On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Arthur Emerson wrote:
> That's the SECRET Car Club of America mentality for you.
> Hopefully, our new president and Danielle Engstrom will
> be able to turn this around. It still won't overcome the
> biggest barrier to main-stream recognition of autocross,
> which is having a permanent facility, IMO.
"Mainstream recognition of autocross." If you're talking about general
recognition of autocrossing as motorsport, it's here, guys. We're
unlikely to make the pages of Sports Illustrated, but every auto magazine
published in the U.S. regularly mentions "autocross" without explaining
what they mean. Automobile Magazine ran a column this summer on their
Solo 2 exploits in a Ford Focus -- granted, the focus (no pun intended)
was on the car, not the sport, but *that's* mainstream recognition!
(Much of that mainstream recognition combines "solo" and "autocross" with
the R-word, but that's another debate....) An article on a rookie ball
player doesn't bother explaining the game or why people play it -- that's
common knowledge. For the last few years, I've been able to tell people
what I do on weekends without assuring people that I don't have to jump
the car off dirt mounds or bang doors with people. On the 10,000-plus
strong Honda Prelude list I'm a member of, I field inquires every day on
how to get into autocrossing -- without having to explain what it is.
If you're talking about print coverage of major autocrosses, that's within
the SCCA's control -- I'd be willing to bet that a well-packaged summary
(with lots of action pictures) of a Pro, Tour, or the Nationals would
easily find it's way into any number of automotive pubs. Not every event,
but enough. A regular spot in Road & Track's "About the Sport" section?
Not yet, but not beyond possibility. Danielle's already managed to get a
regular column on car and personality profiles into Sport Compact Car. I
suspect with a dedicated publicist working on it, we'll see a steady
increase in print coverage.
If you're talking about big sponsor $, TV coverage and spectators,
permanent facilities are no barrier. Look at all the various X-games
events: few are set up in permanent facilities. Many are no more
photogenic or exciting to watch than autocross (speed climbing?!) What
they do have is lots of sponsor $, attracted by showcasing products to
sell to the mass market -- clothing, shoes, skateboards, bicycles, etc.
Unfortunately, the products autocross promotes most -- cars and tires --
already have established marketing outlets. This isn't NASCAR or CART,
where you have a spectator base capable of attracting advertising for
completely unrelated products -- and arguably, without changes to U.S.
advertising laws which made large-scale alcohol and tobacco sponsorship
cost-effective, even those series might still be running at the level they
were in the '50s and '60s. Until someone comes up with a wrinkle no one's
seen previously, it's difficult to see more sponsor $ coming in. From an
outsider's point-of-view (I haven't run a Pro since 1985), the "glory
days" of Pro Solo some lament for were unsustainable -- while a few
well-placed enthusiasts did their best, the rate of return on advertising
dollars was (and is) tough to demonstrate for any large-scale effort. I
don't expect that to change. The only thing I can think of which might
help is a change to the SCCA policies on advertising and setting up events
for spectators -- the sport may not be a secret, but the events
often seem like it! There's also a limit in how many sponsor dollars
we'd ever attract just based on participants -- there's not much
point in spending extra $ to advertise to participants who are
already accessible via other means within the SCCA (and for Pros and
Tours, advertising access via SportsCar is a given). Those policies are
in place for liability reasons, though, and changes will also affect the
cost, and potentially the nature, of events. That may not be a bad thing,
but it's something to consider.
Jamie
'92 Prelude Si
Speed Demon Racing
http://www.mindspring.com/~jsculerati/sdr
|