MSNZ & TMC - 'Wheels start to come off'

[Evomike]

Originally Posted by Bill Brown

I think that the most contentious issue on this forum is not TMC, MPL, V8ST or NZV8s.

It is the accusations, some that are bordering on liable by forum members who are not game to put their names forward.

So come out of the closet everybody and put your name where your mouth is!!!

Although in saying that, the motorsport world is notorious for retribution...

[NickL]

Originally Posted by Bill Brown

I think that the most contentious issue on this forum is not TMC, MPL, V8ST or NZV8s.

It is the accusations, some that are bordering on liable by forum members who are not game to put their names forward.

So come out of the closet everybody and put your name where your mouth is!!!

No, not really, but mud slinging doesn't help the debate along.

Nick.

[Icarus_nz]

Thanks for the kind offer all, but I'd far rather let my thoughts stand or fall on their merit.

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by Bill Brown

I think that the most contentious issue on this forum is not TMC, MPL, V8ST or NZV8s.

It is the accusations, some that are bordering on liable by forum members who are not game to put their names forward.

So come out of the closet everybody and put your name where your mouth is!!!

Having watched all this for 10 years it would seem to me many have large egos or fiefdoms to protect and there is a take no prisoners approach by many or one could say, retribution.

I think this forum is about debating ideas and people should be able to have a place to debate our ideas and who we are doesn't matter. Personally I could care less who this person is or that or what their resume is, I'm here to learn and debate or exchange ideas. If people want to take names and kick butt, I'm sure they could find other outlets for it. But not here. To me I'm always suspect of people that sign up for this forum just to mine personal info and try to coerce people into doing so. It signals an agenda beyond having a chat about the issues.

At times when people have been uncivil, Woolley has done a good job as a mod of cleaning up the mess and certainly I think people could exercise a bit more common sense about some things when they post. However if someone has publicly put themselves into a position of leadership or ownership, they have to expect they might get some criticism. As long as it's legitimate criticism and not a straight up personal attack, I can't see the problem.

Nobody should take this personally or the wrong way, but in these NZ motorsport threads, one common theme I see from many is reciting old history about who did this or that, who was wrong, who was right, who needs to suffer, who needs payback, etc. Great to know, but what I am not hearing is what is the vision and plan for the semi pro levels of motorsport.

To me, MSNZ doesn't have any business being involved with for profit race series as a non profit entity. Time to move beyond that.

From what I know about one circuit in NZ, they are looking to grow the business in other areas in order to survive and are doing so. The Tier 1/V8ST meetings are veering into deadweight territory that might be thrown overboard if it gets too much. I hear similar grumblings elsewhere from other tracks.

So while many on the inside circle are insistent on doing a sequel to "Reservoir Dogs" where nobody leaves the hideout alive, they might find at some point these circuits, clubs and fans will push them overboard and extinguish the nuisance and noise. I don't believe those at the top hierarchy are grasping that the "citizens" out here are running out of patience and revolt is brewing.

[Mr Revhead]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

I don't believe those at the top hierarchy are grasping that the "citizens" out here are running out of patience and revolt is brewing.

Step outside this forum and you hear very little from the "citizens" though.


The thing is NZ is a tiny market. IMO there is nothing wrong with the governing body being involved in promotion in conjunction with the tracks. Better than some private entity pocketing all the money. At least with the way it has been run for 30? 40? years the money heads back to the tracks and sport.
If there was a bigger market and more $$ to go around maybe outside promoters could work. But currently I don't think it would.

[Bill Brown]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

Step outside this forum and you hear very little from the "citizens" though.


The thing is NZ is a tiny market. IMO there is nothing wrong with the governing body being involved in promotion in conjunction with the tracks. Better than some private entity pocketing all the money. At least with the way it has been run for 30? 40? years the money heads back to the tracks and sport.
If there was a bigger market and more $$ to go around maybe outside promoters could work. But currently I don't think it would.

I agree with your thoughts

[socram]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

I think this forum is about debating ideas and people should be able to have a place to debate our ideas and who we are doesn't matter.

However if someone has publicly put themselves into a position of leadership or ownership, they have to expect they might get some criticism. As long as it's legitimate criticism and not a straight up personal attack, I can't see the problem.

Couldn't agree more.

[RogerH]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

IMO there is nothing wrong with the governing body being involved in promotion in conjunction with the tracks. Better than some private entity pocketing all the money. At least with the way it has been run for 30? 40? years the money heads back to the tracks and sport.

You seem to have overlooked the fact that the governing body being involved in the commercial promotion of the sport either wholly themselves or as a majority shareholder in a corporate entity hasn't worked.
The template used in both examples is essentially the same and has failed in recent times with the demise of TMC/MPL. This will cost member clubs cold hard cash as MSNZ is an unsecured creditor in MPL. Competitors also suffered after the failure of Global Promotions and were levied a one-off $50 addition to their competition licence fee that they still pay today (albeit for different purposes).
The MSNZ promotion of Tier 1 is highly likely to cost member clubs as despite MSNZ statements that they will not fund Tier 1, they are committing resources that effectively constitute funding. In addition there are issues like the recently announced Tier 1 Series guide that is being published in a run of 20,000 copies - who is paying for this and who picks up the tab if enough advertisers don't come to the party or enough copies aren't sold to cover costs?
Even if a club or private entity runs a championship event there is still cash going back to the circuits through track hire etc and to MSNZ through the fee structures but without the risk associated with the history of failure under the TMC type template.

[Mr Revhead]

That's if them being involved is the reason for the failure. Worked fine for quite a few decades....

The rest is assumption.

[RogerH]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

That's if them being involved is the reason for the failure. Worked fine for quite a few decades....

The rest is assumption.

Black and White TVs worked fine for quite a few decades .........

Times change and what worked in the past doesn't necessarily mean it will work in a changing environment.

The main concern I have for MSNZ's involvement is a matter of principle and potential resultant conflict of interest.

For example, if MSNZ had just stuck to regulatory and administrative functions they wouldn't have spent $57,500 of member club's money on the NG NZV8 IP. This will almost certainly end up as a loss for member clubs as even the most ardent supporter of the NZV8s would have trouble seeing 29 of them sold (the number needed to recover the $57,500). If you put an opportunity cost on the funds invested of say 5%, then that 29 cars required to be sold increases by up to an additional car each year.

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

Step outside this forum and you hear very little from the "citizens" though.

The thing is NZ is a tiny market. IMO there is nothing wrong with the governing body being involved in promotion in conjunction with the tracks. Better than some private entity pocketing all the money. At least with the way it has been run for 30? 40? years the money heads back to the tracks and sport.
If there was a bigger market and more $$ to go around maybe outside promoters could work. But currently I don't think it would.

That's not what I am hearing from clubs and their members.

You have around 5500 licence holders and all of the clubs with their members, the tracks and the hardcore fans who will go to race meetings and follow it in the media.

So there are plenty of "citizens" out there and a significant portion of them are not happy.

What is clear is MSNZ being involved with a for profit organization, not only did it fail financially, but it has also resulted in what is supposed to be the non profit sport administration get involved in cronyism and picking sides. Not good. It didn't work and they need to step back.

The private entities do a much better job because only they know what they need or not, what they like or not and they have the incentive to do well for themselves. New Zealand might be a small market but that is no reason for the national FIA body to run a totalitarian regime.

[Bill Brown]

Originally Posted by RogerH

You seem to have overlooked the fact that the governing body being involved in the commercial promotion of the sport either wholly themselves or as a majority shareholder in a corporate entity hasn't worked.
The template used in both examples is essentially the same and has failed in recent times with the demise of TMC/MPL. This will cost member clubs cold hard cash as MSNZ is an unsecured creditor in MPL. Competitors also suffered after the failure of Global Promotions and were levied a one-off $50 addition to their competition licence fee that they still pay today (albeit for different purposes).
The MSNZ promotion of Tier 1 is highly likely to cost member clubs as despite MSNZ statements that they will not fund Tier 1, they are committing resources that effectively constitute funding. In addition there are issues like the recently announced Tier 1 Series guide that is being published in a run of 20,000 copies - who is paying for this and who picks up the tab if enough advertisers don't come to the party or enough copies aren't sold to cover costs?
Even if a club or private entity runs a championship event there is still cash going back to the circuits through track hire etc and to MSNZ through the fee structures but without the risk associated with the history of failure under the TMC type template.

Roger I think you may have your facts completely wrong. From my memory the one off payment was nothing to do with Global. It was Motor Race NZ Ltd and it was paid back to the sport.

[RogerH]

Originally Posted by Bill Brown

Roger I think you may have your facts completely wrong. From my memory the one off payment was nothing to do with Global. It was Motor Race NZ Ltd and it was paid back to the sport.

I may be wrong with what particular entity it was but with respect Bill, that is not the point. The point is that a previous attempt to run Tier 1 failed and there was a bail out by MSNZ - bail outs by definition have a cost. My memory was that a one-off levy of $50 was added to the competition licence fee and that this surcharge continues to this day - although I think the surcharge is now days essentially just another funding source for MSNZ activities. I'm sure the one-off levy to competitors was never paid back to them.

[Bill Brown]

Originally Posted by RogerH

I may be wrong with what particular entity it was but with respect Bill, that is not the point. The point is that a previous attempt to run Tier 1 failed and there was a bail out by MSNZ - bail outs by definition have a cost. My memory was that a one-off levy of $50 was added to the competition licence fee and that this surcharge continues to this day - although I think the surcharge is now days essentially just another funding source for MSNZ activities. I'm sure the one-off levy to competitors was never paid back to them.

Brian Budd would be the man to confirm that.

[Goat Boy]

I am genuinely pleased to see people from MSNZ coming onto this forum under their own names and answering questions, thanks Bill, Brian et al for that. We also know of a couple of others who post not using their real names, although their posts have been few and far between of late.

I know there will be some costs to bear unfortunately for the clubs from the demise of TMC/MPL, but at the end of the day the outcome is that the structure that many were complaining about no longer exists.

What needs to happen now is that MSNZ need to listen to what is being said, and concentrate on being a regulatory body and also promoting safety, supplying officials and promoting the sport in a non-specific way wherever possible by giving full support to EVERYONE who wants to either race a car, run a series or run a circuit.

This is NOT the time to be taking sides, organizing your own series in direct competition with another or looking after whatever is left of some people's patches.

It is the time to move forward for the good of the sport, and that may mean making some hard choices and seeing past the egos that inevitably are prevalent in the top echelons of the sport, and asking yourselves, "What is going to be best for the sport?"

Does that sound a bit like Barack Obama? Well his post-election speech made a lot of sense too. So how about it? Let's get the sport moving forward, together, and see if we can't make 2013 the year when we come together, not fall apart.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen.

[socram]

As I have never seen a set of MSNZ accounts, is the income fully categorised?

My own accounts (purely for tax purposes) show a distinction between sales, management fees, race promotion, etc., therefore knowing that payments to MSNZ are our second largest outlay from running a race meeting, plus the licence fees we all pay, income from issuing log books, authority cards, roll cage homologation, CoDs, homologation of items such as racesuits, sponsorship income etc, it is a pretty varied list and I'd be very interested in the full income breakdown.

Only then can we make certain judgements. Combining income/expenditure streams is a classic fudge that many sports use to throw the membership off the scent.

[RogerH]

Originally Posted by socram

As I have never seen a set of MSNZ accounts, is the income fully categorised?

My own accounts (purely for tax purposes) show a distinction between sales, management fees, race promotion, etc., therefore knowing that payments to MSNZ are our second largest outlay from running a race meeting, plus the licence fees we all pay, income from issuing log books, authority cards, roll cage homologation, CoDs, homologation of items such as racesuits, sponsorship income etc, it is a pretty varied list and I'd be very interested in the full income breakdown.

Only then can we make certain judgements. Combining income/expenditure streams is a classic fudge that many sports use to throw the membership off the scent.

Ray - MSNZ is an Incorporated Society so their accounts are a public record.
If you go to http://www.business.govt.nz/companies and click on "search other registers" then click "other registers search" then tick the box "Incorporated Society" then type in "216910" in the top box, you will find MSNZ records and the first listed document allows you to upload the financial accounts for 2011.

[Club racer]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

That's not what I am hearing from clubs and their members.

You have around 5500 licence holders and all of the clubs with their members, the tracks and the hardcore fans who will go to race meetings and follow it in the media.

So there are plenty of "citizens" out there and a significant portion of them are not happy.

What is clear is MSNZ being involved with a for profit organization, not only did it fail financially, but it has also resulted in what is supposed to be the non profit sport administration get involved in cronyism and picking sides. Not good. It didn't work and they need to step back.

The private entities do a much better job because only they know what they need or not, what they like or not and they have the incentive to do well for themselves. New Zealand might be a small market but that is no reason for the national FIA body to run a totalitarian regime.

There were 110 'citizens' racing at Hampton Downs at the weekend - amongst pretty much all of the people I spoke to the conversation was dominated by MSNZ's failings. But you have to get to the grass roots meetings to understand that, not listen to Revhead.

[Icarus_nz]

Originally Posted by Club racer

(snip)... MSNZ's failings. But you have to get to the grass roots meetings to understand that...

On the subject of public vs private I tend to lean toward private. There is nothing 'dirty' about making a profit and in lean times private is able to quickly measure and cut its cloth accordingly.
Private on the other hand is in the business of growth and is notorious for getting parisitic, bloated and complacent.

What's the saying? Politicos and nappies should be changed often and for the same reason

Having said that, private requires regulation. If they tip the boat too far it capsizes. And if financial doldrums arrive they are tempted to beach the boat and play tiddley winks.

[socram]

Originally Posted by RogerH

If you go to http://www.business.govt.nz/companies and click on "search other registers" then click "other registers search" then tick the box "Incorporated Society" then type in "216910" in the top box, you will find MSNZ records and the first listed document allows you to upload the financial accounts for 2011.

Thanks Roger. Much appreciated. As I thought, not too easy to unravel exactly what is included in what figure, which is normal for any set of accounts.

[flyingduck]

Well I have to say that having some people in the know has cleared out some of the rubbish and some interesting comments have come out.

With the loss of Hampton Downs and Tier 1 being only 5 rounds are the dates finalized now or may we see some further changes ahead?

Will these rounds be televised at all?

[Bill Brown]

Originally Posted by flyingduck

Well I have to say that having some people in the know has cleared out some of the rubbish and some interesting comments have come out.

With the loss of Hampton Downs and Tier 1 being only 5 rounds are the dates finalized now or may we see some further changes ahead?

Will these rounds be televised at all?

My understanding is the dates are final.

There will be TV but not same day, or live.

[E36ST]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

Step outside this forum and you hear very little from the "citizens" though.

...

That statement is somewhat misguided & certainly doesn't represent the consensus opinion from a wide range of competitors, co-ordinators and car clubs who I've spoken to throughout the South Island and as far north as Hampton Downs over the past couple of years.

[RogerH]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

Step outside this forum and you hear very little from the "citizens" though.

As with other posters this is not the impression I'm getting from mixing with other competitors.

Maybe the structure of MSNZ doesn't provide for the interface with grass roots competitors. Competitors don't have any "membership" with MSNZ as this is restricted to only affiliated clubs and that direct relationship only really exists at the Annual Conference were about half of the clubs turn up with a delegate.

Hopefully the governance review will address this inadequate representative model and come up with something that allows the MSNZ hierarchy to be more structurally in touch with competitors - who are their real "clients".

[Club racer]

Originally Posted by RogerH

As with other posters this is not the impression I'm getting from mixing with other competitors.

Maybe the structure of MSNZ doesn't provide for the interface with grass roots competitors. Competitors don't have any "membership" with MSNZ as this is restricted to only affiliated clubs and that direct relationship only really exists at the Annual Conference were about half of the clubs turn up with a delegate.

Hopefully the governance review will address this inadequate representative model and come up with something that allows the MSNZ hierarchy to be more structurally in touch with competitors - who are their real "clients".

And therein lies the rub eh Roger? You are dead right - citizens we are not - customers we most certainly are.