BSI Problems?

[Rob B]

BSI seem to be having some problems now, anyone noticed that there is only 3 sponsors now on the airfence and centre, Castrol, Viedec and Fiat Vans, there use to be loads, the meeting sponsors on the front of the bikes use to be big like Coca Cola, Egg etc now we have HSE in Slovenia and Meridian Lifts in Sweden that nobody will have heard of. Also they are cutting back on the big stadiums in Sweden and they have let off a lot of their staff who use to work on the airfence and organisation. They said they would promote the Australian GP themselves but it's never happened.

[tomhaines]

Things like promoting an Aussie GP arent going to happen overnight.

BSI are most probably still feeling the after effects finacially of Gothenburg 2003. (£1million losses?)

 

Chances are, these 'big' sponsors a few years ago were paying very little for what, at the time was not as big a product as it is now. Sponsorship prices for SGP I would expect have gone up quite alot in the past 3/4/5 years.

 

Viedec, Castrol & Fiat Vans are still big companies. Egg simply sponsored Cardiff, then Fiat Vans got that GP.

 

I reckon that we will soon see some GP's outside of Europe, it takes time and they don't want to take any risks (Ullevi for BSI, and Sydney for the local promoter ended up as huge losses)

[SammyR]

Rob,

If BSI are genuinely having problems, is that a good or a bad thing?

From an Elite League perspective, the GPs are very disruptive regarding riders and fixtures. And using riders without really paying for them is really cheeky.

But taking a global view, BSI's involvement has dragged speedway into the 21st century and has raised it's profile in Britain, Scandinavia and much of Europe.

For instance, would the Elite League be getting all the SkyTV money(and consequent exposure) if it weren't for the high-profile televised GPs, which attracted the broadcaster in the first place..I doubt it.

Sam.

[SCB]

From an Elite League perspective, the GPs are very disruptive regarding riders and fixtures. And using riders without really paying for them is really cheeky.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So BSI taking 24 riders (down to 16 next year) minus the 2 or 3 who don't ride in the UK is 21 (13 next year) for between 6 and 16 days a year (rider only have to turn up for the GP's these days and have not got to ride in practice) is "very disruptive"? Yet Sweden and Poland taking rider for 20(ish ?) days a year is ok?

 

Using the riders without paying for them? Again, BSI are not allowed to do it for a World Championship without people monaing yet Sweden, Denmark, Poland and Germany can take whoever they like for 20(ish ?) meetings a year that in some cases might mean very little (compared to a World Championship).

 

 

I wish people woudl think before they actuse the GP's of being restrictive and stealing riders, they do it no more than the Polish, Swedeish, Danish, Czech and Germna leagues, yet do people moan about them? No!!!

 

Also did people moan when rider used to have to go through all the qualifying rounds years ago? That was a few extra days when rider were taken awya but that was ok, the new format is not

 

IMO, if BSI are having problems it's more bad than good for us, the speedway fans but it might be good for the promoters, who as Kevin Meynell has said numerous times, can run the GP's themselves.

Edited September 7, 2004 by SCB

[sward]

I wish people woudl think before they actuse the GP's of being restrictive and stealing riders, they do it no more than the Polish, Swedeish, Danish, Czech and Germna leagues, yet do people moan about them? No!!!

 

Also did people moan when rider used to have to go through all the qualifying rounds years ago? That was a few extra days when rider were taken awya but that was ok, the new format is not

 

IMO, if BSI are having problems it's more bad than good for us, the speedway fans but it might be good for the promoters, who as Kevin Meynell has said numerous times, can run the GP's themselves.

 

Well said, totally agree.

[The Know]

What a load of rubbish as normal. All the large so called sponsors have gone because all they put in was products no money. If you knew what they charge an elite sponsor, title sponsor as well as tele rights speedway federations and so on you would not make these comments as the bsi are working very hard and doing a fantastic job for speedway.

[SCB]

So after the GP's all the rider used to nip around to the local KFC for a bargin bucket each and had a can of coke(or was it a crate of 24 cokes), then they went out and splashed some cash (or is that credit card, thanks to Egg and American Express(blink and you miss there logo, I have) all whilst driving around in the JCB's or is that Fiat's? Then they go home and feed there chicken some LNB chicken feed.

 

 

Incidently, William F1 only have (or at least had) ONE (1) sponsor that didn't give them products (Compaq provided all the teams computers, they were sponsored by oil and ful companies who provided all the oil and fuel etc) the ONE (1) exception was the brewery that produces Budweiser, I can't think why they didn't provide any of there product

Edited September 7, 2004 by SCB

[Trees]

]Of course they are working hard to make a profit for themselves and of course they are doing a fantastic job for themselves or himself whatever the case might be but for speedway I'm not so sure, they could drop the series at the blink of an eye if they wanted no doubt.

[fatface]

This discussion highlights something for me which I don't really understand - who actually owns the riders? For example, when Belle Vue paid a transfer fee for Jason Crump, does that mean they own him or are they simply buying the British rights to him?

[Mylor]

Of course they are working hard to make a profit for themselves ............. they could drop the series at the blink of an eye if they wanted no doubt.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's what business is all about Trees.

 

It's why I and many others on this forum go to work. Why expect anything different from JP and BSI?

 

Yes they could drop the series in the blink of an eye in just the same way they took it on in the first place but why would they want to as long as it turns a profit and potentially a much bigger profit. They aren't the only ones making a living, or part of one, from the GP's. Think of the hundreds of people involved in staging just the British GP in Cardiff. They all got paid and the money came from where it always does, the paying customers who want to see the show, whether they paid at the turnstyle or paid their Sky subscriptions.

 

We wouldn't think of criticising ITV for employing actors to appear in a drama only to drop them at the end of the series. Same thing really.

[Kevin Meynell]

BSI are most probably still feeling the after effects finacially of Gothenburg 2003. (£1million losses?)

 

I think it's unlikely that BSI took much of the loss. It's usually the local organisers who are financially responsible for the GPs, so SVEMO undoubtedly suffered most. This said, it can't have done BSI's credibility much good, and they may be paying in terms of lost sponsorship this season.

[Kevin Meynell]

Yet Sweden and Poland taking rider for 20(ish ?) days a year is ok?

 

Yes, because they run on Tuesdays and Sundays respectively, when no BEL has its regular race night. In fact, Sweden chose Tuesdays many years ago precisely because it wouldn't clash with the then British League.

 

By contrast, the SGP is run on prime days for staging league racing, and clashes (or did) with at least four BEL teams. BSI can also re-organise GPs when they wish, without any regard to existing fixtures.

 

Using the riders without paying for them?

 

The difference is that the Swedish and Polish leagues generally do not take away riders from BEL fixtures. The SGP does, and the BSPA has no power to stop them because FIM meetings have priority.

 

Also did people moan when rider used to have to go through all the qualifying rounds years ago?

 

Again, the difference was the British speedway generally benefitted from the World Championship because it staged at least two rounds in Britain where the profits where shared between promotions. British speedway also profited whenever a World Final was staged in Britain. Nowadays, only BSI profits from the World Championship.

 

Kevin Meynell has said numerous times, can run the GP's themselves.

 

Well I don't actually have any confidence that they would do a good job, but neither is it right that a company unrelated to the national speedway leagues is running the SGP.

[Kevin Meynell]

who actually owns the riders? For example, when Belle Vue paid a transfer fee for Jason Crump, does that mean they own him or are they simply buying the British rights to him?

 

They only own the British rights to him, and in principle can't stop him riding in other countries unless it clashes with a domestic fixture to which he's contracted to ride in.

 

Poland has a similar asset system, although I don't think Sweden does. AFAIK, riders in the Swedish league merely sign-up with teams on an annual basis and are free to move without a transfer fee when out of contract.

 

The situation with the SGP is different though, because it is not in free competition with the national competitions. It can stage its events whenever it wants and without regard to other fixtures, and it can use any riders that it wants (whether they're needed elsewhere or not).

[Kevin Meynell]

So after the GP's all the rider used to nip around to the local KFC for a bargin bucket each and had a can of coke(or was it a crate of 24 cokes)

 

Well, I guess KFC weren't actually providing the bargain buckets because BSI were taking legal action against them to recover the sponsorship they defaulted on

 

BTW - the SGP sponsors are most definitely paying hard cash.

[Kevin Meynell]

It's why I and many others on this forum go to work. Why expect anything different from JP and BSI?

 

I don't think anyone is criticising BSI for trying to make as much money as possible - good luck to them. However, I do question why the speedway authorities, and particularly the major speedway leagues, allow them to get away with doing so.

 

BSI don't do anything particularly clever, and certainly nothing that existing speedway promoters couldn't have done if they had half-a-brain. Speedway could then be sharing GBP 0.5 million amongst itself, instead of it going into JP's pocket.

[SCB]

Yet Sweden and Poland taking rider for 20(ish ?) days a year is ok?

 

Yes, because they run on Tuesdays and Sundays respectively, when no BEL has its regular race night. In fact, Sweden chose Tuesdays many years ago precisely because it wouldn't clash with the then British League.

 

By contrast, the SGP is run on prime days for staging league racing, and clashes (or did) with at least four BEL teams. BSI can also re-organise GPs when they wish, without any regard to existing fixtures.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

To be fair, BSI took over the runing of the GP's after the Saturday race not was fixed so to blame BSI for the Saturday night is unfair. Can you imagine how un happy people would be if BSI started having GP's on a Monday night? (least used EL day, AFAIK). People would moan GP's were nto run on the weekend like all other major sports. Or we could go with the I'm alright jack attitude and suggets GP's are run on Tuesdays and/or Sundays and so upset EVERY Polish or Swedish team rather than just a few EL teams.

 

The EL should not be so greedy and expect 5 days for it's self, 4 days is more than enough (3 too many!).

 

The reason the Swedish and Polish leagues don't take our rider is because they have there own race day (Tuesday and Sunday) and no EL teams ride that day, so if the EL promoters didn't want the GP's to take riders away do what certain clubs have done and not race on a Sunday. AFAIK, GP's are only run on Saturdays yet the Poles and Swedes do occasionally have meetings on alternative days, so surely they're moe of a hindrance than the GP's? At least if no team made the choice to run on a Saturday the GP's would never interfere, yet by not riding on a Tuesday and Sunday, on occasions the Swedes and Poles have called riders back.

[Kevin Meynell]

To be fair, BSI took over the runing of the GP's after the Saturday race not was fixed so to blame BSI for the Saturday night is unfair.

 

I'm not complaining about BSI themselves (although I'd like to know how they wangled a 20-year contract from the FIM). They are a commercial company who were given the rights to the SGP, and it's quite natural they wish to maximise their profitability. I'm merely pointing out the facts of the matter.

 

The EL should not be so greedy and expect 5 days for it's self, 4 days is more than enough (3 too many!).

 

Unfortunately, you're only seeing things from the point of view of a BPL fan who is unaffected by the SGP. The British leagues ran on Saturdays long before BSI came along, so why should they be the ones who have to change, particularly when it doesn't benefit them in any way?

 

GP's are only run on Saturdays

 

In effect, they take three days because practice is on the Friday (and although it's supposedly not compulsory, most riders have to attend), and the restaging date is on the Sunday. That rules out 27 days (plus another 7 days for the SWC) during the season, and during the time of year when the weather is usually good.

[Trees]

That's what business is all about Trees.

 

It's why I and many others on this forum go to work. Why expect anything different from JP and BSI?

 

Yes they could drop the series in the blink of an eye in just the same way they took it on in the first place but why would they want to as long as it turns a profit and potentially a much bigger profit. They aren't the only ones making a living, or part of one, from the GP's. Think of the hundreds of people involved in staging just the British GP in Cardiff. They all got paid and the money came from where it always does, the paying customers who want to see the show, whether they paid at the turnstyle or paid their Sky subscriptions.

 

We wouldn't think of criticising ITV for employing actors to appear in a drama only to drop them at the end of the series. Same thing really.

Yeah I guess I do expect something different from a company running the premier speedway event in the world and that is put some of the profit back into grassroots

speedway instead of keeping it all to themselves. Yes, speedway is a business but it is a sport as well and especially in this country where we are lacking facilities for youngsters we could do with some monies being put back in from the top.

[Whacko]

we need to rellocate the british GP if speedway is to continue to prosper.

If JP contacts George English on sunday evening, I'm sure george would only be too happy to pass on the Landlords of le stade de brough's telephone number.

[fatface]

quote]

Yeah I guess I do expect something different from a company running the premier speedway event in the world and that is put some of the profit back into grassroots

speedway instead of keeping it all to themselves. Yes, speedway is a business but it is a sport as well and especially in this country where we are lacking facilities for youngsters we could do with some monies being put back in from the top.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Unfortunately you are living cloud cuckoo land if you expect an international private company to plough their profits back into something because it's "the right thing to do".

 

Anyway, why should BSI give any money to the development of British youngsters, just because we have largely sat on our a***s and done nothing about it for all these years. Sweden and Denmark have developed youngsters without BSI money. Why can't we?

 

I would exempt Sheffield from my criticism. They have shown what can be done with a little bit of hard work and imagination. Why can't other promoters follow their lead?