[Flyin Ryan]

Originally Posted by Texas

[URL="http://www.murphythebear.com/"]

Is there some point there?

Yeah. What would they really be buying considering what it's looking to be like next year?

Please point me to where I said "will".

At any rate, wewillsee. From what I've heard, I feel good about the chances.

For you to feel good about the chances of getting a Cup date at this track, unless this track is partially owned by SMI or ISC or the track owner plans on spending mega bucks to buy another track from one of those two companies, you are completely out of touch with reality when it comes to the politics of NASCAR. The NASCAR race date for Cup and its availability is controlled by who owns the track, see the 2nd Atlanta date (SMI track) moving to Kentucky (SMI track) and the 2nd Fontana data (ISC track) moving to Kansas (ISC track). What else are you going to do? Buy Pocono from the Mattiolis when they're not selling? They already have 38 race weekends a year, they're not about to go to 39.

OK...wow. Is that supposed to be some kind special insight?

Yes. Unless you likewise have the horn of someone in a decision-making capacity in the series telling you otherwise, which you can then share what you've been told. I know this is auto racing, I've been following multiple forms of it for 23 years now, and the people at the top of the sport are some of the lowest forms of life you'll ever find, but why would Indycar screw over one of their best promoters when he pays the sanctioning fee and gets a better crowd than this Austin track ever would for an Indycar date (due to the fundamental differences between an oval and a road course)?

I remember hearing and reading the EXACT same perception from Joe Schmoe fans all over the internet within hours of the announcement that F1 was coming here.

Because Indianapolis got more than 100000 people to show, a good size of them were Colombians cheering for Montoya at the cheapest ticket on the schedule, and when I went to the USGP in 2004 (thank God I didn't go in 2005, I'd've been ****ed) I paid $115 per ticket in comparison to me in 2010 paying $80 for a good seat at the Indy 500, which is far greater value for money as I have 50% more cars and double the racing of a 90-minute F1 race and the Porsche Supercup, NASCAR likewise for a decent seat is about $80. Austin will have less attendance than Indianapolis simply down to the difference between an oval and a road course. So Indy had the largest attendance of any F1 race in the world multiplied by the lowest price of any F1 race in the world but at the very high end for races in the U.S., and it still could not break even.

Bernie Ecclestone is on record once saying that the problem with American promoters is they want to make money. For the United States Grand Prix in Austin to have any long-term stability, the race has to at some point break even. How does it do that when Bernie's company keeps the TV rights money (it did for Indianapolis' entire run), and ticket sales revenue as I demonstrated above will not cover the sanctioning fee either and will in fact be far less than Indianapolis. Sponsorship levels for both races will probably be more or less the same I'd imagine. The travel bills then were even shared with the Canadian Grand Prix as they did a North American swing, not sure that's possible this time, Austin in June or July isn't the most comfortable unless you're a native Southerner or a Mexican and are just used to it (a Pan-Am swing with Interlagos isn't as much in the way of savings as Montreal would be). One of the best things about auto racing in contrast to other sports in this country is it's not dependent on public financing like sports teams do with arenas and stadiums, so I'm against that just on principle. And to be successful long-term it can't be dependent on state sponsorship from the government because governments and politicians and their budgets come and go. All of this I stated is simple logic here. What is coming in in revenues has to match what is going out for this race to have a sustainable future. I am not a troll, I'm laying out all facts in these past two paragraphs. So where am I wrong in my analysis?