Clear Channel squeezing out competitors?

Gross over-simplification, Mongo, it wasn't just sanction fees, they wanted the sponsorship rights, signage rights and TV rights as well.

It's all right to have all that, if you take the risk. If they want to be in the promoting business, and assume the risk, like they did circa 1994 when they lost something like 200k on that National at Gateway, that's one thing. The Association bailed them out on that deal, gave members' money to AMA Pro Racing.

And trace the lineage of FUSA, from NASB, formed after the AMA/Edmondson split, etc.

It is not as simple as you try to make it sound. The basic question is, what is the AMA supposed to be? A promoter? A sanctioning body? What? And should money belonging to the members of a non-profit association be risked in for-profit ventures?

This isn't a private company we're talking about here, it is a non-profit, membership association.

And what they're doing is tearing apart one of the most successful series in motorsports history, at tremendous risk not only to the series, but also to the sport and the association itself.

Hey, Evelyne owns WERA. If she wants to bet it all, fine. But these guys don't own the non-profit membership association that is the AMA.

 

John, I have long followed the events and commentaries on roadracingworld, and I hope this will be a reform of AMA, how it is run and how it operates. I do not think it is right to pay our membership dues and simply hope that they make the better decisions. I am not involved in the SX part of the moto sport, but I can still question what AMA has done here. I applaud your efforts to reform the AMA, and hopefully it will be the organization that serves the motorcycling public, as its intend.

 

We'll do what we can, assuming we can win the election and get in there and get access to the books, minutes of secret "executive session" meetings, etc.

 

Recently I saw an internal email that was sent by Kevin Elliott to the CMRA. Brooks Gremmels was nice enough to post it on the CMRA message board. (Now maybe the message was a small piece of a larger message) The message talked about the fantastic revenue (entries) that CCS was experiencing, etc. What concerned me is that there was not one mention of what this would mean to you and I as a racer.

Clear Channel has what I consider the most noble intention in business. MAKE MONEY. Clear Channel also seems to have some good intentions relating to racing. I am concerned that in this current market of reduced cap-ex budgets, that Road Racing may not recieve the cash injection it needs to grow the way Clear Channel probably (originally) intended. (That is probably why F-USA has only had one TV appearance in its' two year history) I believe (from what I can see) Clear Channel's short term business plan is reduced cap-ex spending and maintain margins as best as possible. This is a double-whammy to the racer. First, CCS is higher in entry fees and licensing fees. Second, the industry (domestically at least) will shrink or maintain itself (at best) during the immediate economic environment. With outside (of the motorcycle industry) money also more than likely becoming scarce for the next 12 months, Clear Channel may tighten the demands on the road racing group. I believe that Clear Channel intends to grow this sport tremendously, but I also beleive that they are not going to be able to do so as originally intended. I believe that for the next 1-2 years that they will not be able to grow the sport to any significant (i.e. Television time) degree.

Competition is a good thing 99% of the time. I believe Road Racing is the 1% where it is not. We are cannibalizing ourselves (the racing community) to maintain sub-standard growth/revenue opportunities by having several sanctioning bodies. I sincerely hope that JU is successful in getting the dumbasses (sorry that is the only word that seems to fit) out of the AMA who apparently know little about business or Road Racing. I hope that JU's ballot can work to partner with Clear Channel so that a successful business philosophy can be injected into AMA Road Racing as well as qualified and intelligent racing knowledge.

I hope this happens because for 14 years I have watched ma' and pa' Road Racing organizations fight over the most insignificant issues. Very rarely united. In the end the racer and the sport itself suffers.

Why does this matter? I believe it is because if the National series can get coordinated (and consistent) then we will all benefit from the trickle down effect(s).

Just a note: This year (2001), RPM raceclub (Texas WERA affiliate) recieved $20,000.00 from Coca-Cola for purse money for our endurance series as well as selected sprints. This did not happen because they wanted to throw away twenty grand. It primarily happened because motorcycle road racing is becoming a recognizable product. Non-Racers in my office (and this includes President, VP's, etc.) come to me and talk about the races "last night". They can now identify with what it is we do. I have been approached by one of the 10 most powerful people in my company (Fortune 50 energy company) about how can they can sponsor me. This would not be possible if not for TV. The AMA for all it has done wrong, did do the one intelligent thing that they needed for this sport to grow. GET IT ON TV.

The Coca-Cola deal would not have been possible if some CxO in Coca-Cola did not understand our sport and its impact to some degree. Also, Tom Shields did a fantastic job conveying this.

I hope that regardless of whoever wins or whoever loses in this issue, that Racing (and the racers) win.

IMHO

Marcus McBain


[This message has been edited by Renaissance man (edited 11-24-2001).]

 

Maybe because after years of mis-managing and not bringing the sport to where it should be, we thought someone else could do it better?

The AMA, due to SFX/Clear Channel promotions, had brought SX to the point where every race was on TV (on ESPN... that's part of *basic cable*, everywhere), and 50k + spectators showed up for the races. And riders are benefitting.

These are not the same things. One's broke, one's not.

See AMA road racing. I can watch World of Outlaws dirt sprint car racing on TV (TNN/ESPN/others)... I occasionally can see AMA flat track on SpeedVision (weeks after the event... maybe). You'd think with America's perpensity of watching roundy-round racing, this one would be a cinch. Guess not... 50 years? How long have the AMA been doing it?

Sybil has a 27 year history of doing it right.

The only way they can make more money is by doubling their licence fees and rasing the sanctioning fees by tens of thousands of dollars??

Um... how about they make more money by successfully promoting the sport? Like advertising races, drawing more fans, and thus attracting larger sponsorship.

Oh, and by not losing $3m in an attempt to scam a partner. Or not setting themselves up to lose millions more by screwing another partner.

$3m to bail out the Edmonson deal... and the announcement that all the costs were going up. Coincidence? I think not.

- Roach

[This message has been edited by Roach (edited 11-24-2001).]

 

stacey clark is legit. she needs to be in the I.D. badge department instead of lurking though......

 

Yup, nobody complained about how it would divide the sport and hurt the whole thing then either...

How is this argument any different from the AMA's assertion that they felt a new promotor was needed? If you accept one argument that change is good how can you ignore someone elses opinion that change is good?

FUSA Purses suck, they were okay the first year but then they got cut in half and next year I'd be hugely surprised to see them increase and fully expect them to drop again. Our purses are even worse - if we had promotors that we could get more money from we absoltuely would, so would FUSA. Keep in mind the AMA promotors are all making a good amount of money from work the AMA is doing with regards to TV deals and other promotions for the entire series with the factories etc.. so it's not all just work the promotors are doing that is making the promotors money.

The Edmondson deal with the AMA made no one but Edmondson a lot of money. As soon as the deal was done he had to file bankruptcy and transfer CCS over to his daughter. The whole point of Younglblood trying to screw him over was to get the money he was making from "inventing" classes (which had been run in motorcycle racing for years and were stolen from the SCCA in their original concept) back into the AMA's pocket, above and beyond the money they were making already.

None of this still answer my question though - why shouldn't the AMA make money from the work they do to promote roadracing as a sport? The tracks and promoters didn't get the deal made with Speedvision, they didn't get the factory teams in the series, they didn't get the series sponsors, they don't do the pre event promotions with TV stations, all of this is done by the AMA. Why shouldn't they make money on this work when the promotors are? WHy is is some sort of sin for the sanctioning body to make a profit when the promotors have been doing so for years?

 

Is this true? I would think the non-profit status of the org would be invalidated by using the revenues of Paradama when they make a profit.

 

Noooooo...not really. I'm not a tax or law expert, so take this with a grain of salt. I have, however, been invloved with alot of non-profits (Leukemia Society of America, American Lung Association, Lance Armstrong Foundation) that produce large events for the sake of fundraising.

Really, when you get right down to it, a non-profit is a business. They have to "make" money to meet their budgets, pay their bills, pay their staff and to work on advancing the causes they are concentrating on. Any non-profit that isn't run in a business-like way either a.) goes under or b.) never grows and isn't very effective.

So, my point would be that if AMA Pro Racing makes money off of an event and it goes back to the organization, that would not threaten their non-profit status. You could, essentially, consider it to be a "fund-raiser".

All my thoughts are worth what you paid for them!

- Erik

 

Just in case you're keeping track:
Sean Clarke - WERA Owner
Shane Clarke - Motor Builder
Steve Clark - Racer / TSR Injury Fund President
Stacey Clark - CCS Employee

As far as we know, we ain't kin.

(I had someone at the GNF inquire as to why I quit working for Team Valvoline EMGO Suzuki. )

 

So why did you quit?

 

Well, now that I'm the owner of WERA, I don't have time to build motors.

 

Mongo, what's wrong with you, too much turkey make you blind?

We've posted every single AMA Pro Racing press release on the dispute, including the background info they didn't send to everybody.

You can read their side of the story on roadracingworld.com, and if it convinces you that they're doing a good thing, that's your business.

I'm not convinced that a non-profit association is supposed to be taking the risks of race and series promotion, or bailing out a for-profit subsidiary that does same.

It has also been my experience that when you turn control of motorcycle races, series or racing in general to guys who don't have a motorcycle racing background and aren't motorcycle racing guys, it ends up all f--ked up.

One of the bigggest problems with these guys is that they can't just break up and move on, they always put in the little extra flourish that gets them in legal trouble, like screwing with Edmondson's road racing deals or trying to screw with CCE's Supercross deals. They never learn.

But don't give me any of this, oh, you didn't tell both sides, crap.

 

Do you have time to ban that hairy TSR-Clark guy? He gets on my nerves.

 

Yeah, he's a pain in the ass, but his credit card is never rejected, and his checks never bounce(At least before he bought a house). So, let him bitch a little, at least until he starts driving away the other customers.

 

I'm not up on all the details that you guys know, but I caught Motoworld on ESPN2 late night last night and they interviewed the VP of SFX (I guess) and Hollingsworth. I'm not big into moto cross, but I really don't understand it all. I should understand it better b/c it will certainly funnel toward road racing. And it makes my weekend when I can watch a race on TV, or track.

I caught the broadcast about 5 minutes into it and they were asking Hollinsworth about elections I think, and how many OEM board members there were, etc. I think he said that there was one guy from Honda on the board.

I don't know Hollinsworth, but he made it appear as though it was best to go with Clear channel b/c of NASCAR type of promotional interest and revenue.

Anyway, I know I don't have all the answers, but getting people into place that will promote bikes and making them as big as NASCAR would be great. I hope some of the "common" bikers (like some people we can talk to) get in, at least I'll be able to understand things a little better hopefully.

I can't remember hardly anything by the VP of SFX but he said something that was pretty challenging, it was something like, (Well I guess the root of the AMA's decision can be summed up for two probable reasons, control and money...)

I guess the broadcast can best be evaluated, by the fact that I watched the two guys who are making deals happen, and I still have questions, eh? Or it could be that I was really asleep, it was 2 a.m. you know.

 

I was just reading the latest: http://venus.13x.com/roadracingworld/scripts/NewsInsert.asp?insert=1839 and I have to ask, what's the difference between this and the Microsoft case???

Perhaps the AMA with all their political clout should ask the Justice Department to look into all these deals. It appears, at least from where I'm standing, that CCE is making it almost impossible to compete against them. Somehow, it just doesn't sound like it would be in the public's interest.

 

Huge difference. Massive, in fact. What we're seeing here is two former partners, now competitors, going at it. Plus Clear Channel is using it's pre-existing clout to insure it's hold in one certain area, NOT to expand into other areas at the expense of pre-existing businesses.

In Micro$oft, that's not true. The company used it's dominance in one market to force it's way into another. And another. And another. In the process they crushed everyone who dared stand in their way. They also gave the consumers zero real choice in the matter.

And, of course, with our wonderful "money talks" system of govt., they are going to get away with it. Not just in that case, but in every other future case. In fact, they are doing the same thing with a wide variety of "features" in Windows XP.

So, no, it's different. Apples to oranges.

 

QUOTE WERA:
None of this still answer my question though - why shouldn't the AMA make money from the work they do to promote roadracing as a sport? The tracks and promoters didn't get the deal made with Speedvision, they didn't get the factory teams in the series, they didn't get the series sponsors, they don't do the pre event promotions with TV stations, all of this is done by the AMA. Why shouldn't they make money on this work when the promoters are? Why is it some sort of sin for the sanctioning body to make a profit when the promoters have been doing so for years?

Now I don’t know how the contracts are set up, but wouldn’t the AMA be in charge of promoting the series as a whole, and the individual race promoters should promote their individual races?

If you have multiple promoters, it just seems logical that the sanctioning body would work to help the series in all matters that effect the whole series such as television deals and series sponsors.

You couldn’t expect 10 separate individual promoters to go to the networks and set up TV deals for 1 race.


And who said the AMA didn’t make money from their work promoting roadracing?

I would have to guess that the sanctioning and licensing fees they collect, as well as the series sponsorship money is their pay.

I think the question is do they deserve the raise in pay that they are asking for?

The money the promoters take in may seem unfairly high, but aren’t they the ones who are taking all the risks?

They pay the AMA fees upfront, and if the weather suck, they might not make any profit from the gate, and if they are promoting at Sears Point, Willow Springs or Loudon, they might not have a race to sell tickets for.


My point is, the AMA isn’t doing anything out of the goodness of their hearts.

I am sure that even if they lost money this year that the workers at Paradama or what ever they call themselves aren’t worried that their paychecks aren’t going to clear.