New car revealed.

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

If you look at where the money is in racing and it's with series that have great competition whether between cars or drivers.

I thought since the beginning of motor racing time, motor racing has always been about competition. It's the whole point of everything and always has been. Nobody competes for a 13th place achievement trophy.

There was fantastic competition in A1GP, and SuperLeague Formula. Where was the money?

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by Paradise City

There would be a more vigorous safety regime under a multichassus formulae. The manufacturers would pool their safety expertise, the series would then go and frame the regulations based on multiple perspectives.

You can mitigate against it but I think Open Wheelers will always fly. Even OWers cushioned up as Closed Wheeled Life Rafts. Perhaps the direction they should go in is to work in concert with the NASCAR crowd to provide innovative fencing.

Or get innovative with the head protection, as that along with the fence posts played a bigger part of Dan Wheldon's death than him flying and hitting the wall at 180 plus.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

When Reynard and Swift came into IndyCar, the economic situation in America was the polar opposite of what it was now. The economic situation of IndyCar racing was massively different as well.

Where does the revenue come from? Sponsors rarely care about how diverse the choice of engine and chassis are. They usually care how many eyes are on their product. And because IndyCar is American and any prospective sponsors will be looking to capitalize on an American audience that doesn't care about chassis and engines that they will never drive, then you can see why NASCAR is making hay, while the ALMS is barely holding on.

I would disagree. Associating your product, particularly in a sport like motor racing, with someone elses product is pretty much fundamental.
Look at F1 and the sponsors that have associated themselves with various teams and engine manufacturers for example.

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I would disagree. Associating your product, particularly in a sport like motor racing, with someone elses product is pretty much fundamental.
Look at F1 and the sponsors that have associated themselves with various teams and engine manufacturers for example.

Vodafone isn't associating itself with the MP4-27, just like Pepe Jeans isn't basing their sponsorship on exhaust blown diffusers. They're after the drivers, the teams, and the identities of each.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

Vodafone isn't associating itself with the MP4-27, just like Pepe Jeans isn't basing their sponsorship on exhaust blown diffusers. They're after the drivers, the teams, and the identities of each.

Sponsoring McLaren is very much part of their strategy. Why is it then, sponsors like to have long term associations? For example, before tobacco advertising was banned, McLaren and Marlboro were synonymous as were Penske and Marlboro; Target and Ganassi, Elf and Tyrrell.

[Jonerz]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Sponsoring McLaren is very much part of their strategy. Why is it then, sponsors like to have long term associations? For example, before tobacco advertising was banned, McLaren and Marlboro were synonymous as were Penske and Marlboro; Target and Ganassi, Elf and Tyrrell.

^This.^ Lifestyle association has as much to do with the sexy cars as it does with the suave drivers. There is a reason the Patron sponsorship is in the ALMS and not IndyCar (and no, it's not to let Ed Brown drive) and there is a reason it moved to a Ferrari from an "Acura" ARX.

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

When Reynard and Swift came into IndyCar, the economic situation in America was the polar opposite of what it was now. The economic situation of IndyCar racing was massively different as well.

Where does the revenue come from? Sponsors rarely care about how diverse the choice of engine and chassis are. They usually care how many eyes are on their product. And because IndyCar is American and any prospective sponsors will be looking to capitalize on an American audience that doesn't care about chassis and engines that they will never drive, then you can see why NASCAR is making hay, while the ALMS is barely holding on.

Surely you must be talking about the P1 class of the ALMS, because in GT, which is healthy in the ALMS, there is tremendous growth potential, big money and a significantly closer association to street cars, road-going technology and street chassis than in NASCAR.

Chris

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Totally disagree. Sponsoring McLaren is very much part of their strategy. Why is it then, sponsors like to have long term associations? For example, before tobacco advertising was banned, McLaren and Marlboro were synonymous as were Penske and Marlboro; Target and Ganassi, Elf and Tyrrell.

To be fair, Marlboro sponsored everything under the sun. Wish they were allowed to sponsor in motorsports. But to your question, they(Penske, McLaren, and Marlboro) had a long term association because their original "marriage" bore such great fruit. Marlboro got in with two already successful franchises and they both upped the ante and brought Marlboro much exposure. The same deal with Ganassi. Elf and Tyrrell I would say is because they formed a partnership with the Elf driver scheme, and again, the success they had helped Elf decide to stay on for however they did. Where was Elf in Tyrrell's downfall? I'd bet the commitment was not the same, for whatever reason.


And I think you missed my point entirely. The sponsors do have sponsoring McLaren as part of their strategy. They aren't sponsoring based on a car, or an engine. They're sponsoring a corporate identity crafted over nearly 40 years. An identity that can be ruined much quicker than built. Williams could pull premium sponsorship just 5 or so years ago. Now they're reduced to taking two drivers who are there mostly for their money than anything else.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

To be fair, Marlboro sponsored everything under the sun. Wish they were allowed to sponsor in motorsports. But to your question, they(Penske, McLaren, and Marlboro) had a long term association because their original "marriage" bore such great fruit. Marlboro got in with two already successful franchises and they both upped the ante and brought Marlboro much exposure. The same deal with Ganassi. Elf and Tyrrell I would say is because they formed a partnership with the Elf driver scheme, and again, the success they had helped Elf decide to stay on for however they did. Where was Elf in Tyrrell's downfall? I'd bet the commitment was not the same, for whatever reason.

Like Elf, Marlboro also had a driver program across the various junior formulae.

Unfortunately for Tyrrell they lost Elf's sponsorship because they became uncompetative, were back to competition again and Elf, for marketing and advertsing reasons, chose not to associate themselves with Tyrrell anymore; it's bad PR and it's happened over again in motor sport, with sponsors leaving one team for another or even series.

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by Jonerz

^This.^ Lifestyle association has as much to do with the sexy cars as it does with the suave drivers. There is a reason the Patron sponsorship is in the ALMS and not IndyCar (and no, it's not to let Ed Brown drive) and there is a reason it moved to a Ferrari from an "Acura" ARX.




Surely you must be talking about the P1 class of the ALMS, because in GT, which is healthy in the ALMS, there is tremendous growth potential, big money and a significantly closer association to street cars, road-going technology and street chassis than in NASCAR.

Chris

GT is very healthy, because for the moment, GT2 racing in ALMS is satisfying the manufacturers. But Grand-Am is gaining, and the moment it provides greater value to those manufacturers, they'll be gone quicker than a Porsche through the esses at Road Atlanta. That point, IMHO, is closer than many seem to give it credit to.

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Like Elf, Marlboro also had a driver program across the various junior formulae.

Unfortunately for Tyrrell they lost Elf's sponsorship because they became uncompetative, were back to competition again and Elf, for marketing and advertsing reasons, chose not to associate themselves with Tyrrell anymore; it's bad PR and it's happened over again in motor sport, with sponsors leaving one team for another or even series.

And let's say Tyrrell was bought up, the pieces were put back together, someone bought in, made it viable once again and despite some failures along the way, it were back to competing for championships.


Oh that happened? So what's to say it can't happen for IndyCar and we're simply at the BAR stages? Why isn't it that the bricks are being laid, and continuity needs to be the next step? Who's to say the failures of the present(which don't get me wrong, there are plenty) aren't building blocks instead of omens of the end?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

And let's say Tyrrell was bought up, the pieces were put back together, someone bought in, made it viable once again and despite some failures along the way, it were back to competing for championships.

Oh that happened? So what's to say it can't happen for IndyCar and we're simply at the BAR stages? Why isn't it that the bricks are being laid, and continuity needs to be the next step? Who's to say the failures of the present(which don't get me wrong, there are plenty) aren't building blocks instead of omens of the end?

BAR weren't competative.

Hopefully bricks are being laid but without opening up the competition further, we'll be back to square one with a stagnating spec series. So far this season, IndyCar has produced good racing but it's got to sustain that; I don't want to see a return to the what we've had over the last few years.

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

BAR weren't competative.

Hopefully bricks are being laid but without opening up the competition further, we'll be back to square one with a stagnating spec series. So far this season, IndyCar has produced good racing but it's got to sustain that; I don't want to see a return to the what we've had over the last few years.

BAR is when the pieces were being put back together. AKA, we have a long way to go.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

BAR is when the pieces were being put back together. AKA, we have a long way to go.

BAR don't exist anymore. 'They' only became competative once they had morphed from BAR to Honda to Brawn.

Using your comparison with BAR, IndyCar may have to do some morphing if it too is going to become competative.

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

BAR don't exist anymore. 'They' only became competative once they had morphed from BAR to Honda to Brawn.

Using your comparison with BAR, IndyCar may have to do some morphing if it too is going to become competative.

EXACTLY. Welcome to the conversation.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

EXACTLY. Welcome to the conversation.

Never left it,

[Purist]

MS, it's more that most of what I seem to see, or hear about from news reports, is competition purely in terms of undercutting prices on the same sorts of products, and Americans, to a large extent, don't seem to notice when the quality drops on many products. They just assume they're getting a better deal by paying a lower price.

Also, the American-style "market" is different than a number of other models, because it's not good enough to just be consistently turning a profit, but instead, you have to almost constantly be showing increasing profits quarter to quarter. Of course, many business practices that come out of that expectation are simply unsustainable, but we don't seem to be learning that lesson.

Germany seems to do a lot of its business very well, and they still even have quite a bit of domestic manufacturing; just about every town of any size has at least one modest factory. Also, in terms of innovation, Schwabia (in southwest Germany) has the highest number of patents per capita of any region on Earth.

Getting back to racing, it's the "gentlemens' agreements" that have kept DTM and SuperGT going, without going supernova. BPR/FIA GT1 blew up at the end of 1998 because of spiraling costs due to all-out competition. Earlier in that same decade, Le Mans itself nearly imploded when they forced the absurd, F1-engined prototypes on LM and the WSC. You couldn't buy a year-old factory car for love nor money, and they ballasted and then banned the one real customer car that was out there (the Porsche 962C).

MS, factories are more fickle these days, and so out-and-out competition is more tricky now, because the factories are more apt to leave on short notice (Peugeot anyone?). Factories are what you NEED for widespread attention, but they aren't going to tough it out and try to just improve their product for too long; they'll just leave instead, even if they're showing progress in becoming competitve (Cadillac LMP anyone?). For factories, "losing gracefully" doesn't exist anymore.

[IceMan_PJN]

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

To be fair, Marlboro sponsored everything under the sun. Wish they were allowed to sponsor in motorsports.

They were still the title sponsor for Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro up through the middle of 2011. The crappy thing (aside from them being pushed out altogether) is that they were sponsoring the team but yet weren't allowed to display their name or logo on the cars at all. I have mixed feelings about the whole matter, as on the one hand I don't want to encourage smoking, but on the other hand I associate their sponsorship with racing and hate to see that go. At this very moment I have Senna's McLaren as my desktop wallpaper, complete with the Marlboro branding, and it just fits.

[Purist]

And of course, in Indy Cars, before Penske had Marlboro, it was on Pat Patrick's car.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by IceMan_PJN

They were still the title sponsor for Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro up through the middle of 2011. The crappy thing (aside from them being pushed out altogether) is that they were sponsoring the team but yet weren't allowed to display their name or logo on the cars at all. I have mixed feelings about the whole matter, as on the one hand I don't want to encourage smoking, but on the other hand I associate their sponsorship with racing and hate to see that go. At this very moment I have Senna's McLaren as my desktop wallpaper, complete with the Marlboro branding, and it just fits.

This is just what I was talking about, brand association and marketing.

Senna's McLaren is iconic.

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by Purist

MS, it's more that most of what I seem to see, or hear about from news reports, is competition purely in terms of undercutting prices on the same sorts of products, and Americans, to a large extent, don't seem to notice when the quality drops on many products. They just assume they're getting a better deal by paying a lower price.

Also, the American-style "market" is different than a number of other models, because it's not good enough to just be consistently turning a profit, but instead, you have to almost constantly be showing increasing profits quarter to quarter. Of course, many business practices that come out of that expectation are simply unsustainable, but we don't seem to be learning that lesson.

Germany seems to do a lot of its business very well, and they still even have quite a bit of domestic manufacturing; just about every town of any size has at least one modest factory. Also, in terms of innovation, Schwabia (in southwest Germany) has the highest number of patents per capita of any region on Earth.

Getting back to racing, it's the "gentlemens' agreements" that have kept DTM and SuperGT going, without going supernova. BPR/FIA GT1 blew up at the end of 1998 because of spiraling costs due to all-out competition. Earlier in that same decade, Le Mans itself nearly imploded when they forced the absurd, F1-engined prototypes on LM and the WSC. You couldn't buy a year-old factory car for love nor money, and they ballasted and then banned the one real customer car that was out there (the Porsche 962C).

MS, factories are more fickle these days, and so out-and-out competition is more tricky now, because the factories are more apt to leave on short notice (Peugeot anyone?). Factories are what you NEED for widespread attention, but they aren't going to tough it out and try to just improve their product for too long; they'll just leave instead, even if they're showing progress in becoming competitve (Cadillac LMP anyone?). For factories, "losing gracefully" doesn't exist anymore.

Oh I think Americans do notice when quality drops and people don't get a product that meets their needs. It's why I use an Iphone instead of a Windows phone and why I eat at my local pizzeria instead of Pizza Hut and why I use the internet instead of Cable TV. I don't believe you are giving people enough credit to be able to make their own choices.

I think what you and the indy racin' league crowd are trying to do is polish a turd and if people can't see how great that turd called the indy racin' league is, than they are just stupid people. It's the same elitist we know it all thinking at the speedway that has turned the indy 500 into a farce and the indy racin' league into a joke the public ignores.

Sportscar racing these days is bigger around the world then it ever has been, so all that competition did it good. Things that didn't work didn't last and things that did have grown.

You must still be wet behind the ears because factories have always been fickle and have pulled out on short notice. It's been going on for 100 years. And all of it is part of the ebb and flow of motorsport. People get tired of something, a new idea is created and it goes from there. Factories and their marketing and engineering goals change and they move on or come back. Factories are always going to come and go, just like Lotus will be gone from the irl before you know it.

The way you describe the world everyone is and should be terrified of competition. Competition improves the breed and motorsports is all about pushing hard and winning and always has been and the day people like yourself take over, that will be the end of that. Championing mediocrity, gets you mediocrity and being mediocre is why no one cares about the irl.

[Purist]

In sportscar, there definitely were more long-term factory programs in the 1950s and '60s than has been the case since then. Porsche is the only one that has hung in there throughout. Back before the dark ages of the 1970s though, you had Porsche, Ferrari, Jaguar, Aston Martin, Alfa Romeo, Maserati, Lotus, and at least a few others that were in the game for a decade or more, and for most of these manufacturers, their participation was pretty darn continuous. Lancia had to pull out because they were stretched too thin, especially after Ascari died, but their D50 F1 car was good enough that Ferrari took over the program.

I don't have a problem with competition, but a few conditions have to be met. I'd rather not see things go so far that a series darn near implodes because a few participants ramp things up too far too fast, and then pull out themselves when they can no longer justify the expense. Also, I'm not interested in competition which only has the aim of lowering costs, regardless of whether the product actually improves, or in some cases, becomes more cheaply made to meet a price point (Walmart comes to mind here).

And no, Americans are less aware of such things than some other groups, including many Europeans. Even though we have many fewer people over here, we have far more new, cheaply-made crap here in the US. It's NOT an elitist comment, when I've gone over there, and seen it for myself, and seen that it's true.

Would it be elitist for me to ask that the person who is going to give me treatment be a competent, trained, and licensed physician?

And there is a difference between a good product that isn't horribly expensive, and a piece of crap that's just plain cheap. I suppose I wish that people would just learn to do without than fill the world with junk that isn't likely to last, and will never be worth much. Save up for the quality good, or if that's not possible, do without. Necessity comes before want, and never let perfect be the enemy of necessity.

I DO want IndyCar to get better, a lot better, but I see ZERO chance of rebirth if IICS goes down. If, as you say, so few people care now, there won't be enough people with enough money to resurrect it if it goes under, period. So, either we make the best of what we have, or we look for its permanent death. Hey, Mountainstar, you've played a key roole in convincing me that there can be no rebirth of IndyCar under some new guise, that if it goes, it's gone for good, so congatulations!

[cheapracer]

Been looking at these since they came out and they are getting uglier every time I see them sorry to say. Wish they had of gone for the BAT.

[Purist]

Oh dear God no. Please no. I would just about take the DeltaWing over the BAT; I'm being serious here.

2012 Indy Car Preference:
1. Swift
2. Lola
3. Dallara
4/5. DeltaWing/BAT (can't definitively choose one over the other here)

BTW, IndyCar honchos were at Swift over the weekend, and Tony Cotman was there today. I'm not certain what it was all about, but something is clearly going on.

[icemachine]

Originally Posted by Purist

BTW, IndyCar honchos were at Swift over the weekend, and Tony Cotman was there today. I'm not certain what it was all about, but something is clearly going on.

Haven't the Lights been using the same chassis spec since 2002? I could see them being interested in refreshing that

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Purist

And of course, in Indy Cars, before Penske had Marlboro, it was on Pat Patrick's car.

Roger did pretty well out of that, not only getting Marlboro but Emmo as well.