shwah
New member
Yeah ITB was group 1 in 08, it was early. We were group 1 at ARRC that year too.
Wherever the SM/SMM end up, note that mid pack SM car and front pack ITB cars run similar times different ways...
2010 race groups for the I.T.SPEC*tacular
- Thread starter TAC
- Start date
Wherever the SM/SMM end up, note that mid pack SM car and front pack ITB cars run similar times different ways...
I will
My proposed schedule (which is worth less than $0.02):
Group 1 SM, SSM
Group 2 ITB, ITS
Group 3 SRF, EP, FP, HP, GTL
Group 4 ITA, IT7, ITC
Group 5 ITR, ITE, AS, STO, STU
Group 6 FF, CFF, FC, CFC, FE, FM
Allows double dipping Miatii, makes Miata drivers and stewards happy (that was an ugly deal last year with them), and lets the majority of IT folks see each others race groups.
Sunday morning in the rain this year was interesting, and I tried to be good and actually went to bed "early" :toast:
O.K., first race meeting is over and the classes are set. So after a long pause I can say I like this order. Though I may switch group 5 and 6 since the formula group was last in 2008. Only other issue is whether the SM/SSM group will then be ruining steward lunch time both days. I guess that's better than goin' home time both evenings.
I'm thinking more like this.
Group 1 SM, SSM
Group 2 ITB, ITS
Group 3 SRF, EP, FP, HP, GTL
Group 4 ITA, IT7, ITC
Group 5 FF, CFF, FC, CFC, FE, FM
Group 6 ITR, ITE, AS, STO, STU
jumbojimbo
New member
One question on double dipping, why do we generally charge so much for double dipping? Double dippers don't cost us that much in sanction and insurance do they?
I know we're trying to maximize our income, but the number of double dippers is very low.
Why don't we charge a more nominal fee like $125? Sure, profit is less per car but wouldn't a ridiculously low entry fee encourage a double dipping?
My thought is that the more cars who double dip then that pads the field. And what increases car count more than anything else? Car count. People want to race in races with big fields. Even mid-level drivers want someone to race against. So if you can get more people to double dip and this causes even 1 or 2 extra regular entries, then you've got win-win all around.
Another scenario: STU. I've thought about running STU just for the track time. But it's too expensive at the full price. If the price were $125, I might be able to convince a couple of other ITC guys to run. We wouldn't be running to win STU, but all we care about is racing each other anyway. As long as we stay out of everyone else way, we get more track time, club makes more money.
I know we're trying to maximize our income, but the number of double dippers is very low.
Why don't we charge a more nominal fee like $125? Sure, profit is less per car but wouldn't a ridiculously low entry fee encourage a double dipping?
My thought is that the more cars who double dip then that pads the field. And what increases car count more than anything else? Car count. People want to race in races with big fields. Even mid-level drivers want someone to race against. So if you can get more people to double dip and this causes even 1 or 2 extra regular entries, then you've got win-win all around.
Another scenario: STU. I've thought about running STU just for the track time. But it's too expensive at the full price. If the price were $125, I might be able to convince a couple of other ITC guys to run. We wouldn't be running to win STU, but all we care about is racing each other anyway. As long as we stay out of everyone else way, we get more track time, club makes more money.
Sounds like a good idea. My only concern would be keeping the refunds straight.
To clarify it would have to be the same car/ same driver dbl. dipping in two classes. Correct?
jumbojimbo
New member
Butch Kummer
New member
My understanding of the situation:
The sanction fee (a base fee then $15 per entry over 150 entries) is per race entry, so we have to pay twice for double-dippers. We still have to pay the same amount for track rental, ambulance, wrecker, etc., so there's no cost savings there to the host region.
The insurance is $29.50 per car for the weekend, so double-dipping gives us a break there. Ostensibly a double-dipper still consumes one entry's worth of alcohol & food at the Saturday social, so there COULD be a savings there as well.
At the 2009 ARRC by GRM we offered a discount of $25-$50 to people running multiple races (Sprints, Three Hour, Bonus race) with the same car, except for the Pro-IT. Since half the Pro-IT entry fee is returned to the racers in the form of prize money, we don't offer Pro-IT combination discounts. We did not offer "true" double-dipping discounts (ITA & SM, for instance), but I'll have to think about it. The numbers don't support a $100+ discount, however, particularly since the driver gets the benefit of more track time and/or being able to split travel costs with a buddy.
jumbojimbo
New member
I'm not sure you're getting my logic, Butch. First, remember I'm talking about only pure double dippers, SM/ITA, ITx/STU. Not shared cars. And I'm really only talking about normal regional races here, not ARRC, Pro races, etc.
Your note on insurance per "car" wasn't clear, so worst case I'll assume that the incremental cost to the region of a double dipper is Sanction+Insurance~$50. That should cover the occasional extra trophy too. Let's assume someone who drives two sessions won't eat more food at the party and might even be too tired to drink as much beer.
Track, workers, party, etc are fixed costs, these don't change whether SM#27 runs an extra session as ITA#27 or not. And the driver has already made a contribution to the fixed costs with his first entry. I don't see an incremental cost whether workers are dealing with 20 cars in a race or 23. I'd actually argue the workers would enjoy having a few extra cars.
What I am doing is challenging the notion that the price we should charge is the full "value" of the session and then discount it a bit to try to encourage double dipping. I am saying that this does not work and does not encourage double dipping. Drivers don't see double dipping as providing a full entry of value and they don't need the extra track time.
What's the downside to charging a much lower price for DD? Lost revenue. How many double dippers do we normally see? 3? So let's say that is $1,000 of entry. Now if you charge $125 and get just those same three dd's then you've lost $600.
What's the upside of a much lower price? Potentially more entries and potentially more revenue. I could be wrong but I don't think you'll get the same 3 dd entries at a much lower price. I think you'll get more. Enough to make up the difference in price? Maybe, maybe not. But even if you get only 5 or 6 dd entries instead of 3, now your lost revenue is very very small. And, you now have more entries.
Which brings me back to why I think it's worth the relatively low risk. The entry multiplication effect (EMP). I strongly believe that what drives higher entry numbers is higher entry numbers. We all see it, when a race has 1 or 2 entries, people are reluctant to enter. But when you see 4 or 5 entries, interest builds and it becomes 6 or 7 entries. So in addition to getting more double dippers, I think you'll get more regular entries too. Which has upside revenue potential in addition to just the joy of seeing more cars on track.
ITFest isn't the perfect event for this idea. ITFest already uses the EMP to drive entries. ITFest gets big entries because everyone knows it will have big entries, the EMP effect in action. A better example is a little regional race with 4 ITA cars. Who wants to tow up for that? But make that 6 ITA cars and maybe it's worthwhile.
That's all I got, anything else and I'm in danger of
Your note on insurance per "car" wasn't clear, so worst case I'll assume that the incremental cost to the region of a double dipper is Sanction+Insurance~$50. That should cover the occasional extra trophy too. Let's assume someone who drives two sessions won't eat more food at the party and might even be too tired to drink as much beer.
Track, workers, party, etc are fixed costs, these don't change whether SM#27 runs an extra session as ITA#27 or not. And the driver has already made a contribution to the fixed costs with his first entry. I don't see an incremental cost whether workers are dealing with 20 cars in a race or 23. I'd actually argue the workers would enjoy having a few extra cars.
What I am doing is challenging the notion that the price we should charge is the full "value" of the session and then discount it a bit to try to encourage double dipping. I am saying that this does not work and does not encourage double dipping. Drivers don't see double dipping as providing a full entry of value and they don't need the extra track time.
What's the downside to charging a much lower price for DD? Lost revenue. How many double dippers do we normally see? 3? So let's say that is $1,000 of entry. Now if you charge $125 and get just those same three dd's then you've lost $600.
What's the upside of a much lower price? Potentially more entries and potentially more revenue. I could be wrong but I don't think you'll get the same 3 dd entries at a much lower price. I think you'll get more. Enough to make up the difference in price? Maybe, maybe not. But even if you get only 5 or 6 dd entries instead of 3, now your lost revenue is very very small. And, you now have more entries.
Which brings me back to why I think it's worth the relatively low risk. The entry multiplication effect (EMP). I strongly believe that what drives higher entry numbers is higher entry numbers. We all see it, when a race has 1 or 2 entries, people are reluctant to enter. But when you see 4 or 5 entries, interest builds and it becomes 6 or 7 entries. So in addition to getting more double dippers, I think you'll get more regular entries too. Which has upside revenue potential in addition to just the joy of seeing more cars on track.
ITFest isn't the perfect event for this idea. ITFest already uses the EMP to drive entries. ITFest gets big entries because everyone knows it will have big entries, the EMP effect in action. A better example is a little regional race with 4 ITA cars. Who wants to tow up for that? But make that 6 ITA cars and maybe it's worthwhile.
That's all I got, anything else and I'm in danger of
Butch Kummer
New member
Jim,
I know this is going to scare a lot of people out there and may well get me ex-communicated by the SCCA traditionalists, but I hadn't thought of it that way. i.e. - your idea has merit and it wasn't even mine!
The negative is that guys who d-d get more track time per dollar spent, which could be viewed a "unfair" to those that CAN'T d-d because of the type of car they drive. The question, of course, is "Who cares?" If the idea generates more entries then (a) the racing is better and (b) the fixed costs are split over an even larger amount of money.
Let me think about it some more, but I'm not sure there's a negative even for the high EMP events like the IT-Fest and the ARRC. We'd have to give Registration an easy way to keep up with it, but that's surmountable.
Oh yes, and "thank you for your input."
I know this is going to scare a lot of people out there and may well get me ex-communicated by the SCCA traditionalists, but I hadn't thought of it that way. i.e. - your idea has merit and it wasn't even mine!
The negative is that guys who d-d get more track time per dollar spent, which could be viewed a "unfair" to those that CAN'T d-d because of the type of car they drive. The question, of course, is "Who cares?" If the idea generates more entries then (a) the racing is better and (b) the fixed costs are split over an even larger amount of money.
Let me think about it some more, but I'm not sure there's a negative even for the high EMP events like the IT-Fest and the ARRC. We'd have to give Registration an easy way to keep up with it, but that's surmountable.
Oh yes, and "thank you for your input."
Bill,
That would be the Club Course this year.
Jim,
Talked to the Registrar today. She thinks the D-D is doable without too much hassle. I'll start crunching numbers.
For those of you interested in running in two classes with your car at the I.T.SPEC*tacular we will be doing a second entry discount. It should be in the $130 to $150 range. My only concern is having a mass Miata attack on the ITA race. Other than that it is a go. I'll have all the pricing set by next week. In other news the Garage pricing will be as follows. $60 for a single door and $120 for the two door. We can set up the sandbox again if you guys are interested?
Todd
Todd
[FONT=Verdana, Arial,Helvetica, sans-serif]I thought I'd Update everyone on the prices for the weekend. Entry for 1 driver, 2 days went up $10 and I had to raise the garages up $10. Its the best I could do since all the prices went up at Mid Ohio. But on the bright side we did add the double dip feature for those of you who want to try out a second class and we are an official GLDivision Champ Series event.
July 30th PDX
Member................$210
Non-Member............$225
Instructor Driving....$50
Evening Test and Tune.$150
Race Weekend
Garages
1 door....$60
2 door....$120
Race Entry
1 driver, 2 days...$335
Run a second class.$125 example SM/ITA
1 driver,1 day.....$275
2 days, 2 drivers, 1 car....$375
Registration should be open 5/28/2010
Best Regards,
Todd [/FONT]
July 30th PDX
Member................$210
Non-Member............$225
Instructor Driving....$50
Evening Test and Tune.$150
Race Weekend
Garages
1 door....$60
2 door....$120
Race Entry
1 driver, 2 days...$335
Run a second class.$125 example SM/ITA
1 driver,1 day.....$275
2 days, 2 drivers, 1 car....$375
Registration should be open 5/28/2010
Best Regards,
Todd [/FONT]
