I don't think Motion sells stuff to individuals. Chris Hughes works there and makes bike stuff for Chuck just because he wants to. Motion makes (and sells) high-dollar stuff for F1 car teams and the like. Chuck, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Motion makes screw type actuators that are used to raise and lower dentist chairs, drafting tables, etc.. They've been involved with helping F1 teams, NASCAR teams and the like because the owner of the company is an avid car racing fan. Their stuff is very high dollar. They don't make anything for motorcycles except for the parts that Chris (a member of Arclight Racing and officer at Motion) makes for us. Great scoop on your web page about Vince and Ebsco. [This message has been edited by Chuck Warren (edited 01-22-2001).]
I couldn't believe it when he told me. I mean, is a beer company really gonna sponsor a team with a 17-year-old on it? The MADD types would go crazy! But Vince is a great guy. I really hope he doesn't get caught out with nothing.
One magazine said that Ebsco had an adult oriented sponsor for the 24-hour at Willow last year, but I can't seem to find a sticker on the bike or one their page. What's the deal? I'm curious if WERA or the AMA has objections to adult oriented sponsors, or is that up to team owners and riders to make the decision?
For us it would be left up to the teams however there is a limit to what we would allow the team name to be and what type of "graphics" we would allow on the machines. The bottom line is that this is after all a fmaily sport and there are always kids around races. I doubt we'll ever have a problem given that racers are usually pretty cool about that kind of thing. You can be sponsored by Penthouse without have the centerfold plastered to the bike...
Fastdates.com has a pay-per-view section featuring multiple women in various situations in a mostly undressed state. The site owner says it isn't porn because there is no actual penetration portrayed. I guess it depends upon your interpretation of "porn" whether or not the term includes sex scenes involving multiple naked women. Just allowing ads for the guy's FastDates calendars is a big debate around the RW office and it hasn't been resolved. I'm outnumbered by women here and some of them are outraged by the calendar and references to the site, other ads with chicks in small bikinis etc. and some aren't. Anybody have any input?
That's what I love about this country. One person say's it is porn then I guess it is. What is wrong with women in skiny bikini's or showing a little T&A? Most people were born naked and the human body is a beautiful thing. I don't see why anyone could call that porn. If you really want to see porn then I'm sure direct you to some that would be very offensive. But a little T&A is not porn by my definition. By the way I believe the USA is the only country behind the times on this sort of subject.
I think there are a few countries in the Middle East and Southern Asia that are not as "progressive" as you think. You might want to add them to your list.
tracee, looked in the mirror lately?? you may want to re-think your position on that too { just too easy to pass up }
I think the women at your office are right - the ones outraged. If we ever expect women to take a more active participation in this sport, we have to get past the image of relegating them to the status of ornaments - which FastDates and others do IMHO. I like the calendars as much as others, I guess. But they seem kind of juvenile.... my $.02 Charlie Mc #90
LOL - the women in my office would be outraged yet would have no problem buying/selling any of the assorted calanders showing men in their undies... Double standards are soooooo amusing
I don't think any of the women pictured are being made to pose. They do it by choice and you have a choice to not look at it but to say nobody can look at it is censorship.
Oh Tracee!!! And you thought I had balls opening up the religion issue! Wait 'til the "girls" catch on to this thread...
Myself and my other two guys have the opinion that we won't put something scandalous on the bike, but we wouldn't mind being sponsored by an adult type business. At our level, any sponsorship isn't a bad thing. But as I said, we have our limits. I think a nude pic on a bike would detract from the racing scene. Not to mention distract a racer next to you at 100mph. Wait, that's not such a bad thing... Atleast for a night endurance race it would give new significance to the term "headlights".
I've heard that some pro Motocross riders wear "Vivid Video" stickers on their helmets, so sponsorship per se shouldn't be a problem in roadracing ( and may hit a target rich environment of prospective consumers ). I think that sexually suggestive pictures, on the other hand, could keep people and their families from coming to the track- it's hard to imagine NASCAR allowing them, for instance, because they're trying to make as much money from the biggest audience possible. I guess the answer to what you can put on the side of a bike depends upon whether you see racing as an exercise in free speech or an entrepreneurial opportunity.