NZV8's 2011/12

[promax]

is this still a NZV8 thread or a we hate MSNZ and TMC thread

[RogerH]

Originally Posted by promax

is this still a NZV8 thread or a we hate MSNZ and TMC thread

It is a fact that MSNZ, TMC and NZV8s are linked. It also appears that without MSNZ $$ assistance there would be no MRX car. Therefore it should be relevant to the NZV8 thread?

BTW, from my perspective it is not a "hate MSNZ". As I have said in previous posts I think MSNZ do a lot of things right and get unwarranted criticism. They do make mistakes (we are all human) but in my experience they are prepared to listen and things get sorted.

However, where they have got it wrong is getting into commercial relationships with motor sport - that is not their job and they expose members to unacceptable financial risk. I will keep criticising them on this as I believe it is wrong in principle and wrong constitutionally.

[Stockman]

Originally Posted by RogerH

Interesting. I have asked on more than one occasion how much Mr C and also the Mr S (sponsorship man) earn from TMC. MSNZ told me that Mr C had refused to divulge this information to them - even though they own 60% of TMC!!).

Under the Companies Act all shareholders have the right to make a written request for this information, but TMC also have the right under this same act to refuse for a variety of reasons some being "frivolous or vexatious"

Originally Posted by RogerH

MSNZ has also advised me that Mr C has told them in writing that there are no contractual or other relationships between directors of TMC and other parties connected with TMC .............

This is a requirement of their Constitution (TMC)

Originally Posted by RogerH

All of this would be fine if TMC was not majority owned by MSNZ member clubs and relied on MSNZ member clubs handouts. If TMC was completely independent they could do what they liked.

The alleged rot that sits inside TMC, from what I have heard, was a factor in the dissatisfaction that lead to the NZV8 split and the current situation with Tier 1 being a bit of an embarrassment (apart from TRS).

Highly likley, also competitors not wanting to deal with TMC are looking at alternate meetings.

Not only does MSNZ have a majority shareholding in TMC they also have their GM Mr Budd as a Director of NZV8 Entrance group.

[on_to_it]

I think the late, great Billy T would have said " Oh, it's all a bit inset.......insectu........insestu........ it's doesn't look too flash eh!

[Stockman]

Originally Posted by on_to_it

I think the late, great Billy T would have said " Oh, it's all a bit inset.......insectu........insestu........ it's doesn't look too flash eh!

Correct,

Facts:
Within VEEGA
7 directors left within 1 month of each other (Feb & March 2011.)
Of those directors, only two were in the position for longer than 12 months.
Mark Petch being there since VEEGA's inception.

2 remained.

2 new were added in 2011, Tulloch 7/11 and just recently Budd 26/10/11.
3 current directors run a BNT V8 and 1 is obviously from MSNZ.

Something to ponder on,
Why did they all leave at once ? something or someone must have upset them.

[promax]

this thing turned up Feb 2011

[promax]

Originally Posted by Mark Petch

Promax,
A lot of 'water has gone under the bridge' since Kerry Cooper's advise to the MSNZ Race Commission, 6 months ago.

For a start, TMC are no longer joint venture partners with VEEGA in NZV8's Ltd.

NZV8's Ltd is now a wholly owned subsidiary company of VEEGA.

The new "Car Of Tomorrow" COT, is managed by a sub committee of VEEGA and the COT prototype and its development are privately funded.

TMC and or MSNZ have no stake in the new car, however they have both endorsed the concept.

The COT car has been designed and built by Paul Ceprnich, of Pace Innovations Pty Ltd, who have also designed and are currently building the first two V8SA Car of the future prototypes. Our car retains a live rear axle, albeit of the three link kind.

The VEEGA sub committee responsible for the COT project is Gary Pederson, Wayne Anderson and myself.

The prototype COT is running approximately 10 weeks late, largely because of the considerably deeper 'pockets of V8SA. However we are not unhappy at this delay as it has allowed us time to re-evaluate our end objectives, and as a consequence of this we will end up with a more resolved concept, that will significantly lower the cost of the Car of Tomorrow, both in terms of its cost and more importantly its running costs.

At this point in time the photo's of the prototype build have only been revealed to VEEGA shareholders, however we do plan to reveal the car and its final specifications to the general media by the end of January 20011.

A complete 'turn Key' Car will cost slightly less than NZ$200,000 [about A$150,000] This is only possible because the whole car is a control spec, and other than Teams being able to do the final assembly, no modifications can be carried out whatsoever.

At the present time you can choose between the FG Falcon Body or the new VE2 Holden Commodore. The rolling chassis is designed to take any approved body, the current Toyota Camry body has already been approved, however the cost of developing the Areo kit will probably prove to be to costly for any New Zealand team, at this present time.

The New Zealand COT will also share the current V8SA approved body work in its entirety.

Whilst the NZ spec car will not be quite as fast as the current Australian V8 Supercar's, the gap between the the two will be much closer between the two than it is currently.

Until the NZ COT prototype has been signed off by the shareholders of VEEGA, no further details or final specifications will be made available.

Mark Petch.
CEO NZV8's Ltd.

hmmm

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by RogerH

It is a fact that MSNZ, TMC and NZV8s are linked. It also appears that without MSNZ $$ assistance there would be no MRX car. Therefore it should be relevant to the NZV8 thread?

BTW, from my perspective it is not a "hate MSNZ". As I have said in previous posts I think MSNZ do a lot of things right and get unwarranted criticism. They do make mistakes (we are all human) but in my experience they are prepared to listen and things get sorted.

However, where they have got it wrong is getting into commercial relationships with motor sport - that is not their job and they expose members to unacceptable financial risk. I will keep criticising them on this as I believe it is wrong in principle and wrong constitutionally.

In my opinion what is going on is a case of "crony capitalism".

It's an environment where free enterprise exists but has to compete with a government that parses out grants, regulations, investment, etc that benefits certain individuals or businesses. And once government entwines itself with private enterprise, it loses it's ability to be an impartial democratically elected judiciary, executive and regulatory body that serves the interests of all it's citizens. It can also result in it by default picking "winners and losers" in the marketplace.

So in this case you have Motorsport NZ, which is essentially the government of motor racing in NZ and you have member clubs and license holders that are it's citizens. By choosing to support and favor the main enterprise that runs the "professional" side of motor racing, it has ended up losing it's impartial standing when it comes to serving it's clubs and members.

However I think like many instances of "crony capitalism", the intentions were good. MNZ certainly did not get involved to be malicious or had malicious intent. They most assuredly got mixed up in this years ago because they thought it was for the good of the sport and a place where there could be some sponsor and manufacturer involvement. I am sure it was done with completely good intent and with MNZ backing in the background you had some reputable stature that it would not be a fly by night deal.

But there is always the good ole "unintended consequences". And the unintended consequence is that they've been caught between their role of being the impartial government of motor sport in NZ all could turn to and their own commercial interests, investments and as always in motorsport, personal ego.

So you have another group that has sprung up with another idea on how to run things and it's a clash, when really that clash should not exist. It's put a lot of people, tracks, clubs, sponsors and whoever else in the middle, when probably a lot of them don't want to be and a lot of people probably don't even want any part of it.

In my opinion what should happen is the Summer Series should be spun off into it's own entity with no ties to MNZ and it will sink or swim on it's own merits. It might be possible they could do just fine with some well thought out plans and a package of series such as TRS, GT's, etc.

So let free enterprise and the market figure it out and let it all work out the way it needs to. Personally I like both series, NZV8's and Supertourers, so if they both existed in peace that would be fine by me.

[Goat Boy]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

In my opinion what is going on is a case of "crony capitalism".

It's an environment where free enterprise exists but has to compete with a government that parses out grants, regulations, investment, etc that benefits certain individuals or businesses. And once government entwines itself with private enterprise, it loses it's ability to be an impartial democratically elected judiciary, executive and regulatory body that serves the interests of all it's citizens. It can also result in it by default picking "winners and losers" in the marketplace.

So in this case you have Motorsport NZ, which is essentially the government of motor racing in NZ and you have member clubs and license holders that are it's citizens. By choosing to support and favor the main enterprise that runs the "professional" side of motor racing, it has ended up losing it's impartial standing when it comes to serving it's clubs and members.

However I think like many instances of "crony capitalism", the intentions were good. MNZ certainly did not get involved to be malicious or had malicious intent. They most assuredly got mixed up in this years ago because they thought it was for the good of the sport and a place where there could be some sponsor and manufacturer involvement. I am sure it was done with completely good intent and with MNZ backing in the background you had some reputable stature that it would not be a fly by night deal.

But there is always the good ole "unintended consequences". And the unintended consequence is that they've been caught between their role of being the impartial government of motor sport in NZ all could turn to and their own commercial interests, investments and as always in motorsport, personal ego.

So you have another group that has sprung up with another idea on how to run things and it's a clash, when really that clash should not exist. It's put a lot of people, tracks, clubs, sponsors and whoever else in the middle, when probably a lot of them don't want to be and a lot of people probably don't even want any part of it.

In my opinion what should happen is the Summer Series should be spun off into it's own entity with no ties to MNZ and it will sink or swim on it's own merits. It might be possible they could do just fine with some well thought out plans and a package of series such as TRS, GT's, etc.

So let free enterprise and the market figure it out and let it all work out the way it needs to. Personally I like both series, NZV8's and Supertourers, so if they both existed in peace that would be fine by me.

I quite agree. The simple solution is for MNZ to sell TMC to its current directors or the highest bidder (ummm...). Then TMC would have to either perform or it would go the way of some other promotions companies involved with motorsport (particularly V8 Supercars) over the years.

I think TMC used to be Motor Race NZ did it not? I think that was a wholly owned subsidiary of MNZ at the time then it was "partly privatised" by selling 40% to others as stated above.

I'm sure it seemed like a good idea at the time and I'm sure it wasn't about nest-feathering back then, but it surely looks an awful lot like it now.

[Goat Boy]

Also interesting to note that the old NZV8's will apparently now be allowed to run in the V8ST support class. Draw what conclusions you will...

[Stockman]

Originally Posted by promax

this thing turned up Feb 2011

So, doesnt really answer my question.
And the absence of a number of NZV8's shareholders running in another series can be explained by ?

Here's another question,

VEEGA Constitution

25. TRANSACTIONS IN WHICH A DIRECTOR, OFFICER OR SHAREHOLDER HAS AN INTEREST

25.1 Restriction:
The Company shall not enter into any transaction with any Director, officer of the Company or Shareholder or any nominee or Associate of a Director, officer of the Company or Shareholder other than in accordance with the restrictions set out in the Shareholders Agreement.

Mr Budds statement

"MSNZ owns the designs and jigs for the new car and will not release them for sale until satisfied they are ready for competition."

This statement was made as the General Manager of MSNZ

You would assume (either correctly or incorrectly) when available will be sold to the shareholders of VEEGA

Mr Budd is a Director of VEEGA

Conflict ?

Constitution breach or something in the shareholders agreement that is not public knowledge ?

Just dont look good.

[RogerH]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

In my opinion what is going on is a case of "crony capitalism".

It's an environment where free enterprise exists but has to compete with a government that parses out grants, regulations, investment, etc that benefits certain individuals or businesses. And once government entwines itself with private enterprise, it loses it's ability to be an impartial democratically elected judiciary, executive and regulatory body that serves the interests of all it's citizens. It can also result in it by default picking "winners and losers" in the marketplace.

So in this case you have Motorsport NZ, which is essentially the government of motor racing in NZ and you have member clubs and license holders that are it's citizens. By choosing to support and favor the main enterprise that runs the "professional" side of motor racing, it has ended up losing it's impartial standing when it comes to serving it's clubs and members.

However I think like many instances of "crony capitalism", the intentions were good. MNZ certainly did not get involved to be malicious or had malicious intent. They most assuredly got mixed up in this years ago because they thought it was for the good of the sport and a place where there could be some sponsor and manufacturer involvement. I am sure it was done with completely good intent and with MNZ backing in the background you had some reputable stature that it would not be a fly by night deal.

But there is always the good ole "unintended consequences". And the unintended consequence is that they've been caught between their role of being the impartial government of motor sport in NZ all could turn to and their own commercial interests, investments and as always in motorsport, personal ego.

So you have another group that has sprung up with another idea on how to run things and it's a clash, when really that clash should not exist. It's put a lot of people, tracks, clubs, sponsors and whoever else in the middle, when probably a lot of them don't want to be and a lot of people probably don't even want any part of it.

In my opinion what should happen is the Summer Series should be spun off into it's own entity with no ties to MNZ and it will sink or swim on it's own merits. It might be possible they could do just fine with some well thought out plans and a package of series such as TRS, GT's, etc.

So let free enterprise and the market figure it out and let it all work out the way it needs to. Personally I like both series, NZV8's and Supertourers, so if they both existed in peace that would be fine by me.

A pretty good analysis Mountainstar. I agree that there was probably no ulterior intent when MSNZ first got involved in TMC - I recollect that they got their 60% shareholding in return for bailing out TMC who were in the deep financial poo.

However, as you say, it has created an unsatisfactory situation where conflicts of interest arise and MSNZ has lost sight of what they are meant to be all about.

A good idea to caste off TMC and let them sink or swim without their favoured status. I think they may have got a bit fat and lazy thinking they had a monopoly in running premier level motor sport. If they survive on their merits then well and good but they shouldn't survive just because MSNZ members keep propping them up or regulations are changed just to favour them.

Interestingly MSNZ's other commercial involvement (51% shareholding in Rally NZ Limited) has also lost big money in the past - you would think MSNZ executive would have learnt by now to leave these commercial ventures alone.

[promax]

Originally Posted by Goat Boy

Also interesting to note that the old NZV8's will apparently now be allowed to run in the V8ST support class. Draw what conclusions you will...

does this mean MSNZ is no longer the devil?

[Icarus_nz]

I also like your view of things Mountainstar.

I suspect some of the posters here don't have much sense of history or are choosing not to see.

The situation we are currently in has not happened overnight. It has developed over the space of a few years.
I know of member clubs questioning the behaviour of TMC and requesting (as shareholders) to see the financials but the request has been refused.

The timing of ST acts as a catylst.

The status quo is untenable.

And unlike NZ utes I'm certain NZST won't change their view about TMC

[promax]

Originally Posted by Icarus_nz

The situation we are currently in has not happened overnight. It has developed over the space of a few years.

you're stating the obvious there

[Jerico]

Originally Posted by promax

this thing turned up Feb 2011

Yep, that's a nice looking car, I have been around looking at some of the new cars over the past two weeks.

Seeing them dressed up in their war paint, they are seriously a very cool looking car.

Bring on round one.

The difference between this car and the MRX car, is that there will be 20 of these and there will not be one MRX NZV8 sold commercially here.

[Goat Boy]

Originally Posted by promax

does this mean MSNZ is no longer the devil?

They never were mate, they just sometimes get a rush of blood to the head, then later reassess and change their minds when logical thought regains control.

Do you remember the time a few years back when they sent out a hastily released statement saying categorically that contrary to popular belief, A1GP was not coming to NZ. A week later they had to backtrack after they had all the facts.

That was the old administration, for sure, but the current ones have been known to do it on occasion too..

[Just Do It!]

Originally Posted by Icarus_nz

I know of member clubs questioning the behaviour of TMC and requesting (as shareholders) to see the financials but the request has been refused.

How would using the Official Information Act to gain this info work out?

[Goat Boy]

Originally Posted by Just Do It!

How would using the Official Information Act to gain this info work out?

Not sure about that, doesn't that only apply to Government agencies? I think MNZ is a private organization isn't it?

[RogerH]

It's correct that the Official Information Act relates to only Government entities so it wouldn't help here.

The issue with the TMC accounts is not that they are not supplied (they are presented at the annual MSNZ Council meeting) but that they are presented in such a way that there are unanswered questions that are either ignored or declined.

I understand the TMC accounts are prepared by a firm associated with a director of TMC.

[Stockman]

Originally Posted by promax

does this mean MSNZ is no longer the devil?

Only if someone can categorically state that no part of my, club fees, race entry fees, nor licence fees are used in the procurement of the design and jigs for a V8 car that I, and I doubt the greater portion of the motorsport community have any interest in.

Now TMC is a different story.

[Stockman]

Originally Posted by Icarus_nz

I know of member clubs questioning the behaviour of TMC and requesting (as shareholders) to see the financials but the request has been refused.

The shareholders do have options,

11.3.1 Appointment by Shareholders
..... Every director shall hold office subject to the provisions of this Constitution and may at any time be removed from office by special resolution of the shareholders ................


Solution is easy, just needs those shareholders to grow balls.

[RogerH]

Originally Posted by Stockman

Only if someone can categorically state that no part of my, club fees, race entry fees, nor licence fees are used in the procurement of the design and jigs for a V8 car that I, and I doubt the greater portion of the motorsport community have any interest in.

Now TMC is a different story.

Well for a start MSNZ donates $90k per year to TMC as "administrative assistance". This was approved years ago as a one-off to help TMC become established but just continues year after year - it has mounted to over $1m of members money. If this didn't happen then your and my licence fees, event entries fees etc would all be less. I am sure the money for the MRX design and jigs comes out of the same pot so you are correct in that it increase all the fees you, me and all the other pay.
There is also a risk that the MRX car won't be successful and if they don't sell then MSNZ members will face another loss.

[smokin'joe]

Originally Posted by RogerH

There is also a risk that the MRX car won't be successful and if they don't sell then MSNZ members will face another loss.

if the MRX is a fail, then the costs should be forwarded to the turncaots that stole the original 'car of the future' and ran away with it.

[RogerH]

Originally Posted by smokin'joe

if the MRX is a fail, then the costs should be forwarded to the turncaots that stole the original 'car of the future' and ran away with it.

I don't know what actually happened but I doubt if there would be any claim against ST - if there was a strong case that ST stole the design then you would have expected injunctive proceedings to have been already issued to stop the ST guys. That fact that this hasn't happened raises the question that the claim of stealing the design may be lacking a bit of credibility??