Your post again is very reasoned and identifies a couple of points that have been consistently raised in private pm's and conversations over the last few days and that of fixture planning. We are well aware that Sheffield suffers from this - some of it being self inflicted in that the Bank Holidays we moved to Belle Vue - and will remain there because they are very succesful. I do not believe I have made any secret in that when we took Sheffield back from the previous promotion, it was with the sole intent of gaining the Bank Holiday dates and moving them to Belle Vue and at the time closing Sheffield.
However, we since decided that, despite the additional operational costs and operational headaches associated with Sheffield, we would persevere with it. We concluded that whilst good business sense to concentrate on Belle Vue and vacate Sheffield, all our eggs would then be in one basket and if anything developed at Belle Vue the North would be without stock car racing.

It was our decision over the last few years to focus on Belle Vue and `tick' Sheffield over - the last 18 months we have turned our attentions to developing Sheffield, which has produced a gradual increase in audience and car numbers. There are odd exception such as Sunday which was a bad choice of date.
Finding Sunday dates is a massive problem particularly as there is so much congestions and Sunday is no longer a popular day to go stock car racing.
When we planned 2009, we accepted this may be a week date however the next two were solus weekend. Along then came Scunthorpe and to resolve the problem in an unselfless manner we accomodated the two dates prior to Sheffield - what we have done we did for the sport and could prejudice Sheffield - what should we have done - ojected to Scunthorpe ? We did not do that and hopefully fans will realise that - and drivers - and support both fixtures. Few if any other promoters would have been so accomodating or allowd their meetings to be prejudiced [ obviously right from a bsusiness perspective ]- and on paper Sheffield again takes a back seat to justify our faith in F1 fans and drivers.

Prior to Sunday's meeting, I have to say that I had already made a decision to give the forums a miss for a while. Simply becuase I was finding some of the crap being posted and the almost constant negativity was beginning to effect my enthusiasm for the sport. So much so, that I really had to motivate myself to leave home and make the 50 mile trip to South Yorkshire, when in all honesty, I could have spent the day with my family.

I'm glad I went, sure the racing wasn't the top draw, hard hitting, fence wrecking of the doubleheader but it was, as Steve said, a slickly run meeting with very, very little dust and I was back home to be able to bath my two little uns and put 'em to bed.

Today is the first time I've even looked at anything on the web to do with Stock Cars, although, it's only been this site. I'm really not surprised that Steve's being burnt at the stake for adding a quid to get in the pits. It seems that many of the forum moaners begrudge paying anything to watch a meeting and the tidal wave of whinging which has no doubt gripped the other sites, would have either come before any announcement or after the event. Regardless of the fact that, in my opinion, it was a little bit of an own goal not to have announced it prior to the meeting, I don't think it would have avoided the fallout simply brought it forward to before the meeting.

I, like others, found out 'on the day' and paid my £1 and went on the back straight for the racing. Interestingly, didn't Trackstar charge £2 for entry to the pits? I had a choice, I was not forced to pay an additional £1 to get into the meeting, just the pits. I could have turned on my heel and watched from another part of the stadium. I don't feel the need to moan endlessly about it, although next weekend is just around the corner and something new will come over the hill for the whingers to jump on.

Anecdotal evidence from those who I've met through the forums and who no longer post anything, suggests that the whinging, ill informed, half baked and pure malicious comments are alienating more and more decent fans who've previously posted but like me have become sick and tired of reading the same crap, week in week out. I''ve been trying to ween myself off the other sites for a while now because of this. Hence why I've started topics on here where at least the debate is reasoned and sensible (and we can all seem to get along with differing opinions).

However, I'm going 'cold turkey' as I rather foolishly found myself unable to resist the urge to comment on some topics, much to my own regret. Hey-ho, I can't blame anyone but myself for that.

Forums can and do help foster the relationship between fan and the sport. This is widely accepted in sports marketing. It was my reason for returning to the sport. Last week it nearly became my reason for turning my back on it again

On analysis, maybe this meeting was just a 'bridge too far' in terms of the number of meetings held during May for both F1 and F2 drivers, as well as the fans.

During May, I attended all Startrax events plus the opener for Scunny. Whilst I've a season ticket, I still had to shell out for diesel to attend all these meetings, plus the entrance fee at Scunny.

May can be hard on the average northern race fan (Buxton also ran during the month) in terms of expenditure. The same could be said of stock car drivers who also face the same congestion of fixtures. Just looking at the F1 calendar for May shows this as the busiest month with 11 dates. Something was bound to give and unfortunately, Sheffield being at the end of the month, was that something.

Maybe some consideration needs to be given to taking a couple of dates out of the F1/F2 calendar during May 2010 to ease this? I realise that's not going to be easy given the headache that is fixture planning but it may need to be seriously considered if 'quality not quantity' is the aim.

I think we have to take a long,hard look at 2010 based on experiences in 2009 - Sheffield [ or the date rather than venue ] was probably one too far in the present economy which, whether we care to accept it, is beginning to bite and will worsen before it improves and affects all walks of life and all sides of the fence in our activity.

There is a dividing line, less meetings can [ as history has proven ] but not always mean better quality - however when we have at various times in the past cut meetings back and ended clashing meetings, we have lost numbers of drivers. A lot of drivers rely on local events to maintain their interest.

Rather than cut the meetings perhaps the sport needs to look at ways of increasing the driver base. Less meetings and long periods locally between meetings means you increasingly rely on hard core fans and you do not offer enought locally to engage `local' potential fans or potential local drivers - neither becomes an immediate fan and commences travelling, they have to be nurtured.

F1 is an expensive sport and, a little like the controversial budget cap plans in Grand Prix F1 - should we be looking at the similar - de spec cars, make them cheaper - dare I say it, find a way of amalgamating V8's into F1 - that will creat opinion !

There have been several events in 2009 that have not clicked as far as fans or drivers are concerned and there is a pattern emerging - however, we should not be talking things into a decline, we need to remain up beat and allow the sport in parallel to the economy to work it through.
What we cannot afford is to allow any track to shut it's doors as they rarely return and a managaeable solution needs finding. Decompressing the season and trying to achieve one meeting per weekend would be much better - Don't want to write too much more as the next Stoxscene goes into this topic.

One thing is certain - attracting more drivers is the answer before cutting events - how to achieve that is the million dollar question. How many F2 drivers want to be F1 drivers - or inded many other oval disciplines but cannot afford the entry level - talking about 30-35k cars is great for drivers and talking up their assett but becomes an impediment to attracting new drivers.

And then, where would one suggest cuts be made ? The venues that have supported the sport through thick and thin, guest track venues - Scotland is very popular and many people treat it as a mini break away - however it does affect the sport the weekend before and weekend after particularly in the present climate - is that though justification when Scotland provides so much potential in return for the sport - you begin to understand the dilemma.

HI!

I stated many moons ago that I hoped F1s wouldn't price themselves out of the running...the current economic situation seems to be creating some problems even with the F2s.

It may be time (if the situation doesn't improve in the near future), to perhaps look at the Hotstox (V8s) with a view to bringing the F1s more in line with their regulations. It would be much cheaper to run, and although not as "heavy metal" would, I'm sure, gain in popularity when the momentum gets going.

We could even make it more like the NZ-style of racing (which seems to be very popular with the fans) with another format being team racing.

The bodywork could be more easily replaced and have the "retro" look for fun. Small block V8s or V6s (not just Rover) could be used to a capped budget. More "normal" tyres would be the order of the day.

There must be other competitive motors out there which could be used.

I think 30-35K for a STOCK CAR is ridiculous these days and well out of the pocket of many people who would otherwise "have a go".

Right I'll take cover now and await reponses!

GED

I would say the majority of F1's racing didn't cost 30 - 35 grand, most are second / third hand and engines are used by the same driver for years. Motorsport in any form is expensive and even if £30,000 is the norm, that's still at the budget end of motorsport, particularly for one of oval racing's lead formula. How much does a world champion's Hot Rod cost?
Whilst things like over £100 a tyre, diesel prices etc restrict drivers attendance, preparing a car for two meetings on one weekend or two cars for one weekend probably is equally restrictive.
No offence meant here Steve, but if Sheffield was the only meeting on a given weekend, would you get 50+ cars there? Or do some drivers have certain issues with certain tracks, promotions? Even so would one meeting a week I think wouldbe the right thing, as long as I'm not the promtion who loses fixtures.
Often thought would a second meeting on a weekend for white and yellow top drivers ( maybe blue ) only, albeit as a support formula, be the way to go?
Or there is the old, old issue of ( take a deep breath ) start money. I personally believe start money has no relevance now to when it was first introduced, it certainly dosn't cover expenses of attending, which I believe was it's original intention. Maybe use this money to expand / increase prize money, i.e pay down to 20th in final, grade awards, or even a consolation final for lower grade drivers.
The answer is probably with the drivers, but they seem to keep thier opinions to them selves.

Few tracks would attract 50 cars even on a solus weekend other than Coventry.

Have to disagree Tim, F1 Stock Cars is a hobby - and entertainment - as well as a form of `motorsport' - word used very carefully.

This Motorsport since we have gone that route doesn't thought enjoy the fruits of the pukka [ currently credit crunched] sexy motorsports in terms of sponsorship and generally participated by the well heeled, patronised by few paying spectators and pay to race.

BriSCA F1 is in middle ground - it very much is a working mans sport but has aspirations above that and is forcing drivers to actually spend too much - everyone wants to be on the pace - or have the latest technology.

From being a sport with 150 race events and 400 active drivers, the sport has rationalised, partially enforced - but if it wants to remain a mass spectator rather than specialist sport, it needs wider entertainemt - ie more thrills and spills - and most spectators would welcome it costing drivers less to race.

Tim you would not pick up a second hand F1 car of any worth much under 10k - but the problem is the new breed of driver don't want them which is why Kev Smith made so much exporting them to the fields in Holland.
Agreed a number of drivers are racing second/third hand cars - but year and year the numbers are diminishing as the sport in recent years has attracted a degree of different drivers who become aware of the higher value of cars, higher entry levels and presumably have that budget in some cases available to them - but is that a partial reason for the relative stagnation of driver numbers ?

Take Timmy Farrell, I very much hope we retain him in F1 - however he has bought a car that matched his available budget and a combination of distance / learning curve and a `solid' second hand car - plus initially a red roof - has handicapped him, hopefully things will turn around before disillusionment.

We need a lot more Steve Jacklins, Tim Warwicks, Russell Coopers who are the absolute backbone of the sport - but regrettably are also amongst the traditional breed of former drivers, working people with budgets to go `stock car racing' not necessarily motor racing - and to them the £40 is vital! We are between tiers at the moment.

In terms of having a new rolling chassis built I am reliably informed only this morning that a new roling chassis, painted etc from top car builders would be around 13k - give-or take what donor parts are supplied.

Big audiences want Action - customer reaction to last Saturday's Coventry proves that - since Cob was changed years ago in terms of size and fence it has a tendency to provide perfectly acceptable well attended quality events although perhaps criticised for benign racing. Saturday threw up an interesting track provided by the weather, more grip and hey presto - action. Sheffield May 4th everyone raved over the action, similarly KL, Belle Vue is a proper stock car track - however if sustainable stock car racing means bags of action rather than the spectacle of sheer horsepower and the skills of `Pot Black' are we expecting too much from our drivers because damage on today's F1's costs a lot of time - and money - so, should we not be looking at that as a basic but major criteria?
Action comes at a BIG price and is the main attraction of the sport - why the resurgence of Banger Racing ? What other expensive [relative] racing discipline purposely goes out to hit each other and has such a demanding audience that wants to see Action - contact racing carries a price ? Similar applies to F2, try the costs of rose joints etc.
Sustainability in the longer term will only come from knowing who you want to attract intot he sport, the type of racing that will attract paying spectators and - affordability for drivers to do the events and attract more- it is ALL about cost. Drivers and spectators make their choices on affordability at the time, never more prevalent than now in a `perfect economic storm' diesel £1.10 a litre etc,etc.

I personally am grateful to EVERY driver, EVERY discipline who makes the effort to support events because it has cost them a not inconsiderate fee.
There is a happy balance to maintain between gate revenues and driver expenses and we will not survive if we become like Speedway with most Elite League clubs losing North of 50k and a heavy reliance on sponsorship and SKy revenues which in most cases does not even balance the books.
One elite promoter told me in the last week that he had just written cheques for £29k which covered rider expenses for just two meetings!

With regard Speedweekends, fixture planning and comments made by, I think Nigel, and their spacing is difficult. KL was a one off and June and July re very hectic which is why we avoid running - however tracks that do have speedweekend will always presumably want them midsummer for more fabourable weather and they are established events. Nigel is right however that the costs demands on drivers and spectators is prohibitive, particularly in the current environment - again, solving it, another conundrum.

We are at a stage where the demands on the sport are probably too big to sustain the driver and spectator base and natural law probably - and sadly - will `weed' dates and stadiums out in the medium term, however equally the stadiums need revenue to continue and dropping dates never would be a favourable option - until it is too late! Somehow it comes back to growing the audience and driver base - and how to do it.
Tim mentions National Hot Rods, a sport that does now require a big budget to compete but no longer is a major `terrace' attraction - other than one or two dates, is a crowd pulling shadow of the 70's when it was the backbone of Spedeworth - now replaced by Bangers. However, for the promoters, the surviveability is the economics in driver remuneration is vastly different to F1. I would guess ou could run the famous Speedweekend at Ippy for 2 years [ perhaps more - and I am guessing] on the costs of one WF staging.
That said, suggestions of removing start/prize money in F1 would be alien to me and certainly rule out the more budget racers and would be the thin edge of the wedge - you could wipe it out today and save circa 3k - around 300 people - but in 2/3 years time if there is a further decline, what next - pay to race ? A much more creative solution needs to be sought remembering that what we have is already excellent and whatever we do or did in any direction would never escape the current economy.
I for one applaud the drivers for he commitment thus far - during last years escalating fuel costs we all waited with baited breath for big effects in attendances both sides of the fence - luckily for all it did not happen, this year is a little catch up and the future of the sport should be based on sustainability and not a knee jerk to the economy - we have to find a way of drawing together to remain healthy for the next 18 months, any changes of direction anyway would take 3/4 years to bear fruit so would not answer the immediate issues presented to the sport, one of weathering the storm.
2009 was planned on experiences of 2008 and 2010 will doubtless be planned on experiences of 2009 and an individual view on where you may expect things to be in 12 months time - even the Government cannot do that succesfully so will always be hot or miss for promoters!

We are not planning in any way excluding children from the pit area - what we are trying to do by degree is create an `awareness' of the dangers within the pit area so we can demonstrate that we have `controls' - The reason we brought the personell over we did from BV is their training and the first meeting was basically a fact finding/ learning curve so we can improve thereon.

I would never advocate cutting meetings, that simply leads to tracks closing and the sport contracting even more.

May just happens to be the most congested month of the season. As mentioned before, 11 dates for the wuns and god knows how many for the tooz?

Maybe, for next season, moving the Sheffield date to Monday night in August to attract the families at home during the school holidays (similar to the October half term meeting?)

Looking at F1, May has 11 dates, but June has only 6. Maybe a case of trying to spread the dates more evenly to alleviate some of the pressure on the wallets of fans and drivers?

As for tooz shale dates, it's a case of the chicken and the egg. Last season the complaint was too few shale dates for the tooz, however, this season has seen an increase thanks to Steve's efforts last season in getting dates at Cov, which are running Friday nights at least once a month now.

We have a small hardcore of shale tooz drivers, in order to increase this driver base needs more shale dates throughout the season, I suppose though, this means a heavier burden on this hardcore group, but maybe in the long term, more dates and some stability in those dates will see this driver pool increase to ensure more consistant numbers of drivers over the coming seasons.