LRP event and see what happens to car counts at the remaining 2.

[lawtonglenn]

...
3) It's a traveling event same format at each track
Sat. AM practice/qual.
Sat.PM Qual.race
Sun. AM Qual. race(best time from Sat. race)
Sun. PM Main Race (finishing position from AM race)...

Racing for points is nice, but I just love racing....so this proposed
format with 3 races (two Q race and one points race) or the
NER triple format (one Q race and two points races) are equally
attractive to me....I truly believe more races/event is the
most valuable to me.

Last year's NJMPL 5 race season ender, with three regionals
and two PROITs, in one weekend, was heaven...pure heaven!


.