BSPA Ltd.

[PHILIPRISING]

55 minutes ago, THE DEAN MACHINE said:

And that’s where holomagated parts only come in, it is not difficult to implement but there is no will to do it, there will always be a tiny advantage for someone somewhere but speedway is one of the very few motorsports that is all but a couple of rules a free for all, which is the reason prices have rocketed 

WHICH is exactly why riders and promoters need to work together, at least as far as British speedway is concerned, to reduce costs for both parties.

[THE DEAN MACHINE]

33 minutes ago, PHILIPRISING said:

WHICH is exactly why riders and promoters need to work together, at least as far as British speedway is concerned, to reduce costs for both parties.

We all know this but getting any promoters or riders apart from chris Louis to go for this is banging your head against a brick wall 

[Daniel Smith]

3 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

Wages will constitute one of the biggest, if not the biggest cost for a promotion, and is something that the collective will of the promoters can control unlike most other costs.

No point simply saying reduce wages and the rest will follow, because there's a certain inherent costs involved in manufacturing small numbers of specialised engines, and then finding the handful of rebuilders/tuners to maintain them.

Of course the equipment costs have got beyond the point of stupidity and what can be afforded, but it's partly incumbent on the promoters to find solutions to that - either through bulk purchase of engines, maintaining a common pool of engines, or severely restricting how engines can be modded (and that still won't stop the use of selected parts engines).

Nonsense, the costs to a rider's equipment is nothing to do with the promoters. The clubs should only pay what they can afford and look to turn a profit. If the rider's find they can't afford the same or better equipment, tough. They should work doubly hard to find more sponsorship or pay for the upkeep themselves. 

Equipment responsibility is nothing to do with the promoters at all.

[Humphrey Appleby]

14 minutes ago, Daniel Smith said:

Nonsense, the costs to a rider's equipment is nothing to do with the promoters. The clubs should only pay what they can afford and look to turn a profit. If the rider's find they can't afford the same or better equipment, tough. They should work doubly hard to find more sponsorship or pay for the upkeep themselves. 

Equipment responsibility is nothing to do with the promoters at all.

Of course it has something to do with the promoters. Yes, teams should only pay what they can afford, but if enough riders turn round and say it costs x in order to be competitive against other riders and I'll be running at a loss, you'll not only lose riders from the sport, but there will be more competition for those riders that remain - effectively negating any cost savings, even assuming you can still find enough riders to populate the teams. 

Individual riders can't simply decide to cut back on equipment by themselves, and indeed sufficiently cheaper to buy and run engines may not even exist. Promoters need to legislate what can be run for the good of the sport, and if that means maintaining a central pool of engines maintained to a common standard, developing a lower cost engine and mandating its use, or whatever, then that's what needs to happen. Nothing will ever change if those running the sport absolve themselves of responsibility for controlling one of the biggest costs in the sport.

 

[uk_martin]

If BSPA Ltd gets into unmanagable debt, it can be declared bankrupt and a new company, (e.g. BSPA (2020) Ltd) can be formed to carry on where the old one left off, but free of debt.

Just ask Terry Russell... who did exactly that with his GoSpeed incarnations. Wouldn't surprise me if Russell is the "brains" behind this venture too.

[Sings4Speedway]

21 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

Of course it has something to do with the promoters. Yes, teams should only pay what they can afford, but if enough riders turn round and say it costs x in order to be competitive against other riders and I'll be running at a loss, you'll not only lose riders from the sport, but there will be more competition for those riders that remain - effectively negating any cost savings, even assuming you can still find enough riders to populate the teams. 

Individual riders can't simply decide to cut back on equipment by themselves, and indeed sufficiently cheaper to buy and run engines may not even exist. Promoters need to legislate what can be run for the good of the sport, and if that means maintaining a central pool of engines maintained to a common standard, developing a lower cost engine and mandating its use, or whatever, then that's what needs to happen. Nothing will ever change if those running the sport absolve themselves of responsibility for controlling one of the biggest costs in the sport.

 

Its not just the engines though and in fact even if the motors stayed the same riders can find substantial savings year on year. Riders do not need new frames every season (and several young Aussies come over and compete successfully on 2nd hand kit), new bike covers are not constantly required, wheels don't need to be replaced just bearings refreshed, clutch plates don't need to be £40 a plate and replaced every meeting when others are available at £10 a plate and do a very similar job. The most light weight items don't need to be purchased at higher costs than standard. Replacing everything when it shows slight wear or shale rash has become a mindset and that needs to change.

[Daniel Smith]

21 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

Of course it has something to do with the promoters. Yes, teams should only pay what they can afford, but if enough riders turn round and say it costs x in order to be competitive against other riders and I'll be running at a loss, you'll not only lose riders from the sport, but there will be more competition for those riders that remain - effectively negating any cost savings, even assuming you can still find enough riders to populate the teams. 

Individual riders can't simply decide to cut back on equipment by themselves, and indeed sufficiently cheaper to buy and run engines may not even exist. Promoters need to legislate what can be run for the good of the sport, and if that means maintaining a central pool of engines maintained to a common standard, developing a lower cost engine and mandating its use, or whatever, then that's what needs to happen. Nothing will ever change if those running the sport absolve themselves of responsibility for controlling one of the biggest costs in the sport.

 

Again, absolute utter nonsense. 

Rider's are 100% totally responsible for their equipment upkeep. They are self employed. Promoters are totally not responsible. As pointed out, rider's do not NEED brand new year in year out. You see it every season, even Championship 2nd strings are selling all their equipment for new year on year. This is totally irresponsible and promoter / clubs need to make a stand against this nonsense.

£150 per point in the Premiership should be the maximum paid to any rider. If rider's choose to spend big then they should find the money to fund this themselves by chasing more sponsorship etc. This shouldn't be the responsibility of qny club or promotion to fund.

[Humphrey Appleby]

2 hours ago, Daniel Smith said:

Rider's are 100% totally responsible for their equipment upkeep. They are self employed. Promoters are totally not responsible.

One of the reasons speedway has got itself into the massive hole it has, is because both promoters and spectators have got themselves into the mindset that things have always been done in a certain way, so let's keep plugging away doing exactly the same thing regardless of whether it's actually appropriate for the modern world.

Is Lewis Hamilton responsible for building and fixing his car, or does Harry Kane buy his own kit and take it home himself to wash?

Of course not, so why on earth can't speedway reconsider how it does things? If, for example, the BSPA had a central pool of (say) 30-40 engines maintained by 2-3 engine builders to a contracted standard, which were allocated to riders at each meeting, there could be huge savings all round. 

Now the above may or may not be the right solution, but the only nonsense is when people are so blinkered that they're not receptive to considering change, or even worse just keep blindly heading down a path of failure. The harsh reality is that unless some workable solutions are tried to reduce costs all round, the sport is finished. 

Quote

As pointed out, rider's do not NEED brand new year in year out. You see it every season, even Championship 2nd strings are selling all their equipment for new year on year. This is totally irresponsible and promoter / clubs need to make a stand against this nonsense.

All very well but the first thing a promoter is going to say when a rider on old kit loses a race against another rider on new kit, is why isn't your gear up to scratch? And the fans of that team will likely be moaning about it as well.

Presumably though, someone must be buying all this second hand gear and using it somewhere, because you can't really use it for anything other than speedway.

Quote

£150 per point in the Premiership should be the maximum paid to any rider. If rider's choose to spend big then they should find the money to fund this themselves by chasing more sponsorship etc. This shouldn't be the responsibility of qny club or promotion to fund.

Well just cut the rider wages without doing anything else, and let's see where it gets the sport. My prediction would be a lot of riders just simply packing it in. 

Edited November 20, 2018 by Humphrey Appleby

[PHILIPRISING]

BEHIND the scenes, as it were, moves are afoot to standardise equipment and reduce cost for riders, from the top to the bottom.

[THE DEAN MACHINE]

33 minutes ago, PHILIPRISING said:

BEHIND the scenes, as it were, moves are afoot to standardise equipment and reduce cost for riders, from the top to the bottom.

That along with the 2 min clock is good news at last 

[SPEEDY69]

2 hours ago, Sings4Speedway said:

Its not just the engines though and in fact even if the motors stayed the same riders can find substantial savings year on year. Riders do not need new frames every season (and several young Aussies come over and compete successfully on 2nd hand kit), new bike covers are not constantly required, wheels don't need to be replaced just bearings refreshed, clutch plates don't need to be £40 a plate and replaced every meeting when others are available at £10 a plate and do a very similar job. The most light weight items don't need to be purchased at higher costs than standard. Replacing everything when it shows slight wear or shale rash has become a mindset and that needs to change.

Spot on.  When talking to Jeremy Doncaster a few years ago he said he was very keen to keep as much stuff from one year to the next as possible, frames, wheels etc.  Fact is, many riders use new every year because they want to, not because they have to or need to to remain competitive. 

[Humphrey Appleby]

1 hour ago, PHILIPRISING said:

BEHIND the scenes, as it were, moves are afoot to standardise equipment and reduce cost for riders, from the top to the bottom.

"The costs to a rider's equipment is nothing to do with the promoters." - allegedly... 

[iwright71]

2 hours ago, THE DEAN MACHINE said:

That along with the 2 min clock is good news at last 

What good would a 2 min clock do ?

[THE DEAN MACHINE]

9 minutes ago, iwright71 said:

What good would a 2 min clock do ?

When that clock goes to zero ,you’re not ready to go you’re out no ifs no buts out ,works well in the GPs 

Edited November 20, 2018 by THE DEAN MACHINE

[iwright71]

1 hour ago, THE DEAN MACHINE said:

When that clock goes to zero ,you’re not ready to go you’re out no ifs no buts out ,works well in the GPs 

Well that's not going to happen. The rule was wrongly changed to allow riders a full 2 minutes to enter the track, not to be ready to race. Unfortunately health and safety gone mad, rule the day and all the 2 minute clock would show is the time remaining for riders to be on track. Add a very slow ride round to the tapes, a practise start or 2,  intervention of the start marshal to bring riders to the tapes or move riders over and you probably have a good 4 minutes from when the 2 minute warning went on . I agree the rule works in the GP but don't expect it in British Speedway, Its a thing of the past  

[PHILIPRISING]

WHY should it not work in Britain if administerred properly. Thing of the future rather than the past.

[iwright71]

1 minute ago, PHILIPRISING said:

WHY should it not work in Britain if administerred properly. Thing of the future rather than the past.

Can't think of any rule / legislation in Britain that was brought in for health and safety reasons being reversed or unpicked . Once you start on this path there is usually no going backwards.

[Tsunami]

2 minutes ago, iwright71 said:

Can't think of any rule / legislation in Britain that was brought in for health and safety reasons being reversed or unpicked . Once you start on this path there is usually no going backwards.

What's the 2 minute rule displayed on a clock, got anything to do with H & S. It's about pace of a meeting, and making sure the 2 minutes is administered fairly rather than be random as you quoted earlier. 

[iwright71]

1 minute ago, Tsunami said:

What's the 2 minute rule displayed on a clock, got anything to do with H & S. It's about pace of a meeting, and making sure the 2 minutes is administered fairly rather than be random as you quoted earlier. 

The 2 minute clock doesn't mean anything. To stop riders rushing to the tapes, crossing the centre green, going the wrong way round the tapes, you now only need to be on the track within 2 minutes , not at the tapes ready to start. Its feasible now that from when the 2 minutes goes on, we could be 4 minutes away from the start of the race, The start of the race is determined by the riders and the starting official , not the 2 minute clock as in the GP. 

[Tsunami]

Just now, iwright71 said:

The 2 minute clock doesn't mean anything. To stop riders rushing to the tapes, crossing the centre green, going the wrong way round the tapes, you now only need to be on the track within 2 minutes , not at the tapes ready to start. Its feasible now that from when the 2 minutes goes on, we could be 4 minutes away from the start of the race, The start of the race is determined by the riders and the starting official , not the 2 minute clock as in the GP. 

That's not true now. If the clock was introduced, the same rules as the GP would probable be adopted. Riders going the wrong way, crossing the centre green, not being ready at the tapes,   are all in the control of the rider, There is no way, under even the present rules, that a rider could use up 4 minutes after the start of the normal 2 minutes and still be allowed to be in that race.