*Turn 2 Blog is a regular feature on InsideDirtRacing.com. Here, site operators Michael Moats and Richard Allen take turns offering their thoughts on the dirt racing topics of the day from east Tennessee and beyond.
Richard: I was really disappointed that Mother Nature intervened and forced the cancellation of the Sweetheart event this past weekend at 411 Motor Speedway. And while I was looking forward to the competition that was to take place, I was more interested in looking at the grandstands once the racing action started. My interest in the attendance came from the fact that track owners Mitch and Tanya McCarter were making a bold attempt to lure more fans to their track by offering free general admission.
There has always been the debate as to whether lowering ticket prices to races(or anything for that matter) would make such a big difference that the increased numbers of fans would overcome the lower prices in terms of revenue generated. My contention has always been that there are only so many people out there who want to see dirt racing and lowered ticket prices would only make minimal difference and would not overcome the loses suffered from dropping the amount charged to get in. Still, it would have been interesting to see how many people actually showed up when the racing was completely free.
Keep in mind that when a track is hosting a special event such as a national touring series race, that purse has to be paid from somewhere and $10 per person at the gate won’t do that.
McCarter’s gamble wasn’t that his track was going to sell enough hot dogs and pizza to make up the difference. While some claim that this would happen with lower ticket prices, it almost certainly would not because people can only eat so much no matter what they paid to get in. I believe, instead, that the McCarters were hoping to lure new folks to their facility with the promise of free admission in the hopes that more of them would return when there was in fact a cost to get in.
What are your thoughts on lowering ticket prices vs. the actual number of people who would show up?
Michael: There are some recent examples of how each theory does work and doesn’t work. For instance, 411 has offered $5 general admission to weekly races. The crowds have been really strong for those events. At the same time, I have seen where Smoky Mountain Speedway has offered $15 tickets for a $5,000-to-win Super Late Model race and the attendance was the same as previous races where the tickets were $20. Granted, those are two different tracks and that has to come into play.
The idea of 411 offering free admission was interesting because of the time of the year. I think it’s easier to draw more people to something like that during the late spring or summer months than it would be in February. In the past, Florence Speedway in Kentucky has offered free grandstand admission and drew huge crowds. Other examples I have seen that work are offering a reduced pit pass and make all tickets pit passes.
It seems as if the success of such ticket offers depends on which track is offering them. Some have no trouble being successful while others have no luck with it.
Richard: Your point about the facility in question and whether or not it will be successful is a good one. I believe something like this would work best at a track that runs regularly rather than only on occasion. And of course, a track could not offer such a deal when it plans to run multiple classes that require higher purses. 411 intended to have Crate Late Models, Sportsman, Modified Street and Classics competing in the Sweetheart.
And as we have discussed on here many times, the real key to success for any race track is good all around promoting. Simply being the person who swings the gate open can not and will not work in this modern era of a multitude of entertainment choices.
But to change the subject from the price of admission for fans to the payout for racers, it seems as if those payouts don’t change very much as time goes by yet the cost to race does indeed change all the time. One has to wonder how much longer the sport can continue under its current economic model.
If racers aren’t making enough money to at least break even, they will have to quit. At the same time, if track owners and promoters aren’t making any money, they will have to quit. Somehow, someone is going to have to come up with a solution that can work for all parties involved without putting an excessive burden on fans so that they don’t quit.
I’m not sure what the answer is. Could tracks running fewer classes but paying greater purse amounts for those classes work? Is cutting the number of dates each track will run the answer? Are alliances between tracks or even partnerships among the racers something that needs to be explored?
As I said, I don’t know the answer. What are our thoughts?
Michael: I have talked to both drivers and track owners about this over the years. Drivers act as though the track owners are raking in the money while track owners act as though they’re in the poor house. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle for most. If an owner has owned a track for a decent amount of time, chances are they’re doing okay for themselves.
It astonishes me how some tracks (this is a regional point of view) do so little actual promoting. And promoting isn’t always just talk about the event before it happens. If a track has an exciting race, they need to talk about it afterwards. This is what creates fan interest. But the pre-race promoting can be lackluster for some tracks across the region. Making a few posts on message boards and social media is not promoting. Sadly, too many do that these days. Social media is a powerful tool, but should not be the only means to promote events. Lots of people don’t engage in social media.
Richard: Along the same lines, this past week I have watched a dozen or so races that were taking place in Florida via Pay-Per-View. DirtonDirt.com, DirtVision.com and Lucas Oil Racing TV are among those that offer such products. I believe we are going to see these types of broadcasts continue in the coming years. I have no idea what the arrangement is between the tracks, series and the production companies as far as paying for the broadcast rights is concerned, but this looks like an avenue to explore as a means of opening up new revenue opportunities within the sport for all involved.
However, these types of broadcasts come at a cost. For one, the amount charged, which is necessary due to production costs, would likely not allow the average fan to partake more than a couple of times each year. At the same time, anything “televised” is dependent on having a set schedule. As a result, few if any support classes accompany these races which would reduce the number of racers who could participate on a given night. And more, tracks obviously do not make money from concession sales or merchandise sales from those who watch from hundreds of miles away.
All that said, I expect to see more of these PPV events rather than less. What are your thoughts?
Michael: I like the PPV broadcasts from the standpoint that it allows fans to see races from places they can’t get to or haven’t been to. It certainly is the best alternative to races recorded, then replayed weeks later.
The downside is there is a potential limit as to how much one person can pay for these services. Paying for one event over and over throughout the year can really add up if a person attempts to buy all of them. Having a week-long package, as was the case with Volusia this week, is more reasonable. The best option is paying a yearly fee to get everything that will be shown. That gives the customer knowledge of what they are paying up front, as opposed to $20 here, $30 there, and so on and so on. As long as people are willing to buy these events, they will continue to be provided this way and I don’t see that slowing down any time soon.
One has to wonder with the success Lucas has with their own series if World of Outlaws will eventually look into and provide such a service.
