Jeremy (and George),
>George
>
>Its many years since I've been to the Speedway ... in fact in the 1960's in
>the UK I nearly got a free drive but emigrated to Australia just in time!
>
>Notwithstanding Pursey's contention .. I actually have nothing against
>tintops - in fact I started my race career in Escorts and still have very
>fond memories.
>
>Back to your comments though - the speedway guys seem to understand
>promotion in a way that is competely foreign to vintage race promoters. I
>suspect that the main reaosn for this is that speedway doesn't work
>financially if they don't get a crowd - whereas in vintage racing we are
>paying to race. We also don't race frequently enough to build up a regular
>race crowd.
>
>regards
>
>
>Jeremy Braithwaite
>Age & Treachery Racing Australia
I do agree on the concept of promoption in terms of speedway. Of course (not
speaking about the USA here) but in many countries e.g. Australia and
Ireland etc. promotion tends to be a bit lax in many regards I think because
it is organised largely by clubs and they tend to be volunteer
organisations. They run the race meetings well but aren't terribly
commercially oriented. Speedway on the other hand is almost invariably some
promoter's profit-generating fiefdom, and they use every ruse possible to
generate cash.
I don't agree with ther frequency of race argument on building up a crowd.
To be honest the speedway audience is one where the majority are blue collar
folk and like regular entertainment on a Friday or whatever day speedway is
on - the froth on the cake is of course the "blow-ins (e.g. me) who are
largely too busy but come occasionally armed with a batch of nephews and
other major league consumption devices on legs). With historic racing the
audience is generally more likely to be occupied with other activities
(particularly as speedway tends to be an evening activity and racing is a
daytime one), therefore, the key to getting bums at historic racing is
clever marketing, good branding of the events (i.e. making them feel
exclusive - after all, they only happen relatively rarely etc. etc.).
Similarly, the audience for historic racing often tends to be more mature
than speedway in terms of age and therefore these folk only take their
consumption devices (e.g. children and most likely grandchildren) out on
limited errands, unless they have substantial superannuation to cover the
natural wastage etc. Am I making sense? In the words, of Philasster Chase
Johnson, "Cheer up, the worst is yet to come."
Anyway, historic racing is a very packageable thing for spectatosrs and not
just at Monterey or Coys or the Goodwood festival of speed etc. (IMHO) but
it does require more commercial orientation on the part of organisres and
this they either lack or just have not got time to do. Oh, and don't forget
that those who rue the lack of promotion in some forms of historic racing
but love the speedway promotion formula, ought to bear in mind that their
democratic rights in speedway are pretty much zip. However, if it brings in
the crowds, I don't tend to think that's such a great loss. The good
promoters have a good feel for driver desires and will try to match them
with the economic realities. In historic racing, as things stabnd, democracy
usually just amounts to large entry fees anyway.
Of course, there are also those who would rather run a mile than see
historic racing commercialised but I think this can be achieved without
putting the emphasis on dodgy concepts such as outright victory. Providing a
spectacle and allowing appropriate classes to have individual car sponsorhip
dollars as well as good series/ race sponsorhip can go a long way. Even most
club hoistoric races are a meeting of the sort of folk who expensive /
luxury product advertisers drool over attracting to their brands. Historic
racing ought to be capitalising on that exclusivity...but then I suspect in
this instance I am already preaching to the converted.
Regards,
Patrick
|