STCC: New S2000 Saab to be showed at Mantorp-finale

[Thorney]

Originally Posted by DriversKnow

It would be great to see that in the BTCC - Just the image boost Saab needs to fight BMW and Audi

Cant see that happening, GM have a policy of not competing brands against one another, Vauxhall are UK so will be only factory funded operation (for the moment) so no funding available for Chevvy or Saab I'm afraid.

[10tacle]

i thought he mean STCC but write BTCC cause Volvo and Audi didn't come to BTCC either.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by Thorney

Cant see that happening, GM have a policy of not competing brands against one another, Vauxhall are UK so will be only factory funded operation (for the moment) so no funding available for Chevvy or Saab I'm afraid.

Interestingly enough, Chevy has signed another 2 year contract for participation in STCC... Though the SAAB project for sure will not be a full factory support, we are likely to see both these GM brands in STCC at the same time.

[Thorney]

Too many TCC's

GM are fine having as many cars racing as possible.......but they will only directly support one brand in a series. In the BTCC that meant Vauxhall, the Chevvys were run by Robertshaw Racing with no direct support from Chevrolet (I believe they got some dealer support for support cars etc) but thats it. With STCC (not overly familiar with it tbh) I imagine the Chevrolet team is the factory supported one but Saab may get some back end support although who knows. From GM's perspective it makes no sense (from a marketing perspective) to have a CHevvy race against a Saab or Opel they'd rather have them beat a BMW, Ford or Nissan.

[kristof14]

Originally Posted by Thorney

Too many TCC's

GM are fine having as many cars racing as possible.......but they will only directly support one brand in a series. In the BTCC that meant Vauxhall, the Chevvys were run by Robertshaw Racing with no direct support from Chevrolet (I believe they got some dealer support for support cars etc) but thats it. With STCC (not overly familiar with it tbh) I imagine the Chevrolet team is the factory supported one but Saab may get some back end support although who knows. From GM's perspective it makes no sense (from a marketing perspective) to have a CHevvy race against a Saab or Opel they'd rather have them beat a BMW, Ford or Nissan.

Exactly, this is one of the factors that lead to the death of Super Touring (alongside costs etc) Renault and Nissan vanished after Renault acquired Nissan, Volvo went from the BTCC after they were bought by Ford.

The only instance of direct support for 2 brands competing against each other whilst funded by the same parent company is Peugeot/Citroen in the WRC?

[Thorney]

I still think the best method is that of V8 Supercars, I mean there are only 2 brands and they still manage to get good racing. The manufactuers support 2/3 teams each but the non factory supported teams have something to aim for in that if they impress then the facotry can switch support to reflect that or at least offer them support, it also keeps the factory teams on the ball as they know that they have to perform to keep the factory backing, it also gives good value for the manufacturer as they get multiple cars on grid but they're not picking up the bill for the whole lot.

Compare that with the UK, factory supports one team and pays the massive bill for everything, if that team isn't doing well then so be it (although I'm sure words are exchanged ). If the factory supports a couple of teams it means that the development is both shared and competed on which both increases the chances on winning and keeps the bill down the manufacturer. If an independant runs the same chassis and starts doing well then its in the interests of the factory to help them out thus incentivising everyone.

[Thorney]

I still think the best method is that of V8 Supercars, I mean there are only 2 brands and they still manage to get good racing. The manufactuers support 2/3 teams each but the non factory supported teams have something to aim for in that if they impress then the facotry can switch support to reflect that or at least offer them support, it also keeps the factory teams on the ball as they know that they have to perform to keep the factory backing, it also gives good value for the manufacturer as they get multiple cars on grid but they're not picking up the bill for the whole lot.

Compare that with the UK, factory supports one team and pays the massive bill for everything, if that team isn't doing well then so be it (although I'm sure words are exchanged ). If the factory supports a couple of teams it means that the development is both shared and competed on which both increases the chances on winning and keeps the bill down the manufacturer. If an independant runs the same chassis and starts doing well then its in the interests of the factory to help them out thus incentivising everyone.

[kristof14]

Originally Posted by Thorney

I still think the best method is that of V8 Supercars, I mean there are only 2 brands and they still manage to get good racing. The manufactuers support 2/3 teams each but the non factory supported teams have something to aim for in that if they impress then the facotry can switch support to reflect that or at least offer them support, it also keeps the factory teams on the ball as they know that they have to perform to keep the factory backing, it also gives good value for the manufacturer as they get multiple cars on grid but they're not picking up the bill for the whole lot.

Compare that with the UK, factory supports one team and pays the massive bill for everything, if that team isn't doing well then so be it (although I'm sure words are exchanged ). If the factory supports a couple of teams it means that the development is both shared and competed on which both increases the chances on winning and keeps the bill down the manufacturer. If an independant runs the same chassis and starts doing well then its in the interests of the factory to help them out thus incentivising everyone.

I think Australia is a completely different set of circumstances from Europe. As far as I know Holden and Ford have the largest market share in Australia compared to Europe where a lot more manufacturers are competing for sales.

Also don't forget that the DTM is a very similar product and is really struggling at the moment. Whilst Australian and American crowds prefer to see grids full of identical cars it seems Europe prefers the variety offered by WTCC, STCC and BTCC.

[JMeissner]

Keep it to Saab/STCC guys

[kristof14]

Originally Posted by JMeissner

Keep it to Saab/STCC guys

Of course!

I hope you'll be able to provide some videos of this car running next season!

[Bezzen]

Here's a little Youtube clip of it at Mantorp:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inbW3yBRNp4

[FIRE]

Any news? Did they test in the mean time? Or is this project in trouble thanks to the financial crisis?

[JMeissner]

They were testing the car at Sturup two weeks ago, seems to be going strong.

[SEATFreak]

Originally Posted by Thorney

....but Saab may get some back end support although who knows. From GM's perspective it makes no sense (from a marketing perspective) to have a CHevvy race against a Saab or Opel they'd rather have them beat a BMW, Ford or Nissan.

So could that mean that the SAAB cars won't be works funded and that they will be purely Independents?

But one thing I have never understood about the tintop ethic of a manufacturer not competing against a parent company or vice versa is why it was so bad from a marketing perspective. Does it harm sales that much to have a factory and the parent company promote their models on the same track?

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by SEATFreak

So could that mean that the SAAB cars won't be works funded and that they will be purely Independents?

But one thing I have never understood about the tintop ethic of a manufacturer not competing against a parent company or vice versa is why it was so bad from a marketing perspective. Does it harm sales that much to have a factory and the parent company promote their models on the same track?

I would be surprised if that SAAB effort is a works effort. They may get some help from the factory, but I imagine its privateer driven.

In terms of brands competing against one another, it doesn't make logical sense for a manufacturer to split resources and confuse the message.

[werner]

I don't see a confusing message. When you have 2 brands that both can gain customers by racing, then I see no reason why 2 brands can't compete in the same class. Especially when that class of racing is far superior over other series in the region that is considered.
When we consider Saab, I can't think of any series that would suit Saab better then the STCC, when it want's to focus on Sweden. Unless they would be able to make a competitive rallycar, wich I doubt. The same goes for Chevy, I don't believe they have any other options in Sweden than race their easy to get-Lacetti's.
Internationally it usually is a different story. For Instance Audi does not need to race Seat in the WTCC to get international attention for racingperformances, they choosed to do Le Mans and DTM, and they could opt for FIA GT or GT3-series as well.

[SEATFreak]

Originally Posted by werner

I don't see a confusing message. When you have 2 brands that both can gain customers by racing, then I see no reason why 2 brands can't compete in the same class. Especially when that class of racing is far superior over other series in the region that is considered.
When we consider Saab, I can't think of any series that would suit Saab better then the STCC, when it want's to focus on Sweden. Unless they would be able to make a competitive rallycar, wich I doubt. The same goes for Chevy, I don't believe they have any other options in Sweden than race their easy to get-Lacetti's.

That is what I thought. As far as I am aware, because I have heard it mentioned elsewhere, the main focus of a manufacturer as far as touring car involvement is concerned in touring cars, is to sell the model. Just like the main focus for SSUK this year in the BTCC and the last two in the WTCC is to sell the diesel engine.

Even though SAAB are a subsidiary of GM are SAAB not a seperate company that can manufacturer its own models and manage it's own finances?

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by werner

I don't see a confusing message.

I see it as more of a money issue over a confusion issue. Pushing two brands at the (exact) same time and location cost x2 but still only reach x1 the target audience. Additionally, you are potentially "killing" yourself in the manufacturers competition relative if you just have more cars of only 1 brand/team.

So, in most cases, 2 brands with factory backing, doesnt make much sense. Private teams and special circumstances of course can change the final overal picture.

[PTM]

As far as I know, SAAB (and any other manufacturer) has its own marketing department as well as budget. Not often are activities coordinated with other brands, closely or remotely related.

Whether the dealer team is able to get money from SAAB is a totally different story, considering the economical climate, recent stories of lay offs etc.

[werner]

Originally Posted by stedevil

I see it as more of a money issue over a confusion issue. Pushing two brands at the (exact) same time and location cost x2 but still only reach x1 the target audience.

If you have 2 brands you must reach your potential customers twice anyway. If your potential customers are different on some points, but similar in the fact that they apreciate motorsports, then the marketingguys of both brands must think of motorsport as an option, and when 1 serie is superior over any other, as is the STCC in Sweden, they might end up fighting eachother. That can't be to bad, if losing was so dangerous, then we would only see 1-makeseries. I don't think Saab-fans care if the Saab-team loses or wins from a chevy or a Volvo or a BMW.