Interesting News about who caused the Irish GP demise

Sounds like company mismanagement. They should have decided they couldn't afford it before they went forward with the event.

Tell us how the Northern Ireland Events Company would have anything to do with mx in the USA ?

[quote="FreshTopEnd":3f6wr2e6]Sounds like company mismanagement. They should have decided they couldn't afford it before they went forward with the event.[/quote:3f6wr2e6]
x2

They ran the business into the ground long before MX.

Oh, you forgot this part, Jay
[b:3f6wr2e6][i:3f6wr2e6]Other overspends listed by the show include £100,000 on the Circuit of Ireland International Rally, £75,000 on a Coca-Cola film and TV festival for young people and £173,000 on running costs and professional fees between 2005 and 2007. [/b:3f6wr2e6][/i:3f6wr2e6]

But hey, why worry about facts when you have an axe to grind or an agenda

Oh, one other thing, considering we know you don't sit around reading UK/Irish business news, who spoon fed you that info?

so i'll put it another way you may understand 500guy, what has Northern Ireland Events Company got to do with youthstream looking into the nationals

I have no axe to grind.
I have no vested interest either way.
I just want more and I want better, and however we get to that goal, so be it.
Unlike you, I have no bias.
I am willing to look at and discuss all options openly and evenly
Unlike you, I have never said I do not want the any particular company running the show.
I have actually said the opposite, that I'd prefer the NPG, I just want to see a better set up

Bruton Smith should run the nationals.

[quote="Nemo":230iyxz7]Tell us how the Northern Ireland Events Company would have anything to do with mx in the USA ?[/quote:230iyxz7]

Here's where a little transparency in what the AMA asked for would help. The line of argument is this: YS demands a fee for the right to run a GP ($300K according to GL a couple years ago). It also controls significant revenue opportunities from the event, and that limits the event organizer's opportunity to recoup its expenses. So the Irish debacle is held up as an example of how YS strip mines revenue from the GP franchise to the detriment of a stable event base. There's a reasonable basis for the argument, and that YS's economic model is better for YS than it is for the sport.

But it also begs the question of whether YS would be allowed to operate the US Nationals under the same economic structure. Knowing what the AMA was asking from its future promoter and what target YS and NPG and other entities would be shooting at would go a long way to keeping folks on track.

i see what you say freshtopend but i cant see how people like 500guy dismiss youthstream because of a couple of gps that didnt make any money, people seem to forget that mx in the usa is far bigger then it is in europe, i dont know maybe jay hasnt been to a gp in a few years so hes just making his judgement on what he reads on the net.

to be honest i think youthstream would be good for the nationals with the market you guys have over there


[quote:1j7fjlvr]Sounds like company mismanagement. They should have decided they couldn't afford it before they went forward with the event.[/quote:1j7fjlvr]

anyone can put on a gp if they have enough money, wether or not they make a loss is down to more then youthstream like you say the irish promoter got in too deep and made a big loss which seems like it wasnt new to them

Jay, I can sell a bicycle tomorrow and set it up to lose money.

Not saying this happened, but if I give myself a fee of $500,000, but the event "loses" $500,000...did I really "lose" $500,000?

Aside from all that, you're basing your premise on a mismanaged company, the Irish promotions group.
Remember the old computer saying, garbage in-garbage out

[quote="Jarid332":17elkmen]Bruton Smith should run the nationals.[/quote:17elkmen]

x2

[quote="500guy":35xlg332]Looks like The MX promotor was the main helper in the demise of the Irish GP and MXoN

[b:35xlg332]The show claims the company’s involvement in Motocross biking events may have sowed the seeds of its destruction. [/b:35xlg332]

Funding of £50,000 was approved by the body’s board of directors for the Motocross Grand Prix in 2005, but it ended up with an overspend of £369,000 for the event, the documentary claims.

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/12m-de ... 3786769.jp


Sure we want this in USA

Wake up people[/quote:35xlg332]

The USA is covered. You have the Dinger cleaning up corruption and abuse. When he gets done here, send him over. " title="Smile">

The new AMA can kick some ass.

How dare you introduce facts into this and not bash Youthstream!

SHILL!!
SHILL!!

You think youthstream would just take a percentage of the money that was made on the event. Why charge 500 grand if the race might not even make that?

It's called a "sanction" or "rights" fee
It's common practice in all forms of racing.
When a NASCAR race is held at Bristol, Bristol pays a fee to NASCAR for the event
When F1 races at Silverstone, they pay a fee to F1
When a National is held at Southwick, Local 338 (owners) pay a fee

It's nothing unusual.

Jay, care to dispute any of Stefan's comments or are you just going to poo-poo it with no facts at all to back it up?

The only issue is where you set the fee, and whether it is set so high that quality people say no thank you and step away. But it may not have anything to do with what the AMA may require here.

What I think is worth asking is whether this sort of buy and sell the rights middleman type of arrangement is the best one to grow the sport. It is no different from what AMA Pro Racing was set up to do, and it failed according the AMA.

Yeah, but BE sport manages to get way bigger while he get richer.

I think the fee issue is almost a sidebar, it's seems to me more about how event risk gets spread.

[quote="500guy":fhoo0gmj]Keep working it, maybe they will start paying you to be a Youthstream lap dog too[/quote:fhoo0gmj]


thats pretty ironic coming from the biggest npg suckler on the planet .

I tend to view it as a franchisee situation.

If I want to open a Dunkin Donuts, I pay a fee and have to follow their rules and regulations
If I want to run a National or a GP, I pay a fee and have to follow their rules and regulations

My fee does not change if my Dunkin Donuts loses money or fails, nor do the rules and regulations.
Dunkin Donuts will not absorb my losses nor pay my debts in the event of failure, regardless of reason
It is the risk you take in business.

Operating a race is the same thing.
You take a business risk

The franchiser collects their fees, risk is on the franchisee

That's oversimplified to the point of silliness Dave. Nationals (or GPs) are a one-day, once a year shot, not a day-in and day-out business.

Here's a simple shift of risk: if the AMA and its ultimate promotional partner wants a track, they should rent it at the rate the track operator believes he can get a fair rate of return for his work in preparing the facility to standard for the event, and the AMA and promotional partners who are supposed to get people to the gate get the gate and promotional revenue. It's only half a flip from the current YS model.

Then you open up potential legal issues over revenue, percentages and profits.

Seems much easier to me, business wise, and looking at it from both sides, to just say "If you want a race, you must do it like this and the fee is this"

Pay your fee, follow the rules and whatever you make is your profit.
Do it right and do it smart, you can make a lot of money
Do it poorly, you don't

If it rains, you should've insured the event (which you can do) to cover losses.

Your way means I have to split my profit for the event at my track.
My way means I get to keep all my profits, no matter how I work my books.
I take more risk, but I increase my opportunity to make more.

[quote:2injkmx3]Then you open up potential legal issues over revenue, percentages and profits.[/quote:2injkmx3]

Actually, you don't at all. You pay the track owner a contract rate for the facility (if the parties agree), and then the promoter runs the race and collects the money without having the accounting issues at the end of the day, or the ridiculous issues we have today in the AMA series about who is a series sponsor, a presenting sponsor, an event sponsor and so on, and the issues with whose money is what at the end of the day.

Now, an organizer has to pay the series promoter, who controls some of therevenue from the event along with the risk free payment of the fee for the right to run under the sanction, and the organizer bears almost all of the individual event risk with limited revenue sources. And on top of that you're asking the event organizer to expend a bunch of front-end capital on facility improvements for the privilege of getting handed the event specific risk.

Nope, I think what I propose is much clearer (which equals less chance of disputes once a deal is done) and much more equitable.

So, should we shift to why in the world the promoter runs the MXdN as a pure commercial profit event while riders and teams are supposed to show up and race for pride? This is wicked ass-backwards sport sometimes.

I see your point.
That's lawyer-view
LOL!

[quote="500guy":20l26knh]Youthstream claims 1 million was made at the last MXoN

Surely they can pay healthy sums to the riders or teams to offset costs ? Why is it the riders are expected to donate their time while everyone fills their pockets with money ?[/quote:20l26knh]
Jay, who pays the purse, the promoter, track or the AMA?