TVRCC Brown Noseing
Discussion
Having read my latest copy of "Sprint" in particular comments by the editor and a letter by Jim Baynam i would like to have my rant.
The club spent £5000 sponsoring the race Tuscans which made our editor feel proud to be part of the team. The money is a drop in the ocean as far as the racing is concerned but would have been of far more use backing up club members with problems. Instead of crawling around Peter Wheeler, why dont they put pressure on the factory to sort out engine problems etc. It wouldnt of harmed the factory to have supported the club by putting the logo on for free. The club should get some backbone and support its members rather than pussy footing around, scared that the factory tours may get cancelled. Surely Mr Wheeler would have more respect for the club and its members.
The club spent £5000 sponsoring the race Tuscans which made our editor feel proud to be part of the team. The money is a drop in the ocean as far as the racing is concerned but would have been of far more use backing up club members with problems. Instead of crawling around Peter Wheeler, why dont they put pressure on the factory to sort out engine problems etc. It wouldnt of harmed the factory to have supported the club by putting the logo on for free. The club should get some backbone and support its members rather than pussy footing around, scared that the factory tours may get cancelled. Surely Mr Wheeler would have more respect for the club and its members.
pistolar said:
Having read my latest copy of "Sprint" in particular comments by the editor and a letter by Jim Baynam i would like to have my rant.
The club spent £5000 sponsoring the race Tuscans which made our editor feel proud to be part of the team. The money is a drop in the ocean as far as the racing is concerned but would have been of far more use backing up club members with problems. Instead of crawling around Peter Wheeler, why dont they put pressure on the factory to sort out engine problems etc. It wouldnt of harmed the factory to have supported the club by putting the logo on for free. The club should get some backbone and support its members rather than pussy footing around, scared that the factory tours may get cancelled. Surely Mr Wheeler would have more respect for the club and its members.
This is about Le Mans, isn't it?
I've been wondering if this had been raised here as I haven't had a lot of time on-line over the last week or two.
Personally I find this absolutly outrageous that such a sum has been "gifted" to a driver for this competition. It's my money (well, I've contributed) and I had no idea on joining that the donations would be made by the club for such a project. A project taking place in a foreign country which many members can't realistically attend for logistical reasons.
Whilst I support the team and drivers with goodwill and mean no offence, let's face it, £5k is a drop in the ocean. The money, whilst obviously being appreciated, surely could not have been fundamental to this particular driver taking part. I assume that the club's funds are not without limit, so surely more "needing" causes should be found?
Or maybe they should do a poll of members: "Who would like to go racing and would like some money?" My guess would be quite a few! And I'm pretty sure 5k would mean more to them than on a project which must have cost hundreds of thousands.
I agree with your other point about supporting members. I'd like to know what the club is doing to pressure the factory over the ongoing fiasco with the speed6 engines. Reading the magazine every month it's beginning to fall into a predictable:
- Restore old car;
- trip to some far-flung place;
- don't they all look nice;
- Le Mans (yes, there's even more of next month. In fact, if they enter next year, too, then it'll probably run continuously for over a year).
I realise they struggle for articles and yes, I should write one and contribute something. Maybe if I had any talent or time I would. But all I'm asking for here is a report on what the factory has said when "the club" has pressed the point. Who's the commitee member for owners' gripes and new-car quality control? Is there one?
The club is really a "TVR & PW apreciation society" with apparently cliquey benefits for those in the inner-sanctum. It's supposed to be a "car club", or at least I thought it was, for the benefit of its members, who fund it.
Well, at least now I know where my 30-odd quid has gone. I'm not sure they'll be getting this year's renewal which, coincidentally enough, is due over the next couple of months.
[pause for reflection]
I've changed my mind about writing an article. My first will be a letter and this is the first draft of its contents. Mr Baynam deserves some support (as the Editor states his was the lone dissenting voice) and I feel ashamed that I should have waited for someone else to speak up first before writing myself.
--
Edited for minor typos
>> Edited by whatever on Wednesday 16th July 17:28
I believe the driver concerned was immensely grateful for the support - and although in the scheme of Le Mans things it was a relatively small amount, every little helps. As someone trying to raise money to fund my own Tuscan Challenge racing, I know how difficult it is!
Whether club funds should be allocated to this sort of thing without a vote from the members is a different matter. I suspect had there been a vote it would have been passed as the 1,200 or so TVR owners who attended Le Mans are the very active type of club member who would actually get round to voting. Unlike the more 'dormant' member.
Marque specific car clubs always tread a fine line between maintaining good relationships with the manufacturer and promoting the interests of their members.
On balance, I'd say it is better to be on the inside p1ssing out than the other way round. There are big advantages to a good relationship with TVR for the club, and the best thing about TVR for me is the sense of belonging it brings. If the club takes a confrontational stance with TVR over certain issues then I think it can only harm the wider club membership. e.g. Do Chim/Griff owners want the relationship with TVR soured over a stance about alleged relaibility of Speed 6 engines?
Don't get me wrong, I think TVR have had some quality issues and these should be sorted out. But I don't think it is TVRCC's job to do this.
At the end of the day there is a club AGM in September and everyone can go and make their points heard if they wish.
Whether club funds should be allocated to this sort of thing without a vote from the members is a different matter. I suspect had there been a vote it would have been passed as the 1,200 or so TVR owners who attended Le Mans are the very active type of club member who would actually get round to voting. Unlike the more 'dormant' member.
Marque specific car clubs always tread a fine line between maintaining good relationships with the manufacturer and promoting the interests of their members.
On balance, I'd say it is better to be on the inside p1ssing out than the other way round. There are big advantages to a good relationship with TVR for the club, and the best thing about TVR for me is the sense of belonging it brings. If the club takes a confrontational stance with TVR over certain issues then I think it can only harm the wider club membership. e.g. Do Chim/Griff owners want the relationship with TVR soured over a stance about alleged relaibility of Speed 6 engines?
Don't get me wrong, I think TVR have had some quality issues and these should be sorted out. But I don't think it is TVRCC's job to do this.
At the end of the day there is a club AGM in September and everyone can go and make their points heard if they wish.
griff2be said:
I believe the driver concerned was immensely grateful for the support
I'm sure he was, and I was disappointed they didn't get further than they did. I watched what coverage there was on tv until the cars were confirmed as out.
griff2be said:
As someone trying to raise money to fund my own Tuscan Challenge racing, I know how difficult it is!
And I'd be happier if club funds were used to support people such as you, on a lucky-dip basis if too many people (meeting some criteria) applied.
griff2be said:
Whether club funds should be allocated to this sort of thing without a vote from the members is a different matter. I suspect had there been a vote it would have been passed as the 1,200 or so TVR owners who attended Le Mans are the very active type of club member who would actually get round to voting. Unlike the more 'dormant' member.
I've no idea how many "dormant", or indeed any other type of member, there are. And you're right, the more vocal and supportive members might well have carried it. It still doesn't make it "right", though, in and of itself.
griff2be said:
Marque specific car clubs always tread a fine line between maintaining good relationships with the manufacturer and promoting the interests of their members.
but doesn't the TVRCC also do a lot to promote the interests of TVR Engineering Ltd? So the exchange is goodwill from the tvrcc to the factory and, as alleged above, some quids coming back in return to keep the club afloat?
griff2be said:
On balance, I'd say it is better to be on the inside p1ssing out than the other way round. There are big advantages to a good relationship with TVR for the club,
I'm not really sure what these are. I never read anything in Sprint first that I haven't already read here. No "scoops", no exclusives. No interviews with PW or whatever. What do they get from the factory that no one else does?
griff2be said:
and the best thing about TVR for me is the sense of belonging it brings.
That's true. It's one of the things I like about PH, too. But isn't it a regional thing as far as the tvrcc is concerned?
griff2be said:
If the club takes a confrontational stance with TVR over certain issues then I think it can only harm the wider club membership. e.g. Do Chim/Griff owners want the relationship with TVR soured over a stance about alleged relaibility of Speed 6 engines?
Why not? Don't they care about their fellow club members' problems? What do they think they're going to (eventually) upgrade to? What benefits do they get from this "relationship" anyway?
griff2be said:
Don't get me wrong, I think TVR have had some quality issues and these should be sorted out. But I don't think it is TVRCC's job to do this.
I'm not saying it's any one individual or group's responsibility.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not starting some crusade against the factory over reliability, but who is going to push it? We've seen a number of dealers voting with their feet (thankfully replaced by others). We can't expect owners to desert the marque in protest (due to inherent TVR-induced madness
) So who? griff2be said:
At the end of the day there is a club AGM in September and everyone can go and make their points heard if they wish.
True enough, but frankly I can't be bothered. At the end of the day I'm probably just a subversive minority who doesn't want to play the game. Having said that, I wonder if the venue they've booked is large enough to accommondate all members?
why shouldn't the TVRCC sponsor a car at le mans! if you people were so against it why din't you voice your opinions earlier. i bet if tvr had won its class you comments would have been somewhat differant. if your so against this kind of support then stop paying your yearly subscrption(which i feel is minimal) considering the quaility of the sprint magazine and go and put your efforts into writing into Points of View on BBC1, least you'll get TV COVERAGE OF YOUR OWN THEN!
griffman said:
why shouldn't the TVRCC sponsor a car at le mans! if you people were so against it why din't you voice your opinions earlier. i bet if tvr had won its class you comments would have been somewhat differant. if your so against this kind of support then stop paying your yearly subscrption(which i feel is minimal) considering the quaility of the sprint magazine and go and put your efforts into writing into Points of View on BBC1, least you'll get TV COVERAGE OF YOUR OWN THEN!
TV coverage of my own? Get real. Believe me, I get little vicarious excitement at seeing the logo on the car on the tele (or even in EVO). I wonder what the club got from such advertising? How many new members?
I agree the quality of the magazine is excellent. Is £38 pounds per year "minimal" for 12 magazines, with the option of being able to pay more to attend other events? I'd hardly describe it as that -- I pay a similar amount for Evo. A magazine which also seems to support a reasonable lifestyle for a much larger number of staff (albeit on a larger ciculation and larger ad base, I agree). I don't want to get drawn into discussing Sprint magazine, though. I've said I think it's excellent and a credit to the club.
You ask "Why shouldn't the car be sposored?" Because I wasn't aware that the club's committee members were permitted to go assigning (from the club's perspective) considerable amounts of cash apparently on a whim. Would the Le Mans bid have failed without this cash-injection? I doubt it. Why act in such haste? It was only announced a month or so beforehand as a fait acompli. I realise that the whole entry to Le Mans was shrouded in secrecy, but surely the special "relationship" alluded to previously meant that the club knew of the entry long before everyone else and could have organised some proper way of determining the most democratic course of action. Surely...
I would have been delighted if TVR had won their class, or even managed to complete the distance in one of the cars. Maybe I'd have been so delighted that I would have forgotten about it, but I felt this way the minute I read of the donation when it was announced. I've already apologised for not complaining earlier.
I disagree with the Club's decision to spend £5K on sponsorship. IMHO if they have money to burn it should be used for the benefit of members, or maybe the annual fee could be reduced instead. Or maybe a dividend like the CoOp!
I also don't understand the Le Mans obsession. It was perfectly clear to any realist that the TVRs would expire. Rather like expecting Tim Henman to win Wimbledon. An article about the first Bentley win for about 50 years would have been more interesting.
There, that should stir things up!
I also don't understand the Le Mans obsession. It was perfectly clear to any realist that the TVRs would expire. Rather like expecting Tim Henman to win Wimbledon. An article about the first Bentley win for about 50 years would have been more interesting.
There, that should stir things up!
simpo one said:
... An article about the first Bentley win for about 50 years would have been more interesting.
There, that should stir things up!
...a win, but with Audi's permission? (and I'm not talking simply about running out of fuel) Did the fact that they had a new car to promote mean anything? And why aren't they going to defend their title? Because the job's done. The "advert" is completed. I know racing is business these days, but surely there should be more than this?
And didn't Bentley contract all the dev work to third parties? Does it still count as "Bently Boys" if they're all contractors who are now looking for other work?
It was difficult to get too excited about another German team winning it, who just happened to be using a formerly British marque to do so, for advertising reasons.
Anyway, that's way O/T. So stop stirring
simpo one said:OH dear John what have you done.
I disagree with the Club's decision to spend £5K on sponsorship. IMHO if they have money to burn it should be used for the benefit of members, or maybe the annual fee could be reduced instead. Or maybe a dividend like the CoOp!
I also don't understand the Le Mans obsession. It was perfectly clear to any realist that the TVRs would expire. Rather like expecting Tim Henman to win Wimbledon. An article about the first Bentley win for about 50 years would have been more interesting.
There, that should stir things up!
Dave
griffman said:
why shouldn't the TVRCC sponsor a car at le mans! if you people were so against it why din't you voice your opinions earlier. i bet if tvr had won its class you comments would have been somewhat differant. if your so against this kind of support then stop paying your yearly subscrption(which i feel is minimal) considering the quaility of the sprint magazine and go and put your efforts into writing into Points of View on BBC1, least you'll get TV COVERAGE OF YOUR OWN THEN!
I absolutely agree. there's so many club members who have strong opinions about things after the event. The committee and supporting ROs tend to get a lot of this. When it comes to organising stuff they are so often on their own. But when the event comes along there's a fair amount who have strong feelings about how it should have been managed.
Get involved up front and influence what happens. It is YOUR club! Energies spent this way will produce a far more productive environment than the moaning after the event.
whatever said:
...a win, but with Audi's permission? (and I'm not talking simply about running out of fuel) Did the fact that they had a new car to promote mean anything? And why aren't they going to defend their title? Because the job's done. The "advert" is completed. I know racing is business these days, but surely there should be more than this?
And didn't Bentley contract all the dev work to third parties? Does it still count as "Bently Boys" if they're all contractors who are now looking for other work?
Funny this, because I've already posted the answer to this on another thread today :twilightzonesmiley:. I went to an IMechE lecture and open evening at Bentley in Crewe last night (given by their Technical & Race Director IIRC). The principal reason for entering LM was indeed to place the brand name and to press home the performance and reliability of the marque in preparation for the new launch. They were up front about it and personally I can't see why this is a less valid reason than 'because I want to and I can' would be.
Where you are mistaken though is in thinking that the development was all contracted out. It was largely designed and built (and rebuilt I think they said 200 times to test minor adjustments) here in the UK, with the bulk of the work being done at Crewe and in Norfolk at (IIRC) RDN - Racing Developments Norfolk? (forgot to take a notebook with me), which is also a wholly-owned subsidiary of Audi. AP did quite a bit of work, and Michelin developed tyres specially. I suspect most of the competitors used contractors for tyres
. I talked to one bloke who worked on the project, who had been working for Bentley for 40 years. Incidentally, it was a fantastic night - they let us climb all over the car and talk to the people who built it - gave us access to some of the components that had been rejected during testing (in fairness, much as we did with the TVR LM car at Back Home).
Hello fellas but the last thing you all want to hear is what a load of F**K**G B*****s you are talking. Forget the cars/motors, the people you meet are the gems!!!!!!Get real, chill, and enjoy the company.I will probably get slateded for even logging on. So fill yer boots.
Assuming that the above figure is correct that works out at 66p each,i dont begrudge the commitee spending that amount of money supporting "our" team.
.One day the commitee will spend money on something you like and i dont,I won't get concerned and bothered.The commitee have enough problems trying to please everybody,i know i've sat on commitee's.If you want to alter club policy you can always stand for a position on the commitee.
Yes the money dosen't go far but every bit helps.I didn't go to Lemans
but i felt "involved" with out the clubs sponsership i doubt i would have.The members that went to Lemans probably felt like part of the team.
As for the club getting involved with certain reliability issues,who says the don't.Its the sort of thing that tends to be done quietly,not in public. (that helps nobody)
The club and company IMHO seem to have a fairly good understanding that each needs the other
.One day the commitee will spend money on something you like and i dont,I won't get concerned and bothered.The commitee have enough problems trying to please everybody,i know i've sat on commitee's.If you want to alter club policy you can always stand for a position on the commitee.
Yes the money dosen't go far but every bit helps.I didn't go to Lemans
but i felt "involved" with out the clubs sponsership i doubt i would have.The members that went to Lemans probably felt like part of the team. As for the club getting involved with certain reliability issues,who says the don't.Its the sort of thing that tends to be done quietly,not in public. (that helps nobody)
The club and company IMHO seem to have a fairly good understanding that each needs the other
Angus wrote 'there's so many club members who have strong opinions about things after the event... Get involved up front and influence what happens.'
True. I'm an RO too and wasn't aware that the Club was planning to burn £5K. Perhaps there was a bit about it in Sprint; if so I apologise for missing it - but I doubt my opinion would have had any effect. Don't remember being asked to vote on it either.
Valhalla wrote: 'OH dear John what have you done.'
Well it's quite simple. I expressed an opinion, dared to speak out against the tide, represented the silent majority - take your pick. Call me a seagull. But I'm quite sure that the club logo on the busted TVR will have achieved precisely sod all, apart from throw £5K down the drain. (How much for sporting the club logo on *my* car then eh???)
True. I'm an RO too and wasn't aware that the Club was planning to burn £5K. Perhaps there was a bit about it in Sprint; if so I apologise for missing it - but I doubt my opinion would have had any effect. Don't remember being asked to vote on it either.
Valhalla wrote: 'OH dear John what have you done.'
Well it's quite simple. I expressed an opinion, dared to speak out against the tide, represented the silent majority - take your pick. Call me a seagull. But I'm quite sure that the club logo on the busted TVR will have achieved precisely sod all, apart from throw £5K down the drain. (How much for sporting the club logo on *my* car then eh???)
As someone that did get to vote on it (maybe the Scottish chapters are more democratic?), the vote that we carried didn't seem to matter anyway.
What we voted for was that the club should be a guarantor of £5k for the team, but that the money should be raised by raffle or similar means - i.e. the club would only have to fork out in the event of not raising enough funds.
What we voted for was that the club should be a guarantor of £5k for the team, but that the money should be raised by raffle or similar means - i.e. the club would only have to fork out in the event of not raising enough funds.
Gassing Station | General TVR Stuff & Gossip | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff