BSI Problems?

[Liesdale]

Sweden Denamrk and Poland?

 

I think you're missing my point. Why should BSI expect to benefit from the development programmes of any country, whilst putting nothing back themselves? For that matter, why should any country bother to develop riders when they can be used by the SGP without any compensation (be that financial or otherwise)?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You make soem very interesting points Kevin, but what are the British, Swedish, Polish authorities going to do about it?

[Rico]

And where will BSI get the next generation of riders for the SGP?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I've tried biting my tongue on this particular topic, but now I've failed.

 

Kevin, your point above I have read as being directly related to Britain - we don't hear of such arguments coming from the other big speedway nations - correct me if I'm wrong on that front.

 

I wouldn't say Britain exactly have a conveyor belt of riders coming through at the moment in the GPs - other than Loram winning in 2000, no rider has finished in the top 3 of the GP series since its inception in 1995.

 

It's a bit of a chicken and the egg argument going on here and I'd have to agree that we should be looking to get our own house in order first. I'm sure the money coming in from Sky would outweigh the potential profit share from 'owning' the world championship rights.

 

The Speedway Academy will hopefully see some new riders, firstly ready for the Elite League and secondly, if they harbour the ambition to become World Champion stepping up to the GP Series.

 

Imagine the scenario in the EL at the moment if teams were told to build with one foreigner as per Polish rules at the moment. The standard would drop dramatically. However when you look at the number of riders coming through the ranks in Poland then you can see the benfit of such a move - we just don't have the riders at the moment to fill our own top flight, come to think of it there are probably too many foreigners filling up our PL teams, which should be the breeding ground of British riders capable of moving up to the EL.

 

Sorry I've probably gone off on a huge tangent here - but I personally don't see BSI and the GP series as the big baddies they are often made out to be.

 

Rico

[Kevin Meynell]

Rico,

 

Kevin, your point above I have read as being directly related to Britain

 

There are quite a few issues here, so I'll try and disentangle them ;-) In many respects, my arguments equally apply to Poland and Sweden (not to mention other countries), but it's Britain that happens to be most affected by the SGP. As you'll know from the mailing list, I'm far from being a little Englander, but equally Britain is one of the major income generators in world speedway, yet has in effect been rolled-over by those with little or no financial stake in the sport.

 

You don't really hear objections from Poland and Sweden about the SGP because through virtue of historical accident, their leagues do not directly clash with the GPs. However, if the GP ever expands further, it will certainly start to cause problems with the Polish League because they will have to start scheduling fixtures on GP reserve days.

 

I also think that many countries have not yet woken-up to the real nature of the SGP. Once they realise how much money BSI is making, and how they are getting next to nothing despite taking nearly all the financial risk, then things may start changing. Indeed, the fact that the SGP has not expanded beyond a few countries is possibly an indication that the number of mugs are running out.

 

That is not to say that I have anything against BSI. They spotted an opportunity, the FIM agreed to the terms, and they went out and raised a decent amount of television and sponsorship money. Fair play to them, and who can blame them for trying to make as much money as possible.

 

However, you have to ask whether all this is a good deal for the sport. In the past, the profits from World Finals were usually shared by the tracks in the staging country, but now they're simply going to a private company. In effect, GBP 0.5 million is being lost to the sport each year.

 

Now I would take the point that much of this is new money that has been generated through the efforts of BSI, but one has to question why the likes of the BSPA, SVEMO and the PZM couldn't have formed a promotional company and done exactly the same?

 

The next problem is the amount of disruption that the SGP causes to the British leagues. With the agreement of the FIM, they are able to schedule GPs on prime domestic race nights, use any riders they wish, and re-arrange fixtures without any concern for anything else. That might be all well and good if domestic speedway was compensated in some manner, or if the SGP demonstrably brought new fans and/or money into local tracks, but I don't think that's the case at all. I do think the SGP possibly interests former fans of the sport who can watch it all on Sky, but attendances have arguably not increased in Britain as a result, and certainly not to the extent that it compensates for all the disruption.

 

Now that we've established that the SGP's benefit to domestic speedway is marginal at best, that raises the question of use of rider assets. The SGP is currently able to take the pick of the riders from the domestic leagues, regardless of whether those leagues need them. Yet it is precisely those leagues that bear the cost of developing these riders. The argument has nothing to do with which country has the best development programmes, but the fact that the SGP can use other organisations' assets without compensation. The SGP could not continue to exist without the domestic leagues, yet it simultaneously undermines those leagues (mostly the British leagues).

 

We now come to the question of how good BSI actually are at promoting the SGP. I personally feel they made a decent enough start in the first three years after obtaining the rights, but I don't think they've done anything great since then. They have established 2 or 3 'glamour' GPs which draw crowds on par with about 10-15 years ago, but the other GPs do little better than before BSI came along. They've also had a number of very poorly-organised events (including the SWC), which I think is unacceptable for a professional events company that can call on eight staff plus local organisers. In addition, the much-vaunted expansion programme has yet to happen (and in fact we're perhaps even likely to see a reduction in events at lower-key venues), whilst the levels of prize money have remained static which makes a full-time series even less likely.

 

In conclusion, I think you've got to separate the issues of whether BSI do a good job or not, and the consequences of their involvement in speedway as a whole. I personally do not believe the FIM has done the sport any favours by giving a 20-year contract to a commercial company with no domestic speedway interests.

 

I'm sure the money coming in from Sky would outweigh the potential profit share from 'owning' the world championship rights.

 

Why is it a mutually exclusive thing? Can't the BSPA get their own Sky deal without supporting BSI and the SGP? [bTW - this is a rhetorical question as I already know the answer ;-)]

 

Imagine the scenario in the EL at the moment if teams were told to build with one foreigner as per Polish rules at the moment.

 

Well if the Polish Leagues don't drop the restrictions on EU riders next season, the European Commission will be receiving a letter. Poland can't expect to have the benefits of EU membership without fulfilling their obligations as well. I see the point of developing your own riders, but sport can't exist above the laws that everyone else has to follow.

Edited September 10, 2004 by Kevin Meynell

[The Know]

There seems to be one major problem with this you cannot have the BSPA or any other federation taking over the sgp rights as there all bent. Do you think the likes of TR-MF and so on would not keep all the money. The bsi are independant from all other speedway and that is how it shoud be.

[Rico]

No time for a full reply to your post Kevin - got to make my way to Cowley to see the big match

 

I agree with a few of your points, especially in relation to the promotional issue, however others I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on. It's an emotive issue, some are pro-SGP and others aren't.

 

Looks like the national federations missed the boat, especially when it came to the renewing of the contract - that was the point they could have stepped in, but in reality could you really see that happening? I wouldn't be surprised if the time and effort of staging some of the recent world finals was worth the small gain to be made, especially when you then start dividing that small sum up around the tracks. Then again, would the promoters use the money they did receive to enhance the sport at grass-roots level, no they'd have just paid the money out to Rider X to entice him to ride for them the following season.

 

I am guessing that none of the fee paid (I assume that was part of the contract) to the FIM gets filtered through to the national federations as things stand at present (genuine question)

 

I personally don't think we'll ever see a full-time series, it will remain merely a series of competition, whether that takes in countries outside of the SGPs present incumbents is another matter entirely.

 

As for your point about the Polish league, on a general principle I agree, however without opening up a huge political debate there appear to be countries who are able to enforce their rules (noticed you are only allowed to take bring back 200 cigarettes from the Czech Republic for example - not sure who wanted that). Given the performances of the young poles in the SWC I'd say they'll be happy to get away with that one as long as they can.

 

Must run

 

Rico

[Kevin Meynell]

There seems to be one major problem with this you cannot have the BSPA or any other federation taking over the sgp rights as there all  bent. Do you think the likes of TR-MF and so on would not keep all the money.

 

That's as maybe, but it's up to the BSPA to agree their financial relationships with the likes of TR. Then again, you might equally ask how BSI managed to get the SGP rights for 20 years!

 

The bsi are independant from all other speedway and that is how it shoud be.

 

And what do they actually contribute to the rest of speedway - in terms of attracting support and/or finance? Everyone repeats the mantra that the SGP is good for speedway, but I'm afraid I don't see bigger crowds and more sponsors at British tracks.

Edited September 10, 2004 by Kevin Meynell

[The Know]

The bsi signed a very long deal with the FIM as they knew it would take time to get it working correctly and to make money. Why should thet spend many years building it up to lose it to someone else. Regarding british speedway why should they help it when in the past they have only put bsi down. But regardless of this john p is doing a lot for britishspeedway behind closed doors which will soon be known by all.

[Kevin Meynell]

The bsi signed a very long deal with the FIM as they knew it would take time to get it working correctly and to make money.

 

Yes, but why did the *FIM* agree to a 20 year deal? With the best will in the world, even if BSI were doing a good job now, a lot could change over the next 20 years, not to mention that other companies might come in with better offers.

 

But regardless of this john p is doing a lot for britishspeedway behind closed doors which will soon be known by all.

 

Well I look forward to seeing what it is.

[Kevin Meynell]

Looks like the national federations missed the boat, especially when it came to the renewing of the contract - that was the point they could have stepped in, but in reality could you really see that happening?

 

Of course, the national federations and leagues allowed the World Championship to be run down in the first place, so one wouldn't expect much imagination from them. The fact that an average outfit was even able to come-in and upsurp them, shows just how poorly the sport is run.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if the time and effort of staging some of the recent world finals was worth the small gain to be made

 

I'm not necessarily advocating a return to the one-off World Finals. The SGP probably does offer more possibilities for attracting television and sponsorship deals, but at the moment no-one is benefitting except BSI.

 

Then again, would the promoters use the money they did receive to enhance the sport at grass-roots level, no they'd have just paid the money out to Rider X to entice him to ride for them the following season.

 

I don't doubt it, but it would still be money in the pockets of the local tracks rather than that of one individual.

 

I am guessing that none of the fee paid (I assume that was part of the contract) to the FIM gets filtered through to the national federations as things stand at present (genuine question)

 

There are unsubstantiated rumours that the FIM pays the SGP prize monies, which would presumably be funded out of the amounts that BSI pays them for the rights. If this is correct, then that would not leave much (if any) money for redistribution elsewhere.

 

As for your point about the Polish league, on a general principle I agree, however without opening up a huge political debate there appear to be countries who are able to enforce their rules

 

They can try it on, but people need to complain about violations. BTW - this equally applies to the various illegal actions of the British Customs & Excise.

[fatface]

Sweden Denamrk and Poland?

 

I think you're missing my point. Why should BSI expect to benefit from the development programmes of any country, whilst putting nothing back themselves? For that matter, why should any country bother to develop riders when they can be used by the SGP without any compensation (be that financial or otherwise)?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You've obviously got a big problem with BSI. It's almost as if you are suggesting that riders that have been through youth development programmes and go onto a high level shouldn't go and compete in that nasty Grand Prix, all for the benefit of those terrible men at BSI.

 

Development programmes should be about getting more riders into the sport, new generations of riders into the sport and consequently fresh talent at the very top of the sport. Who benefits? Clubs, supporters, sponsors, promoters, etc. or in other words "Speedway", the whole sport benefits and unfortunately for you that includes your sworn enemies at BSI.

 

If you are trying to make the point that BSI puts nothing directly back into grass-roots development, then thanks for stating the bleeding obvious for us all. What they have undeniably done is increase the profile of the sport's top men and the World Championships - team and individual.

 

Consequently, interest in the sport is now much higher than it was in the bad old days pre-SGP and pre-SWC. Old supporters have come back and new ones have arrived. We have crossed this bridge before Kevin, but I did dig out figures that proved there has been around a 50% increase in the amount of operating tracks in Britain since our profile has been raised. Coincidence? I'm sure you will try and prove it is.

 

Over to you, King Copy-Paste.

[Guest Carp]

The SGP probably does offer more possibilities for attracting television and sponsorship deals, but at the moment no-one is benefitting except BSI.

Even taking this at face value and assuming there's no benefit to anyone bar BSI, surely they deserve to benefit because they're the ones taking the risk.

 

The "prestige" big-stadium GPs represent a considerable gamble on the part of BSI, and no financial small investment. It would have extremely easy of them to just leave all the GPs at existing facilities and take a small profit from each, but they had the balls to go to the bigger venues and I really don't see how they can be criticised for that.

 

The other rather reassuring benefit of BSIs involvment is it spreads that financial risk around nicely. Or, to put it another way, if for some reason SGP has a terrible year financially, it doesn't really effect national speedway - no-one else gets hurt. Personally I'd worry immensely if league promoters were heavily involved in the financing of SGP, because any serious GP financial problems would have a direct impact on club speedway and we may well loose teams as a result.

[Kevin Meynell]

You've obviously got a big problem with BSI.

 

If you read my posts properly, I clearly state that I've nothing against BSI. I'm simply not taken in by the hype that surrounds the SGP, and I also question whether the current setup is beneficial to speedway as a whole.

 

It's almost as if you are suggesting that riders that have been through youth development programmes and go onto a high level shouldn't go and compete in that nasty Grand Prix

 

Not at all, but the fact remains that they're only financially able to compete in the SGP because they also ride in one or more of the national leagues. Yet, the SGP does not benefit at least one of those leagues in any conceivable way.

 

unfortunately for you that includes your sworn enemies at BSI.

 

I don't have any enemies at BSI - I don't know anyone there and couldn't care less what they do because I can choose where to spend my money. I'm merely of the opinion that the current SGP setup doesn't particularly benefit the sport as a whole, despite what we're endlessly told.

 

Consequently, interest in the sport is now much higher than it was in the bad old days pre-SGP and pre-SWC.

 

Is it? I would say that overall crowd levels at BEL and BPL tracks have never been lower.

 

I did dig out figures that proved there has been around a 50% increase in the amount of operating tracks in Britain since our profile has been raised.

 

Firstly, an increase in the number of tracks isn't particularly useful if average crowds are still going down. Secondly, as I've said before, most of the new tracks started before BSI were involved with the SGP.

 

Bearing in mind that BSI started promoting the SGP in 1999, the number of tracks were as follows (BCL figures only count standalone tracks):

 

1995 - BPL 21, BCL 5, Total 26

1996 - BPL 19, BCL 7, Total 26 (no change)

1997 - BEL 10, BPL 14, BCL 3, Total 27 (+1)

1998 - BEL 9, BPL 13, BCL 3, Total 25 (-2)

1999 - BEL 10, BPL 14, BCL 5, Total 29 (+4)

2000 - BEL 9, BPL 14, BCL 5, Total 28 (-1)

2001 - BEL 9, BPL 15, BCL 4, Total 28 (no change)

2002 - BEL 9, BPL 17, BCL 4, Total 30 (+2)

2003 - BEL 8, BPL 18, BCL 4, Total 30 (no change)

2004 - BEL 10, BPL, 15, BCL 5, Total 30 (no change)

 

It can therefore be seen that has been a net gain of five tracks since 1998 (hardly a 50% increase as you suggest), but four of those tracks actually started in 1999 which was first year of the BSI contract, so can hardly be down to their influence. Since then, there's been a net increase of precisely one track, so I don't quite know where you're getting your figures from

Edited September 11, 2004 by Kevin Meynell

[Kevin Meynell]

because they're the ones taking the risk.

 

Are they? I thought it was the local promoters who were taking the financial risk. Furthermore, BSI can cancel their contract with the FIM if television and sponsorship revenues prove insufficient to run the series.

 

The "prestige" big-stadium GPs represent a considerable gamble on the part of BSI, and no financial small investment.

 

The gamble is more a threat to their credibility than their finances. The local organisers are the ones taking most of the financial risk.

 

but they had the balls to go to the bigger venues and I really don't see how they can be criticised for that.

 

I'm not criticising them for that, but they're not taking the risk some people seem to think.

 

Or, to put it another way, if for some reason SGP has a terrible year financially, it doesn't really effect national speedway

 

Yes, that's a fair point. However, BSI seem to be doing okay financially, despite indifferent promotion.

[Kevin Meynell]

Rico,

 

It's an emotive issue, some are pro-SGP and others aren't.

 

If people like what the SGP offers, then that's fair enough. Even I'll admit that the GPs can sometimes be exciting.

 

However, I think people should ask whether the current model for running the SGP is likely to be sustainable in the future. They should also ask why the much-vaunted expansion has not really happened, why the levels of prize money have never been increased (although that may change next season through virtue of there being fewer riders), and why the series seems further away than ever from being a full-time circus.

Edited September 11, 2004 by Kevin Meynell

[The Know]

K.M as you have pointed out you do not know anyone at bsi or know their plans for the future so why keep putting them down. It would appear you do have a problem with them maybe you should turn your attention to the crap job the BSPA do, as they do have problems.

[SCB]

TBF, I think KM has pointed out some good points. We mnay not all agree with them (some I didn't but do now, some I do and some I don't).

 

If you're of the opinion that BSI and there runing of the GPs is the greatest thing since sliced bread, that up to you. But IMO, it's not, it good, don't get me wrong but I'm sure that some how there could be a better way, sadly I don't know how exactly or I would post on here.

 

Kevin can only speak/type as he see's so future plans are o an extent no relevant, we can onyl judge BSI on there past, which has not bene so great at time, though to there credit, has been absolutly spot on at others.

[Kevin Meynell]

K.M as you have pointed out you do not know anyone at bsi or know their plans for the future

 

I haven't for a moment suggested that I do know their future plans. I'm just commenting on their track record to date.

 

As you seem to know so much the future, perhaps you could enlighten us as to what your relationship with BSI is?

 

It would appear you do have a problem with them maybe you should turn your attention to the crap job the BSPA do

 

I'm certainly no fan of the BSPA either, but this thread is not for discussing their incompetence. Furthermore, comparing BSI and the BSPA is like comparing apples with oranges. The BSPA collectively organises hundreds of meetings per season, and at a variety of different levels. By contrast, BSI organised 13 this season (less than every British promoter).

Edited September 11, 2004 by Kevin Meynell