motoho - 14 May 2008 06:40 PM

Ducati Rules - 14 May 2008 05:54 PM

I'm not saying that these tracks have to do anything and I do understand that it is a lot of money. But the tracks willing to make the investment are going to get the additional events.

Just look at the world superbike round, I am sure other than the three tracks you mentioned there weren't any others considered because they wouldn't meet various requirements. All I am saying is if those other track owners want to attract these other events they will have to put some money into improving their facilities.

Just look at Indy, they made changes to their course layout as well as repaved sections of the track to host the Moto GP race. They were obviously able to figure out the economics to get it done.

As far as the track day comment it is all about economics. A race track is basically an asset and the more it gets utilized the more money it can produce. So if you have 2 large events a year then you have 359 other days to fill and try and generate income (I am assuming the large events are 2 weekend races). It's all about maximizing income and profit. Instead of leaving all those other dates open you fill them with track days, tire test, etc.... just to generate income and pay the bills. Otherwise you still have to pay the bills and have no income. If you are good at it then over time you generate enough profit to make improvements to your track.

In my opinion DMG is trying to write the rules so they don't have to worry about track safety and therefore they can race anywhere they want. I would rather see a series run by the rules they think will make good racing and work with the tracks that want to host the event to develop a plan to improve any issues they have (safety, capacity, traffic, etc....)

If the tracks never get challenged to make improvements then what is the motivation to do so?

Surely, you aren't bringing Indy into this. They lost the F1 event and wanted to add MotoGP. The sanction fee difference alone could pay for the improvements. Any track that can afford to pay an F1 sanction doesn't belong in this conversation.

Laguna is busy EVERY day of the year, except Christmas. They still had to find someone else to pay for the improvements.

Obviously if they want to attract a World Championship race, the tracks would have to make safety improvements. They also have to pay a multi million dollar sanction fee and build garages. It isn't a small undertaking and there isn't a guaranteed profit. I don't think this country will support any more World Championship Events.

There must be more demand out there otherwise you wouldn't have people building new tracks (Barber, Miller, NJMP). The New Jersey Motor Sports park is going to be 700 acres and cost over $150 million dollars to complete all three phases. Obviously they expect to get a return on their investment. It is all about planning for the future, if the current tracks don't then they will eventually die off because no one will want to race there. If the NJMP project needs to attract world championship level events to turn a profit then I would look out because as you said they aren't adding more so that just means they will try to take one from another track.

I have no idea why Laguna couldn't afford the improvements on their own, aren't they a quasi governmental owned track? As far as Indy goes it's a fair comparison, they are able to host F1, Moto GP, etc... because they have continually improved their track over the years and they have built their business to the point where they have the money to pay these sanctioning fees.

But if you want to let's ignore Indy, and let's assume there is no return on these investments. Then why did Barber and Road Atlanta make changes to their courses? They didn't get Yamaha to foot the bill so are they just crazy or are they run by bad business people? I don't think so, I think they have a plan and they want to keep their current races and possibly attract others, so they make the improvements that will help them land these other events. I agree there won't be any additional Moto GP or WSBK rounds in the US so that just means these tracks will try to get the race organizers to move the races to their track. Why will the race organizers do this, obviously money is a big part of it but so are the amenities and features of the track. Moto GP and WSBK want to run on premier tracks so it wouldn't matter how much money Brainerd threw at Dorna they wouldn't give that track a Moto GP round in a million years because of the facilities (I admit that is an extreme example).

The tracks pay for this by building a business plan. In simple terms it would be the costs involved to attract a Moto GP race would be X (X equals track improvements, sanctioning fees, etc.....). In order to do this that means over a 3 year period (assuming they get a 3 year deal to host the race) we would have to have Y spectators on average with a Z average ticket price and we could also create these other revenue streams that would bring in W amount of dollars (merchandising, concessions, luxury box fees, etc....). If the math all works out then the track owner gets the deal signed, gets a loan from the bank, makes the improvements and hopes to God that Y spectators show up at an average ticket price of Z, etc, etc, etc .... if they do then everything is good. If they don't then they may be headed for trouble. That risk is up to the owner to decide.

I'm not arguing against what you are saying, DR, but NJMP is one of the 'racetrack country clubs', assuming all phases happens that cost includes the condos and garages that are to be leased, I believe there are 3 hotel/motels in the plan, etc. Looks like it could be a hell of a set-up, I hope it works. It's less than 2 hours drive from me so naturally I am possibly looking to move soon...to where the nearest track would be...ugh...Loudon.

Yeah, from what I read in Phase 1 there will be two road courses, one that is 2.3 miles and another that is 1.9 miles. Then there will be a 1.0 mile Kart course and as you said Condo's and other facilities.

I think Phase 2 added two more cart courses and who knows what else.

I guess when I look at that it seems there is money out there to build new circuits so you would think there would be money to improve some of the current tracks.

Ducati Rules - 14 May 2008 10:52 PM

Yeah, from what I read in Phase 1 there will be two road courses, one that is 2.3 miles and another that is 1.9 miles. Then there will be a 1.0 mile Kart course and as you said Condo's and other facilities.

I think Phase 2 added two more cart courses and who knows what else.

I guess when I look at that it seems there is money out there to build new circuits so you would think there would be money to improve some of the current tracks.

I think there is enough demand for track time that we will see a couple of new tracks in the next few years. Supposedly High Rock Raceway in NC has begun construction and Liberty Motorsports Park in TX is on its way to getting built. There are also plans for Riverside Motorsports park in Cali and Dragon's Ridge in VA but I think Dragon's Ridge has been stalled by the locals.

At this point even some of the crappier tracks have no problems selling every weekend of the year so these tracks are making a good amount of money. I think the problem is that these tracks can sell all of their dates without making improvements so why drop the coin on improving the track for a once a year pro event unless it is bringing in big bucks. Summit Point for instance is crappy in a lot of ways and easily has the money to do a proper repave or fix some of the ghetto bathrooms but they don't. Why? Because they still sell out every weekend.

I think as you said, as the new tracks come on line they are going to force some of these tracks to raise their game or give up their dates.

Ducati Rules - 14 May 2008 08:05 PM

motoho - 14 May 2008 06:40 PM

Ducati Rules - 14 May 2008 05:54 PM

I'm not saying that these tracks have to do anything and I do understand that it is a lot of money. But the tracks willing to make the investment are going to get the additional events.

Just look at the world superbike round, I am sure other than the three tracks you mentioned there weren't any others considered because they wouldn't meet various requirements. All I am saying is if those other track owners want to attract these other events they will have to put some money into improving their facilities.

Just look at Indy, they made changes to their course layout as well as repaved sections of the track to host the Moto GP race. They were obviously able to figure out the economics to get it done.

As far as the track day comment it is all about economics. A race track is basically an asset and the more it gets utilized the more money it can produce. So if you have 2 large events a year then you have 359 other days to fill and try and generate income (I am assuming the large events are 2 weekend races). It's all about maximizing income and profit. Instead of leaving all those other dates open you fill them with track days, tire test, etc.... just to generate income and pay the bills. Otherwise you still have to pay the bills and have no income. If you are good at it then over time you generate enough profit to make improvements to your track.

In my opinion DMG is trying to write the rules so they don't have to worry about track safety and therefore they can race anywhere they want. I would rather see a series run by the rules they think will make good racing and work with the tracks that want to host the event to develop a plan to improve any issues they have (safety, capacity, traffic, etc....)

If the tracks never get challenged to make improvements then what is the motivation to do so?

Surely, you aren't bringing Indy into this. They lost the F1 event and wanted to add MotoGP. The sanction fee difference alone could pay for the improvements. Any track that can afford to pay an F1 sanction doesn't belong in this conversation.

Laguna is busy EVERY day of the year, except Christmas. They still had to find someone else to pay for the improvements.

Obviously if they want to attract a World Championship race, the tracks would have to make safety improvements. They also have to pay a multi million dollar sanction fee and build garages. It isn't a small undertaking and there isn't a guaranteed profit. I don't think this country will support any more World Championship Events.

There must be more demand out there otherwise you wouldn't have people building new tracks (Barber, Miller, NJMP). The New Jersey Motor Sports park is going to be 700 acres and cost over $150 million dollars to complete all three phases. Obviously they expect to get a return on their investment. It is all about planning for the future, if the current tracks don't then they will eventually die off because no one will want to race there. If the NJMP project needs to attract world championship level events to turn a profit then I would look out because as you said they aren't adding more so that just means they will try to take one from another track.

I have no idea why Laguna couldn't afford the improvements on their own, aren't they a quasi governmental owned track? As far as Indy goes it's a fair comparison, they are able to host F1, Moto GP, etc... because they have continually improved their track over the years and they have built their business to the point where they have the money to pay these sanctioning fees.

But if you want to let's ignore Indy, and let's assume there is no return on these investments. Then why did Barber and Road Atlanta make changes to their courses? They didn't get Yamaha to foot the bill so are they just crazy or are they run by bad business people? I don't think so, I think they have a plan and they want to keep their current races and possibly attract others, so they make the improvements that will help them land these other events. I agree there won't be any additional Moto GP or WSBK rounds in the US so that just means these tracks will try to get the race organizers to move the races to their track. Why will the race organizers do this, obviously money is a big part of it but so are the amenities and features of the track. Moto GP and WSBK want to run on premier tracks so it wouldn't matter how much money Brainerd threw at Dorna they wouldn't give that track a Moto GP round in a million years because of the facilities (I admit that is an extreme example).

Thanks for the business 101 lesson. I'm quite clear on how a track plans to host an event.

You want to include Indy in this conversation? Great. It's probably the only track (except perhaps Daytona) in this country that you could stop someone on the street and they would know about it, whether or not they are motorsports fans. Also, I'm not sure if you've noticed but Indy is an OVAL. I'm going to just guess here, but they probably make most of their money on two little events- the Indy 500 and the Brickyard 400. This conversation was talking about roadcourses, because oval racing is alive and well in this country.

I'm not arguing that the tracks that can afford to make the changes will get World Championship events. Of course that's the case. So, since this country can maybe support 4 events that's 4 tracks.

Barber and Miller are run by rich guys as their playground. Barber makes changes because it's a point of pride for him to have a great racetrack. That being said, they'd still have to spend millions to get it up to MotoGP standard.

I agree mostly with what Hi Zoot Says.

I think DMG will ultimately get more people interested in Motorcycle racing in the United States and DMG will get Series Sponsorship within the Next Year or two.

That being Said I'd like to see 3 class's of racing personally:

1. 600 Supersport
2. Superbike (Jap Liter Bikes and whatever Harley and or Ducati you want to bring in)
3. Formula Extreme (Essentially a "Run What You Brung" series)


Nascar has the Viewership and thus the money AND Sponsorship. Big thing is.... can this recipe work for motorcycles?

Well you aren't getting #2 as soon as DMG can get rid of them, and no chance whatsoever for #3.

As far as the NASCAR model, who knows - but my belief is no.

garyb425 - 15 May 2008 02:14 PM

Well you aren't getting #2 as soon as DMG can get rid of them, and no chance whatsoever for #3.

As far as the NASCAR model, who knows - but my belief is no.

Roger That

18fan1 - 15 May 2008 01:39 PM

I agree mostly with what Hi Zoot Says.

I think DMG will ultimately get more people interested in Motorcycle racing in the United States and DMG will get Series Sponsorship within the Next Year or two.

That is going to be difficult to do if you alienate a significant portion of the current fanbase. They tried the same approach with Grand Am and are still struggling to attract decent crowds some 5 years on. And keep in mind that Grand Am actually does have close racing and strong grids.

I rather enjoy watching the Grand Am rigs - far more than the roundy-round bumper cars, in fact. However, those are four-wheelers, DMG - not the same thing as motorcycles...get it??