Special Stage Forums banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
There was an article in Army magazine--- Alot of the recruiters were venting about the nascar program. Saying it was a waste of money. Alot of people in the military are really mad about the nascar sponsorship.

----When NASCAR fans pack the 20 racetracks to attend the 36 races that comprise the 2003 Winston Cup schedule, the tickets, parking, and t-shirts will not be the greatest costs assumed by those in attendance. Before the green flag ever falls at a single event, these, and all other American taxpayers will have already paid over $16 million for the "Army of One" sponsorship on a Winston Cup stock car.

That's right, American taxpayers dish out millions to purchase sponsorship for the United States Army in NASCAR's elite touring series.

By raiding its taxpayer-funded advertising budget to plaster decals on the quarter panels of an MB2 Motorsports Winston Cup Series entry, the Army hoped to speed off with 1,200 new recruits. The sponsorship forces taxpayers to subsidize much of the research, development, and manufacturing costs for the cars and engines, as well as employee salaries and operational expenses of MB2, a private for-profit enterprise. Thus, the race team is free to jockey for earnings through race purses and bonus funds with very few expenses left uncovered by the U.S. Army. Who are the recipients of this subsidy? The multi-millionaire owners of MB2 Motorsports led by investment banking firm principal and auto dealership magnate, Nelson Bowers.

The sponsorship intends to reach the sports-minded 17-24 year old male population, a main source of possible Army recruits. However, that prime demographic group constitutes less than 10 percent of NASCAR fans and viewers, meaning that relatively few of the Army's target audience will ever see the black and gold "Army of One" car in action.

Further limiting the potential for recruiting success is a severe lack of star power and on-track achievement by the drivers wearing the Army firesuit. MB2's regular driver Jerry Nadeau, currently sidelined with injuries sustained in a practice accident at Richmond International Raceway, has never finished higher than 17th in NASCAR's year-end point standings.& Mike Wallace, temporarily piloting the "01" car for the recovering Nadeau, boasts only two top-five finishes in a dozen years of Winston Cup racing. In all, Nadeau and Wallace possess a combined total of one victory in over 300 Series starts.

The Army's $16 million commitment is considered highly lucrative by Winston Cup Series standards and sponsorships of such magnitude generally fall to only the most highly successful, thus most recognizable and marketable drivers in the sport, not also-rans like Nadeau and Wallace.

For example, pharmaceutical maker Pfizer pays $12 million per year, far short of the cost of the Army's agreement, to sponsor the Jack Roush car of 33-time race winner Mark Martin. A $15 million yearly arrangement by United Parcel Service secured Robert Yates' entry driven by Dale Jarrett, whose resume boasts 30 Winston Cup race winsÑamong them, three Daytona 500 victoriesÑand the 1999 Winston Cup Championship. In NASCAR, where consistent finishes and frequent trips to victory lane translate into sponsor visibility and promotional success, it seems the Army found a dud of a race team rather than bang for its buck.

If the Army manages to reach its goal of signing 1,200 new soldiers resulting from its $16 million association with the MB2 NASCAR team, it will do so at the staggering cost of $13,333 per enrollee. Currently, the Army seeks to enlist over 70,000 new recruits. If the Army spent as much to reach each of the desired new enlistees as it will on those attracted by its NASCAR program, the cost would verge on $1 billion.

The Army recruiting budget, which includes advertising expenses, is set to increase $228 million in the upcoming fiscal year and Army brass claim that still more money is needed to satisfy its advertising needs. Congress must realize that it is not insufficient funding, but rather the imprudent way in which the Army spends its substantial taxpayer-provided advertising budget that limits its ability to reach potential recruits. It is time to wave a red flag over further Army attempts to recruit through wasteful methods at the expense of America's taxpayers.
When NASCAR fans pack the 20 racetracks to attend the 36 races that comprise the 2003 Winston Cup schedule, the tickets, parking, and t-shirts will not be the greatest costs assumed by those in attendance. Before the green flag ever falls at a single event, these, and all other American taxpayers will have already paid over $16 million for the "Army of One" sponsorship on a Winston Cup stock car.

That's right, American taxpayers dish out millions to purchase sponsorship for the United States Army in NASCAR's elite touring series.

By raiding its taxpayer-funded advertising budget to plaster decals on the quarter panels of an MB2 Motorsports Winston Cup Series entry, the Army hoped to speed off with 1,200 new recruits. The sponsorship forces taxpayers to subsidize much of the research, development, and manufacturing costs for the cars and engines, as well as employee salaries and operational expenses of MB2, a private for-profit enterprise. Thus, the race team is free to jockey for earnings through race purses and bonus funds with very few expenses left uncovered by the U.S. Army. Who are the recipients of this subsidy? The multi-millionaire owners of MB2 Motorsports led by investment banking firm principal and auto dealership magnate, Nelson Bowers.

The sponsorship intends to reach the sports-minded 17-24 year old male population, a main source of possible Army recruits. However, that prime demographic group constitutes less than 10 percent of NASCAR fans and viewers, meaning that relatively few of the Army's target audience will ever see the black and gold "Army of One" car in action.

Further limiting the potential for recruiting success is a severe lack of star power and on-track achievement by the drivers wearing the Army firesuit. MB2's regular driver Jerry Nadeau, currently sidelined with injuries sustained in a practice accident at Richmond International Raceway, has never finished higher than 17th in NASCAR's year-end point standings.& Mike Wallace, temporarily piloting the "01" car for the recovering Nadeau, boasts only two top-five finishes in a dozen years of Winston Cup racing. In all, Nadeau and Wallace possess a combined total of one victory in over 300 Series starts.

The Army's $16 million commitment is considered highly lucrative by Winston Cup Series standards and sponsorships of such magnitude generally fall to only the most highly successful, thus most recognizable and marketable drivers in the sport, not also-rans like Nadeau and Wallace.

For example, pharmaceutical maker Pfizer pays $12 million per year, far short of the cost of the Army's agreement, to sponsor the Jack Roush car of 33-time race winner Mark Martin. A $15 million yearly arrangement by United Parcel Service secured Robert Yates' entry driven by Dale Jarrett, whose resume boasts 30 Winston Cup race winsÑamong them, three Daytona 500 victoriesÑand the 1999 Winston Cup Championship. In NASCAR, where consistent finishes and frequent trips to victory lane translate into sponsor visibility and promotional success, it seems the Army found a dud of a race team rather than bang for its buck.

If the Army manages to reach its goal of signing 1,200 new soldiers resulting from its $16 million association with the MB2 NASCAR team, it will do so at the staggering cost of $13,333 per enrollee. Currently, the Army seeks to enlist over 70,000 new recruits. If the Army spent as much to reach each of the desired new enlistees as it will on those attracted by its NASCAR program, the cost would verge on $1 billion.

The Army recruiting budget, which includes advertising expenses, is set to increase $228 million in the upcoming fiscal year and Army brass claim that still more money is needed to satisfy its advertising needs. Congress must realize that it is not insufficient funding, but rather the imprudent way in which the Army spends its substantial taxpayer-provided advertising budget that limits its ability to reach potential recruits. It is time to wave a red flag over further Army attempts to recruit through wasteful methods at the expense of America's taxpayers.----
 

·
don't cut
Joined
·
2,252 Posts
Wow! $16mil for that team? As a taxpayer, I feel jipped. The Army got screwed on that one. I remember Timo telling me one of the reasons the AFR fit well with rally was that they were looking for technically minded recruits, and those types of individuals were more likely to be drawn to racing like World Challenge, Rally, and import drag. The Nascar crowd, to put it bluntly, wasn't sophisticated enough for the boys in blue.


The sponsorship forces taxpayers to subsidize much
>of the research, development, and manufacturing costs for
>the cars and engines, as well as employee salaries and
>operational expenses of MB2, a private for-profit
>enterprise.

I have to disagree with the writer here. Racing is an entertainment/advertising business, and there is nothing wrong with making a profit. Profit is not a dirty word. When they buy a TV ad, doesn't the network make a profit on that? If they want free ads, PBS is always there.....

Dennis Martin
[email protected]
920-432-4845
 

·
codriveur
Joined
·
1,385 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
First off I'm not going to try to defend the sponsorship. I saw a relationship between the U.S. Army sponsorship of a certain type of motorsport and the recent sponsorship by the U.S. Airforce Reserve of another type of motorsport, ours. That relationship is expectation by the sponsor, and results produced by the team, driven. It can be extrapolated to any sponsorship, Rally car, NASCAR, NHRA (as mentioned) Peewee Football, etc.. It was information not an opinion.

Secondly, the post you put up I am sure is accurate and correct and right off of some cookie cutter anti-something website. Please edit it so the cut and paste is posted only once and readable.

Plus, it would have a lot more weight if the 2003 rant was updated for 2004 or:

Soon coming to a calendar near you! 2005!

Bernie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
FYI

All of the military teams in NASCAR, Army, Navy, Marines, National Guard, Air Force, and Coast Guard have all re-upped for 2005. The Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee has gone on record with his support of the sponsorships. Not only is it a recruiting effort but it also has some public affairs aspects to it as well as giving the guys overseas something to root for. I'm sure they will last a couple more years before they die out.

As Dennis said all the anti-sponsorship arguments could be made for any form of advertising including billboards, print, radio, etc. It's just another form of advertising. If race sponsorships were eliminated it would just result in more TV and radio ads. All the services are going to use their entire allotted budget in one way or another.

It is very hard for any company to get a good read on what forms of advertising are the most effective except for things like direct mail. Especially companies that require you to sign part of your life away. Even the GAO acknowledged that in an audit they did on recruiting advertising last year.

Eventually, however, times will change and the military will move on to other forms of advertising like most companies do.

Greg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
>Alot of the
>recruiters were venting about the nascar program. Saying it
>was a waste of money.

Wow... Next time you're near your local Armed Forces Recruiting Center, pay attention to the number of (gov't) vehicles parked out front. I swear these guys are responsible for half of the Dodge Stratus purchases ever made. Blazers, Cherokees, etc as well, all seemingly parked unused for 99% of the time.

I support the military, but they sure don't mind the pennies like private businesses do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Don

I can see your point. :)

But I do disagree a little. When I was a LT and would fly in to a base on travel the motor pool would give our formation a car to get around in. From 1990-1995 I don't think I ever got in one that wasn't either a Dodge Aires K car or a Dodge Van. Dodge must have sold a billion K cars to the US military (green for the Army and blue for the Air Force). Those cars were something else! When I drove around in them I used to always think that the guy who closed this deal for Dodge had to be the greatest salesman on earth!

Actually the recruiter's cars are different. Since most recruiters work off-base their cars are not handled by the base motor pool but by the Government Services Administration (GSA). The GSA manages the whole fleet to include trading them for newer models and selling the old ones, taking care of paying for oil changes and maintenance, etc. Recruiters put a lot of miles on cars but the military is pretty fussy about equipment so the GSA, and the motor pools, take good care of them.

Greg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Funny this comes up, The Army brought their NASCAR to my college when they raced the California Speedway, during a club day/thingy. No one except for the recruiters were around it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
I just put the article to spice up the topic. My father works with recruiters for the army. He just heard they where mad because of the wrong demographics and not enough funding towards static displays at other events. I am sure it helps troop moral to watch cheer their racecar. I am not against the military sponsoring race cars "good form of exposure" I just think amry spending money on both Nascar and NHRA is a waste of money. Both have the same identical demographics! I can understand sponsoring one of the above, but both is dumb marketing. It would be smart to sponsor something the younger crowd is interested in:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Tex

I agree with you. Believe me we have long discussions about where we should be and how much is too much almost every week. To be honest none of the major racing series have very young demographics with the exception of import drag and drifting. Most major forms of the sport lean toward the high 30's in age.

This brings up an interesting point about military recruiting. One of the best recruiting tools we have are friends, relatives, teachers and coaches who have been in the military and encourage young people in their lives to do the same. Unfortunately, since we have gone to an all volunteer force, the number of these people have dropped steadily as have the number of military vets in congress and the senate.

We call these people influencers. The question is should we direct advertising directly at them in the hope they will take in the information and pass it on to someone we know. An influencer can have a tremendous effect on a potential accession.

Nothing is ever easy

Greg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,812 Posts
Hey I'll join the military if I don't have to suck up to and salute anyone.

Get me an F-16 or an A-10. I'm ready.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
>Tex
>
>I agree with you. Believe me we have long discussions about
>where we should be and how much is too much almost every
>week. To be honest none of the major racing series have
>very young demographics with the exception of import drag
>and drifting. Most major forms of the sport lean toward the
>high 30's in age.
>
>This brings up an interesting point about military
>recruiting. One of the best recruiting tools we have are
>friends, relatives, teachers and coaches who have been in
>the military and encourage young people in their lives to do
>the same. Unfortunately, since we have gone to an all
>volunteer force, the number of these people have dropped
>steadily as have the number of military vets in congress and
>the senate.
>
>We call these people influencers. The question is should we
>direct advertising directly at them in the hope they will
>take in the information and pass it on to someone we know.
>An influencer can have a tremendous effect on a potential
>accession.
>
>Nothing is ever easy hah
>
>Greg

Yea the people influencers worked on my brother :) I can see your point about that. Yea motorsports in the US tend to be the older crowd....Being young myself.... it's just really anoying when people my age rave about the World Rally Championship. They are hooked after watching a 2 min rally video. Its just irritating knowing how much potential this sport has in the US.
 

·
codriveur
Joined
·
1,385 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
To be honest none of the major racing series have
>very young demographics with the exception of import drag
>and drifting. Most major forms of the sport lean toward the
>high 30's in age.
>
>Greg

Can you share what the demographics where of SCCA Performance Rally, and if you know the WRC? It is an often asked question (along with TV ratings) and since the SCCA ptrogram is dead as it was known, and no other TV package has been announced, it might be OK if this nugget of information was leaked out.

Or is it a mirror of the people involved?

Bernie

Unrelated but still in the sponsorship topic I just saw a commercial (during SpongeBob) for a Hotwheels "Slimecano" that featured a Subaru STI 3 times in full rally vinyl. Is this the only use of rally in the Hotwheels line?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
240 Posts
>2003 ISC WRC Demographics --- Average of
>Australia/France/Germany/Uk viewers
>
>
>16-24 14%
>
>25-34 23%
>
>35-59 39%
Note: Disproportionate time span. The 16-34 would be 37% and still 8 years less than the 35-59 so yes the younger crowd dose have a greater representation despite the misrepresentation.
>
>35-59 24%
What they weren?t sure so try again?
You also need to take into account that in most of those countries with shrinking populations and a baby boom that breakdown probably pretty accurately reflects the population breakdown.

Notice it dosn't say US I can say for sure College age kids are very into rally in the US. Being a college student it has continually amazed me just how many kids are into rally and by into it I am talking posters on the wall WRC.com faithfulls and it's gotten so any guy and shockingly a lot of girls will at least give it "Wow thats cool" status.

Blah Blah Blah Statistics go watch rally stand in the crowd disproportionately <30 male I would say at least 50% (unless you are in Quebec where the Females are also out in force :7) Need further proof ask the 20 something year old girl running the VIP tour at Pines who comes out to watch rally!
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top