ASK THE MXPERTS:
ARE SUPERCROSS-ONLY CONTRACTS GOING TO KILL THE 250/450 NATIONALS?
Tim Ferry.
Dear MXA,
It seems to me that with Supercross-only deals, that the days of riders racing the Nationals is over. Why would a rider want to race the Nationals if he can get paid to race only 17 indoor races? Are Supercross-Only contracts the wave of the future?
No. Emphatically no! Although Reed and Stewart had the horsepower to get Supercross-Only contracts, they are probably the last of the breed for quite awhile. Reed cracked when he realized that his potential of getting hired in 2010 would diminish if he didn't race the 2009 450 Nationals. It is no secret that the salary bubble has burst (or soon will as the old contracts expire) and the days of hiring someone to work part-time, represent the company part-time and return on investment part-time are coming to an end.
There are several major reason why Supercross-Only contracts are not the wave of the future.
(1) Dollar Cost Investing: The manufacturers are not selling any bikes this year because of the economic downturn (and other factors). Of course that means that “race wins” during the dead of winter (when Supercross is held), when no one is riding or spending money, don’t actually return on investment. The later starting 250/450 Nationals, which lead into the release of new bikes for next year (and hopefully better economic times) fit better into any serious marketing plan.
(2) Value For The Money: What benefit did Team Honda get out of the 2009 Supercross season? Or KTM and Kawasaki? Do you think that a manufacturer who barely makes the Supercross podium and hasn't won any races can sit out the AMA Nationals? You are only as good as your last race--and the secret message of factory racing teams is "buy our bikes because we win races on them" -- when you lose races the exact opposite message is delivered. Racing the 2009 Nationals was the best chance that Honda, Kawasaki and KTM had to win any kind of motorcycle race. Any business plan that strips you of your opportunity to win, in order to do something that you cannot win at is seriously flawed.
(3) Win Or Go Home: Ivan Tedesco, Mike Alessi, Davi Millsaps, Andrew Short, Cody Cooper, Josh Grant, Nick Wey, Tim Ferry, Michael Byrne and others did nothing in the 2009 Superceoss series. They don’t have good enough Supercross results to get a Supercross-Only contract (and when a rider who gets a Supercross-Only deal does not perform up to par, he is dropped). Unless riders outside of the current Supercross top three have an existing two-year deal, they are all potential firees instead of hirees. In the future the Supercross Champion will be the only rider who can sign a Supercross-only contract, everyone else must race the Nationals. They need the Nationals to save a disastrous season. Plus, the pay scale for Supercross-only will most likely be half for half the work. Riders who sit on the sidelines during the Nationals are not in the big picture from June until January.
(4) Job Security: Team managers are always claiming that if the AMA Nationals don’t make the changes that they want, they will become Supercross-Only teams. Who are they kidding? If Team Kawasaki, Honda, Yamaha, KTM or Suzuki became Supercross-Only teams, all of those team manager would be looking for jobs in short order (or working in the warehouse). How so? If your race team only plans to race from January until early May, the bean counters at the manufacturers will realize that it would be many million dollars cheaper to farm the team out to someone else as opposed to keeping it in-house. Rather than have an in-house race team with a big budget, Kawasaki'a accountants would quickly figure out that it would be a lot cheaper to just give Mitch Payton half of their in-house budget and let him run Team Kawasaki. Kawasaki would save money and Payton would probably deliver them winners. The same goes for Larry Brooks at L&M Yamaha. Aren't these two privateer teams the real powers-that-be at Yamaha and Kawasaki? Job security for the factory team managers, mechanics and professional hangers-on comes from racing the whole season; not badmouthing the Nationals.
(5) Public Relations: The first team to go Supercross-Only will have to sit back and watch all the publicity (from May 2009 until the following January 2010) go to the teams that are racing the Nationals. In a world where marketing men count impressions, being invisible is not savvy marketing. James Stewart has suddenly realized this and is doing a media blitz of press releases and "Ride Days" to try and stay relevant. Additionally, lot of sideline sitting riders are banking on the X Games to keep them in the public eye (even though it didn't do much for Josh Hansen or his sponsors last year). The other idea is to race in Paris or Genoa to stay visible, but those two races are invisible to American consumers...and being invisible doesn't do anything for your American sponsors...you might as well race at home in your backyard for all a European tour is worth.
(6) The Bottom Line: As harsh as it may sound, from a marketing point of view, Supercross-only riders aren’t worth the money they are paid. How can we say that? The guy who won the 2009 Supercross Championship has disappeared. In the process, his motorcycle company is having the worst sales year in the last 30 years. The manufacturer will sell less motorcycles, lose money on the bottom line and wonder why the workers, executives and janitors have to work all year, while Stewart is paid full-time to be a part-time employee. Even worse, many factories have started laying off workers...while the 2009 Supercross Champion is lounging by the pool with a big paycheck. That doesn't play well at the home office.
(7) Race To win: Supercross-Only deals only bring to light the fallacy of “Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday.” And this is not a function of the bad economy; Ricky Carmichael won 15 AMA National Championships, but almost every company he raced for saw a decline in the sales of the bike he raced (with the exception of new models that had no previous track record). If winning races sold motorcycles, then we would have all been riding Suzuki's during Ricky's time there. And, one look in the garage will prove that not to be true.
(8) The Good Of The Sport: Supercross-Only contracts are a luxury for the rider and a burden for the manufacturer (and the fan). Supercross has been on TV for years, but it hasn't been the saving grace of the manufacturer's sales departments. It is conceivable that Supercross doesn't sell motorcycles any more than the circus sells elephants. Local motocross, product quality and the joy of motorcycle riding are what moves the sport. Stressing the daredevilry of Supercross over the fun of outdoor riding might well be a damper on sales. And, we haven't even discussed motocross as the root of the sport of Supercross; the connection between motocross and the buying public; a manufacturer's need to have the company relate to the consumer by showing interest in what they do; or the fact that after a Supercross race is over the track is rolled up and taken away (leaving it unusable by the consumers for anything but baseball).
|
|