Joined
·
69 Posts
OK, here we go again. This only my opinion and not that of the AFR, SCCA, RA, Subaru, or Mitsubishi.
First, I don?t know all the answers about what is going on with Wild West. Clearly the management at the SCCA and the management at Wild West do not get along (don?t dispute this; I have personally heard comments going both ways). The primary reasons, I believe, are personalities and a disagreement over the operational procedures at the rally.
What I do know for a fact was that as recently as 30 days prior to this year?s event the SCCA was not sure if Wild West was going to be a SCCA sanctioned rally. I?m glad it was because if it wasn?t the Air Force Reserve Rally team would not have been there. So these problems have been going on for a while.
I hope Wild West and the SCCA can work things out. We have a big reserve unit at McChord AFB with a very active public affairs department. I want to stay there but that doesn?t mean that it is the right thing to do.
Regardless of the letter from the PRB, Wild West should have been at the Oct 1st meeting. They have been a stop on the championship for a long time and they should know what we have to offer to events that stay in the championship. Heart of Dixie rally was at the meeting and they are not a points event on the 2004 schedule. They do, however, want to be one in 2005 and they are willing to work with us to make that happen. I am sure that Wild West could do the same thing if they wanted. So the bottom line is that the letter from the PRB and the meeting on the 1st were not connected. They are two very separate things.
Now let?s get into some philosophy. Again all my opinion.
One thing this championship sorely needs is a consistent set of operational rules. I can?t speak for Subaru and Mitsubishi but I know that I don?t care if those rules are SCCA, FIA, or some sort of hybrid. Whatever they are, they need to be consistent across the championship.
I don?t believe that those rules should be dictated from above. I hope that the organizers can get together and decide what they want to see out of a set of standard operational procedures (including timecards, etc.) and then work with the SCCA to get them implemented throughout the championship. Andy Brown has 15 years of WRC experience and I respect his opinion a great deal. I can?t tell you how many times he has said to me, in frustration, that he wished that we had just one set of rules and they were enforced consistently. He?s right. We need that if we ever want to have a cohesive championship.
Currently, operational procedures, I think, give a clear indication of what direction the organizer is going with an event. Wild West has been very clear about their desire to host a WRC event. I wish them the best of luck with it. If they get it done, I will definitely come up and spectate. I have my own opinion of how likely it is but I will keep that to myself. I am a big believer in working on dreams until they become reality so I would never discourage others from doing so.
However, as a sponsor, I am not interested in doing business with a rally whose primary goal is to host the WRC. The WRC does nothing for the Air Force Reserve. We wouldn?t have a car in it. This is the same reason I don?t support the CNAR championship. 2/3rds of the events take place outside of the United States and I don?t recruit outside the US so why would I want to get involved?
I love Canada and Canadian rallies. I?m an ACP and Pat Richard fan, and Martin Headland is one of my favorite people in all of rally. But will one cent from my budget ever make it there or to Mexico? No way, never. I think most potential American sponsors would agree with me.
Again, I don?t mind using FIA operational rules at our rallies, if that?s what the organizers, competitors, and the SCCA want, but I would not being doing it to impress the FIA. I definitely do not want to deal with their organizational requirements.
When I ask an organizer their goal this is what I want to hear: ?I want to make a profit, and I want to have the best event in the SCCA ProRally Championship.? That means they want to work with the SCCA, sponsors, and the other organizers to build a successful, profitable, cohesive, consistent series. Now if somewhere down the list they want to someday hold a WRC event that?s fine. AS LONG AS THEIR BUSINESS DECISIONS PUT THE SCCA CHAMPIONSHIP FIRST AND FOREMOST. What they do after that is up to them.
Right now the ProRally series in a state of transition and we are short of resources. I want to keep every rally that wants to be there on the calendar, but I also need to know that they are working on the same goals as the other events and the SCCA as a whole. If not, for strictly business reasons, it may be better to go our separate ways.
The requirements the FIA puts on rallies are very resource intensive. Complying with them takes money, people and time. All three of these things are in short supply with all rallies in the United States. I think we have to build a strong ProRally series first and worry about the WRC later. In my opinion, we can?t spend time and money on FIA organizational requirements right now and I sure as heck do not want to give my money to a rally so they can spend it on appeasing the FIA.
When I give sponsorship money to a rally I become a customer of that rally. As I customer of a rally I would hate to see the rally designed to benefit another organization that is not even paying for it. How much money has the FIA directed to fund the sport of rally in the US? I know I have spent a bunch and Subaru and Mitsubishi have spent a lot more than me.
This isn?t a bad thing. It isn?t a personal or negative attack. It?s business. All organizers are free to pursue whatever goals they want and I am free to financially support the rallies that best meet my needs. No problem.
In case it isn?t clear yet, I?m a SCCA guy. I don?t have the money to be in two places at once. In 2004 we will not run any rallies that are not SCCA sanctioned and/or part of the SCCA ProRally championship. That is where I think the sport of rally should go and that?s where I am putting our money. I am sure many will disagree with me and they are free to support the rally of their choice.
Again, I hope Wild West and the SCCA can come to some sort of agreement to keep them on the calendar. I think John and Steve will have to have a long phone conversation and bury the hatchet. Will it happen? I don?t know. Will the goals of the two organizations be so divergent that they can?t work together? Quite possibly.
Greg
First, I don?t know all the answers about what is going on with Wild West. Clearly the management at the SCCA and the management at Wild West do not get along (don?t dispute this; I have personally heard comments going both ways). The primary reasons, I believe, are personalities and a disagreement over the operational procedures at the rally.
What I do know for a fact was that as recently as 30 days prior to this year?s event the SCCA was not sure if Wild West was going to be a SCCA sanctioned rally. I?m glad it was because if it wasn?t the Air Force Reserve Rally team would not have been there. So these problems have been going on for a while.
I hope Wild West and the SCCA can work things out. We have a big reserve unit at McChord AFB with a very active public affairs department. I want to stay there but that doesn?t mean that it is the right thing to do.
Regardless of the letter from the PRB, Wild West should have been at the Oct 1st meeting. They have been a stop on the championship for a long time and they should know what we have to offer to events that stay in the championship. Heart of Dixie rally was at the meeting and they are not a points event on the 2004 schedule. They do, however, want to be one in 2005 and they are willing to work with us to make that happen. I am sure that Wild West could do the same thing if they wanted. So the bottom line is that the letter from the PRB and the meeting on the 1st were not connected. They are two very separate things.
Now let?s get into some philosophy. Again all my opinion.
One thing this championship sorely needs is a consistent set of operational rules. I can?t speak for Subaru and Mitsubishi but I know that I don?t care if those rules are SCCA, FIA, or some sort of hybrid. Whatever they are, they need to be consistent across the championship.
I don?t believe that those rules should be dictated from above. I hope that the organizers can get together and decide what they want to see out of a set of standard operational procedures (including timecards, etc.) and then work with the SCCA to get them implemented throughout the championship. Andy Brown has 15 years of WRC experience and I respect his opinion a great deal. I can?t tell you how many times he has said to me, in frustration, that he wished that we had just one set of rules and they were enforced consistently. He?s right. We need that if we ever want to have a cohesive championship.
Currently, operational procedures, I think, give a clear indication of what direction the organizer is going with an event. Wild West has been very clear about their desire to host a WRC event. I wish them the best of luck with it. If they get it done, I will definitely come up and spectate. I have my own opinion of how likely it is but I will keep that to myself. I am a big believer in working on dreams until they become reality so I would never discourage others from doing so.
However, as a sponsor, I am not interested in doing business with a rally whose primary goal is to host the WRC. The WRC does nothing for the Air Force Reserve. We wouldn?t have a car in it. This is the same reason I don?t support the CNAR championship. 2/3rds of the events take place outside of the United States and I don?t recruit outside the US so why would I want to get involved?
I love Canada and Canadian rallies. I?m an ACP and Pat Richard fan, and Martin Headland is one of my favorite people in all of rally. But will one cent from my budget ever make it there or to Mexico? No way, never. I think most potential American sponsors would agree with me.
Again, I don?t mind using FIA operational rules at our rallies, if that?s what the organizers, competitors, and the SCCA want, but I would not being doing it to impress the FIA. I definitely do not want to deal with their organizational requirements.
When I ask an organizer their goal this is what I want to hear: ?I want to make a profit, and I want to have the best event in the SCCA ProRally Championship.? That means they want to work with the SCCA, sponsors, and the other organizers to build a successful, profitable, cohesive, consistent series. Now if somewhere down the list they want to someday hold a WRC event that?s fine. AS LONG AS THEIR BUSINESS DECISIONS PUT THE SCCA CHAMPIONSHIP FIRST AND FOREMOST. What they do after that is up to them.
Right now the ProRally series in a state of transition and we are short of resources. I want to keep every rally that wants to be there on the calendar, but I also need to know that they are working on the same goals as the other events and the SCCA as a whole. If not, for strictly business reasons, it may be better to go our separate ways.
The requirements the FIA puts on rallies are very resource intensive. Complying with them takes money, people and time. All three of these things are in short supply with all rallies in the United States. I think we have to build a strong ProRally series first and worry about the WRC later. In my opinion, we can?t spend time and money on FIA organizational requirements right now and I sure as heck do not want to give my money to a rally so they can spend it on appeasing the FIA.
When I give sponsorship money to a rally I become a customer of that rally. As I customer of a rally I would hate to see the rally designed to benefit another organization that is not even paying for it. How much money has the FIA directed to fund the sport of rally in the US? I know I have spent a bunch and Subaru and Mitsubishi have spent a lot more than me.
This isn?t a bad thing. It isn?t a personal or negative attack. It?s business. All organizers are free to pursue whatever goals they want and I am free to financially support the rallies that best meet my needs. No problem.
In case it isn?t clear yet, I?m a SCCA guy. I don?t have the money to be in two places at once. In 2004 we will not run any rallies that are not SCCA sanctioned and/or part of the SCCA ProRally championship. That is where I think the sport of rally should go and that?s where I am putting our money. I am sure many will disagree with me and they are free to support the rally of their choice.
Again, I hope Wild West and the SCCA can come to some sort of agreement to keep them on the calendar. I think John and Steve will have to have a long phone conversation and bury the hatchet. Will it happen? I don?t know. Will the goals of the two organizations be so divergent that they can?t work together? Quite possibly.
Greg
secondhand; I can only say that from what I've observed and know of the parties involved, this was a long time coming, and no surprise either way. 
