Britcar 24 2010
Discussion
I listened with dismay to an interview with James Tucker re the event next year.
He repeated the same (innaccurate) excuse for cutting this year's race down to a 6 hour event instead of a 24 on the grounds of global economic downturn. Very responsible, but sadly complete rubbish. The cost per driver and difficulty in getting support for a 6 hour race are much more difficult to find than they are for a 24 race. The fixed costs (including quite a big entry fee) are a signifcant part of the the overall costs (over 50% in most cases) meaning that money split between 2 to 3 drivers rather than 4 in the 24 hour race is as much if not more than the longer format.
We have fought for years for a 24 hour race and it is easily lost. Now I think James should jolly well listen this time and stop this condescending argument about global downturns and the like.
Britcar 500 was a stonking race and enjoyable, but it was not the 24...
If it is a question of planning and resources, then let us discuss what we need to do to help James restore it to its rightful place on the calendar. If the fee needs to grow and he charge more than £2 per litre for fuel, then so be it. But let us not accept the nonesense that the 24 hour race won't happen due to teams not having the money to do it...
He repeated the same (innaccurate) excuse for cutting this year's race down to a 6 hour event instead of a 24 on the grounds of global economic downturn. Very responsible, but sadly complete rubbish. The cost per driver and difficulty in getting support for a 6 hour race are much more difficult to find than they are for a 24 race. The fixed costs (including quite a big entry fee) are a signifcant part of the the overall costs (over 50% in most cases) meaning that money split between 2 to 3 drivers rather than 4 in the 24 hour race is as much if not more than the longer format.
We have fought for years for a 24 hour race and it is easily lost. Now I think James should jolly well listen this time and stop this condescending argument about global downturns and the like.
Britcar 500 was a stonking race and enjoyable, but it was not the 24...
If it is a question of planning and resources, then let us discuss what we need to do to help James restore it to its rightful place on the calendar. If the fee needs to grow and he charge more than £2 per litre for fuel, then so be it. But let us not accept the nonesense that the 24 hour race won't happen due to teams not having the money to do it...
Edited by phatgixer on Sunday 4th October 21:47
Had you been in the office when it looked like the world was facing financial destruction last November when we had to make the financial commitment to Silverstone for the event you will understand why we had to go for the shorter race. We wondered at one point if there was going to be enogh teams to be able to run a champoionship let alone a 24hr race. Itis, to a certain extent, a guessing game, whats the financial worl going to be doing in 9 month. Maybe there was enough money around to have enough teams enter a 24hr race this year but last November that didn't look likely.
Whilst at the time there wasn't enough teams saying they could do a 24hr event we were stuck between a rock and a hard place. Had the race been a potentially more preferable 12 hours we would have had to install the refuelling station which looking at the financial figures before the race took place last week would have put he company under massive financial strain to the point there may not have been any more races at all. The same with a 24hr, we would have struggled even more as we wouldn't have been able to have as many support races chipping into the pot.
Trust me we want to see a 24hr race back as much as you do but it is SUCH as financial risk for such a small company it has to be proven almost a year in advance that it will work other wise we are risking our livelyhoods and the future of the race.
Britcar David
Whilst at the time there wasn't enough teams saying they could do a 24hr event we were stuck between a rock and a hard place. Had the race been a potentially more preferable 12 hours we would have had to install the refuelling station which looking at the financial figures before the race took place last week would have put he company under massive financial strain to the point there may not have been any more races at all. The same with a 24hr, we would have struggled even more as we wouldn't have been able to have as many support races chipping into the pot.
Trust me we want to see a 24hr race back as much as you do but it is SUCH as financial risk for such a small company it has to be proven almost a year in advance that it will work other wise we are risking our livelyhoods and the future of the race.
Britcar David
Indeed, but you could have ditched the lighting gantries, had fewer marshals and held the whole thing over 2 days not three.
I was a bit baffled at the entry fee this year compared to last given the race programme enabled 2
full days of support races to be sold and no requirement for a filling station. I was competing elsewhere though, so I guess its none of my beeswax.
I very much hope it returns to a full 24 hours next year.
I was a bit baffled at the entry fee this year compared to last given the race programme enabled 2
full days of support races to be sold and no requirement for a filling station. I was competing elsewhere though, so I guess its none of my beeswax.
I very much hope it returns to a full 24 hours next year.
Number of Marshals wouldn't have changed and the cost of the lighting is less than the value of the track time. Plus racing at night is Cool! and part of the atmosphere of the event. The event was effectively over 2 days, qual sat race sunday.
The fact the cost of the track time seemed to increase markedly from last year didn't help the entry fee price unfortunately.
The fact the cost of the track time seemed to increase markedly from last year didn't help the entry fee price unfortunately.
dhmotorsport said:
Had you been in the office when it looked like the world was facing financial destruction last November when we had to make the financial commitment to Silverstone for the event you will understand why we had to go for the shorter race. We wondered at one point if there was going to be enogh teams to be able to run a champoionship let alone a 24hr race. Itis, to a certain extent, a guessing game, whats the financial worl going to be doing in 9 month. Maybe there was enough money around to have enough teams enter a 24hr race this year but last November that didn't look likely.
Whilst at the time there wasn't enough teams saying they could do a 24hr event we were stuck between a rock and a hard place. Had the race been a potentially more preferable 12 hours we would have had to install the refuelling station which looking at the financial figures before the race took place last week would have put he company under massive financial strain to the point there may not have been any more races at all. The same with a 24hr, we would have struggled even more as we wouldn't have been able to have as many support races chipping into the pot.
Trust me we want to see a 24hr race back as much as you do but it is SUCH as financial risk for such a small company it has to be proven almost a year in advance that it will work other wise we are risking our livelyhoods and the future of the race.
Britcar David
David, read and understood. But with the experience now of the 500 and people's comments, surely you can see that the 24hour is needed? OK, I'm certain the 500 is better financially for the organisers and you must of course not go bust! Whilst at the time there wasn't enough teams saying they could do a 24hr event we were stuck between a rock and a hard place. Had the race been a potentially more preferable 12 hours we would have had to install the refuelling station which looking at the financial figures before the race took place last week would have put he company under massive financial strain to the point there may not have been any more races at all. The same with a 24hr, we would have struggled even more as we wouldn't have been able to have as many support races chipping into the pot.
Trust me we want to see a 24hr race back as much as you do but it is SUCH as financial risk for such a small company it has to be proven almost a year in advance that it will work other wise we are risking our livelyhoods and the future of the race.
Britcar David
I am perplexed as to the comments about the fuel station. The economics would be harder to justify over a 12 hour race, but at £2 a litre over a 24 hour event, it must no be a financial burden, rather a profit opportunity.
Running a race series is not easy, I'm sure and the uncertainty we all felt last year after the banking crisis etc was palpable, but we are now a year on. Time for a reflection. I could not find one person in the paddock who said it eased the burden by running 6 hours rather than 24...
So, work out what is needed to run a 24 hour in 2010 and let all the potential competitors know PDQ, please...
dhmotorsport said:
We break even on the fuel station over 24hours s over 12 we'd need to charge near £4 a ltr which is unfair.
We desperatley want the 24hr back again and we will do all we can to get it back for 2010, it is the cornerstone of Britcar now so it should be there if at all possible.
Good to hear. We desperatley want the 24hr back again and we will do all we can to get it back for 2010, it is the cornerstone of Britcar now so it should be there if at all possible.
Can you tell James!
Re the fuel - I think a supplier review may be in order. Sounds like they are taking the proverbial...
Was the 40 car grid evidence of the economic climate or the event cost?
We would certainly be out for a 24 hour event but in the words of one of my customers: 'Why would I drive round Silverstone in the dark when i can go and race at Spa or the Ring for 6 hours in daylight at a fraction of the cost?'
Maybe the cost is not so important to the bigger teams running expensive GT Cars but the lack of smaller saloon cars at the 500 is a guide to me that it was too expensive, on the flip side running a smaller saloon makes my opinion bias!
We would certainly be out for a 24 hour event but in the words of one of my customers: 'Why would I drive round Silverstone in the dark when i can go and race at Spa or the Ring for 6 hours in daylight at a fraction of the cost?'
Maybe the cost is not so important to the bigger teams running expensive GT Cars but the lack of smaller saloon cars at the 500 is a guide to me that it was too expensive, on the flip side running a smaller saloon makes my opinion bias!
dhmotorsport said:
It's the cost of the fuel station to install, the actual fuel itself is a reasonable price.
I'm sure the provision of the plumbing and pumps etc can be negotiated with the supplier of the fuel as a complete package. The current set up (as I understand it from James) is a bit of a confusing hotch-potch.Just get a fuel provider to do the entire job and get them to charge an amount per litre based on what they think they could make from the entrants in terms of volume and the type of delivery mechanisms needed. This de-risks it for the race organiser and it is likely that the price will be better for the competitors as the element of competition between providers will have been leveraged. I'm sure a rebate scheme for the organiser could also be built in....
phatgixer said:
dhmotorsport said:
It's the cost of the fuel station to install, the actual fuel itself is a reasonable price.
I'm sure the provision of the plumbing and pumps etc can be negotiated with the supplier of the fuel as a complete package. The current set up (as I understand it from James) is a bit of a confusing hotch-potch.Just get a fuel provider to do the entire job and get them to charge an amount per litre based on what they think they could make from the entrants in terms of volume and the type of delivery mechanisms needed. This de-risks it for the race organiser and it is likely that the price will be better for the competitors as the element of competition between providers will have been leveraged. I'm sure a rebate scheme for the organiser could also be built in....
dhmotorsport said:
phatgixer said:
dhmotorsport said:
It's the cost of the fuel station to install, the actual fuel itself is a reasonable price.
I'm sure the provision of the plumbing and pumps etc can be negotiated with the supplier of the fuel as a complete package. The current set up (as I understand it from James) is a bit of a confusing hotch-potch.Just get a fuel provider to do the entire job and get them to charge an amount per litre based on what they think they could make from the entrants in terms of volume and the type of delivery mechanisms needed. This de-risks it for the race organiser and it is likely that the price will be better for the competitors as the element of competition between providers will have been leveraged. I'm sure a rebate scheme for the organiser could also be built in....
Edited by phatgixer on Monday 5th October 18:38
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff