Originally Posted by robert gatten:
when i say i'm interested in better coverage for the good of the sport that's what i mean. one race, or several races, losing live feed is not good when your dealing with a large racing organization like USAC. I'm a fan yes, but i also have an investment in the sport. When i read of tracks cutting races and purses it bothers me. And, when i see an opportunity to promote one of the biggest races of the year and it goes down that bothers me, and hurts the sport. Lets say you own a team that has run some races over the years and you tell a sponsor that you would like more money next year because your going to run alot more USAC shows. And one of the benies he will get is his company will receive exposure on live feeds from all over the country. He clicks on to watch and gets the problems we all had, think he will want to spend the extra money ? Same thing with prospective sponsors you have been working with. And we all know if we don't attract new fans then tracks will close. It all ties together for" the good of the sport". If you would take the time to think about how it's more than just not being able to see a race, you might understand it's not bullcrap at all.
I understand where you are coming with this as far as sponsor concerns. The question I have is how does this attract even one new fan? If they do not know anything about it how would the stumble across the USAC site. I can see the convienece to fans who follow the sport already, but do not see it creating new fans. Not trying to upset you. I just do not see it.