CompetitionPlus.com Forum  

Go Back   CompetitionPlus.com Forum > NHRA

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 3 Weeks Ago
Tim Charlet's Avatar
Tim Charlet Tim Charlet is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,386
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RVT1000 View Post
I'm promoting adults making decisions for themselves. I grew up in a house with two smoking parents at a time where smoking was everywhere and never smoked cigarettes although I did pick up cigars a few years ago. You want to save lives, ban big macs and doctors. Obesity and medical mistakes kill far more than smoking or vaping.

And I'm not buying a vaporizer is worse than a cigarette.
Don't take my word for it - do your own research and use basic logic. And I'm all for adults making their own decisions. Where I have a problem is informing children about 'subtable' alternatives to smoking cigarettes - that are NOT safer alternatives. Remember - TONS of KIDS go to NHRA Drag Races or watch it on TV...

Again - it doesn't matter - because if a tobacco company or vaping company or CBD company - or weed maps company - or medical MJ company wanted to promote their brands in NHRA - as Mark said, it would fall on deaf ears.

Plus, putting it on a Pro Stock car would be a HUGE waste of money...which is really where the root problem exists in this class (going back to the original thread). Just go find the money he says...hard to do when it's going to be dumped into a money pit.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 3 Weeks Ago
HEMI_guy HEMI_guy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 10,437
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RVT1000 View Post
I like to quote Sgt. Zim from Starship Troopers.."Come on, you apes! You wanna live forever?"
Don't expect to live forever, but I when I go I don't want a long slow miserable death if I can avoid it.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 3 Weeks Ago
2MNYTYS 2MNYTYS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 67
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a21stud View Post
So there isn’t any logical way to reduce Pro Stock costs to:
1. Increase the number of people willing and able to race a current Pro Stock car. - Looking at the results so far this year there have been 36 Top Fuelers, 34 Funny Cars and 33 Pro Stocks enter events. But Pro Stock is the problem by having 3 less than Top Fuel and 1 less than Funny Car....
2. Lower the annual costs to field a Pro Stock car to where a sponsor could see it fits their budget and they would reap enough increased sales due to it to make sponsorship profitable for them.

Pro Stock racers have received either cash or something of high enough value that they put the following company’s name or product name on their car and then could afford to race for an NHRA Pro Stock World Championship:
Mac Tools, Kendal, GM Performance, Slammers, AC Delco, Pennzoil, Sliick 50, Mopar, Jagermeister, Motorcraft, STP, Spitfire, Pypes, Matco, Valspar, McDonalds, Super Shops, Winnebago, Goodwrench, Ford Quality Care, Vegas General, Castrol GTX, Rod Shop, Moser Engineering, Miller Lite. - These sponsors in green were also sponsors of fuel cars, why are they not there now? But Pro Stock is the only one losing sponsors....
This list is not even close to being a complete list of Pro Stock sponsors over the last 48 years. (I just got tired of adding more names to the list.)

Most, if not all of these companies do not sponsor a Pro Stock or Top Fuel Or Funny Car anymore. But at one time all of them saw value and agreed to support a Pro Stock Team so it could race for the NHRA Pro Stock National Championship.

Someone with the power to ok that decision believed that spending the company’s marketing money to sponsor a Pro Stock car would produce enough sales or company good will to make it profitable. At some point the people that wrote those checks or ok’d the deal came to the conclusion that they would be better off spending their resources somewhere else… and they did it.

Richard Freeman is a smart and successful businessman. So how can he and all the other people with their time and money invested in owning a Pro Stock car convince businesses to move their marketing dollars to Pro Stock? Is there really a chance that he or any other current or future Pro Stock car owner can get one of the companies listed above to come back to Pro Stock? Where’s the value to business owners other than Summit and Jegs.
Advance, O’Reilly’s, Autozone and NAPA all see NHRA value. Just not in Pro Stock.
Half of your sponsor list that "left" Pro Stock also left the fuel classes as well.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 3 Weeks Ago
dragzilla's Avatar
dragzilla dragzilla is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 499
Default

And how many were business to business dealings?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 3 Weeks Ago
a21stud a21stud is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,286
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2MNYTYS View Post
Half of your sponsor list that "left" Pro Stock also left the fuel classes as well.
Which means those big name sponsors were not getting enough return on the money they spent to keep doing it.

After a few years of watching companies come on board and leave as soon as their contract with a team runs out, other potential sponsors know the ROI must not be there or the former sponsors wouldn't have left.

The key is to have enough value to support the cost of running a car in the class for the full year.

Some of you must have an idea of current ballpark costs to run a quality Pro Stock car for the full season. Is it 1/3 of a fuel cars costs? That many former Pro Stock sponsors moved up to the nitro classes means they saw the value in NHRA and increased their budget for a better return.

That means somehow Pro Stock needs to give more value to get and keep sponsors. Either increase the value or reduce the costs to run a full season.

NHRA isn't going to move TV time from nitro as they obviously believe nitro rules spectator interest and ticket sales. The ball is still in the Pro Stock owners hands to keep their gig going.
__________________
.
a21stud only refers to the more common 21 stud flathead motors early drag racers coveted before the Chy. Hemi and sbc came along.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 3 Weeks Ago
2MNYTYS 2MNYTYS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 67
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a21stud View Post
Which means those big name sponsors were not getting enough return on the money they spent to keep doing it.

After a few years of watching companies come on board and leave as soon as their contract with a team runs out, other potential sponsors know the ROI must not be there or the former sponsors wouldn't have left.

The key is to have enough value to support the cost of running a car in the class for the full year.

Some of you must have an idea of current ballpark costs to run a quality Pro Stock car for the full season. Is it 1/3 of a fuel cars costs? That many former Pro Stock sponsors moved up to the nitro classes means they saw the value in NHRA and increased their budget for a better return.

That means somehow Pro Stock needs to give more value to get and keep sponsors. Either increase the value or reduce the costs to run a full season.

NHRA isn't going to move TV time from nitro as they obviously believe nitro rules spectator interest and ticket sales. The ball is still in the Pro Stock owners hands to keep their gig going.
I think you a wrong. I don't have time to look all of them up, but I'm pretty sure most of the above sponsors left Pro Stock, Top Fuel and Funny car at the SAME TIME. Some left the fuel classes and went TO Pro Stock and vice versa. But the disturbing thing is that they left NHRA Drag Racing and went on to sponsor other entities because the ROI wasn't there with the NHRA.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 3 Weeks Ago
Gen. Disarray Gen. Disarray is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Edgewater Park N.J.
Posts: 97
Default

Corporate America doesn’t want us . Join Club NHRA ,bring your own cash or buy a ticket and become a professional spectator. End of Story !
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 3 Weeks Ago
a21stud a21stud is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,286
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gen. Disarray View Post
Corporate America doesn’t want us . Join Club NHRA ,bring your own cash or buy a ticket and become a professional spectator. End of Story !
No, Corporate America doesn't want NHRA drag racing at the current price.

Otherwise all of DSR, JFR, CKR sponsors and the Amalie, Parts Plus, SnapOn, Cat Spot, Rustoleum companies would be gone too. (Trying to ignore the ego or team owner sponsors like Scrappers and Capco as I doubt their ROI is even close to a break even, much less as profitable for a company as it should be.).

This is also ignoring the slam dunk sponsorship of Summit and Jegs.
After 20 years the Army T/F deal is looking stale and they must have found a better ROI deal for next year. Wonder if they would have stayed at 1/2 price?

Marketing researchers found that Nike reaped an additional $103 Million in sales with their $9.9 Million Tiger Woods endorsement. A 10 fold return! (probably a 5 fold return after costs of sale. Still a no brainer purchase.)

If drag racing could provide that type of return on a Pro Stock car sponsorship, there wouldn't be a problem with car count. If sponsoring a Pro Stocker for a season cost just 2 Million and the sponsors sales went up by just 6 Million and netted a 1-2 Million increase for their gamble, you would see sponsors lining up!

The costs to play vs. the return are too out of line. Sellouts indicate NHRA drag racing is not dead.
__________________
.
a21stud only refers to the more common 21 stud flathead motors early drag racers coveted before the Chy. Hemi and sbc came along.

Last edited by a21stud; 3 Weeks Ago at 05:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 3 Weeks Ago
slugbelch slugbelch is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 5,678
Default

I wonder if Scrappers, Capco, etc. is a tax write-off...
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 3 Weeks Ago
slugbelch slugbelch is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 5,678
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a21stud View Post
Marketing researchers found that Nike reaped an additional $103 Million in sales with their $9.9 Million Tiger Woods endorsement. A 10 fold return! (probably a 5 fold return after costs of sale. Still a no brainer purchase.)
... and still took on/hired/sponsored someone as cotroversial (and polarizing) as Kaepernick. No Nike crumbs over here. I remember Reebok dipping their toes in the sport that one time in the 90's.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.