Nationals split: pre-75 or pre-78?

[Rossvickicampbell]

E74 - a completely different poll - which Nats would you ride pre/post showed majority would ride the earlier one (trying to avoid splits here).  This is a direct question - the poll above only asks about where the split should be but it seems like you said you would go to both as would most people - not as the earlier poll indicated - but as Nathan has said probably a moot point now the split is different.

Nathan - we have discussed before good attendences by pre75 at the last 2 Nats (pre Broadford sorry) - correct - whether that is enough to successfully run a Nats meet not yet sure but as long as people do not underestimate the popularity of pre 75 - nearly 30 bikes in that era alone at the Tassie and Qld Nats just from WA.  Enough at Conondale to require qualifying in some classes.

And as far as costs go - maybe MA should look at some of the fee structure then as well?

Rossco

[Nathan S]

And as far as costs go - maybe MA should look at some of the fee structure then as well?

Absolutely. The Nationals fee structure makes sense in the context of modern MX - with paid riders and transporters and media and all the rest.
We make a fuss about our Nationals (and with god reason!), but we're not in the same league as the moderns, or even historic road racing.

------------

I don't dispute that pre-75 is strong - overall, there's no doubt that it and Evo are our two strongest classes.
However, pre-70 is weak and the older classes are very wobbly. So the strength of the pre-75 class is balanced out by the weakness in the older eras.

The HEAVEN club groups the pre-78 bikes with the older bikes in their race format and 'special events' (ie: Canowindra, Crawford River and Evo Challenge). It works well - the two groups (pre-78 and older vs Evo and newer) are about equal in size.
I'm fairly sure that this split also minimises the overlap of riders across eras - when it comes to the split Nationals, this means the minimum number of riders who are 'forced' into attending both events, or minimum number of riders who will miss out on riding pre-78 because its been grouped into the Evo+ Nationals (that they weren't planning on attending).

-------------

A late observation because I've got time to fill in....
Who has entered both Pre-78 AND Evo/Pre-85 at the last three Nationals?
I can think of only a handful of people - including myself. I entered Evo 125 at Broadford only because my pre-70 bike wasn't ready and the Evo125 class was short on numbers. When the Evo bike was unreliable, it didn't worry me.
Others that I have entered in both eras:
Brad 090, Donny, and Snowy 76.
Young Luke from Tassie? Others?

In any case, its a pretty short list.

[SAABCOMBI]

So, is the split  confirmed by the vintage Commision and MA Aust for next year. so what will it be. my feeling towards all this, pre78 must stay with pre 75.

[bert]

What a load!

Pre '75 is for machines with 7" and 4" travel. This includes pre '60, pre '65, pre '70 and pre '75. Long travel machines (over 7 and 4) do not belong in this era.

The split of eras is simply defined by the suspension travel limitations.



 

[090]

What a load!

Pre '75 is for machines with 7" and 4" travel. This includes pre '60, pre '65, pre '70 and pre '75. Long travel machines (over 7 and 4) do not belong in this era.

The split of eras is simply defined by the suspension travel limitations.



 

Yes you are right. That is a load!
Using that logic, it doesn't belong in the later classes either as they have 12'' of travel.
Shit! It needs to be split in to three 

[fatboyracing]

Hi All,
The commission minutes from the last meeting should be released to the SCBs in the next day or so when they are please make sure that if you have anything to say about them that you put it in writing to your SCB and they in turn will send the comments/suggestions on to MA/Commission This is the ONLY way you will be heard.

Cheers
Fatboy

[worms]

aw gee, i tought we could debate it here and go round in circles with long winded replies and then do nothing except whinge afterwards, that would be heaps more fun

lets start a new thread on how to talk with your club to put in a submission or comment on the way forward, thats what we will do!!!!!!!!!!!

Cheers Trev

[shoey]

Hey Trev.

I respect to your experience relating to the nats that were hosted at the Connondale course in 2009 would it be possible to roughly break down the revenue the club collected and what the outcome was:

Just rough , round  figures Trev.

As it was run

In your experienced opinion would it have been viable , If it was run with say pre-78 down

In your experienced opinion would it have been viable  ,If it was run with say pre-78 down with No sponsor input

I feel this may enlighten some of the people debating the issue in relation to splitting the Nats.

[GMC]

Interesting questions Shoey
Part of the equation to consider is that if the events are split then it would fit into a 2 day event (maybe even 1 day if it's only Pre 75) thus reducing a lot of costs, ambulance costs being the main one.

[worms]

cheers for asking Shoey

my opinion,

National events without major sponors are not viable! possible but not viable. your profit comes from sponorship dollars.

To run just pre75 without pre 78 attached would only be viable in WA, so hence the need to run pre78 with pre 75 on the eastern seaboard, I think EVO and pre 85 could run a stand alone event with or without pre 78 but you would need sponorship or you run the risk of running at a loss

approx costs for 2009 Nationals $34 000, total income with approx $10 000 in sponors was $43 500 approx
2 clubs with about $5000 each in returns for an event that took 12 months of planning and a huge team of happy workers, yes they were happy.

I feel race fee's for National Titles will rise to cover the potential short falls from running these events no matter where pre 78 lies, how much they rise will be determined by the sponorship dollars invovled with each event,

Cheers Trev

[Davey Crocket]

Would love to know the profit or loss the Preston club made from the Broadford nats?....and how much it got propped up by MA or MVIC.....we'll probably never know the truth.

[VMX247]

Worms,
Does the total include the two clubs doing the catering or was that done by outsiders.?
cheers & thanks

[VMX247]

As a sponsor the split will be a bit of a dilemma . We now have to double the expense and half the exposure . 

Agree- as it makes the sorcing of sponsorship harder for the hosting Classic Nationals club.Competition alright 
cheers

[shoey]

Thanks Trev.

Great stats.

Members love viability and the understanding that their club stands to gain not only the prestige of running a successful national event but also gain a reasonable monetry return from all the work required to host a national event.

I can fully understand why you guy's had a happy team and an outcome to be very proud of.

Thats the attitude that attracts strong corporate sponsors that benefit our clubs and sport.

This issue the issue of division requires a blinkers off attitude and holistic view.

Significant analysis in respect to this proposed change will be required .

Prior to submissions to the appropriate bodies , has anybody carried out this analysis , if so , lets share the forcast revenues from         stand-alone events. The fiscal outcome in terms of the effect on riders is of particular interest. Does the entry cost go up accordingly and do the numbers drop away accordingly or do we have growth and increased financial growth.

Is the change for a particular the purpose , perhaps some one could elaborate more on the issues.

Not just time to run the event and the number of races per day , the tracks chopped up , some real reasons. So what do we as members and riders gain , after all its about us as the riders. Truth be told , obvious conclusion , no riders ,no income ,no events , no clubs.

Let's see some of the work put in that has led us to this conclusion of seperation.

As a group of companies , we are avid supporters of this  sport , and i know other groups and companies that are also avid supporters of this sport and we all have a genuine interest in all the points above.

So ............ , some answers , how did we arrive at this point.





Rob Shoemark

[Rossvickicampbell]

Shoey - what you mention brings up a quandry.  It is a little 6 of one 1/2 dozen of the other.  Yes dollar value will have a signficiant impact on whether a club can/can't want to/don't want to run a Nationals but this cannot be a deciding factor in whether the sport is split at a particular level.  This is a case of the tail wagging the dog.  Yes I agree - will have an impact but is the sport about whether clubs can afford to run the Nats or about giving good value for effort as far as the riders getting what they want.  At the end of the day it may make finding the sponsorship dollar harder yes.

Maybe they are mutually exclusive in this case?