Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

The USAC National Midgets completed their 3rd event for 2008 on Saturday evening in Kenly , NC.

This is a traveling series of 30 events in 9 states from California to North Carolina. Thousands of miles will be logged requiring a substancial budget to sustain travel costs alone.

The purse payout for Kenly last evening ( and the previous event at Anderson a week ago ) was as follows :

First - $ 2,500. ... to Kody Swanson
2nd- 1,200. ( Dakota Armstrong )
3rd- 700. (Cole Whitt )
4th- 600. ( Darren Hagen )
5th- 500. ( Tracy Hines )

6th- 425. ( Bobby East ) 7th- 400. ( Brad Sweet ) 8th- 375. ( Kevin Swindell ) 9th- 350. ( Brad Loyet ) 10th- 330. ( Dave Darland )

11th- 300. ( Mike Murgoitio ) 12th- 290. ( Brad Kuhn ) 13th- 280. ( Josh Wise ) 14th- 270. ( Chase Barber ) 15th- 260. ( Jerry Coons , Jr. )
16th- 250. ( Chad Boat ) 17th- 240. ( Levi Jones ) 18th- 230. ( Chris Windom )

19th thru 26th ... all received $ 225.00
( Brent Beauchamp , Stephanie Mockler , Ricky Ehrgott , Zach Schiff , Brady Bacon , Caitlin Shaw , Josh Butler , and Mario Marietta )

Payout versus expenses to participants is an embarrassment to all parties involved. And this clearly shows that the sport survives only by the will of the team owners.

Paul Gray :Steer www.paulgray28.com

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

I'd be curious to know if USAC tried to book a Friday night or Sunday afternoon anywhere to give these guys a second show to help defray some of the expense.

There were tracks available. But, if none were interested, this show should have been scrapped.

ISMA Supermods used to come to NC in the Spring and Fall. But, only if they could get a two race weekend. When one track fell out and they couldn't find another (and they tried) that ended the Super tours in NC.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

Welcome to the world of auto racing...

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

You will never make anything in racing.. the cost of buying and run car's always out way's the payout's..(in all form's of racing) for car ower's like me.. unless you have a sponsor who will pay for every thing? (Very Very hard to fine) you will alway's lose money.. we do it for the love of it... for most of us car owener's (me anyway) if I sell all I have today, I would not even come close to getting what I have paid in.. it's a hard fact... and I have very good stuff.. Just think, If you drive doe's not make the B-Main for some reson.. the pay out is 0" so all you paid out that night, you get nothing in return.....

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

It has been close to 40 years since it was possible for a car owner to show even a minimal profit at any level of racing. And many share in the blame. Promoters with a back gate mentality that essentially makes the competitors pay for their own event are part of the problem. Car costs that include $50,000+ midget engines, cockpit adjustables, and new tires every night are part of the problem. Sanctioning bodies that don't do nearly enough to control costs also share in the blame. But there is one part of the equation that makes me stop and say "What the hell!" And that is the car owners themselves. Not all owners as many are competing on a very tight budget. But many others are spending lots of $ that doesn't need to be spent. When a car owner talks to me about high engine costs, tire bills, pit fees, etc. he has both my ear and my sympathy. However, when that same owner pulls his $75,000 midget into the pits with a tractor and stacker trailer worth in the mid six figures I take what he says with a grain of salt. Engines, tires, pit fees, etc. are expenses to race. Big tractors and shiny new stacker trailers are costs to satisfy egos and not look inferior to the team parked next to you. And please don't tell me about impressing sponsors. If you have to spend a half mil to impress a sponsor giving you maybe $50 thou than you don't need that sponsor. This is not meant as a slam to those owners who struggle to compete and do so on limited budgets. It is just meant to clarify the difference between costs to compete and other costs.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

we used to run ace speedway in burlington n. c on friday night then kenly on saturday to try and get a two day show in .that way you try not to take such a bad hit.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

I've said it before, and nothing that happens will change my mind....racers(owners and drivers) will race for bottle caps. The only things that have changed in the past fifteen years are the costs! Purses haven't improved enough to offset the cost of $40K motors, $250K toters/trailers, and $4.00/gal diesel. I dare say that there is not a track or sanctioning body in the country that has doubled its purse from 15 years ago.

But then, fans won't pay double what they were paying to watch races 15 years ago, either.

Do most local racers need huge trucks/trailers and $40K motors to compete - especially the once a week racer?

I know that there is no solution; as long as the tax code allows owners, sponsors, and others to be creative when dealing with "business" expenses, there will not be a rush to economic feasiblity...

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

That's what made me a fan of Don Moore....after seeing his "tow rig" last October at Granite City. Good thing they were racing midgets, & not trailers....cause they had 'em covered in that dept! :thumb

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

Let play a game like we were kids, lets pretend.

There were 3 races this past weekend in NC. The tire bill for the two additional nights was $1400, fuel cost $210, pit pass for each team member for two additional nights $250 , 2 extra nights in a motel and food for 6 $650. Bent one wheel and 2 more races on brake pads, engine , ect.. = misc. costs $800. TOTAL $3310.00. We ran 9th and 11th. Our total purse for the two extra nights $640. So we only lost a grand total of $2670 and 2 days away from our family, 4 vacation days, and a fishing trip!

The phrase "beating a dead horse" is often used on this board. If you woke up this am and just realized that owning a racecar cost money then read no farther.......To everyone else....... Owning a racecar is not for everyone, not everyone can have a boat, take big vacations, have a pool in their yard, have store bought enhanced body parts, drive a sports car, ect... The world is full of haves and haves not, if you have the money to buy toys (racecars) great, enjoy them, if you need them money you spend on a racecar to pat your bills, buy little Sally some shoes, help your family enjoy life, then maybe the water is a little deep in racing.

I see guys pull into the track with a below average race team They have a $50,000 truck, pulling a $10,000 trailer, with a $40,000 racecar, with $15,000 worth of 4 wheelers, spare parts ect.. They spent $1000 min. on tires and fuel and pit-pass-admission. I live in a $100,000 home,raised my family well, have plenty of $$ to do as I please, and I can not come close to feilding their race team.

OWNING A RACE TEAM IS A LUXORY!!!!

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

This will be my second year running the Wolverine Outlaw Midget Series LLC. The comments by Paul Gray regarding pay out versus cost are right on the money. The problem is everyone is getting squeezed right now. As a sanctioning body we want to offer the top purse that we can but the tracks are hurting right now. It's tough enough getting races, let alone a decent purse. Sponsors are the key and with the economy hurting it's tough to make ends meet. We have a great schedule at some great tracks this year but the only way to get better purses is to put on great shows with a good car count.We need to create a demand for our services. This year we have raised our purse but it's far from what it should be. We limit our schedule to ten races to make it affordable and yet still give our drivers the opportunity to run for a season championship. Most can not afford to run a twenty race schedule. An engine rebuild can last two or more seasons in our series.We have some very good equipment but a rebuild every year is not in most budgets. If not for the car owners(drivers) and their love for racing none of this would make economic sense. Hopefully some day the pendulum will swing the other way. We all expect to lose but we would like to keep those losses to a minimum. With the current trend there will be fewer owner/drivers able to compete without huge sponsors paying their way and that will be to bad. I am concerned, as I do not want racing just to be for the elite few.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

Paul,
Unfortunately for racing; its still the fastest way to make a million dollars.

All you have to do is start with two-million.:rolling

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

See what the travelers with the ASCS race for. That USAC purse is generous by contrast.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

Not sure where you get your facts but the ASCS regional races do not pay that bad. Up here in ASCS SOD they pay $1300 to win, $500 for 5th, $310 for 10th and $250 to start and $100 tow money if you don't make the show. Other than $1200 on top it is the same purse as USAC.

Plus the cost for competing with ASCS is not near the cost to complete in USAC sprints or midgets. There are plenty of competitive racers with 10k motors, running used tires, and no stacker trailers. Heck Tim Norman won the ASCS SOD title using a open trailer!

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

As a small time micro sprint promotor, nothing huge, but finding money isn't all that damned simple. How do you raise the purse without raising anything else if you don't have sponsors. What this sport needs is an actual marketing group to go out and find sponsors, or rather than have Mopar give a "possible" 50 thousand bucks to one race, spread it over a few races and make a few bigger shows. I just use that as an example.

These guys are right though, the cost of racing is to high for what we all race for, and to say that we'd race for peanuts doesn't really fit well, because with that mentality nothing will ever change. But its also some of our responsibility too to provide a good avenue for a sponsor to get exposure. If we race and look like a bunch of hillbilly idiots, who would want to sponsor that, if our racetracks are dirty, trash not taken out, bathrooms not cleaned, etc... who would want to sponsor that, I sure as hell wouldn't want my businesses name on something that doesn't look professional. I think we all know what the problems are, its just a matter of finding the sponsors to make it happen.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

I think it would be fantastic if an owner/driver could make a profit racing at the local, regional or even the national levels!

But has this happened since the early 60's? (if even then, I wasn't there) I'm not even sure it has EVER been profitable to own a racecar?

Name any other owner/participant sport where you can turn a profit?
I know you can't do it racing bikes! (Flat track or motocross)
I have never raced boats or airplanes, but I think those might even be worse at an investment to return ratio!

Just saw a thing the other day on the Herbst SCORE team from Vegas.
They have an investment of OVER a MILLION BUCKS in their Trophy Truck that runs the Baja 1000,
IT ONLY PAYS $6,000.00 TO WIN THAT CLASS!

And you're griping about USAC's payout? :headbang

Anyone that races, had better be racing for the love and the fun of it and don't look too close at the bottom line!
Racing is and has always been a rich mans sport, if it wasn't, there would be a HELLOFALOT more teams than there are!

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

This was not meant to start the usual debate of "have's" and "have-not's" or if the owner of a toter home / stacker can be taken seriously in discussion of the costs to participate in this activity.

This is a National traveling series. There are no "have-not's" ; everyone is a "have" at this level , only the depths of the deep pockets will vary.

This is about the costs of participation "after" those expensive assets have been acquired. Assets that are , in most cases possible as tied to a viable business entity for depreciation , write off , expensed , charged to advertising , etc. Obviously , a real cost exists as the tax laws do not make racing free.

The sanctioning organizations appreciate that there are those who will field a professional entry of top quality and are certainly aware of the investment required in real dollars. Privately , they may question the business sanity of the owner , but still appreciate that these folks exist to the betterment of their own purposes.

This is about 43 teams at Anderson one week and the 17 that chose not to go to North Carolina the next because of costs. ( Seventeen is a good car count for a local or USAC regional show or the starting field for a UMARA event or WOMS , etc. ).

Those are 17 teams that are staying closer to home in '08. Teams that will not travel for a few hundred dollars versus expense in the thousands. An event such as Kenly , NC makes no good sense and USAC is fortunate that 26 showed ; just ashame the event was not supported otherwise.

Forget the toter - this is about entry fees and pit passes , 8 Hoosiers , 20 gallons of Methanol , 200 gallons of diesel , 2 hotel rooms , 3 days travel for 8 people who like to eat , racing for a couple hundred bucks and having 1 event cost you $ 5 Grand.

This is about how long can this continue ? .... and by how many ? ...
and a sanctioning body powerless to change it.


Paul Gray :greenflag: www.paulgray28.com

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

You never answered my question though, so I will ask it again.

When has it EVER been different?
What are you using as a frame of reference?

I know for a fact it wasn't the late 70's or early 80's, the Carter years were as lean as any time in racing that I can remember.
Were the 90's that profitable for teams?

Honestly, I am not trying to argue, just get a clarification on when it has been any different?

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

I dont think its ever been that diff. but it has gottin a lot worse as far as how much money your spending to how much you get paid.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

:usacfan wasn't right after the war that midget racing was profitable? There were even investers involved. Non racing people even. A very short time however.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

people have always told me IF YOUR IN RACING TO MAKE MONEY YOU MIGHT AS WELL GET OUT....UNLESS YOU FIND YOU A SUGAR DADDY OR A BIG BIG SPONSOR:angry-smiley-007:

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

When was the last time National midgets got a pay raise?

I do not think anyone is asking for 10k to win each week but a $500 increase in both divisons to 3k and 4.5k would be nice.

You can make money racing but it is not on the track. You have to be a great salesman and a great busness man. The money is out there for the taking you just have to convence people why they should give you money.

I have talked to hundreds of teams over the years and most of them did hardly anything for their sponsers and most of them never stepped outside their circle to find sponsors. The best I have ever seen with sponsor relations in USAC has been John Scott. John made sure everything was clean tidy and presented a great image for the sponsers. He was always in constant contact with the sponsers not just when he needed something but kept them informed along the way. John told me one day and I stick by it that 25% of the value of any sponsorship he ever got was spent taking care of the sponsor. How many teams can say that?

On a National level the teams need to become more profesional through out the entire sport. Just look at NASCAR they did not start taking off and making stupid money until they started to shed the "Southern" image.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

They didn't start making stupid money until Winston came in a promoted the poop out of it. Winston went to the tracks and asked if they could pay to paint and spruce up the joint for signage in return.

Granted, Winston had a high profit margin and money to burn, but that is when it all changed. Then they got the live T.V. to go along with it and it just grew and grew until it reached the tipping point when Jeff got there and provided the counterpoint to Earnhardt.

They had a vision and something to prove and they have followed that to until just the last few years when it seems they have lost that down home friendly feeling their fans had towards them. They have allowed themselves to "APPEAR" as if they are a greedy corporate entity and it's hurting them.

What USAC and the others must do is show the racer that they are indeed trying to find ways to put money in the racers pocket and help grow the sport "WITH" the racer. It's going to be hard and honestly nearly impossible to pay what I believe is a good purse to be fair to the teams. The N.C. show and most of the midget shows should pay $1,000to start and $10,000 to win. It can be done, but it will require a whole new mindset for all involved.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

Quote "John told me one day and I stick by it that 25% of the value of any sponsorship he ever got was spent taking care of the sponsor. How many teams can say that?"

This team can say that, Josh calls his sponsors every Mon. good or bad he also sends a newsletter once a month to keep everyone up to speed. We also try to put the car in front of as many people as we can. (in a positive way)

Jerry #66j
www.joshspencer.com

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

As long as the Oklahoma Sweat Shop sets the national example by attracting 300 midget owners/drivers for a penny purse, nothing is going to change. The midget community is it's own worst enemy, but no one understands that. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

IMO
Fix the sprint car problems first, then the midget's and finally the Big Car's.
The goal seems to be $1,000.00 to start and $10,000.00 to win.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

Paul, Somebody posted a late fifties early sixties payout for a USAC or AAA national Sprint car race and the payout today based on the inflation caculator was actually close to being the same return as it was back then.

You used to build your motors for a couple grand, Your own car. A set of tires would last you 7-10 races. hell your whole car probably cost 4grand back in the sixties.

Now you got motors your forced to pay 40g to compete. A chassis thats junk after one good roll. Tires that last three races tops.

It's not all USACs fault but what do you want? it's been proven people won't travel for non series and your not gonna get a $30 front gate for the shows.

While I certainly understand where your coming from. It certainly isn't the only form of auto racing suffering the high cost vs return syndrome.

Best of luck in 08
Chuck

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

Don - I agree with your thoughts on the Silly Bowl but ASCS does not force 300 team drivers/owners to show up and race. As long as owners and drivers support the event nothing will change.

I have to agree with Paul, that is a long haul for one race and with todays fuel costs the average racer is not going to make that tow.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

You used to build your motors for a couple grand, Your own car. A set of tires would last you 7-10 races. hell your whole car probably cost 4grand back in the sixties......Chuck Nungester

Oakie Drout paid $5,000 cash for the Bobby Marshman/Herb Porter/Don Brown Sprinter with a fresh TRACO Chevy in 1966. The car was first class all of the way. Ross Smith won the L'Burg Track Championship with it in 66 (or 67).

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

" Do you think Dave Darland made the trip and drove for a percentage of $ 330.00 ? "

Paul Gray :greenflag: www.paulgray28.com

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

I was just wondering ,Why do late model shows pay so much to win??? How much does WOO sprints make to win?

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

We build our own engines for the sprints, and if we ran these little guys we would build our own engines for them also. We can't see having someone do what we can do ourselves. That includes the rest of the car also. You save thousands on thousands doing it that way. And you don't always need new this and that, thats the want list. And for many people their want list well exceeds the need list.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

WoO pays $10,000 to win, $5,000 for second and $800 to start for a one day show.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

Staggerman, that is exactly my point!! The midget owners/drivers cannot have it both ways!! You can't have it one way in Oklahoma at what most people call the biggest midget event of the year and have it another way in Indiana. One of two things needs to happen.

1. The midget/owners and drivers boycott the event... or

2. Some how, some way, the midget owners/drivers bring intense pressure on the promoters there to pay a respectable purse. By that I mean something like $25,000 to win and pay a respectable purse on back. That would include boosting the purse considerably for each preliminary night... for example $5,000 to win and a respectable purse for the positions on back.

But until this "Oklahoma Gold Rush" attitude goes away, all of you are wasting ur time even talking about larger midget purses for the outdoor season. It's not gonna happen as long as these two guys pay pennies to race midgets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! When are all of you ever going to figure this out and get real?

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

It costs our owner/driver $500 to race our winged 360 one night if we don't break anything. That covers fuel for the truck and car...Pit passes for 4 and a new RR. He's lucky because the shop is 10 miles from the track.

Sammy and Steve figured it out years ago. Own your own team, have corporate sponsorship pay all of your expenses, and pocket ALL of the winnings. I heard an interview with Sammy several years ago where he stated that he made some investments quite some time back and "did good with them". That is the ONLY way to make money racing sprints and midgets.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

That's why I never could understand why people are so wrapped up in how much a race pays to win. Only one team gets the winners share. What a race pays to start, is the key. Also, what does 10th through 24th pay???

Look at the Knoxville Nationals. Though it pays something like $140k to win, it also pays something like $5k for the first non transfer out of the "C MAIN"!!!

It's going to be interesting to see the car count for the $15k to win midget race at Granite City this Fall. Considering who is promoting it, I seriously doubt that the payback will be too good. USAC is off that weekend and it is PowerI sanctioned...

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

$1000 to start the feature. Look for every midget in America to be there.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

I have to admit on this Jackie Robinson Day in America I didn't think I would be reading "Silly Bowl" or "Oklahoma Sweat Shop" or "Oklahoma Gold Rush" comments form my main man DonMoore10.

Why do all of you choose to look at your cups half empty?

Didja all stop to thank your maker this morning that you could have been born in Istanbul or Mozambique and not ever know what a Spike dirt car or a Beast combo car was or ever hear the sound of an Ed Pink bullet screaming around the high banks of Belleville even if it ran you over and knocked the turbin off your head?

I concede the high ground that purses are stuck in the 60's, 70's or
80's...take your pick but the taxi cab contingent can pay 10K per event because they have the front gate to support the purse.

Do you think Anderson could have paid that kind of purse with a sparsley filled grandstand on a bright sunny Sunday afternoon? Do you think Kenly could have paid that kind of purse? Shoot they couldn't even get EMT's to the track on time or get proper push trucks.

Rome wasn't built in a day and this problem will not go away anytime soon. There are many pieces to the answer one of which is to get out to the USAC shows and support the promoter for making the investment he has in the event. :checkered:

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

Post of the week. No, make that post of the year.:applaud::checkered:

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

Ty-EP
Cold, hard facts. People will flock to a LM show or a winged show and pay $40 to sit ass to ass and watch that type of racing. I have to say I would not go if it was free. I am in a minority,just as most that post on this board.
Next time you take your head out of the sand, look around, if your math skills lack, buy a calculatoer. Count the bodys, multiply, devide. hell even try some guesstimating. The answer will be that open-wheel non wing racing has a cult like following. They are loyal, love their sport, will travel the planet to watch. The trouble is they can all make the trip in a micro bus.

Re: Payout Vs. The Cost to Compete an Embarrassment ...
 

And that last post brings me to this point. When are all the promoters and sanctioning bodies going to wakeup and decide that they have to improve the entertainment value of open wheel racing. By that I mean some new and fresh ways to present the product. The presentation of the product hasn't changed since I started going to races a zillion years ago. How many McDonald's restaurants have you seen torn down and a fresh building erected to attract the comtemporary customer. Do you still watch a 7 inch screen black and white TV? Would TV commercials that you saw many years ago work in today's market?

Where we have been:

1. Racing till all hours of the night... and morning. A major turnoff to me and the fans. Great way to send home the fans pissed. Did the powers ever think of getting all the nonsense preliminaries over like hot laps and qualifying by 7 PM? People come to see racing, not a bunch of jacking around.

2. Same racing format for a zillion years. Qualify, heats, semi, feature. A zillion years ago the midgets had the Austrailian pursuit race. That seemed to have disappeared. At Montpelier a few years ago, the midgets ran two 20 lap features. The fans loved it. Haven't seen it since. There's an idea that worked and nobody picked up on it. Duh.

Recognition of drivers winning the race. The driver used to carry the checkered flag around the track after the win. I presented this idea several months ago and it was resounding yes to that including drivers. Well... I been to several indoor races and haven't seen it yet. Another idea to sharpen the entertainment value that nobody's picked up on. Duh.

Problems with the pill draw/point system. Haven't seen a good solution to it yet. So if ur in the fourth heat race and tie several others with points from previous heat races, you may want to plan on loading up early. Another bad deal for the racers and fans. My suggestion of another draw to break the ties... haven't seen that either.

When the pill draw is used, how about running the heat race for 8 laps or so, wave the checkered flag and reverse the order, then go another 8 laps. Total the points from each race. Something different to try.

Racing with radios. Get the guys off the track that don't want to get in line. I'm personally tired of watching race drivers go lap after lap (with radios) and not get in line. Either get in line immediately or load up and go home.

Start the clock for intermissions and stick by it. 10 minutes and we're starting to race. No exceptions. BMARA does this and it works.

Now... costs of racing. We can post on here all day, but the fact is that almost every racing organization has done nothing... that's nothing.. to reduce the costs of racing. And now we have $4 a gallon fuel costs to contend with. USAC is the biggest problem, allowing bigger engines, namely the Esslinger and Fontana driving up costs for owners to stay competitive. This is just one example. Plan on USAC doing nothing as long as 20-40 midgets show up to race, mostly multi-millionaire/factory supported teams/some with salaried drivers racing for $2500 to win. Stop and think of how rediculous that is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When are we going to make some drastic changes in tires to even the competition. I keep hearing it won't make any difference.. OK... when was it tried?????????? Why do we need such big tires to race? Did anybody ever think that we would attract more participants if the costs weren't so high?? The fans on this message board love to see a big car count. Duh. Are you listiening promoters and sanctioning bodies?

Outlaw purose built cars. I've already posted on this many times and I keep hearing that it can't be done. Register one car for the season would be a start. Legislation could be worked out for this with some creativity.

Can anybody name me one item that has been initiated by the new order at USAC to drastically reduce the cost of racing????????????

And finally as much as I love POWRi/Siner/Brown/BMARA..... guys you need to step out of the box and reinvent midget racing with some fresh ideas. We don't know if they will work unless we try them. Is anybody trying???????