Hypothetically

It would never happen.

However, The teams should be paid. Like the F1 and NASCAR teams are paid. They supply the talent. The talent is the show.

aroark247 wrote:

It's the day before A1.
Factory Honda, Kaw, Yam, Suz, KTM, Husq all collectively go to Feld group and say, "Look, not one of our contracted riders will be on your starting gate. We will not pay any factory contingency to any privateers who participate in your races, until some type of changes are made". "Us and our team sponsors should not have to be the riders' sole income."

Oh boy that would sting FELD.

Granted I don't want to see that happen, not this year anyway

I can't see the OEMs doing anything remotely like that for the riders........

Now if your hypothetical called for the teams to be paid a percentage of gross revenues, ala F1 style, then it'd almost make some sort of sense.

The teams couldn't care less about the purse for the riders, I'd think. But they'd love to have direct payments to themselves to offset costs and potentially make some money if everything went well.

So you guys are under the impression that FELD is making NASCAR, F1, or NFL type money. Not even close...not even close to MotoGP money.

That's interesting that you think that though...

Hate to break it to you guys but SX isn't that big a deal here in the ole' US of A compared to stick and ball sports or even auto racing.

But keep thinking it is...maybe someday the hipster millennials will actually find pleasure in riding motorcycles and we'll be back to pre-2008 unit sales.

Until then...this idea of profit sharing isn't gonna happen.

Zaugg wrote:

So you guys are under the impression that FELD is making NASCAR, F1, or NFL type money. Not even close...not even close to MotoGP money.

That's interesting that you think that though...

Hate to break it to you guys but SX isn't that big a deal here in the ole' US of A compared to stick and ball sports or even auto racing.

But keep thinking it is...maybe someday the hipster millennials will actually find pleasure in riding motorcycles and we'll be back to pre-2008 unit sales.

Until then...this idea of profit sharing isn't gonna happen.

Sadly this is true..thread over..

Zaugg wrote:

So you guys are under the impression that FELD is making NASCAR, F1, or NFL type money. Not even close...not even close to MotoGP money.

That's interesting that you think that though...

Hate to break it to you guys but SX isn't that big a deal here in the ole' US of A compared to stick and ball sports or even auto racing.

But keep thinking it is...maybe someday the hipster millennials will actually find pleasure in riding motorcycles and we'll be back to pre-2008 unit sales.

Until then...this idea of profit sharing isn't gonna happen.

I don't know of anyone who believes that Supercross generates anywhere close to the type of money of the things that you mentioned..........

Zaugg wrote:

So you guys are under the impression that FELD is making NASCAR, F1, or NFL type money. Not even close...not even close to MotoGP money.

That's interesting that you think that though...

Hate to break it to you guys but SX isn't that big a deal here in the ole' US of A compared to stick and ball sports or even auto racing.

But keep thinking it is...maybe someday the hipster millennials will actually find pleasure in riding motorcycles and we'll be back to pre-2008 unit sales.

Until then...this idea of profit sharing isn't gonna happen.

So youre saying the manufacturers and aftermarket gear and part companies are having a tough time with sales yet continue to field the teams and provide the majority of suport for the riders while the company that sells the show is looking pretty good. But there should continue be a seperate but equal arrangement?

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2017/05/12/Leagues-and-Governing-Bodies/Supercross.aspx?

Zaugg wrote:

So you guys are under the impression that FELD is making NASCAR, F1, or NFL type money. Not even close...not even close to MotoGP money.

That's interesting that you think that though...

Hate to break it to you guys but SX isn't that big a deal here in the ole' US of A compared to stick and ball sports or even auto racing.

But keep thinking it is...maybe someday the hipster millennials will actually find pleasure in riding motorcycles and we'll be back to pre-2008 unit sales.

Until then...this idea of profit sharing isn't gonna happen.

You are right.
As a point of reference though. Someone posted the official broken down event payout on here from 2016. It was $121,080 total.
Rough guess sx tickets cost a mean of somewhere around $65.00 a seat that's generous(cheap). That equals Feld selling a little under 2,000 seats to cover the entire payout.(I know these facts are missing a LOT, like cost for use of the stadium, employees, etc. etc.)
I know that WAY more than 2,000 people attend even the worst attended SX a year.
It does not seem unreasonable to negotiate a higher pay out.

early wrote:

So youre saying the manufacturers and aftermarket gear and part companies are having a tough time with sales yet continue to field the teams and provide the majority of suport for the riders while the company that sells the show is looking pretty good. But there should continue be a seperate but equal arrangement?

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2017/05/12/Leagues-and-Governing-Bodies/Supercross.aspx?

I didn't say that...I think that's what you're saying.

I said that Supercross isn't generating NASCAR, F1, NFL, or MotoGP money which is why profit sharing isn't financially feasible. Not sure how you didn't get that out of my comment.

And that linked article talks about FELD's success last year, it doesn't offer comparison to other more mainstream sports...which motorcycle racing isn't (Unless you're in Europe.)

When SX and MX are as popular as MotoGP is in Europe or stick & ball sports are here in the US, generating the same levels of revenue, then maybe this conversation has merit.

At this point it does not.

Not saying the idea is bad...it's just won't work in a sport this small.

aroark247 wrote:

You are right.
As a point of reference though. Someone posted the official broken down event payout on here from 2016. It was $121,080 total.
Rough guess sx tickets cost a mean of somewhere around $65.00 a seat that's generous(cheap). That equals Feld selling a little under 2,000 seats to cover the entire payout.(I know these facts are missing a LOT, like cost for use of the stadium, employees, etc. etc.)
I know that WAY more than 2,000 people attend even the worst attended SX a year.
It does not seem unreasonable to negotiate a higher pay out.

I'm no expert but do you know how much it cost to run Supercross? Rent the stadium, build the track, staffing, etc, etc.

I don't...

Personally, I think ticket prices are too high and if they lowered ticket prices, more people would attend but I don't know the specifics behind their operating budget.

I would also agree with your observations regarding rider payouts. Seems painfully low considering the amount of danger involved but then again, I don't know the budget.

When they're a publicly traded company, then maybe we'll get a peak behind the curtain.

Not trying to sound like I'm going to bat for FELD. Just stating the obvious to comments that might need a little more thought before posting.

Zaugg wrote:

I didn't say that...I think that's what you're saying.

I said that Supercross isn't generating NASCAR, F1, NFL, or MotoGP money which is why profit sharing isn't financially feasible. Not sure how you didn't get that out of my comment.

And that linked article talks about FELD's success last year, it doesn't offer comparison to other more mainstream sports...which motorcycle racing isn't (Unless you're in Europe.)

When SX and MX are as popular as MotoGP is in Europe or stick & ball sports are here in the US, generating the same levels of revenue, then maybe this conversation has merit.

At this point it does not.

Not saying the idea is bad...it's just won't work in a sport this small.

I dont think anyone said that the arrangement should be the same as stick and ball sports. The argument is that Feld has an obligation to their advertisers, viewers, and broadcast partners to provide the highest quality of riders, teams, and organizations. It may require profit sharing to provide that because the money the teams are receiving is shrinking (because millenials are lame?) and Feld is limiting their sponsorship opportunities thru internal policies.

NASCA and formula 1 are failing business models.

If riders don't like the poor conditions at supercross, they can always get a regular job like the rest of us.

Bruce372 wrote:

NASCA and formula 1 are failing business models.

If riders don't like the poor conditions at supercross, they can always get a regular job like the rest of us.

This. 100% this.

it's obvious that NASCAR has hit a downturn in revenues but I would like to see the numbers as far as F1 is concerned.
I also am in favor of some type of revenue going back to the team's from Feld. Obviously it can't be anything close to what the F1 constructors championships pay out but certainly some type of a percentage can go back to the team's at the end of the year based on performance. Even if it is a very low percentage to begin with but something. The money itself probably wouldn't be enough to make any credible difference for the team's but I think this would help accomplish a partnership attitude between the team's and Feld. Anything to help the participants in the sport and the promoter work together for the good of the sport because let's be honest, Feld is an entertainment business and the manufacturers race to sell motorcycles. I believe if they could find a way to work together they both could generate more fans, more bike sales, and ultimately more profits to grow the sport.
Which brings another question up, do we really want our sport to grow? Look what happens to sports when they go to that "next level" In a lot of ways it makes the sport less "pure" and the only people that would be disappointed by that would be all of us hard core fans on here. In a lot of ways our sport is where we would probably want it to be. we get to watch races for most of the year , the tv package is generally pretty good. I mean I'm pretty happy with what we have now

I may be wrong but pretty sure that F1 is only second to soccer, worldwide, in tv time and revenues. That’s where the dollars come from. You could do some digging but it’s billions. That’s not happening for SX.

If you want to sell more dirt bikes, you will need more places for people to ride them. It's really that simple.