If all grass root racers stopped paying the levies I'm sure that would get their attention.
If all grass root racers stopped paying the levies I'm sure that would get their attention.
If you don't pay the levies you cannot compete.
Who says?Originally Posted by rf84
There are various forms of levy. Clubs are levied an affiliation fee for every member. This is built in to membership fees (subs). If you don't pay the annual sub, you cannot be a club member. There are levies in the form of MNZ Permit fees. Every event must have a MNZ Permit. Until the beginning of this year our local Club charged $15 to enter a motorkhana. Of this $15, $10 went to MNZ in Permit fees ie they made TWICE as much out of the event as the organising Club did! Licences, log books, roll bar homologation are all forms of levies. They may not be called a levy, but they are all ways used by MNZ to finance their operations. So when they require more money they simply increase their fees.
Excuse my ignorance but where do MSNZ get their authority from? If you want change you have to find a way to make it happen, otherwise you'll still be unhappy about things in 20 years time and grass roots racing may not be around.
Anyway I'm about to depart for Hampton Downs rain and all. I hope the Ferrari owners don't mind getting their cars wet!!
Just read Norm Beechey -AMC #100,-got paid $17,500 to come to NZ to race his Monaro here at Puke;
For him, it was the highlight of his career.
I went to this meeting to see this wonder car
That was excellent value for the money in my mind, and we all still talk of it now
And Nigel...its bucketing down up here.
Last edited by John McKechnie; 04-13-2018 at 07:42 PM.
MNZ are affiliated to the FIA (the world governing body of motorsport).
MNZ have control of motorsport in this country which they maintain in various ways. They issue Track Licences for the circuits and Permits for events not held on circuits (hillclimbs, autocrosses etc). They then issue Competition Licences to individual competitors so that they can compete in MNZ sanctioned events. If an individual contravenes MNZ rules they can be disciplined in various ways including having their competition licence revoked. Competing in non-MNZ sanctioned motorsport events could result in disciplinary action. These are all "in house" methods.
Then there was the recent case where a group attempted to set up a 'rival' series (the V8 Supertourers). This ended up in Court and MNZ (i.e. every car club member) with a $800,000 bill.
the clubs should only pay a levy on issued competition licenses not totall members. MSNZ should pay mashalls instead of charging them a levy to do a remarable job for free.
Your suggestion has some merit 928. I gave up active participation in competition three years ago but continued to serve on our local car club committee, as a flag marshall, event organiser and a MNZ licensed Scrutineer. Partly because of dwindling membership and a reluctance of remaining members to help with events, I found a few of us were being called upon to do more and more work. I think our club now has only one MNZ licensed Scrutineer so he is going to have a lot of demands placed upon him. As you rightly point out 928 people like myself are paying for the "privilege" of doing work for the clubs and MNZ. Why should I pay an affiliation fee to MNZ so I can go and socialise at a monthly club night? Or to go sit out in the country waving a flag in the hot sun (or, on several occasions, snow)?
Your suggestion will never be taken up however. It would cause a significant drop in income for MNZ by way of loss of affiliation fees and a corresponding large increase in fees for Competition Licences. This would inevitably exacerbate the problem we are facing which is fewer and fewer competitors.
Who controls speedway in NZ?
I seem to remember many years ago,and i am talking many,there was a lot of disatisfaction about MSN when they really start to pump up the fees,as memory serves me a breakaway group was formed i think, BUT,basically had no where to race as the circuit owners/operators shut then out .Does anyone else remember this or am i getting confused in my senior years.
Speedway is administered by Speedway NZ. I do not know if it affiliated to MNZ or not. Can anyone tell us?
If the VCC can run an event, then that seems to me to be the best option, but I'm sure Roger or Rhys will correct me if I am wrong, but I believe they have 'an understanding' with MSNZ, that they limit their events to pre 1961 cars?
They have run the Roycroft meetings at Hampton Downs for the last few years. I am also assuming that Hampton Downs has never had an exclusive with MSNZ, therefore I'm not sure what the situation would be if any breakaway organisation approached them. I believe some other tracks are bound to MSNZ? Again, not sure.
There is the issue of insurance liability, but in the event of a fatal, then the police always have to investigate. If a safety plan is submitted as now, for a MSNZ permit, then I'm not too sure what the current MSNZ insurance liability covers, other than protection for its officials, valid as long as they adhere to published ASRs. (Note the Queenstown tragedy.) At the moment, as long as officials abide by the MSNZ rules and published ASR's, they are covered, as many will know, meeting organisers can be taken to court if they are in any way negligent.
The insurance certainly doesn't seem to cover damage or losses to competitors' vehicles, nor damage to the track barriers, use of fire extinguishers, spill kits etc., so it appears to be a liability cover. Not my field of expertise!
Events run on circuits under a VCC permit, by agreement between VCC and MSNZ, as you allude to Ray, are restricted to those vehicles before 31 December 1960. There are vehicle rules which dates a vehicle by the newest of body/chassis and engine, so effectively shuts out the pre-65 cars, which a) VCC don't want as they are not representative of vehicles of the pre 1960 era, and b) MSNZ didn't want to lose the fees from.
For anything other than circuit events, VCC is allowed to run vehicles over 30 years old, however some events (eg Chelsea Walsh) restrict which vehicles they will accept. The wording in the VCC rule book for tyres precludes some cars by default.
A "mythical" non acceptable car would be an A40 Farinawith a 5 bearing MGB motor just for argument's sake.
Thanks Rhys.
I had an in depth, interesting chat yesterday at Hampton Downs whilst sheltering from the rain, with someone intimately connected with the sport across most classes.
We both believe that any small grid is an absolute killer from several viewpoints - which have been covered in the past. We both believe passionately, that regardless of it being a Tier 1 meeting or a National meeting, absolutely no-one benefits from a small grid.
We also both believe that the time has come that any race meeting, (apart from maybe the Aussie V8s) has to be financially viable with a zero paying spectator expectation. Driver entry fees cover all the outgoings.
If sponsors want to throw money at a meeting and festoon the track with signage, paste billboards all over the place, pay for a series organiser or promote the meeting, pay for TV coverage, that is their choice, but getting people through the gate to balance the books is fraught with problems - including the weather.
Having got that far, we then discussed the problem of not just smaller grids, but to quote Tony Roberts, "The Chinese Warlord Mentality", where self interested potential warlords, set rules in place that have a high degree of self interest, either honourably motivated or otherwise, or, reject existing laid down rules because those rules are either flawed and unworkable, or do not reflect the wishes of sufficient drivers, but who can still put together a viable grid outside of those rules. (There is a case for both.)
From a meeting organisers perspective, we both believe that if a grid limit for saloons at Hampton Downs is 46 cars (national track) putting just 5 or 6 cars on track is absolutely pointless and ignores the negative effect on flag marshals, spectators and even the commentator, tasked with making a 4 or 5 car procession sound interesting - when it quite plainly isn't.
Whether it is tier 1 or a national event, if there are likely to be less than 15 single seater cars on a grid (other than maybe TRS), it HAS to be combined. No excuses.
For saloons, that minimum should be at least 20 cars. It is pointless having over 200 cars at a meeting (which is obviously good), if there are several races of small grids, doing little more than stretching out the meeting unnecessarily.
If there is a danger of one group all being lapped, in an 8 lap combined race, extend that race to 9 laps. Win - win.
Yes, that may be simplistic, because if say the grid of Toyota 86's is just 9 cars, Toyota who may be paying for TV coverage, may not take too kindly to a grid padded out with Suzuki Swifts (what happened to them?) and Minis. So who is really calling the shots and who is sending the sport downhill? Maybe the very people who are using the sport (and its officials) as a cost effective means of spending their advertising budget?
Getting a small one make grid televised is not making the sport exciting, though from a manufacturer's perspective, it is a far better spend than a newspaper that is tomorrow's chip wrapper.
It seems that most of the spend by MSNZ is the amateurs subsidising the professionals - which was Nigel's point. Surely, it has to change?
Not a fair comparison by any means but just for a laugh:
10:17am Goodwood Note - no catch fencing = great spectator experience
11:13am Pukekohe Note - catch fencing = poor spectator experience
Last edited by ERC; 04-15-2018 at 12:17 AM.
I think Goodwood shows how to run a really successful event that relies on spectators not competitors for its continuing financial success. It is about providing something that will engage a large number of people who have a common interest in old cars and the general culture of that time. Remember that racing at Goodwood was shut down in 1966 because the previous Lord March thought that it was getting out of control with costs and speed. Even if you go to Goodwood and not see one car race you will have a fantastic experience. Racing can kill easily kill racing. For too long technical progress has been killing racing. Not only do you have to have the newest stickier tyres they now have to have an expensive heat treatment to get even more grip. The narrow focus on rules for cars, a multitude of classes and the ridiculous costs of modern motor racing have made it less appealing for drivers and not appealing at all for spectators. In contrast old cars have never been more popular which is the silver lining that can easily be exploited. Makes events something that car clubs include on their calendars. Be more inclusive by promoting regularity, handicap and sprint events. Rallying is about racing against the clock and crashing into the scenery rather than other competitor's cars and is as popular as ever. Baskerville in Hobart, Tasmania, is a great example of how to run a once a year historic meeting that is increasing in popularity with both spectators and competitors. The end is not nigh.
Heres an answer to Ford fans requests-
DJR Team Penske and Tickford Racing will race Ford Mustangs in the 2019 Virgin Australia Supercars Championship, Ford Australia has announced
Nice to post some good news here.
Oh yes, btw, it has a V8
Last edited by John McKechnie; 04-17-2018 at 12:31 AM.
I assume that means replica Mustang body panels on a spec chassis?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote