Warsaw Gp Saturday 18th April

[PHILIPRISING]

Far for me to defend Philippe, but BSI payments to riders have been made for some years - supposedly for expenses relating to running in the SGP, but in reality to make up for the pitiful prize money on offer. Of the course, the timing is pretty poor considering there will be thousands of fans still out of pocket from Warsaw that have been fobbed off to the PZM.

 

Of course Philippe is not just a messenger. He is the (former?) Deputy Race Director, his company produces the programmes for the SGP, and possibly has some sort of media relationship with BSI to manage the publicity. Don't expect any real or sustained criticism.

NEVER denied that Pinegen (publishers of Speedway Star) produce SGP programmes for BSI but have no media relationship, financial or otherwise, with them. Neither BSI nor the FIM contribute financially to my attendance at SGP/SWC events. Views expressed here are my own.

 

Fans haven't been fobbed off to the PZM ... it was their event. Who received the ticket money ... BSI or the PZM? Answer: the latter.

 

Thanks for the defence, however short and not so sweet!

Edited May 11, 2015 by PHILIPRISING

[oldace]

 

I would imagine BSI are not in a position to talk about refunds. The PZM were the event organizers and your contract is with them, not BSI.

 

 

BSI are the license holders and clearly have a major promotional role whether it is a GP they are organising or not. Once again we are entering territory where it is more about their legal team than holding up their end of the bargain with the fans.

 

 

 

 

It has nothing to do with being license holders. In all cases the contract exists between the party that paid the money and the party that received it. If there are refunds they will come from the PZM who in turn, if there is a case, will claim against BSI.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fans haven't been fobbed off to the PZM ... it was their event. Who received the ticket money ... BSI or the PZM? Answer: the latter.

 

 

 

Quite correct Phil. A point I brought up 3 weeks ago. Any ticket refunds will be from the PZM but they won't be happy about giving them out and in turn will seek recompense from BSI. I would imagine the reality is no one will bother pursuing a refund so it won't be an issue.

 

Do organizers not have insurance against "force majeure" in any case. Not sure 16 stroppy prima donna riders with other agendas class as force majeure in any case

[racers and royals]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quite correct Phil. A point I brought up 3 weeks ago. Any ticket refunds will be from the PZM but they won't be happy about giving them out and in turn will seek recompense from BSI. I would imagine the reality is no one will bother pursuing a refund so it won't be an issue.

 

Do organizers not have insurance against "force majeure" in any case. Not sure 16 stroppy prima donna riders with other agendas class as force majeure in any case

Fans in Poland have already -through a Gniezno law firm-started proceedings claiming refunds for ticket ,travel. etc

 

This is a google translation of a sportowefakty article

 

 

 

Requests for payment sent by the ASN Gniezno office went unanswered. In the coming days, the court addressed will be the first lawsuits.

 

Law firm Klejborowski / Bernaciak of Gniezno over two weeks ago sent the Polish Motor Association request for payment on the organization LOTTO Warsaw FIM Speedway Grand Prix of Poland at the National Stadium. In the absence of a reaction from the ASN, the law firm will submit the first lawsuits in court. - From the moment of sending the first requests for payment expired two weeks, but today PZMot did not take on any position. In these circumstances, as indeed with what we announced, next week, our office will submit to the court for payment of the first lawsuits - said the lawyer Matthew Klejborowski.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lawsuits will include the reimbursement of tickets and passes. In some cases nights. - In most cases reimbursement claim includes ticket and reimbursement of travel expenses and sometimes even accommodation. In our opinion, all of these expenses constitute a detriment supporters, formed as a result of breach of contract by PZMot. We set PZMot long, because the two-week deadline for restitution claims by supporters, understanding that PZMot needs time to explain all the circumstances relating to the organization of the tournament. Despite this, there has been during this period no reply, which raises our surprise and disappointment at the same time, the more in view of the nature of the claim - said the lawyer Klejborowski.

 

Recall that the office of Gniezno treats each case individually. There is also a group of supporters, which is considering filing a class action lawsuit in the case

Edited May 12, 2015 by racers and royals

[baldinhio]

DON'T think cost of transponders is an issue as far as GPs are concerned but certainly would be across domestic speedway. I'm no expert (perhaps you are) but who pays for the people to operate them? And as I say, riders not convinced that it would be right just to have them at GPs when they would be required to change their starting rituals of a lifetime.

IT is the FIM who determine prize money but only this week all the permanent SGP riders received a fairly substantial 'bonus' payment from BSI. Of course everyone would like to see the riders earn more but right from the outset of the involvement of BSI, initially through John Postlethwaite, he said that he would provide the TV coverage on which they could build sponsorship deals which would probably not otherwise be available. Works for some, maybe not all.

 

BSI liable for what? Clearly the PZM were the organisers of the Warsaw event and it is they that are liable for any refunds, etc. BSI/IMG's lawyers would obviously not want them admitting liability for something which they consider they are not liable for.

 

Whether or not I would support a breakaway from the FIM is immaterial but it just wouldn't work unless all other forms of speedway did the same and that is never going to happen.

 

The FIM appear quite a useful foil for the BSI in terms of limiting the distribution of profits and blame apportionment and as such the current arrangement is very much to their advantage. Time will tell if someone feels there is sufficient profit to challenge the status quo. A collective challenge from the riders is unlikely without third party organisation as they are not exactly renowned for being "Team" players. Interesting the FIM determine prize money but the BSI pay bonus'. This suggests the BSI can pay more if they deem it beneficial. In other posts you reference these being annual payments in which case the previously reported £2,000,000+ profits are after deducting such bonus'.

 

As to liability I still believe it lies with the BSI and PZM have responded to that effect. For the sake of £70, there is very little to lose in lodging a County Court claim. Whilst I appreciate you are fan of the BSI and I can see they have developed the sport at GP level , is their handling of this situation really as you infer , " Beyond reproach"?

[The White Knight]

 

DON'T think cost of transponders is an issue as far as GPs are concerned but certainly would be across domestic speedway. I'm no expert (perhaps you are) but who pays for the people to operate them? And as I say, riders not convinced that it would be right just to have them at GPs when they would be required to change their starting rituals of a lifetime.

IT is the FIM who determine prize money but only this week all the permanent SGP riders received a fairly substantial 'bonus' payment from BSI. Of course everyone would like to see the riders earn more but right from the outset of the involvement of BSI, initially through John Postlethwaite, he said that he would provide the TV coverage on which they could build sponsorship deals which would probably not otherwise be available. Works for some, maybe not all.

 

BSI liable for what? Clearly the PZM were the organisers of the Warsaw event and it is they that are liable for any refunds, etc. BSI/IMG's lawyers would obviously not want them admitting liability for something which they consider they are not liable for.

 

Whether or not I would support a breakaway from the FIM is immaterial but it just wouldn't work unless all other forms of speedway did the same and that is never going to happen.

 

The FIM appear quite a useful foil for the BSI in terms of limiting the distribution of profits and blame apportionment and as such the current arrangement is very much to their advantage. Time will tell if someone feels there is sufficient profit to challenge the status quo. A collective challenge from the riders is unlikely without third party organisation as they are not exactly renowned for being "Team" players. Interesting the FIM determine prize money but the BSI pay bonus'. This suggests the BSI can pay more if they deem it beneficial. In other posts you reference these being annual payments in which case the previously reported £2,000,000+ profits are after deducting such bonus'.

 

As to liability I still believe it lies with the BSI and PZM have responded to that effect. For the sake of £70, there is very little to lose in lodging a County Court claim. Whilst I appreciate you are fan of the BSI and I can see they have developed the sport at GP level , is their handling of this situation really as you infer , " Beyond reproach"?

 

NO!!!

 

Whilst not being amongst the 'in' people, it appears to me that BSI has, generally, been bad for Speedway. I have believed this for years.

 

Yes they give us the Grand Prix - but at what cost to British Speedway, which seems to have gone down hill with the inception of the GPs.

 

BSI are a business and are in the GP Series for BSI - certainly not British Speedway. All Profits seem to go to BSI with a bit for the Riders and that seems to be it. There is nothing, as far as I can see, for the Training of young Riders or anything else for our (British) Speedway. BSI should remember that as soon as a Rider is proficient enough to enter the GP System he is another Rider who keeps the 'Circus' on the road. But again, BSI contribute nothing for the Track who developed the Rider, and nothing toward improving Speedway in this Country from it's roots to the top. My contention is that as BSI benefit from having our Riders in their GP System - they should, at the very least, be putting money in at the bottom end of Speedway so that even more Riders can be developed for their GP Series.

 

Surely that is to their benefit and also to the benefit of British Speedway.

 

That is the way I see it anyhow.

[weatherwatcher]

As for the post on do they take out insurance, I think it would be very hard to file a claim for nothing better than a pile of horse manure. Because that is what was dished out the night of the 18th of April 2015.

Not a night that many true speedway fans will want to remember, also don't think it will make it into the top 20,,000 speedway meetings of all time.

[The White Knight]

As for the post on do they take out insurance, I think it would be very hard to file a claim for nothing better than a pile of horse manure. Because that is what was dished out the night of the 18th of April 2015.

Not a night that many true speedway fans will want to remember, also don't think it will make it into the top 20,,000 speedway meetings of all time.

A Night of infamy.

[oldace]

NO!!!

 

Whilst not being amongst the 'in' people, it appears to me that BSI has, generally, been bad for Speedway. I have believed this for years.

 

Yes they give us the Grand Prix - but at what cost to British Speedway, which seems to have gone down hill with the inception of the GPs.

 

BSI are a business and are in the GP Series for BSI - certainly not British Speedway. All Profits seem to go to BSI with a bit for the Riders and that seems to be it. There is nothing, as far as I can see, for the Training of young Riders or anything else for our (British) Speedway. BSI should remember that as soon as a Rider is proficient enough to enter the GP System he is another Rider who keeps the 'Circus' on the road. But again, BSI contribute nothing for the Track who developed the Rider, and nothing toward improving Speedway in this Country from it's roots to the top. My contention is that as BSI benefit from having our Riders in their GP System - they should, at the very least, be putting money in at the bottom end of Speedway so that even more Riders can be developed for their GP Series.

 

Surely that is to their benefit and also to the benefit of British Speedway.

 

That is the way I see it anyhow.

 

 

British Speedway has gone downhill since the launch of Eastenders but that has nothing to do with it either.

[The White Knight]

 

 

British Speedway has gone downhill since the launch of Eastenders but that has nothing to do with it either.

So you are saying that the GPs have had nothing to do with the decline of British Speedway.

 

All I can say to that is that you are entitled to your view. :rofl:

[oldace]

So you are saying that the GPs have had nothing to do with the decline of British Speedway.

 

All I can say to that is that you are entitled to your view. :rofl:

 

 

The decline started in earnest in the early 80s. The GPs and Sky coverage/funding has slowed that decline.

 

British Speedway, free of charge, was being showcased in tens of thousands of living rooms every other Saturday. Advertising like that was worth hundreds of thousands of pounds. British Speedway simply had to adapt to a changing climate, as do all business' and adopt a set race day or two days actually, Monday and Thursday would have been good.

 

To be a successful business you really need to be proactive, not reactive, you dont wait for the issues to bite you on the arse, you pre empt them and adopt.

 

A 10 or 12 team Elite League with half racing on a Monday and half on a Thursday racing each other twice over a season could have allowed for weekly speedway. Riders should have been centrally contracted on a set pay scale carved in stone. A 42.5 limit imposed would keep equality, no riders would be forced out of work because they could all be accommodated somewhere, new blood would replace the natural retirements and the league could grow and prosper.

 

It is easier though just to keep upping admission and blame everything on the GPs

[Barrycuda]

Post removed

Edited June 6, 2015 by Barrycuda

[spook]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quite correct Phil. A point I brought up 3 weeks ago. Any ticket refunds will be from the PZM but they won't be happy about giving them out and in turn will seek recompense from BSI. I would imagine the reality is no one will bother pursuing a refund so it won't be an issue.

 

Do organizers not have insurance against "force majeure" in any case. Not sure 16 stroppy prima donna riders with other agendas class as force majeure in any case

and i'll say it again .... BSI need to hold their end of the bargain up................ they are responsible for deciding who holds what rounds & they are responsible for the promotional work......... they have a deal with the fans... & rather than trying to pass the buck via their legal team they should be ensuring that the fans are not left holding the bill

[fullbore]

So you are saying that the GPs have had nothing to do with the decline of British Speedway.

Yes, the GPS run on only 12 of the 30+ weekends in the british season.

 

Niamh

[The White Knight]

 

 

The decline started in earnest in the early 80s. The GPs and Sky coverage/funding has slowed that decline.

 

British Speedway, free of charge, was being showcased in tens of thousands of living rooms every other Saturday. Advertising like that was worth hundreds of thousands of pounds. British Speedway simply had to adapt to a changing climate, as do all business' and adopt a set race day or two days actually, Monday and Thursday would have been good.

 

To be a successful business you really need to be proactive, not reactive, you dont wait for the issues to bite you on the arse, you pre empt them and adopt.

 

A 10 or 12 team Elite League with half racing on a Monday and half on a Thursday racing each other twice over a season could have allowed for weekly speedway. Riders should have been centrally contracted on a set pay scale carved in stone. A 42.5 limit imposed would keep equality, no riders would be forced out of work because they could all be accommodated somewhere, new blood would replace the natural retirements and the league could grow and prosper.

 

It is easier though just to keep upping admission and blame everything on the GPs

I will give you that SKY Television didn't help with overall attendances, but, to my mind BSI and The Grand Prix Series have done infinitely more damage.

 

Yes, the GPS run on only 12 of the 30+ weekends in the british season.

 

Niamh

That is too simplistic a view. Mind you that is still approximately 40% of the Season - that is a fair old chunk of it.

 

It's not just Race Days that are the problem - it is the way that the GP Riders have, in the main deserted British Speedway.

[oldace]

I will give you that SKY Television didn't help with overall attendances, but, to my mind BSI and The Grand Prix Series have done infinitely more damage.

 

ay.

I think you misunderstood what i meant

[The White Knight]

I think you misunderstood what i meant

Quite possibly Oldace. I am in my dotage you know. :sad:

[PHILIPRISING]

Forgive me Humphrey can you or anyone explain to me exactly what BSI stands for and what company are they.

Would be helpful if you could get back to me.

 

BENFIELD Sports International, founded by John Postlethwaite, formerly of Pepsi and the Benneton F1 team, was originally a subsidiary of Benfield Greig, one of the world's largest re-insurance companies. JP later took BSI away from the Benfield Greig umbrella and subsequently sold BSI Speedway to IMG.

[waiheke1]

I will give you that SKY Television didn't help with overall attendances, but, to my mind BSI and The Grand Prix Series have done infinitely more damage.

 

That is too simplistic a view. Mind you that is still approximately 40% of the Season - that is a fair old chunk of it.

 

It's not just Race Days that are the problem - it is the way that the GP Riders have, in the main deserted British Speedway.

Oldace stated his view (which I agree with) that both sky and GPS had SLOWED the decline of British speedway.

Why have go riders deserted British speedway? Its hardly due to GPS, where the earnings aren't great. Its because they can earn a lot more money in the Swedish and polish leagues. The UK's scattergun approach to scheduling doesn't help, but if the wages matched those in Poland riders would find a way to make it work

[Barrycuda]

Post removed

Edited June 6, 2015 by Barrycuda

[Humphrey Appleby]

So did Broomco (1279) Limited start the ball rolling with rights to which it then changed hands to Benfield Sports International Limited on the 1st of July 1997 and then on the 10th May 2007 the afore mention Benfield Sports International Limited was acquired by IMG still branded as BSI.

Broomco was possibly an off-the-shelf company, which used to be a popular way of creating the illusion of a trading record.

 

BSI or Benfield Sports International has gone through various renamings and legal restructures down the years, but BSI Speedway is currently the legal entity holding the SGP rights. It is in turn owned by a dormant holding company (something like BSI Holdings) that I think was originally the umbrella for all John Postlethwaite's speedway ventures like BSI Reading, but is now directly owned by IMG(UK) which is in turn owned by its US parent IMG. IMG is ultimately owned by another US corporation - possibly some sort of venture capitalist.

 

BSI Speedway was probably kept around as a company after the transfer of ownership to IMG(UK) as the long term agreement for the SGP rights was between it and the FIM. IMG(UK) provide all the staff and administrative support to the SGP, and other companies in the IMG group do other things like television production, each of course charging costs to BSI. So in fact IMG make substantially more from the SGP than the audited profits might show.

 

Although it's oft-claimed that John Postlethwaite's was the owner of BSI, it appears that Benfield Re-Insurance (of Chelsea Matthew Harding fame) put up most of the capital, and in fact there were several other minor owners from memory as well. At some point though, Benfield agreed to waive their rights in BSI, seemingly without getting any money back, so there's presumably some story behind that.

 

IMG(UK) has something of a troubled recent history. It lost millions on failed ventures into a Wembley tie-up, the Ricoh Arena at Coventry, and golf courses.

 

Edit - Just checked, and the parent IMG company used to be owned by Forstmann Little which was a venture capitalist company specialising in leveraged buyouts. It suffered a series of losses and was successfully sued for mismanagement by the State of Connecticut which ultimately resulted in its demise, which I assume is why IMG was sold to William Morris Endeavour Entertainment in 2013. WME is apparently a large LA-based talent agency.

 

IMG itself was of course founded by Mark McCormack who started out by managing professional golfers and tennis players. The company was sold upon his death in 2003.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Humphrey Appleby