The "Junk Formula" era

[Lucky161]

In the past when tough times hit, Indy had a solution. It wasn't perfect and there were complainers, but it was done anyway and I don't think the racing suffered.
For a visual:

http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z...ndy_Racer.aspx

[RS2]

This should be in the nostagla forum. Why did you put it here?



Edit: I saw you put it there also. Are you trying to say that Indy Racing is now upon hard times? How so?

Just asking.

[Lucky161]

This should be in the nostagla forum. Why did you put it here?

It is in the nostalgia forum. I put it here too because I thought some people might be interested. You can click on the link here or there or not.

[Racewriter]

This should be in the nostagla forum. Why did you put it here?



Edit: I saw you put it there also. Are you trying to say that Indy Racing is now upon hard times? How so?

Just asking.

Are you trying to say that Indy Racing isn't on hard times?

[RS2]

Are you trying to say that Indy Racing isn't on hard times?

Sure it has been. But we will have to see how this season goes at least. It is not like nothing has happened in the offseason.

[Lucky161]

Sure it has been. But we will have to see how this season goes at least. It is not like nothing has happened in the offseason.

That's true, but in my opinion nothing has happened in the offseason to address the real problems in Indycar. But as you say, we'll see how it goes.

[Ezra]

"Are you trying to say that Indy Racing is now upon hard times? How so?"


Often times one of the reasons given for a lack of sponsorship or low car counts in the IRL is weak economcs.I've had a hard time accepting that excuse, are you suggesting you do also?

[Lucky161]

"Are you trying to say that Indy Racing is now upon hard times? How so?"


Often times one of the reasons given for a lack of sponsorship or low car counts in the IRL is weak economcs.I've had a hard time accepting that excuse, are you suggesting you do also?

I think you were addressing your question to RS2, but I'll take a stab at it. My answer which I suspect will different from RS2 is yes and no.

I'll do the "no" part first. It is weak economics in the IRL. It takes about 8 million a year to run a top rung IRL team and about 2 million a year for an also ran team. Currently there are about 10 top rung teams and about 8 also rans. Given that the IRL says that a full field is around 30 cars, they are 10-12 cars short. That means the available money to run a full field of Indy cars is at least $20 million short and possibly as much as $96 million. What they have is about $96 million. So yes, they have weak economics in the IRL.

The yes part is different. There are over 1000 American companies that could afford to fund a team at the $8 million level and that allows for spending an additional two million for related items such as store and product promotions. So the money is "out" there.

So the problem is not that there isn't enough money, it's that their isn't enough interest in spending that money in the IRL. That means that the companies that can "afford" to spend that much money don't think there is a good enough ROI to do so. Or another way to say it is they think the IRL costs too much for what they get in return. They are NOT race fans, even though they may have some interest individually, the company doesn't care anything about racing. What they want is customers, which is butts in seats and eyeballs on TVs.

Which brings us to the basic question of what do fans/customers want to see. Well they don't want to see what's available now. That much we know. What we are arguing about now is whether they want to see a lot of cars racing close together on all/mostly ovals or do they want to see the same/fewer cars with the highest technology available.

Personally I think it's a mistake to think that either side NEEDS the other side to reach their goals. I think a more/mostly road racing series with high tech cars can stick around with the small fields or slightly smaller ones that they have now. But I've been told by several of those type of fans that small fields are ok and that larger fields can actually be a detriment to their enjoyment of racing. I say ok, go for it.

The other side that agrees with me that they need MUCH larger competitive fields on mostly if not all ovals generally understands that to get these larger fields, the cars must be drastically less expensive. If that means less technology, that's ok. I think there is plenty of potential market for that type of racing and it is NOT dependant on how some other form of racing is doing, good or bad. We don't NEED road racing fans, we need more cars. They don't need oval fans. They will never get a significant number of oval fans strongly interested in road racing, particularly if they insist on emphasising technology over large fields of cars.

And finally both sides think they are ENTITLED to Indy. I don't think either side is automatically. Personally I think Indy has some problems for the road racers in that nobody is shifting gears or turning right at Indy. I personally think they just want the additional money that a venue as large as Indy can provide.

[RS2]

Actually I started a bit confusion here. Lucky said "tough times" and I was thinking he meant financially because that is why the junk formula was put in place way back when.

I changed what he said to "hard times", but not on purpose.

[Lucky161]

Actually I started a bit confusion here. Lucky said "tough times" and I was thinking he meant financially because that is why the junk formula was put in place way back when.

I changed what he said to "hard times", but not on purpose.

I don't see a distinction myself. Both mean the same to me at least in this context. And yes that is what I meant. And the point being that Indycar may need another "junk formula" to survive/thrive now. Doesn't mean it has to be permanent either.

[RS2]

Hmmm, I am not really understanding you so well. The Junk formula was put in place out of neccessity due to Serious financial problems. In fact the purse for the Indy 500 was if I remember cut in half from '32 to '33.

If I get you corrcetly, You are in a roundabout way of saying that IMS needs a new Formula because you do not like the direction things have turned.

[hdolan]

Hmmm, I am not really understanding you so well. The Junk formula was put in place out of neccessity due to Serious financial problems. In fact the purse for the Indy 500 was if I remember cut in half from '32 to '33.

If I get you corrcetly, You are in a roundabout way of saying that IMS needs a new Formula because you do not like the direction things have turned.

Lucky is well qualified to speak for himself...however, I don't think he is saying what you say he is...if IndyCars don't reduce the price of racing they will price themselves out of business...NASCAR can afford to demand silly amounts in sponsorship...the IRL cannot...just a guess...

[RS2]

I don't know. But from what I said at the start of this thread. Many things have chaged in the off season. And there has not even been the first race yet. Like it or not. The split is what killed OW racing. Things will be at least a bit better just from the fact there is no more split.

[Lucky161]

I don't know. But from what I said at the start of this thread. Many things have chaged in the off season. And there has not even been the first race yet. Like it or not. The split is what killed OW racing. Things will be at least a bit better just from the fact there is no more split.

Howard was right in what he thought I was saying. It's not a matter of "I don't like the direction." It's true that I don't care a lot for Indycars on road courses and there are other things about the "direction" I don't like.

In my opinion, the split did not kill open wheel racing. And if the split didn't kill it, then getting rid of the split wont fix it either. It might be a little bit better, but it won't be much better and open wheel needs a lot more than a little bit better.

What killed open wheeled racing is that it got too expensive to pay it's bills. That has not changed substantially. It still cost way more to put a full field of competitive cars on the grid than open wheel can afford. There are a group of people that don't think small fields are a problem. You may be among them. If you are I can understand you being happy with the way things are. But if you think open wheel is not going to be fixed until they have full fields at every track, you should be very worried about the fact that the runaway cost have not been checked.

T13 likes to point out that he thinks open wheel puts on better races than nascar. I would agree if they had full fields of competitive cars, but they don't. They don't even come close to full fields. nascar not only has full fields at every race, but they turn cars away at every race. How do they do that? They do it because of two things. One is they generate a lot of money. More money than it cost to run. The other thing is their rules are such that even someone without a full sponsorship can build a car that is at least competitive. Nearly every car they send home is almost fast enough to qualify. With the 35/8, sometimes cars that are fast enough are still sent home. In the IRL if someone enters the race and is way off pace, so what, they still make the race. That doesn't make for good racing. And when they don't have good racing, then people stay away. They stay away in droves! They don't attend the races and they don't watch them on TV. People don't despite what some say, stay away because of the split. They stay away because the racing isn't good enough to attract them. If there was 75-80 cars before the split and they only had 35-40 cars, they could still put on good races and it wouldn't matter if they were split. The split only exxagerated the impact. It didn't cause the problem.

Sponsors are staying away because of the split either. Some left CART/CC, but again it wasn't because of the split. They left because those teams no longer raced in the I500 and therefore were not a good value for sponsors. They also left the IRL, not because of the split, but because the other races were not a good value. They were willing to pay for the I500, but not the other races.

nascar gets by with a lot of things. They have a couple of road races and most of their fans stick with them. It's a novelty. Personally I think a nascar road racing series would be pretty good, but it wouldn't generate the kind of money that they do now. But I think it would be popular enough to pay its bills, because the cars would be cheap enough. They even have a few "road race ringers" come in. Foreigners like Ron Fellows (one of my favorites) come and race in those races. That doesn't hurt nascar. Does nascar suddenly become less focused on American drivers during those two races? No, their fans can appreciate a little diversity and recognize the skills those drivers bring to those races. They can afford those types of things because they generate massive amounts of money relative to the costs of the cars.

Many of the people that disagree with me, suggest that it's near sacriledge to copy nascar in open wheel. Some of them don't like stock blocks. Some of them don't like pack racing. Some of them don't like the "WWF" aspects of nascar. But they don't seem to have a big problem with Danica, Sarah and Milka racing mostly because they are they are the latest gimmick. In the case of the first two, they are probably good enough to hold their own in a full field. But in the pathetic fields they have now, all 3 of them are good enough. Am I anti women drivers? Not at all. Fisher is one of my favorites. In drag racing, John Forces daughter is racing. She has their "gimmick" qualification along with a famous father who owns the team. But there is a difference. She is good enough, period. The IRL has a couple of drivers with famous fathers who own the team. One is probably good enough even if the had full fields. The other two, probably not. And the IRL has a rich owner/driver. That's seven out of 18, almost half of the field that might not even make a race if they had full fields. nascar has zero female drivers regularly making the field. nascar has 3 sons of famous drivers, two who drove for the team his father owned. But all three of them have won mutliple races, two are/were championship contenders most of their careers. And they did that against full fields of cars every race every year. Open wheel doesn't need to put on fenders and tops on their cars, but they do need a strong dose of reality. Race what you can pay for. And right now they can't afford to pay for much.

In my opinion, Indycar has to dramatically lower their cost, no matter what direction they go.

[Jimmy Hendricks]

The split is what killed OW racing.

Wrong.

The people running the sport killed OW racing. That encompasses the series owners, team owners and engine manufacturers.

Continuing to use "the split" is just a crutch. The sport STILL would have gone in the dumper whether TG had sat on his duff and done nothing or not.