In Years To Come

[Richspeedway 327]

So how does everyone think the speedway would go in Britain in years to come. More teams? less teams? more coverage in the media, or just the same? I would like to think that few more teams start up and also more countries start get involved as lower countries like Croatia, Ukraine etc start to bring up more talented riders.

[AndyM 1]

Two scenarios:

 

1) Costs spiral without a commensurate rise in sponsorship or agreement among the promoters about cost-cutting measures as Sky terminate their contract. Top riders gradually filter out of the UK, crowds dwindle as the price of admission rises and clubs close until we're left with one top league of about 10-15 clubs with continuous infighting among the remaining promoters. League speedway dies a death after 100 glorious years.

 

2) A new chief executive buzzing with energy and ideas is appointed by the BSPA. Consensus is found on a new constitution for UK league speedway, with a single, stable set of rules, platform for teambuilding and cheaper specification for engines and frames. Promoters agree a dynamic new marketing strategy and start improving the entertainment at tracks. Sky are impressed and increase coverage. Top line sponsors start pouring money, helping to fund an expansion of the Academy. Talented young motorcyclists flood into speedway and young Brits are guaranteed reserve places. UK wins 6 world titles in a row, crowds return to 1960s levels, and speedway returns to its rightful place as the no 2 UK spectator sport.

 

OK, would you put your money on either of these? If you fancy the second, who has the leadership ability to drag the sport and its promoters, kicking and screaming, into the 21st Century?

[Subedei 0]

We have to learn from the Poles.

[AndyM 1]

I know you say this at every opportunity, Subedei, but I've yet to see any evidence that Poland has got its house in order. They have a few innovations that have worked well, and by gum they've certainly succeeded in farming out their young riders to gain experience everywhere else, but have they met the two common measures of success: a healthy profit and World Champions? Neither, yet!

[Subedei 0]

a healthy profit and World Champions? Neither, yet!

 

Missed Poland walking away with the SWC then? And surely that's the true measure of success. To win the team world championship. After all, you only need to find 1 exceptional rider to win the GP series.

[iris123 21,102]

We have to learn from the Poles.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

O.k,but in what sense? As Andy said and you know yourself Polish speedway isn't healthy financially,they have had to draft in foreign teams to make up the numbers in Div.2.Not really something British speedway could or needs to do.Will that have positive or negative long term effects?Also the display in the WTC was awesome,but it was at home.Team Gb looked good at home,its away that proves strength in depth.And lets be honest i'm sure they would swap all their Team titles for a GP series winner.

[Subedei 0]

O.k,but in what sense?

 

In the sense of helping and not hindering the progress of young British riders. A young Polish rider can race at Nos 6 and 7 in his team until he is 21. That's a huge advantage.

[AndyM 1]

This is in any case a diversion. Learning what has been done elsewhere may be helpful, but what is needed here is an effective review of the unique position of UK league speedway, its goals for the next 10-15 years and to develop solutions that might help achieve them. In another thread, I proposed a list of strategic objectives centred on revolutionising the governance of the sport, lowering costs, increasing revenues, attracting long-term improvement in attendances, attracting more clubs and, yes, encouraging young riders to succeed.

 

Blindly copying anybody else is a sure guarantee of making all their mistakes, and I say this with my professional management consultant's hat on - I see companies following whatever happens to be the current trend all the time, regardless of whether it's effective or relevant for their company.

Edited September 6, 2005 by AndyM

[Subedei 0]

Blindly copying anybody else is a sure guarantee of making all their mistakes, and I say this with my professional management consultant's hat on - I see companies following whatever happens to be the current trend all the time, regardless of whether it's effective or relevant for their company.

 

But I didn't say copy, I said learn.

Governance is clearly the primary concern and the sport in this country just seems to drift.

Are we too "hung up" on averages? Do we punish success and reward failure through rider control measures? Do we encourage a "merry-go-round" of riders via restrictions on club strengths?

[iris123 21,102]

In the sense of helping and not hindering the progress of young British riders. A young Polish rider can race at Nos 6 and 7 in his team until he is 21. That's a huge advantage.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Excactly,a huge advantage to the team that has good U21 rider(s).Those that don't suffer badly.See it here in Germany,where a U21 must be given at least 2 rides.

[Deano 1,318]

Sorry a doom and gloom post

 

Unfortunately, whatever plan is put in place, speedway won't grow while we are losing stadia to the property developer. I'm sure even if promotions owned there own stadiums, who would miss out on the huge payout if Barretts open their cheque book.

[AndyM 1]

Yes, Deano, looking at my two scenarios at the top of the post, that was a key component of the worst case in no (1). It's a very real threat and the promoters must plan contingencies for our stadia dropping like dominos. This is why advanced planning is critical.

But I didn't say copy, I said learn.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OK, fair comment - I was a bit harsh on your suggestion, Subedei, and you are of course quite right about the need to learn. My reply was really aimed at people who don't like what the promoters come up with but are quick with knee-jerk solutions of their own.

Edited September 6, 2005 by AndyM

[Mylor 0]

Two scenarios:

 

1) Costs spiral without a commensurate rise in sponsorship or agreement among the promoters about cost-cutting measures as Sky terminate their contract.  Top riders gradually filter out of the UK,...........

Andy, this seems to say that the top riders have creamed off the Sky money, which I can quite believe as we see little else to show where the Sky money goes.

 

So who will be brave enough to sign top riders at current rates if/when Sky do pull out and pass the full cost directly to the supporters? Not many methinks.

 

That leaves us with the third and most likely scenario:

Following a year or two of top riders taking the pain we return to pre-Sky days. Promoters will shrug their shoulders and we'll all be wondering what might have been if we'd got our house in order.

 

You pays your money and the BSPA takes your choice!

[AndyM 1]

Not just the riders, to be fair. The costs of running speedway as a sport, particularly but not exclusively the machinery, have far outstripped any rise in gate revenues. Without the safety net of Sky TV money EL tracks would be struggling to employ top riders unless there were a drastic cut in the costs and/or the riders accepted lower rates. Since they are mostly contracted for one season only (or less than that in some cases), riders have no security and would inevitably choose to go where the most money is.

[Mylor 0]

The latest motor racng series seem to tackle the machinery problems by contracting single suppliers for chassis and engines.

 

GP2 cars are Dallara/Renaults and the new A1GP cars will be Lola/Zyteks. Presumably these were the best value suppliers.

 

Now Zytek will only be building 54 engines in the first year.

 

How many speedway riders are there in the world and how many engines & chassis do they buy each year? Surely there's a case for the sport as a whole awarding a contract to a single frame and engine supplier. A monopoly in exchange for a fixed low price.

 

I could have started a new thread but seeing as Andy brought up the subject of machinery costs............. I still might!

 

I don't know who would fly the technical committee for the FIM but how about inviting Ole Olsen, Tony R, Ivan Mauger, Barry Briggs to lay down specifications for a cheap but fast...ish bike then invite tenders? Implementation for say January 2008?