Bob Barnard Track Engineering

Monetise, what an interesting word. George Lopez followed up on Martin Whitmarsh's comment the other week about F1 doing a better job to promote itself. Speaking to Autosport Lopez said, "Formula 1 does need to promote itself better as it is a global sport," Lopez told AUTOSPORT. "It probably also needs to monetise better, which is a different thing. Promoting means putting money into something and hoping you get known, monetising means making money."

So, what he wants is more money, not necessarily more fans. He goes on to talk about exploiting the Internet, "Lopez believes there are many other avenues on the Internet that can be pursued that would raise good finance for the sport.

"There is all the historic video content for example - and people would pay," he said. "I would, for example, love to really look at the Ayrton Senna/Alain Prost Suzuka accident, and I would pay to have monthly access to any race I wanted to watch." Well he may pay, but what he is really saying is that we can make money from existing fans by charging them to watch the good old days. Aren't existing fans getting soaked enough by high track entry fees? And didn't Bernie try to get us to pay for HD? That failed badly, one of Bernie's only missteps.

He has lots of other good ideas such as on-course betting. Again, getting money from those already at the race. His idea for new fans? Letting his drivers walk to the paddock without minders.

But maybe George has it correct. We had the Goodwood Revival race meeting over the weekend, a sell out, watching the old stars, both the cars and the drivers, so perhaps watching old races will pay? Perhaps returning racing to these good old days might also increase the audience.

Martin Whitmarsh had another interesting pronouncement the other day on Team Orders from a different perspective. He made the point that motor racing is dangerous, potentially lethal, and no driver should be asked to take that risk just to support his team mate. Good point.

The discussion continues on LinkedIn on spectator decline. A post today from David Harris, who presumably works for SPEED, tells us that viewing figures have grown from 20m when it was Speedvision in 1996, to 80m as SPEED today. Considering most people could not get Speedvision in 1996 I am not surprised. The problem is, are the 80m race fans or motoring soap opera watchers? Pinks, Dangerous Roads, etc. etc. to me do not constitute race fans. As I said yesterday there were great races going on all over the world that we did not see. Now, I do not blame Fox for chasing audience numbers of whatever sort, that is their business, to make money, but there is more to racing than endless NASCAR and "reality" shows.

That is George Lopez's business too, he runs a venture capital group like CVC, who own F1 and are in it for the money. That is great so long as that is not your only objective, all businesses have to make money to survive, but I doubt if you ask Sir Frank Williams, Patrick Head, Peter Sauber, and yes, that epitome of corporate correctness, Ron Dennis, what matters most, they will say the racing. Enzo Ferrari only built road cars to make it possible to go motor racing, not the other way round. Perhaps we have reached the root of the problem? Today's racing is run by "the suits," the grey men who only see the balance sheet, not the timesheet. They have forgotten what made the sport worth investing in in the first place, and will ruin it all.

Finally a mention for someone who does get it and lives it. Garry Dickinson returned to the track that nearly killed him two years ago and rode a couple of laps, virtually his first time back on a bike. Well done Garry, that takes real guts, not some fabricated made for TV BS. Where were SPEED when you did that?

Here we are on Sunday, and I do not know if it is just me, but there is not much getting my juices flowing. Congratulations to Casey Stoner for his win at Aragon, and just maybe Valentino has made a brilliantly timed move to Ducati. He is talking about missing the last two races to get his shoulder operated on, sounds like a very smart move to me.

I mentioned the discussion on LinkedIn the other day about the loss of TV audience for NASCAR. I commented, but I am having my doubts as to the value of such discussions. I am amazed at the lack of knowledge or analysis that people in these groups have about the sport that they profess to follow. It is as if they just watch the races and believe everything they hear from either commentators or promoters without question. I am seriously considering stopping my involvement, but then they will all talk to each other and promote more disinformation.

So, back to the racing. IRL went to Motegi because Honda supplies the engines, I doubt the number of spectators made the trip worthwhile. I watched a little of the race towards the end, but cannot get excited by it. Have I been spoilt or just getting jaded and old? DTM, WTCC, FRenault3.5, BTCC, FIAGT, and Superleague all raced, but we do not see any of it here despite having a dedicated race channel, sorry NASCAR channel, so it is hard to follow these and comment. The Fords have been winning in BTCC, but stirring up controversy over their engine package. Sounds like good racing, but it is going the way of most series with spec body shells by Toyota and engines by the series. Formula Ford or Formula Vee have been delivering close racing for probably over twenty years, but who watches?  Nice to see Donnington back in action though.

There are signs that the honeymoon for the new CEO of the IRL, Randy Bernard, is over. It seems the team owners are not happy about the new car for 2012, and I admit to being wrong when I said that teams like Penske and Ganassi would dominate because they had the money to design and build the aero for the bodywork. Penske has come out and said he will not be producing his own aero kit as he would have to commit to selling it to any of the other teams who want it, so we are back to a spec car again because they will buy the best package from whoever comes up with it. That whole idea sounded goofy to me when it was announced.  The Indy boss also wants to go back to Milwaukee because they have a tremendous fan base there. That is why the last couple of promoters at the track went broke.

On LinkedIn yesterday a discussion started in the Motorsport Professionals Group as the result of an article in the Sports Business Journal quoting David Hill of Fox and the drop off in viewing figures. To quote the discussion, "Fox Sports chairman David Hill recently told the Sports Business Journal that “the biggest problem facing NASCAR is that young males have left the sport.” Fox reports that ratings among men 18-34 have declined 29%. This isn't just NASCAR's problem, folks, this is racing's problem. If new life isn't injected into the sport in terms of technology and overall interest - and soon - before you know it there will be nothing left but vintage racing all across the country."

Just as an aside, David was the Producer for the telecast of my first F1 event in Adelaide in 1985, he has gone far since then.

Anyway, this seems to have struck a chord with a lot of the Group and there are several comments. Regular readers to my blog will know I posed the question, "Is motorsport in danger of becoming a non-spectator sport?' a few weeks ago, and commented that NASCAR were removing seats so obviously did not expect the audience levels to return.

It's interesting that the comment above talks about injecting new technology. Is that in the way that people interact with racing, or in the cars and motorcycles? One of the Group said that technology was killing the interest, but how can that be when just about every category is "dumbing down" the technology in the interest of cost savings? NASCAR still runs carburetors and five nut wheels and COT that is virtually a spec car, IRL is a spec car, as is basically Grand Am, Moto2 and soon 3 in motorcycle GP's, ALMS has two spec classes to make up the numbers, and even F1, that pinnacle of technology has control tires, common ECU, engine rules that are virtually spec, and moves for more common components. This spec racing is not reducing "costs" because it is costing racing spectators and viewers.

Then there are those that say that the marketers are getting it all wrong. So did they have it right when NASCAR went through it's growth spurt? I doubt it, it probably had more to do with Dale Earnhardt, a larger than life character. Where are they now? Only Tony Stewart even comes close and they slap him down every time he shows a spark of life. NASCAR went through a fad, and thought it would last forever and alienated it's fan base to chase the yuppie. It went to new markets. Did you read the piece here a couple of days ago from ESPN F1 about F1 chasing new markets like Korea?

So then there are the sponsors, who are pushing the sports towards these new markets and younger generations. Have they asked anyone if that is what the people watching now want? The sponsors came in because the sport was successful, and then they want to change what made it successful, and are then annoyed that the audience drops. I wrote the other week about Martin Whitmarsh suggesting F1 needs to market itself better and commenting that there is a problem marketing a product that is not good. Red Bull is probably one of the great marketing stories of the decade, and I watch their cars and motorcycles all the time, and did try it once. Hated it and have never bought one since. You cannot make people like something.

That is probably the nub of the problem. We have a generation growing up that does not want to watch what we are offering. No amount of marketing or packaging is going to change that. Some sociologists can probably tell us why they think this is. Maybe they are all brainwashed about global warming and racing wasting resources. Would they all watch if we raced electric cars? Maybe they cannot watch two hour races, but GT have tried shorter races and I do not think more people watched them. Maybe because they can all race every track and every car on their X-Box in their lounge room or on their phone they do not need to go to the race or watch on TV. Then again, as they get older will they "find" racing and become a fan? I do not profess to know the answer. But if we change racing to suit them, do we lose the audience we have now?

I do know that most tracks being built are non-spectator tracks for people to drive their own cars fast. This has to tell us something about the future? We may not like it, but we are not going to change it by "better marketing." Perhaps we have to adapt to a new world, or go the way of the dinosaur?

There a few small words that have large connotations. Integrity, truth, honor, respect, reputation, character, honesty and ethics. I have been well off and poor, famous and infamous, employed and unemployed, but one thing that I always was was respected. Through a lot of trials and difficult situations I have maintained my integrity, preserved my reputation and kept the respect of others. It is worth more than any amount, in fact at one event that was seemingly in trouble and the main sponsor was all over me, I told him "this is only about your money, to me it is my reputation, which is worth much more." He was not pleased with that answer, but it was the truth, his best guarantee that it would succeed was my reputation, and it did. Actually he went bankrupt before the event, so that put things into perspective.

What has this to do with motorsport you ask? Everything. All industries are small worlds of their own, but motorsport is smaller than most, and word travels fast. We all know that this business is like a drug, and unfortunately there are people who will do anything to compete or work in it. I had an e-mail earlier this week asking about an individual and was it OK to do business with that person? In the end your reputation is all you have, guard it well, do not be tempted to risk it for a short term gain.  Do any of us want a reputation like a certain German driver?

It is a sign of what is not happening in the motorsport world that most of the news is about the German Round of the World Rally Championship! Rumors continue to abound that Kimi is coming back, but where is there a seat that he would want? Yamamoto, Mr. "My Wallet is Bigger Than Chandook's," is driving again for HRT in Spa. Timo Glock looks in danger of losing his seat to an Argentine Government sponsored driver at Virgin, so Sir Richard's pockets are not as deep as we think., or his arms are short this week.

Force India's legal squabble with Italian wind tunnel Aerolab continues with both sides getting nasty. Talk of impounding cars and equipment when they get to Monza. I have respect for what they have achieved, but you have to wonder about the rumors of financial problems, staff leaving and now this ongoing fight.

After watching as much as I could take of the ALMS offering of the race from Mid Ohio yesterday, which was not much, I asked my mates Tony Dowe and Tom Kjos their view, just to make sure I was not over-reacting. Most of you were saved this latest idea from the brains trust. It looked and sounded like a movie, aimed at the complete idiot who knew nothing about the sport, and mimicked a NASCAR offering featuring the team radio traffic. As Tony said "They are trying to attract the “casual” viewer that has little or no knowledge of what racing is about for the lowest possible cost, they will kill it!"

Following my comments in yesterday's blog about Dorna and Moto3 I had to ask is motorsport dying as a spectator sport? Tony in his usual fashion was blunt. "Yes, thanks to the suits and accountants who think they know what the public wants." It seems they most care about what their bottom line wants, what the TV wants, what the manufacturers want, and least of all about what we want to watch.  With even NASCAR struggling to fill the stands you have to ask where is this going? OK, some will say it is the economy, but can they tell me that soccer and football attendances are down? What about the TV figures, it does not cost most folks to sit at home and watch.

Is motorsport turning into a "hobby" for enthusiasts? For years the joke has been that to make a small fortune in motor racing start with a big one, but it is true for almost everyone except a fortunate few, and very few, who make money at this, so yes it is a hobby. That would account for the rise in country club tracks to cater for this growing number that want to drive fast and not go racing, at non-spectator tracks. For most series you may as well say they are non-spectator events now, look at Grand Am.

FOTA has just staged a fan town hall meeting so at least they recognize the need to address what the fan wants, but their hands are tied for most of the changes that we want by the "powers that be."

There seems to be general agreement that the Czech MotoGP was a pretty boring event. So what went wrong? Motorcycle GP's used to be the most exciting form of racing. We know what went wrong. The manufacturers wanted four strokes, Dorna wanted to make it "cheaper" and no one invested in young talent, so now when the Doctor retires it is basically done. Oh Yes, Valentino and Yamaha et al confirmed what we all knew, he is going to Ducati. That will spice things up for a season, maybe, but what then.

In other news Mr. Schumacher is blaming the car for all his woes, I guess it steered itself into Barrichello? Bahrain is to revert to the original track layout for next years GP, it seems you can have too many corners after all. Korea has delayed the obligatory race meeting prior to the F1 GP, so they are cutting this fine, although with a street race like Adelaide we had no "dress rehearsal." Jean-Eric Vergne clinched the British F3 title with a win in the third race at Silverstone, so presumably is free to go off and try his hand at something faster.

Saw TV footage of the desert race that claimed the lives of eight spectators. To say it was totally out of control would be complimentary. It looked like a cross between Spring Break on Daytona Beach and the Portuguese round of the World Rally Championship. People right next to the course  and on it, not that the "course" was defined in any way. How do the organizers, and I use the term loosely, live with themselves?