RatsMC wrote:Guys...stupidly long.
Zaphod wrote: Wow ! bet you're really good at diplomacy !
so you can cite two out of how many world wide that missed the chance to show their talent through lack of a recognisable path to the top ?..........or funds.
Never mind that Stoners parents laid everything on the line to give him a shot........not sure what Arthur or Jacks parents had to sacrifice, but I bet it wasn't light.....
Lets continue down this path and have riders have to front with wads of moolah to secure their ride, like Bradl.............and in the vein of F1.
The days of packing up your bags (for an Aussie) and heading over, working a shit job while you try to pick up a ride are long gone. The last person ( from Aus at least) to do that was Gardner. Now it costs hundreds of thousands.
Kudos to Wayne for putting it all on the line, like Stoners parents, to give his kid a shot.
When interviewed on TV, his estimated running costs bike and equipment, hotels, food fuel etc, etc, etc) for the season were $500 000 plus.
Meanwhile, motorcycle (in particular, sportsbikes) markets and intrest in this sport ( other than Spain and Italy)continue to dwindle, and general public intrest in the sport continues to wane due to poor tactics employed to generate said interest.
The numbers in attendance for the P.I GP is the equivelant of the crowd numbers for one or two AFL games........and if Stoner wasn't racing ?
Your answer is to get better accountants to show a better return for sponsorship signage in an ever more irrelevant (to the general public) sport.
You then propose to skim a couple of bucks off that revenue and give some poor kid a one off ride at his home GP on a second rate piece of machinery in the hope that his 28th place may inspire a team to pick him up.
Well done !....can see how the sport, industry and all involved will thrive and prosper on that.
Spoken like true middle-management/acountant material.
It's not about Dorna throwing money at the problem.......it's about someone setting rules in place that create a clear pathway to the elite class, and manufacturers producing a machine that is reasonable enough cost wise to encourage participation.
Have a look at the AMA and ASBK..........that's what happens when interest in the sport is lost, and when manufacturers fail to participate at the level they should to generate the sales they so desperately need.......to be able to participate.
Hansd wrote:phoenix1 wrote: Honda and Yamaha will burn cubic dollars to develop their own
If they have the money to develop pneumatic valves, why would developing a desmo system pose a big(ger) problem?
TwoStroke Institute wrote:Wayne Gardner never packed his bags and headed off to Europe. Wayne is just another rider in a long line of Antipodeans who made a mark in Europe. Wayne's talent showed when he first hit Oran PK on a YZ125, then on the TZ250 that Ron Sumskis bought him, Tony Hatton recommended Wayne to Moriwaki-san and duly won the Suzuka 8Hour. Wayne rode with Moriwaki when he first went to the UK.
TwoStroke Institute wrote:16GPs and million Euros to lease a Aprilia is about $90kAUD hardly going to make round or series sponsors recoil.
TwoStroke Institute wrote: MA/Honda Australia paid for a spare NSR250 for Darryl Beattie to ride in the 89GP, Darryl finished 12th . Suzuki Australia paid the Molenar team for a spare RGV 250 that Troy Bayliss rode to 4th in the early 90's. Both those results were good enough to ignite their respective international careers.Money well spent.
You seem to be implying that MotoGP has nothing to do with manufacturers making money ?? Where does this magic money come from ? I would like some myself !!TwoStroke Institute wrote:AMA and ASBK is a separate story and heir failings have nothing to do with MOtoGP state of play.
tom wrote:Phoenix in my suggested series the factory's are not allowed to race, only to supply bikes and parts. I want it to be a prototype series I'm just trying to remove the manufacturers big budgets from the equation.
phoenix1 wrote:tom wrote:Phoenix in my suggested series the factory's are not allowed to race, only to supply bikes and parts. I want it to be a prototype series I'm just trying to remove the manufacturers big budgets from the equation.
Right. Forgot they wouldn't be on the track. Still the same situation, though. No mods -- the manufacturers are happy supplying, all IRTA are competitive but bored. Extensive modification -- IRTA are not bored, but some IRTA teams become dominant and other IRTA teams backmark in anguish (similar to now)...
mmmexico wrote:First of all I have no interest in addressing the question, because it doesn't need "saving". Even in these dire economic times, races are being run, the grids are filling up, there is worldwide television coverage, and there are websites all over the internet devoted to this tiny part of the larger motorsport "industry". I can offer some suggestions about how all of this would be vastly more entertaining to me, and that is my primary interest.
First, I would separate (much more distinctly) the rider's championship from the manufacturer's championship. On this board, and at the racetrack there are two kinds of enthusiasts. Obviously there are fans of specific riders, and there are the fans of the machinery. As things are presently organized, both are a little frustrated. Machinery is being slowly but surely simplified to keep costs just south of a space shuttle. Fans of the riders are left with the uneasy feeling that the rider's championship is decided largely by who the factories hire, instead of who has the greatest skill, bravery, etc....
Last year I watched a couple of Moto 2 races. They were spectacular. Very close racing, essentially identical bikes, identical electronics, etc...It made for great races, and at the end of the race I had a clear belief that the best rider had won the event. This is how the rider's championship should be decided, and this should be the premier event at every Moto GP meeting. The very best riders on essentially identical bikes. I don't really care about the mechanical formula for the bikes, but they should be fast enough to provide a significant challenge....something probably bigger than Moto 2, but along the same formula, i.e. identical motors, electronics, tires, etc...I would leave the details to the guys that created Moto 2. Who wouldn't like to see Rossi on a bike identical to Stoner? You can fill in your preferred combinations.
And don't start complaining about the problem with contracts, or these these precious athletes couldn't possibly run two races on a single weekend. They can run two races, motorcycle racers from the beginning of the sport ran two, three or four races in a weekend, and they did it most weekends of the year. Keep in mind this is what I want, I'm really not in a position to impose this plan on the motorcycle world.
The manufacturer's championship is up to them. Let them do whatever they want. Hire whoever they want, impose whatever technical specifications they want. Spend as much money as they want. I don't think that anyone will care. The rider's championship will be the main event.
cmb wrote:All bikes need to be CRT or all bikes need to be factory no mix of bikes. Motogp is a total waste of sponsor money if you are not a repsol or other big factory sponsor. I just don't see how you would want to race for a team that has no chance at all. When you race you race to win and there is motogp problem there are only 4 bikes capable of winning and the rest are fillers. Motogp just became WWE wrestling it's a show no longer a race.
yzr750 wrote:I think they should allow thesehttp://www.suterracing.ch/en/suter500.html.
I wonder how much they cost?
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests