Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The sanctions do not flip the tracks.
VintageBMX.com > BMX NOW > BMX Racing
Pages: 1, 2
HRPdesigns
After these last few days and the drama flowing around tracks flipping sanctions, I would like to remind people that the sanctions are not the ones flipping tracks, the people of that track are the ones that change sanctions, open or close tracks, run races, etc…

When a track changes it is more than likely because they felt that the current conditions at their track were not the best for their program and they wanted to see what options were there for them. If they believe it is in the best interest of their track to move to the other side that is what they will do if they can. The ABA nor the NBL comes in and takes over a track, there are no corporate raids at a track. The sanctions do not come in and buy up all the stock and just take over.

The NBL nor the ABA actually run a single track in this country. Gary Aragon nor BA Anderson are out at one single track every time it opens and neither are listed as a TO, to the best of my knowledge. The sanctions provide structure and a system under which the locals, involved with any track, can run races and grow their local program. It is completely up to the people in charge of the operation of said track that make the decision to run under whatever system they want.

Examples, Nashville just changed for whatever reason, but John David did not come in and strongarm them into this, more than likely he came in, at their request, and told them what the ABA could or would be able to do for the Music City folks and they decided to go that way. They knew what the NBL had to offer as they were an NBL track and they felt the ABA better suited their needs. Las Cruses, NM was the same way a few years back, they joined the NBL after having been an ABA track. For whatever reasons they decided the NBL was a better fit for their program, thus they are NBL. I do not think Bob Tedesco or Ken Master (do not know who was running the show then) went to Las Cruses and demanded they turn NBL or else. It just does not work that way.

I think I have read that Prundale has voted at least twice in the last year about what direction and sanction they wanted to run under and both times they have chosen to stay with what they are, NBL. McDonough voted and stayed where they are, NBL. ( I would have used a ABA track example, but I do not know any, but I am sure they are there). Will everyone who attends a track be happy or satisfied with the directions, usually no? By the very nature that a track is voting on the issue, usually there are some who do not like the system that said track currently runs, but you will never please everyone, you just hope to do what the majority feel is best for the track and local program.

As far as a sanction calling up the other sanctions tracks, who cares, if that track is happy with what they have, then they can politely tell them, “No thanks we are happy with what we have”. I get calls at my real job on a weekly basis asking me to switch suppliers and vendors, and most of the time I tell them no thanks, but on occasion I listen to what they have to say, especially if my current supplier is lacking a little, and I base the decision on what is best for my company.

There is no reason to hate a sanction because it offers an opportunity to a track and that track takes it. If they do not deliver on said offer then by all means hate the sanction, but remember it is the people at the track who make that decision to be either NBL, ABA, NPSA, USBL, etc….

For those saying “I just wish the sanction would come in and build a new track if they want in an area”. Well who is going to run it? Sanctions do not just randomly build tracks and cross their fingers hoping someone will drive by and volunteer to run the thing. There has to be local people willing to run the track.

If you do not like a sanction for some reason, then do not race it. If that sanction happens to become your local tracks affiliation, then you as a rider have a choice to either take a chance and support it, or don’t, tracks are there for us, as riders, to use and enjoy, no one makes us race them.

Anyway it is just something to consider when you read about a track changing or even voting to change or stay, it is not sanctions making tracks join their programs or affiliation, as some seem to think.
floridabmxican
QUOTE (HRPdesigns @ Oct 3 2010, 07:14 PM) *
After these last few days and the drama flowing around tracks flipping sanctions, I would like to remind people that the sanctions are not the ones flipping tracks, the people of that track are the ones that change sanctions, open or close tracks, run races, etc…

When a track changes it is more than likely because they felt that the current conditions at their track were not the best for their program and they wanted to see what options were there for them. If they believe it is in the best interest of their track to move to the other side that is what they will do if they can. The ABA nor the NBL comes in and takes over a track, there are no corporate raids at a track. The sanctions do not come in and buy up all the stock and just take over.

The NBL nor the ABA actually run a single track in this country. Gary Aragon nor BA Anderson are out at one single track every time it opens and neither are listed as a TO, to the best of my knowledge. The sanctions provide structure and a system under which the locals, involved with any track, can run races and grow their local program. It is completely up to the people in charge of the operation of said track that make the decision to run under whatever system they want.

Examples, Nashville just changed for whatever reason, but John David did not come in and strongarm them into this, more than likely he came in, at their request, and told them what the ABA could or would be able to do for the Music City folks and they decided to go that way. They knew what the NBL had to offer as they were an NBL track and they felt the ABA better suited their needs. Las Cruses, NM was the same way a few years back, they joined the NBL after having been an ABA track. For whatever reasons they decided the NBL was a better fit for their program, thus they are NBL. I do not think Bob Tedesco or Ken Master (do not know who was running the show then) went to Las Cruses and demanded they turn NBL or else. It just does not work that way.

I think I have read that Prundale has voted at least twice in the last year about what direction and sanction they wanted to run under and both times they have chosen to stay with what they are, NBL. McDonough voted and stayed where they are, NBL. ( I would have used a ABA track example, but I do not know any, but I am sure they are there). Will everyone who attends a track be happy or satisfied with the directions, usually no? By the very nature that a track is voting on the issue, usually there are some who do not like the system that said track currently runs, but you will never please everyone, you just hope to do what the majority feel is best for the track and local program.

As far as a sanction calling up the other sanctions tracks, who cares, if that track is happy with what they have, then they can politely tell them, “No thanks we are happy with what we have”. I get calls at my real job on a weekly basis asking me to switch suppliers and vendors, and most of the time I tell them no thanks, but on occasion I listen to what they have to say, especially if my current supplier is lacking a little, and I base the decision on what is best for my company.

There is no reason to hate a sanction because it offers an opportunity to a track and that track takes it. If they do not deliver on said offer then by all means hate the sanction, but remember it is the people at the track who make that decision to be either NBL, ABA, NPSA, USBL, etc….

For those saying “I just wish the sanction would come in and build a new track if they want in an area”. Well who is going to run it? Sanctions do not just randomly build tracks and cross their fingers hoping someone will drive by and volunteer to run the thing. There has to be local people willing to run the track.

If you do not like a sanction for some reason, then do not race it. If that sanction happens to become your local tracks affiliation, then you as a rider have a choice to either take a chance and support it, or don’t, tracks are there for us, as riders, to use and enjoy, no one makes us race them.

Anyway it is just something to consider when you read about a track changing or even voting to change or stay, it is not sanctions making tracks join their programs or affiliation, as some seem to think.




Very well put Stuart! sun_bespectacled.gif
bmx-dad
Nicelly said..
bighead
I think the following statement is a pretty big assumpion Stu.

"When a track changes it is more than likely because they felt that the current conditions at their track were not the best for their program and they wanted to see what options were there for them."

I personally was not at the meetings to decide the switch so I cannot speak for anyone but I know this isn't true for one track operator that I recently spoke with. He was upset with another track operator of the same sanction so he wanted to switch over. I am sure there are a lot of reasons for switches with personal conflict being one of the main ones. I know of tracks that are unhappy because of the lack of being "given" a big race. In my opinion that SHOULD be the least of a tracks worries with the local program being the biggest.
HRPdesigns
Joel you still illustrate the point of my post. The sanction did not change the tracks affiliation.

I agree with you, that in that one line you pulled out of my post, sure it is assumption, it is actually just a generalization since there are a billion scenarios as to what goes into tracks decisions. I just did not feel like typing all billion as my fingers were tired. LOL
LACK
If every sanction gave the deals to flip to their old tracks riders as they do their new tracks that just flipped... ummm.. its like flipping Cc cards or cell phones for better deals or best said in this bank commercial

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yl67TNDW-0Q...feature=channel
woodybmx86
QUOTE (LACK @ Oct 4 2010, 12:25 AM) *
If every sanction gave the deals to flip to their old tracks riders as they do their new tracks that just flipped... ummm.. its like flipping Cc cards or cell phones for better deals or best said in this bank commercial

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yl67TNDW-0Q...feature=channel

Exactly my issue with sanctions calling tracks and offering them "rewards" to switch. Despite claims to the contrary, I have had Many TOs that I trust fully tell me of offers... and substantial ones to "flip". You say good business. You say competition. I say NO.
How?
Sanction A has track. Running along ok. Sanction B has money. Uses that money towards own tracks, or towards opening another track somewhere. Sanction A doesn't lose, its riders dont lose funds at all, Sanction B is using that money to further its own sanctions tracks or to expand. Win, win. BMX as a whole gets better and bigger. Competition comes from offereing Riders the best they can get... making it a riders choice as to what sanction to pursue, and what to dabble.

Sanction B has track. Running along ok. Sanction A has money. Uses that money as offer to Sanction B track to "flip". Sanction B track thinks, wow, that's pretty good. Think we'll go with it. Sanction B now loses. its program has suffered a setback, a decline in BMX overall. No good. Sanction A has used its money to increase it's own BMX, at the expense of Sanction B. And its riders funds. Now they have to convert, or make a desision to go out of their way to stay with sanction B. this loses them funds, and Forces them into a decision. Santion A has now not used that money to further the tracks within its own ranks to make them better OR to increase its own BMX by increasing BMX as a WHole. BMX as a whole loses. Not gets better.

One scenario is trying to claim all the pie. Forcing rider choice.

The other senario is creating more pie, creating more choice.

Hence the reason I DESPISE sanctions, of either side (emphasis on this, to you clowns painting me as anti-ABA), contacting other tracks and offering them incentives to change sanctions.
If its something your not going to give you loyal tracks, you are LAME and I look down on you for offering it to another track to switch. PERIOD.
I have a huge problem with the thought of the NBL giving Nashville a contract for 3 years of Elite nationals. Especially since their local program has stunk for years, number wise. to give you an example of what I am talking about.
MikeCarruth
I am taking no sides here, but interested in debating one point.

For this purpose, let's remove the word "sanction" and "track" from the discussion, and replace it with "company" and "customer," respectively.

How is it wrong for one company to hawk their wares to the customers of a competing company?

I mean, by that standard, every time I call an advertiser and try to shine the light of righteousness on online advertising (with us, of course) versus print, am I doing a disservice to the universe? Naturally, I don't see it that way, and neither do the customers who are persuaded by my masterfully-presented and highly-logical argument. biggrin.gif

The ones who are not persuaded go merrily on their way, and it's all good. If I have done my job, I have at least given them something to think about, and bring back to the print reps next time they call for an insertion order. Beyond that, it is up to me to keep in touch with them, and show them the sizzlin service, for which I am internationally known. tongue.gif

I would be more empathetic to the former argument if, as a result of the actions of one company to increase its customer base, their current customers were suffering and unhappy. If, however, a company can prospect for customers AND keep their current customers properly serviced, then it seems they are doing the right thing by their enterprise. And how can they be faulted for doing so?

If that tack of "evangelism" is seen as ruthless or somehow unsavory, then it seems it would behoove the competing company to either work diligently to shore-up the relationships that keep customers on-board, or undertake an evangelism program of their own that is on par with, or exceeding the other. In business, we face this all the time. It is one of the things entrepreneurs love about "the game." Being in the ring, toe-to-toe, against a worthy opponent. By the way, isn't that what you love about racing in the first place? If someone shut it down and let you beat them in the main next week, would you be stoked, or would you demand the other rider's "best lap" in a post-race rematch?

Of course, this is BMX Racing, and all rules of business are suspended, if not reversed, as if within some sort of motorific Alice In Wonderland scene. But if it were the real world, much of this would be met with a shrug (OK, maybe a one-finger salute or two), then a couple all-nighters in a "war room" to figure out the next move by the other side.

As I said, I am not taking sides here, as I have friends in both camps and, like any third party who sees two friends of different cliques slugging it out, I feel bad about the conflict between them. I wish we could all sit down and have a beer to sort it out (though I am more of a wine person, so let's make it a sturdy California Cab').

But the idea that "normal business principles do not apply in BMX Racing," whether it be this, or the denouncement of an entrepreneur trying to profitably run a business in service of the sport, is one point that puzzles me with great frequency. My point more revolves around this than the debate at hand, but it is hand-in-glove with my question.

M
TLack
Sooner or later the incentives run out and the track will have tumbleweeds rolling through it. You can't better a track if the track is not willing to better it themselves!

Todd Lackey
Cape Coral, BMX
Gary Mason WWR
It just so happened to be one of the questions of concern by a parent who had just purchased a membership the day of the meeting. Free Membership was only brought up in this regard. The Rep and TD werent trying to bad mouth the NBL in any way. They just simply put out the facts about what being a ABA track could do to improve the racers experience. When everyone heard the differences they were impressed by how much more there was to offer as far as support from the sanction. Freedom to grow your own track and reep the benefits was a major concern.
bmxmom156
it seems the word that comes to mind when i read this is more like "bribe"..is it right for a sanction to "bribe" another track to switch sanctions by offering them a big race? why not offer the bigger races as a reward for already established tracks that have great local programs or those who run the larger /national or regional races well? if they have a great local program w/good volunteers and prove they can handle a big race how does that make them feel when a sanction gives a brand new track coming into the sanction a "bribe race" as incentive for switching sides?

i heard this over the years from tracks that switched from nbl to aba as well as the other way around.. can someone explain why this has to be done? still sounds like a bribe no matter what..

how is that right?
RBIGroup
QUOTE
is it right for a sanction to "bribe" another track to switch sanctions by offering them a big race?


Are you just asking or are you saying the tracks that just switched are being bribed and offered these big races?


Buntster
Gary Mason WWR
Funny how everyone always thinks bribes were involved . The simple fact is a better product was offered and was the reason for the change. No special races or bribes from what I saw and heard. The only thing mentioned about extra races was that since Florida has so few tracks then Daytona would get a series race every year.Which is the same for all ABA tracks in Florida.
bmxmom156
no i am asking..it always seems that a track switches and they say oh but they offered us a race... or if the current track dosnt get the race they hope for they start saying oh we will switch to aba/or nbl...

but it dosnt make sence for nashville as they have recently had the big national at their track... (because they deserved it as far as we are concerned)... the past 3 yrs we have attended it was always run smooth and its a top notch facility...track layout is awesome, esp after the redo... so you couldnt ask for more as a "customer" ... so that wouldnt make sence...someone did mention they would be getting a uci race dont know if this is true or not but we will certainly miss this stop on the nbl slate...

other tracks threaten to leave and sometimes the reason seems to be that they wanted a big race...(nbl or aba dosnt matter) but my question was geared to why give a track that just switched sanctions a big race until they prove themselves on a local level first? thats what i was getting at really...

we may still make the 13 hr trip down... smile.gif



but i also hea
bmxmom156
ok but i also heard one of our tracks in nj used to run aba on one day and nbl on another ( now this was way long ago)

not a bad idea if you think about it.

if someone wants to run aba on a friday just say and sunday run nbl races... best of both worlds... would take a bit of working together...nah forget that idea never happen...
sanjosebmx
we got more motos at a single point race last week, than Prundale did at their 'national' about an hour away...just sayin'..
woodybmx86
QUOTE (MikeCarruth @ Oct 4 2010, 01:58 AM) *
I am taking no sides here, but interested in debating one point.

For this purpose, let's remove the word "sanction" and "track" from the discussion, and replace it with "company" and "customer," respectively.

How is it wrong for one company to hawk their wares to the customers of a competing company?

I mean, by that standard, every time I call an advertiser and try to shine the light of righteousness on online advertising (with us, of course) versus print, am I doing a disservice to the universe? Naturally, I don't see it that way, and neither do the customers who are persuaded by my masterfully-presented and highly-logical argument. biggrin.gif

The ones who are not persuaded go merrily on their way, and it's all good. If I have done my job, I have at least given them something to think about, and bring back to the print reps next time they call for an insertion order. Beyond that, it is up to me to keep in touch with them, and show them the sizzlin service, for which I am internationally known. tongue.gif

I would be more empathetic to the former argument if, as a result of the actions of one company to increase its customer base, their current customers were suffering and unhappy. If, however, a company can prospect for customers AND keep their current customers properly serviced, then it seems they are doing the right thing by their enterprise. And how can they be faulted for doing so?

If that tack of "evangelism" is seen as ruthless or somehow unsavory, then it seems it would behoove the competing company to either work diligently to shore-up the relationships that keep customers on-board, or undertake an evangelism program of their own that is on par with, or exceeding the other. In business, we face this all the time. It is one of the things entrepreneurs love about "the game." Being in the ring, toe-to-toe, against a worthy opponent. By the way, isn't that what you love about racing in the first place? If someone shut it down and let you beat them in the main next week, would you be stoked, or would you demand the other rider's "best lap" in a post-race rematch?

Of course, this is BMX Racing, and all rules of business are suspended, if not reversed, as if within some sort of motorific Alice In Wonderland scene. But if it were the real world, much of this would be met with a shrug (OK, maybe a one-finger salute or two), then a couple all-nighters in a "war room" to figure out the next move by the other side.

As I said, I am not taking sides here, as I have friends in both camps and, like any third party who sees two friends of different cliques slugging it out, I feel bad about the conflict between them. I wish we could all sit down and have a beer to sort it out (though I am more of a wine person, so let's make it a sturdy California Cab').

But the idea that "normal business principles do not apply in BMX Racing," whether it be this, or the denouncement of an entrepreneur trying to profitably run a business in service of the sport, is one point that puzzles me with great frequency. My point more revolves around this than the debate at hand, but it is hand-in-glove with my question.

M

I'm not sure if you are replying to my post... if so, you are misreading. I actually have no problem with ABA or NBL calling up a rival sanctions track and saying, hey, just so you know, here is what our Normal, everyday sanctioning will do for you. As you say, if the track likes it, they can switch, if not, then not. Happy where they are, great. That being said, portraying falsehoods about ones sanction and what they will do, or badmouthing in a false manner the other sanction is a no-go for me. For all y'all coporate trader-hawks out there, might be business as usual, but my personal opinion is its WRONG, morally.

On to what I am saying... offering incentives... nope. That is just lame. Offering cash or complete rebuilds or natinals or guarnteed this or that... that your NOT calling up your own loyal, hard-working tracks, and offering them, just in the name of taking over another track to float some bloated theory that BMX is getting BIGGER in so and so sanction, or our numbers are increasing, or look, poeple like OUR program so much they are switching... that is what burns me. IT"S LAME. and dirty.

Same as giving into a certain tracks threats do switch if you dont do all those things. IT"S LAME. NBL - ABA, are you hearing me? You do it, I think your double-dealing, underhanded dirt.

Tracks that engage in it. SAME with you. there are a few IN tracks that always seemed to get a regional or something each year... and each year, you would hear about them changing sanctions. Tracks that think they DESERVE it or some such junk. LAME.

Yeah. I know. I am naive. thank you, I'll stay that way.

Like I said, I have had guys I admire, that have been straightshooters with me in everything I know about... tell me to my face, yeah we've been offered this and that. On the other hand, I've seen both sanctions do shady stuff. and not care. so forgive me if I tend to believe these guys.
And sometimes, you just gotta know that where theres smoke, theres fire.
woodybmx86
AGAIN... I am NOT calling out one sanction, or track, or any such thing. I have heard it both ways. And seen it both ways. I have seen one track get special attention, and others get nothing. I am remarking on NBL, ABA, tracks, etc. And NOT on the tracks just switching, expecially Daytona, they have just kinda been doing their own thing for forever. lol.

I just get tired of hearing all this back-room, deal-offering crap.

and every time this comes up, it seems... ita all for the kids... but you know, we didnt get this national... or tis been years since we got that regional, or roc... but we all voted this is best for the local scene... but so and so track has gotten this for this long... its like. come on. sheesh.
be real
PDePauw
I would like to call a time out so everyone could take a listen to (The Gambler) by Kenny Rogers. That always seems to sum things up nicely.
LACK
QUOTE (MikeCarruth @ Oct 3 2010, 08:58 PM) *
I am taking no sides here, but interested in debating one point.

For this purpose, let's remove the word "sanction" and "track" from the discussion, and replace it with "company" and "customer," respectively.

How is it wrong for one company to hawk their wares to the customers of a competing company?

But the idea that "normal business principles do not apply in BMX Racing," whether it be this, or the denouncement of an entrepreneur trying to profitably run a business in service of the sport, is one point that puzzles me with great frequency. My point more revolves around this than the debate at hand, but it is hand-in-glove with my question.

M


1 Normal business? Like what banks or Mortgages Housing with govie incentives or pure comp in economics agriculture with price controls or a real biz, restaurants that reaaaaly fight it out?
BMX has free land grants free labor grants and donations (for the kids)

2 If it was a real biz (customers)
Would be a dealer net work and the production company either channel stuffing or offering rebates incentives for some to buy X inventory..or when times are good (macro econ) they raise prices as they have a captive audience. (neither is seemingly true vs inflation indexes, any of them) Prices ar cheaper today than 1980 adjusted for fall in dollars inflation and no Id never use the CPI gimme a break please.

Customers (in traditional sense) are end use consumers.. (Clients) are middle men..

Producer Honda, Supplier Client customer of Honda is a Dealership and with all sorts of tricks to make sure clients take care of end users (customers tha buy bikes) they do or not use pay plans of sales or the new thing past 15 years is CSI customer service index.. Carz used it in the 90's and now Home Depot Lowes and Sears drives me nuts (call this number to win 5k please say nice things about clerks)

We do not live in a democracy.. We live in a republic and we elect reps to vote for us in congress..
One sanction is set up kinda like this with boards and groups. There is no way to keep the boards and groups from card stacking either side of the spectrum.. Either they use every customer that raced the past 10 years (few that showed up the last 2) to get the vote or they hold a quick meeting with all the volunteers that showed up last year that can make it..
Either way its card stacking..

Not perfect but the most market based solution (see selling spectrum for FCC)

Govie regulators FCC SEC have 30 days to propose a rule change then seek (public comment) this keeps the GE or ATT of the worlds from card stacking..usually no one comments but insiders..But every now and then you get public outcry.
Did you blow up your surround sound from commercials on TV at 2x the volume than the Ball game?

FCC proposed all cable companies and TV stations broadcast commercials at same volume as games.. Failed every year for a decade + but finally it passed and now this year Congress votes all yes as the public outcry was huge..it got worse and worse so the public responds.
GE NBC to Cable companies were not the end users..and they have all the money from the millions of customers.. Most issues slip right thru the cracks until it becomes a huge issue.

Other sanctions and tracks use a more business like model and it can be called entrepreneur if you like, but its a dealer or franchise.. If you call your self an entrepreneur for opening up a Subway or Dunkin Doughnuts okay but your not inventing a start up business, Nor the wheel..

It can be said that one sanction or another allows for "more" direct feedback from end user to supplier..but to say then that will get back to production and change rules for all franchises (quickly or faster) is a stretch. Not as quick as a sole proprietor that has his own brand and shop.

I do not think there is anything wrong with any of it.
No one is getting rich of the backs of BMX racers and there is no fraud waste or abuse. Id take it easy on everyone involved with BMX. What ever decision any one makes they believe at the time its best for them. Most of us have been there and done that with all sanctions over 30 years.

In general I think everyone does a good job..but I came from a 2x6 board and hand pole manual gate, no berms 2 jumps and the track outlined with old snow tires in a field out back of the Joliet Il YMCA in 1978.. guys have better pump tracks in their yards today. jlack

PS there were more scams and ripoffs in 1982 than Ive seen in the past 8 years Ive been back racing..

bmxmom156
woody hit the nail on the head. thats what i was referring to...
obsessive
here is something that people have not mentioned yet. When someone tells you that the "enter sanction here" called them and offered this "enter offer here" to them, how often do you really believe that? I mean, first, I would venture to guess that oftentimes the person who told you actually contacted the sanction themselves. And, is it also humanly possible that the person inflated the offer they received? to make it look like they had good reason to do what they already wanted to do but shouldn't in the first place?

is any of this human nature? heck yea it is.

As a team manager, you see this stuff all the time and learn to just laugh at it. People will fabricate situations all day long to give themselves reason to do what they want and detour their own conscience.

But in the end, and its hard to judge each individual situation, the local tracks just need to be looking out for their best interests. If that means changing sanctions, then so be it. I'm with Stu though, the NBL is basically creating a completely new sanction, changing everything. Thats the perfect time for a track to stop, look and make a move if they are uncomfortable with the new business plan. I know lack thinks its brilliant but to me, its sketchy at best for the long term. I see payout adjustments all over the place. and i see tracks in two years wondering why they didn't flip because the numbers were too good to be true and they have to make adjustments. This will leave a terrible taste in the mouth of tracks.

If I'm wrong, then that will be good for the nbl tracks and i'll be happy to say that i was wrong.

LACK
Obsessive I agree with everything you said up to..
making predictions..( I dunno how people can predict it will fail)
on brilliant that must be its good for me!
I said is its great for my family or it was til the locals switched not its a cluster #@$%.. but for me I we to save X bucks for 2011 rock on!

(truth is its "seemingly" great for recruiting new riders 99 bucks that it vs old system)

I said it will work..It will for 2011 or they will raise prices for 2012 or bail to old system what in the world do I care? I do not own NBL stock or receive profits..No one does so ho cares?
Oh I see if it fails by July 20100 guys are left out or if it doesnt work tracks will be left with accounts receivable and no ability to collect. I thought that probability for 1st year was slim..So Id bet 1500 on it to save a grand..if I was scared Id pay monthly if they fail I quit payments..

Now I said the first day the sales presentation and the deal wasnt great..Ill go ahead and say now it wasnt good. I have very smart friends that say it cant and will not work. They are not finance guys so I understand their frustrations. My brother and I were both traders, racers and our friends with similar backgrounds think the deal rocks. So that Fla track sticks to the pay plan and their recruiting and the huge rider base.

In retrospect arm chair QB Id set up 2 plans
99 buck locals all you can race (no payments)
500 a head and family plan for NAG series.. ( call for payment details)
I would never sell a 500 dllar product or anything under a durable good 3-5k on payments never.

Id drop the (middle regional champion pay plan and deal) as anyone that ever raised kids knows you give them two choices and if they throw a fit you send them to bed.

under that plan any 99 dollar rider can sign and race any national or regional and get plates for 55 a race..

Sales deal was way to much info confusing and if some one couldnt pay 500 up front for whole year cool pay the 99 and sign and drive 55..but the payment thing is crazy if I cant afford 500 up front or have doubts how can I afford 4-12k to race a season..

No money now? maybe this, maybe that..maybe aba maybe usac maybe dirt and vert maybe MTB well pay 99 now or maybe pay 99 later..

They tried to over come every objection before they sold a single unit.. all those that wanted to buy said Yea its awesome..all the maybes didnt have an objection to over come so they....."cant work"

"payments" and "Ill pay as I go" well you dont have to make payments and you can pay as you go..
but if you want you can save a bundle by pre pay...
and that is all I woulda sold "Save $$$ by NBL pre pay" or do it the old way maybe- nbl-NAG riders

brand new walmart bike local racers dont know better and ...
if you say 99 bucks for a newbi isnt a good deal........................yikes. jlack












LACK
Oh one more thing Nashville goes ABA so now I have to go to Rockford next year..Poor me!..and Ill have to go to ABA grands next year poor wifeee!..So the SSA gets a push back is all..Ill do NBL NAG plan for 3 of 5 racers in the family and well do ABA locals as its not sanctions..there isnt another local track with in 2.5 hours of Nashville as I must drive 72mph with kids in the van.

Its all still BMX I dont care about the racing part..its all awesome.. Now I blow off SSA and hit the rock and the ABA grands..Its gonna cost the same exact budget..now there is 5 less races..but 2 absolutely bitchin races in ABA.. Nashville Nat better be on VS because that indoor stuff is boring. lack

PS I was still gonna do ABA steel wheels this winter cause my Cousin Bobby is coming back to BMX.
lumpy
One thing I have noticed over the years.. When a track is "bribed" with a national or other big race, they are usually upset that they didn't get a big race from the other sanction.. That is what seems to get a phone call made..

Brian
woodybmx86
QUOTE (lumpy @ Oct 4 2010, 06:53 PM) *
One thing I have noticed over the years.. When a track is "bribed" with a national or other big race, they are usually upset that they didn't get a big race from the other sanction.. That is what seems to get a phone call made..

Brian

What!?! NO! How dare you say that happens.
lumpy
Woody.. I love your sacasm...

Maybe we just need more nationals so every track can have a national and every one will be happy.. That would mean something like 4-5 nationals a weekend all year long, right? Seems doable to me...

I think some of these tracks that get nationals on a regular basis rely to much on that national for revenue. While a national, or any other big race, is a good short term boost in money, you still need to hustle to get people at your track the rest of the year. That's why as soon as some tracks don't get whatever race they feel they deserve, they are calling the other sanction.

Now, with the recent tracks flipping, I think the NBL can look at how this new deal has been addressed as of late.. A lot of people still have a lot of questions. And whether or not the E-speculation is true or not, that is, for the most part, all that is out there. If I was a TO, and I didn't have 2 to 3 months worth of opperating expenses in the bank, I would be hesitant about this new plan too... After all, Gary himself said that payment to the tracks may take up to 4 weeks. What stops that 4 weeks from becoming 8 weeks? Meanwhile, the tracks still have bills to pay..

There are a lot of "what ifs" that are very possible in this new deal. Some potentially have a good outcome, others, not so good..

Brian
MikeCarruth
I said once before that it's almost getting to a point of inverse-correlation to how BMX was when we started racing...

1978: Race locals every weekend, and a national maybe once or twice a year.

2010: Race nationals almost every weekend and maybe hit a local a few times a year.

wacko.gif
upstatebmx
QUOTE (LACK @ Oct 4 2010, 12:37 PM) *
Oh one more thing Nashville goes ABA so now I have to go to Rockford next year..Poor me!..and Ill have to go to ABA grands next year poor wifeee!..So the SSA gets a push back is all..Ill do NBL NAG plan for 3 of 5 racers in the family and well do ABA locals as its not sanctions..there isnt another local track with in 2.5 hours of Nashville as I must drive 72mph with kids in the van.

Its all still BMX I dont care about the racing part..its all awesome.. Now I blow off SSA and hit the rock and the ABA grands..Its gonna cost the same exact budget..now there is 5 less races..but 2 absolutely bitchin races in ABA.. Nashville Nat better be on VS because that indoor stuff is boring. lack

PS I was still gonna do ABA steel wheels this winter cause my Cousin Bobby is coming back to BMX.

Where has it been posted that Nashville will have a national? or is it an assumption? I believe the same thing was said about Hampton supertack last year and as you can tell there was no national there this year.
lumpy
Mike,
That's where the saying "Nationals are the new locals" came from.

I think if I ever open a track, I will call it "National BMX" and the slogan will be "Where every race is a National race.."

Brian
Elvis
QUOTE (MikeCarruth @ Oct 4 2010, 04:02 PM) *
I said once before that it's almost getting to a point of inverse-correlation to how BMX was when we started racing...

1978: Race locals every weekend, and a national maybe once or twice a year.

2010: Race nationals almost every weekend and maybe hit a local a few times a year.

wacko.gif


While you could, if you could afford it, be a Joe National most every weekend, the reality is most people hit a couple/three nationals a year and are otherwise regulars at their local track(s). This is at least true for those in the circles I travel.

lumpy
QUOTE (Elvis @ Oct 4 2010, 09:34 PM) *
While you could, if you could afford it, be a Joe National most every weekend, the reality is most people hit a couple/three nationals a year and are otherwise regulars at their local track(s). This is at least true for those in the circles I travel.


E,
I have seen a different picture over the past few years.. It used to be the tracks had a lot of local hotshots that would race locals on a regular basis.. Then as the number of national went up, more of these local hot shoes became "National" riders.. Traveling to nationals in hopes of getting those elusive 6 scores... Traveling back east or to Canada, hoping to get a win or two.. All for that gray plate. Soon after, the riders who are motofill at the nationals started to leave with the national riders.. Soon, you are pretty much left with newbs and experienced vets like myself who just want to race. And of course, experienced riders like me having to race newbs kills the sport. I read it on the interwebs.. It must be true.

This is where I think a teired program with fewer nationals could shift the emphasis back towards the the local, state and regional levels while potentially giving us fewer nationals that have more of a grands attendence and feel to them.

Brian
Elvis
While I wouldn't be opposed to changing up the national schedule, the real question in the background here is what is the attraction of nationals that locals don't have?

We can probably guess at those answers, but at the same time removing those inducements from the mid-level riders (per your argument) could very well cost you mid-level riders, or more to the point: What could the locals provide in place of the now-missing inducements?

Not being confrontational here, just really wondering. 'Cause here's the other thing: They're going out spending all that time and money to some end, to some reward, and that reward isn't in place racing locals -- and nobody can provide assurance that the inducement would magically return to locals with the rolling back of nationals, as some suggest.

Worse, this is the group primed to jump out of the sport (citing reasons such as "expense" or "time," "burnout," whatever, none of which are the actual reasons, but that's another story). We start rolling up inducements without a clear understanding of impact you're liable to loose this group of riders.

See what I'm saying? It's not like you get better gas mileage by putting less gas in the tank, and it's not like you improve one scene by removing, or removing inducements from, another. Buyers are finicky people.

BTW, the hot shoes in this neck of the woods are the ones hitting the locals. Its where they get to race against other hot shoes, and national travel on any consistent basis is a real time-and-money suck which few are able to provide. Which is to say I'm not seeing the problem you're seeing.
alan726
If everyone wants to grow the sport at the grassroots level why not require just as many or more local races as national or regional races to qualify for a national ranking? Maybe require 12 local races and 4 national races or something like that. I think something like this would work well especially with the NBL's new membership program.

Alan Vonderheide
TheBinkster
I've always wondered this: Why are the sanctions hesitant to cut down the nationals and focus more on the local grass roots racing? Do they make more money running a high number of nationals compared to the local grass roots racing that brings double digit moto counts? I figure the nationals can pull in a large amount of money all at one time compared to amounts from local racing that get paid in over time.

My kids and I use to hit quite a few nationals through out the year because the nationals were what everyone at our tracks always talked about and bragged about so we wanted to experience what they said they were experiencing. To make a long story short, we hardly raced locals. No local riders = no funds for the operation of the track = track closing = no place to race when I get old like I am and don't want to travel to race. By the time we realized that we weren't supporting our track as much as we should have, it was gone
lumpy
QUOTE (Elvis @ Oct 4 2010, 11:23 PM) *
While I wouldn't be opposed to changing up the national schedule, the real question in the background here is what is the attraction of nationals that locals don't have?

We can probably guess at those answers, but at the same time removing those inducements from the mid-level riders (per your argument) could very well cost you mid-level riders, or more to the point: What could the locals provide in place of the now-missing inducements?

Not being confrontational here, just really wondering. 'Cause here's the other thing: They're going out spending all that time and money to some end, to some reward, and that reward isn't in place racing locals -- and nobody can provide assurance that the inducement would magically return to locals with the rolling back of nationals, as some suggest.

Worse, this is the group primed to jump out of the sport (citing reasons such as "expense" or "time," "burnout," whatever, none of which are the actual reasons, but that's another story). We start rolling up inducements without a clear understanding of impact you're liable to loose this group of riders.

See what I'm saying? It's not like you get better gas mileage by putting less gas in the tank, and it's not like you improve one scene by removing, or removing inducements from, another. Buyers are finicky people.

BTW, the hot shoes in this neck of the woods are the ones hitting the locals. Its where they get to race against other hot shoes, and national travel on any consistent basis is a real time-and-money suck which few are able to provide. Which is to say I'm not seeing the problem you're seeing.


E,
The biggest issue I here is lack of competition.. For the sake of making sure I am clear, the "mid level" rider as you put is the guy who is an expert who may be quick on the local level, but not quite ready for prime time. Just to make sure we are on the same page here..

Now, I don't believe for a second that simply reducing the amount of nationals would be a cure all. The core of the problem, IMO, is that it seems the powers that be want to get riders from the local tracks to the national level as fast as possible. But when the racer doesn't become a NAG rider overnight (Or in about 2.5 years) expense, burnout, and time become a factor with mom and dad.. No instant gradification, you know what I mean?

That's where I think we need to take what we currently have in the local, state, and regional levels and rethink how each of those are used.. Look at other sports where you work your through one level to get to the next.

Sorry to say, I don't like the idea of a local race requirement for a NAG plate.. Easiest solution, but I don't think local racing should effect national results.. Just like I think the national points shouldn't effect the local district rankings.

At this time, all we can do is guess as to whether or not this would help anything.. After all, for some people the current set up is fine. But it would seem things finally hit a point somewhere that someone decided a major change was needed.. The big question is, was that the right change? The biggest downside I see to the NBL's new deal is that if it fails as badly as some of us think it can, it will only reinforce the notion that we need to keep doing things the same way for another 30 years as we have for the past 30 and hope for the different result.

Brian
GurleyGurl
QUOTE (TLack @ Oct 3 2010, 10:18 PM) *
Sooner or later the incentives run out and the track will have tumbleweeds rolling through it. You can't better a track if the track is not willing to better it themselves!

Todd Lackey
Cape Coral, BMX




+1000000 Thank you Todd!

Alright already.........now can everyone just shut up and go race/ride what ever sanction you think works best for you..........sheeesh.!!!!!!!! biggrin.gif

Oh yeah, one more thing, if you all spent half the time trying to make BMX better for all as you do on this board talking sh@t, maybe BMX wouldn't be in the state it is today. Just saying......of course that is just my opinion. Peace out!!!
Bikemonkeys
Alex and Brian, I don't know that changing the schedule for Nationals would be in the best interest for the Sanctions. That would limit the potential of racers getting to go to one that isn't 16 hours away or more.

Where is the incentive to race locals for a "National" rider? They make the Top 10 NAG and they don't get a district jacket even if they were at every local in the District when not at a National.

Where is the incentive to race State Races? Double/Triple points and maybe a plate that has their state rank in the upper corner of a plate they'll most likely never run and a (kickbutt Fly)Backpack only for 1st. Another issue is that an inter that has never raced an Expert or Experts can have a lower number than Experts that are racing the Expert Comp all year.

Redline Cup? There are a few people around here that run the races that are in state. A lot less than the ones that race the State series here. Having it at a track that was under water one year didn't help that. Though I do think that placing the racers to 3 was an improvement.

Where is the incentive for a "fast" novice/inter to turn Expert? A recognition Plaque/Trophy that says their about to get their butt kicked at the next "BIG" race or maybe local? So instead they hangout in the lower class for the next "BIG" race, whenever that might be or get a cruiser.

Maybe we need to change the rewards? Why reward the 1st place novice or inter better than the 8th place Expert that had 1/4's or 1/8's? Where they really better than 8th or even the same as the 1st place Expert?


We've had a bunch of kids get into mountain bike racing. It's funny to hear parents that are all "if you ain't first, you're last" talking about how great their kid did at a mountain bike race just because their kid finished. It's like BMX racing is all about the win and Mountain Bike racing is just about participating. Is it because you can watch the whole BMX race or maybe cause it only takes 40 seconds? Maybe there needs to be more of a participant vibe in BMX racing?
Elvis
QUOTE (GurleyGurl @ Oct 5 2010, 05:57 AM) *
+1000000 Thank you Todd!

Alright already.........now can everyone just shut up and go race/ride what ever sanction you think works best for you..........sheeesh.!!!!!!!! biggrin.gif

Oh yeah, one more thing, if you all spent half the time trying to make BMX better for all as you do on this board talking sh@t, maybe BMX wouldn't be in the state it is today. Just saying......of course that is just my opinion. Peace out!!!


Well yeah, but the meme seems to be the tracks switch sanctions 'cause somebody offered some specific inducement for the coming season.

Has anyone thought a track might flip 'cause it's looking to engage in a sanction that its management feels is going places? Junior Devo, marketing support, that sort of thing? Maybe the inducement is, specifically, that by flipping sanctions the track is now on a team it feels better positioned to grow it's local program.

This whole thing about "tracks are short sighted, I am not" being put forth (not by the quoted poster specifically) is kind on insulting.
LACK
QUOTE (Elvis @ Oct 5 2010, 08:06 AM) *
Well yeah, but the meme seems to be the tracks switch sanctions 'cause somebody offered some specific inducement for the coming season.

Has anyone thought a track might flip 'cause it's looking to engage in a sanction that its management feels is going places? Junior Devo, marketing support, that sort of thing? Maybe the inducement is, specifically, that by flipping sanctions the track is now on a team it feels better positioned to grow it's local program.

This whole thing about "tracks are short sighted, I am not" being put forth (not by the quoted poster specifically) is kind on insulting.


Ill answer it so my bro doesnt have to.. Every example we see is offers to flip..So its our data..No we didnt take the time to look at full data set to see if its the majority or what % and total observations.
Yet our N=5 over past 24 months and we are 100%.

If you have 5 observations of tracks that changed because its better or free mailers or JR devo or VS..then its 50-50.

I am not at all nor is my brother saying there is anything wrong with any of it..it is what it is.. a 5 moto local (nice park and track) has incentive to flip.. a 30 moto local has incentive to stay as current sanction would do what ever to keep them..and they have cash and are profitable which cuts drama down to.

PS in Fla there was a very good incentive to flip but not really as the other guys were just as interested or perhaps more interested in you me we starting a brand new track.. so its not like they are nefarious in any way..
Fla is different in so many ways all year around riding big rider base killer state series..It was kinda hard justifying opening a new vs sanction on the other side of town.. Even if it would be profitable to do so.. therefore we us them just opened another nibbler track in BFE sticks and it still go more motos for 95 degee locals than too many of the most bitching tracks in the USA.
jlack
GurleyGurl
QUOTE (Elvis @ Oct 5 2010, 09:06 AM) *
Well yeah, but the meme seems to be the tracks switch sanctions 'cause somebody offered some specific inducement for the coming season.

Has anyone thought a track might flip 'cause it's looking to engage in a sanction that its management feels is going places? Junior Devo, marketing support, that sort of thing? Maybe the inducement is, specifically, that by flipping sanctions the track is now on a team it feels better positioned to grow it's local program.

This whole thing about "tracks are short sighted, I am not" being put forth (not by the quoted poster specifically) is kind on insulting.



So the first sentence could be taken that way, I agree. Here is the sentence I am trying to make a point about, and yes I hear you but the bottom line is, it doesn't matter what is promised, not promised, which sanction it is, the below still holds true..........that is all I'm saying. I hold cards in both sanctions and have both tracks available to ride close by, but it gets very tiring when you continue to hear the same ole' crap over and over........if they want to be ABA fine, NBL fine, so what......we get it already......now lets take all the energy we waste on the keyboard out into the community and to the local track and do something with it.........lets ride shall we!

"You can't better a track if the track is not willing to better it themselves!"
Bikemonkeys
QUOTE (GurleyGurl @ Oct 5 2010, 08:35 AM) *
So the first sentence could be taken that way, I agree. Here is the sentence I am trying to make a point about, and yes I hear you but the bottom line is, it doesn't matter what is promised, not promised, which sanction it is, the below still holds true..........that is all I'm saying. I hold cards in both sanctions and have both tracks available to ride close by, but it gets very tiring when you continue to hear the same ole' crap over and over........if they want to be ABA fine, NBL fine, so what......we get it already......now lets take all the energy we waste on the keyboard out into the community and to the local track and do something with it.........lets ride shall we!

"You can't better a track if the track is not willing to better it themselves!"

From the posts I read about this, we are the ones trying to make BMX better. This keyboarding is just one way for us to talk about how things are and to share ideas with like minded people.

LACK
Actually just shut up and ride doesnt work too well. You should say Shut up and work.. my wife says you should never tell someone to shut up.. but she tells me to do it..
but its impossible to tell people to shut up and work for free!

Okay get the joke..If a old dude has business acumen contacts and the time to work for free.. everyone knows its best to build a new track some 30 miles from existing track (sanctions do not matter..) either sanction one will jump at the chance to kick in some cash (no promise of NAG race) and a simple ("maybe" to a redline cup or nbl regional..) If you have a business plan and contacts for land grands fencing and dirt.. your in.. period.

If you have the ability to do 10,000 fliers a year, video for schools and keep the track open 3 days a week no matter what//and make it a good local..it will work and be a 15-20 moto local in two years..

But its a never ending grind..and you must work for free.. The best guys that do it are good dirt men that have an up and coming 15X that will go pro to A pro.. or a rich guy with 4 kids that race wants a 20 rider team to NAG but wants a local 5 minutes from his house for training..So he ramps it all up, pushes cool people to run it and boom its a good local until they quit. Then it dies unless anew family steps in.

Other examples are killer locations and cities that truly support BMX Ive seen a few of them where year after year no matter how good or bad the management is the track does very good.. this is very rare indeed..

A good track is about the same weekly turn out for 4-6 months at most and usually 1 good quarter a year 3 months.. the same turnout that you get in any normal park league of baseball from 16 U to 12U LL to T ball.. thats a lot of total riders/kids but any given Sunday or Sat there is only about 200 kids that play and that is where you get the best locals on good weekend on that good 3 month quarter has 39 motos and a pro am. Off season the ball fields are empty to!

However LL B-ball gets dozens and more volunteers and parents are forced to work concessions or pay in my town so there is less burn out..Most tracks have a hard core group of 5 dudes and 10 show up for a meeting even if its a 30 moto local or 3 motos. BMX burnout goes for parents to kids!

I sit here and debate BMX (even when hurt or broke) for a mutually beneficial exchange of ideas that helps my business career. Please do realize that companies cater to a certain demographic 18-24 40-50 for sales?

I hope everyone realizes this is the most diverse set of cool people, but type A hard heads anyone can ever meet.. Not to mention we are very competitive. If you can sell a BMX racer.... (we are also cheap, perhaps parsimonious)
you can sell anyone.

You think sanctions and To's are frustrating..OMgauche get the joke.. what do they think of us as racers? ha! jlack

Elvis
QUOTE (LACK @ Oct 5 2010, 08:20 AM) *
Ill answer it so my bro doesnt have to.. Every example we see is offers to flip..So its our data..No we didnt take the time to look at full data set to see if its the majority or what % and total observations.
Yet our N=5 over past 24 months and we are 100%.

If you have 5 observations of tracks that changed because its better or free mailers or JR devo or VS..then its 50-50.

I am not at all nor is my brother saying there is anything wrong with any of it..it is what it is.. a 5 moto local (nice park and track) has incentive to flip.. a 30 moto local has incentive to stay as current sanction would do what ever to keep them..and they have cash and are profitable which cuts drama down to.

PS in Fla there was a very good incentive to flip but not really as the other guys were just as interested or perhaps more interested in you me we starting a brand new track.. so its not like they are nefarious in any way..
Fla is different in so many ways all year around riding big rider base killer state series..It was kinda hard justifying opening a new vs sanction on the other side of town.. Even if it would be profitable to do so.. therefore we us them just opened another nibbler track in BFE sticks and it still go more motos for 95 degee locals than too many of the most bitching tracks in the USA.
jlack


So if an inducement is given, then the inducement is the only explanation for the behavior?

Puh-lease.

And there's no inducement to protect the track if it's a small moto count?

Market share what? I mean, an ol' spinner like you, market behavior guy, should be able to appreciate that one.

Further your implication: An inducement was given, which created a loss, but it was not a big loss, since it's a small moto count track. Rather insulting to the track management, which I appreciate as further inducement for them to flip, since the CW seems to be nobody cared, "no big loss" anyway.

(Somehow I don't think this is what you meant, but that's what's being read.)

To put it another way, your "research" into this behavior is skewed because you've made your mind up and are accepting inducement X as the only reason to switch. I still ain't buying it. Moving a track from X to Y is based in a lot of complex reasons -- as is the behavior of any entity in a market -- and getting on board a going concern is a reason. If a pot sweetener was offered, so be it, but that doesn't make that final factor the sole consideration in making such a change.
Elvis
QUOTE (Bikemonkeys @ Oct 5 2010, 07:20 AM) *
Alex and Brian, I don't know that changing the schedule for Nationals would be in the best interest for the Sanctions. That would limit the potential of racers getting to go to one that isn't 16 hours away or more.

Where is the incentive to race locals for a "National" rider? They make the Top 10 NAG and they don't get a district jacket even if they were at every local in the District when not at a National.

Where is the incentive to race State Races? Double/Triple points and maybe a plate that has their state rank in the upper corner of a plate they'll most likely never run and a (kickbutt Fly)Backpack only for 1st. Another issue is that an inter that has never raced an Expert or Experts can have a lower number than Experts that are racing the Expert Comp all year.

Redline Cup? There are a few people around here that run the races that are in state. A lot less than the ones that race the State series here. Having it at a track that was under water one year didn't help that. Though I do think that placing the racers to 3 was an improvement.

Where is the incentive for a "fast" novice/inter to turn Expert? A recognition Plaque/Trophy that says their about to get their butt kicked at the next "BIG" race or maybe local? So instead they hangout in the lower class for the next "BIG" race, whenever that might be or get a cruiser.

Maybe we need to change the rewards? Why reward the 1st place novice or inter better than the 8th place Expert that had 1/4's or 1/8's? Where they really better than 8th or even the same as the 1st place Expert?


We've had a bunch of kids get into mountain bike racing. It's funny to hear parents that are all "if you ain't first, you're last" talking about how great their kid did at a mountain bike race just because their kid finished. It's like BMX racing is all about the win and Mountain Bike racing is just about participating. Is it because you can watch the whole BMX race or maybe cause it only takes 40 seconds? Maybe there needs to be more of a participant vibe in BMX racing?


I wasn't ignoring you, I just got hung up on that other point (this one's gone meta boys!)

I'm seeing incentive different than you. Greater rewards the further up the ladder you climb exist, it's a matter of how far up the ladder you want to go (can afford to go, etc.). Incentive to turn Ex, for example, is easy, since you get more points for doing so.
LACK
QUOTE (Elvis @ Oct 5 2010, 09:52 AM) *
So if an inducement is given, then the inducement is the only explanation for the behavior?

Puh-lease.

And there's no inducement to protect the track if it's a small moto count?

Market share what? I mean, an ol' spinner like you, market behavior guy, should be able to appreciate that one.

Further your implication: An inducement was given, which created a loss, but it was not a big loss, since it's a small moto count track. Rather insulting to the track management, which I appreciate as further inducement for them to flip, since the CW seems to be nobody cared, "no big loss" anyway.

(Somehow I don't think this is what you meant, but that's what's being read.)

To put it another way, your "research" into this behavior is skewed because you've made your mind up and are accepting inducement X as the only reason to switch. I still ain't buying it. Moving a track from X to Y is based in a lot of complex reasons -- as is the behavior of any entity in a market -- and getting on board a going concern is a reason. If a pot sweetener was offered, so be it, but that doesn't make that final factor the sole consideration in making such a change.


Nope that is not what I meant.. all I said meant was that is data we have so why we "can" say that but its not predictive.

Only thing that works is the love of the game.. None of us really think sanctions matter..we know the local TO and group is all that matters for local scene..
nationals..its what ever is closest. jlack
LACK
e I am sure we agree on 99%. . lack
Bikemonkeys
QUOTE (Elvis @ Oct 5 2010, 10:22 AM) *
I wasn't ignoring you, I just got hung up on that other point (this one's gone meta boys!)

I'm seeing incentive different than you. Greater rewards the further up the ladder you climb exist, it's a matter of how far up the ladder you want to go (can afford to go, etc.). Incentive to turn Ex, for example, is easy, since you get more points for doing so.

But what do those points matter unless you're in the top 10 of the district without being top 10 NAG in the country? Points don't add up to a greater prize at the end of the year but for a very small group and one not likely to include a kid that just moved up this year. 253 guys in TX 06, of them 10 will get a district jacket, a few (one currently)might get a NAG jacket, but it quickly gets expensive for those parents that were gunning for a title if all they get in the end is a District 11 that they have to buy. The incentive quickly evaporates for those not in the mix.
woodybmx86
so my buddy and I had a plan... we live in the country, right on the edge of 4 towns with a couple more within 10 miles. Plan was to get two tracks going... about 10 miles from each other, one ABA, one NBL. I'd do the ABA, since I know those guys, he'd do the NBL since that's all he knows, really. We live 3 miles from each other, we both have Barn ramps and pump tracks in our backyards. We wanted to make our own BMX mecca... lol.

Both help the other out, even though we wouldn't be "officials" in each others track... both wives were down to be a part of the Track Leadership.

Unfortunately, we are both back at ground zero, due to the upheavals in the city governments around here... and economic upheavals (struggling to keep/get jobs to keep own backyard meccas).

But its still a plan. And if it happens.... since the same rider base will be available to both.. it will be an intersting experiment on both systems.
TheBinkster
Ok back to the flip thing...It seems that the most common determinate is that they are not happy with something their sanction did or didn't do for them or did or didn't do for another track and their thinking might have possibly been thinking that switching sanctions will show the other sanction that the track means business and the track will show them for not giving them whatever it is that the track wanted. I've heard plenty of grumbling from tracks from time to time about how unhappy they are with a situation and may be thinking about going a different sanction to alleviate their frustrations. Eventually you just have to accept things the way they are and do the best you can with what you have and promote to get the riders to come to the track and race. The SANCTION shouldn't matter if all you really want to do it ride.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.