Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Big Al

BSPA Ltd.

Recommended Posts

Reasons, implications, ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rider control? If all assets have been transferred to the company. Meaningful shareholder meetings to push rules through, share sales if an interested party comes along wanting to buy the sport, collective bargaining power for purchasing shale or riders time, spread of profit/loss. I think this could be the most positive step in years for the sport

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMAZING that this wasn't done before. Provides protection (limited liability) for promoters who could otherwise have been in danger of having to contribute financial support to the Association in the case of debts, etc. No doubt the Gerhard fiasco sharpened some minds!

Many other potential benefits, too, but ultimately will not bring additional people through the gates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PHILIPRISING said:

AMAZING that this wasn't done before. Provides protection (limited liability) for promoters who could otherwise have been in danger of having to contribute financial support to the Association in the case of debts, etc. No doubt the Gerhard fiasco sharpened some minds!

Many other potential benefits, too, but ultimately will not bring additional people through the gates.

You've hit the nail on the head Phil. Crowds might improve slightly at tracks that have moved up, but they will fall at those that have dropped down. The sport desperately needs new blood coming through the turnstiles, but non of the decisions made will help rectify this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, cityrebel said:

You've hit the nail on the head Phil. Crowds might improve slightly at tracks that have moved up, but they will fall at those that have dropped down. The sport desperately needs new blood coming through the turnstiles, but non of the decisions made will help rectify this.

Absolutely not in the short term... But it opens up the possibility to do so in the longer term, the way things were, as has been proved over the decline of the last 50 years or so, big ideas were almost impossible to implement

Edited by iainb
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, PHILIPRISING said:

AMAZING that this wasn't done before. Provides protection (limited liability) for promoters who could otherwise have been in danger of having to contribute financial support to the Association in the case of debts, etc. No doubt the Gerhard fiasco sharpened some minds!

Would have thought there was always the risk of a rider taking the BSPA to court over the asset system, winning the case, and then getting damages that the promoters (or at least those on the Management Committee) would be collectively liable for.

Maybe it wasn't done before because of the need to publish accounts which would open the promoters to financial scrutiny. The law has been changed in recent years though, to increase the amount of turnover before you have to publish full accounts, and I doubt 6.5 million per year is going through their books. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, iainb said:

Absolutely not in the short term... But it opens up the possibility to do so in the longer term, the way things were, as has been proved over the decline of the last 50 years or so, big ideas were almost impossible to implement

Rider allocation, centrally-contracted riders, wage control, standardised equipment and procurement thereof are all possibilities. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

Rider allocation, centrally-contracted riders, wage control, standardised equipment and procurement thereof are all possibilities. 

Possibilities that should be embraced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are reading into it too much. My theory is that with so many clubs up for sale the BSPA want to give themselves the protection of working within the structure of a limited liability company. I can't see any benefits in what people have described above such as collective bargaining or pooling of profit/loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

Rider allocation, centrally-contracted riders, wage control, standardised equipment and procurement thereof are all possibilities. 

None of which will attract new fans - unless clubs reduce prices and effectively promote their product to their required audiences within their respective catchment areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Skidder1 said:

None of which will attract new fans - unless clubs reduce prices and effectively promote their product to their required audiences within their respective catchment areas.

That wasn't really my point.

Things like the points limit, lack of control over wages, and an engine tuning arms race have forced up costs beyond what is sustainable.

Of course you have to get fans through the door as well, but can't reduce prices until you reduce costs. And even if you do get more fans through the door, teams will just spend any extra money on trying to lure riders unless there are controls on this, which doesn't get you any further forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So sounds like it's a defensive move first and foremost, but could bring benefits in terms of potential costs saving. After Scott Nicholls won his case, it may have acted as a wake-up call?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

That wasn't really my point.

Things like the points limit, lack of control over wages, and an engine tuning arms race have forced up costs beyond what is sustainable.

Of course you have to get fans through the door as well, but can't reduce prices until you reduce costs. And even if you do get more fans through the door, teams will just spend any extra money on trying to lure riders unless there are controls on this, which doesn't get you any further forward.

Which costs need reducing to achieve lower admission costs? 

For me it's just rider's wages the clubs can really look at. The cost to the rider's is irrelevant for lowering admission costs. Lower a rider's wage they have a choice to make, keep up the expense out of their own pocket or find a new supply chain / engine tuner at lower costs.

No way should British Speedway clubs and rider's be lining the pockets of engine tuners.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy