I honestly tend to disagree that every entity within an organization has to
be profitable, at least from a financial sense. In SCCA, if Solo did not
exist today, there would be no SCCA or an SCCA with very little membership
and awareness. What Solo does for the SCCA, in addition to providing its
membership a very fun thing to do, is make the most amateur of car
enthusiasts aware that there is an organization out here that allows you to
bring your beater, or build a $300K purpose-built racecar and go racing.
Then in turn that amateur is exposed to so many things the SCCA can sell it.
Solo is a sales tool. It is the finest form of advertisement the SCCA has at
its disposal. I see that fact. I hope Mr. Johnson does as well. Over
everything else that SCCA has including Speed Channel(Sports Car Revolution,
World Challenge, etc.), Solo and its loyal regional volunteers is what
brings the outsiders in to our group. And without us, they9re much less. So,
in the end, if it costs SCCA an extra $100K to have us around, its a bargain
and essential to its continued survival itself.
On 3/21/05 11:37 AM, "Jay Mitchell" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Mike King wrote:
>> > I'm honestly not at liberty to start naming names, but the
> understanding is
>> > that Solo has to be a self-sufficient entity within the SCCA so
> it be
>> > survive within the SCCA banner.
> I think that's absolutely the correct outlook. On a personal
> level, I wouldn't want my sport to continue exist at the expense
> of other activites' profits. So, I'd say get rid of whatever
> portions of the program incur excessive costs (e.g. travel by
> National staff, specialized equipment, etc.) and return the
> conduct of those portions of the program to the Regions, much as
> club racing has been done all along.
> If the present management of the program can't operate within a
> reasonable budget (i.e., expected total revenue), then you have
> to consider the possibility that they simply aren't doing their
> job. That's how businesses are run, and this portion of the club
> must be run as a business if it is to survive.
>> > And that has become the challenge this year;
> Well, it looks as if Pro Solo is outta here, then.
>> > To make the National Solo
>> > program a profitable program.
> Beyond the Solo2 National Championship (which presumably doesn't
> lose money, taken as a standalone), why do we _need_ a "National
> Solo program?" We did just fine without one for years prior to
> the introduction of National Tours in 1992. If the series can't
> be conducted in the black with National staff and equipment, then
> it should be easy enough to go back to Divisionals as the
> qualifiers for Nationals. There are still plenty of old-timers
> around who remember how to do that.
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> * http://groups.yahoo.com/group/evolution-discussions/
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> * email@example.com
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .