SCCAITS

iTrader: (3)

MAZDASPEED racers got an email a few hours ago asking to them to complete a survey. The tone of the survey indicated lots of frustration with the SCCA and MAZDASPEED members interest in other organizations.

I am curious what type of racers are on this forum... club, solo, drag, etc. and what the non-club racers have to say. Club racers are probably divided between the NASA and SCCA loyalists as well as those who run both. 2 cents anyone?

Don49

iTrader: (3)

I race E Prod @ the SCCA National level. This survey concerns me greatly. I just bought my car last January and don't want to see the support go away. SCCA leaves a lot to be desired as an organization, but the racing and the racers are tops. In the past I quit SCCA 6 or 7 times, but came back for the level of competition. I have been racing since 1971 and competed at the Runoffs 10 times since 1988.

Flynbryn

NASA has room for all brands and types of cars production or purpose built. If you own it, it can be raced in NASA. SCCA can't say that. The SCCA, in my opinion, is falling behind NASA in driver instruction with their HPDE program. The SCCA recently has implemented a similar program but I don't think it has become very popular or it is being not marketed correctly, as I've never seen one of these events on any of the local track's schedules in Southern CA. A healthy HPDE program is at the heart of increasing membership and a great way to sustain a clubs operating budget. I quit the SCCA's Solo II because of all of the politicing and BS over rules and classes. Just my 2 cents. If you don't like what is going on in the SCCA there is an alternative.

DriveFast7

iTrader: (1)

What caused this survey to be sent out? What were the "words were said by Mazdaspeed staff"? Or what was the jist of the discussion?

Oh, and http://drivenasa.com

mazda6guy

iTrader: (1)

I just completed my survey. Mainly it ask question about how do you feel about NASA. And if you compete with one organization would you leave them for a better organization. It was about a 14 or 15 question survey.

SCCAITS

iTrader: (3)

It was a lengthy survey, a lot of reading and allowed for a lot of input - both in written comments and a rating type style. As a NASA and SCCA racer I got to answer questions about both organizations, not sure if everyone did or just those who raced both. The survey did ask the respondent if they drag raced, did solo, etc. so I am thinking more than club racers got it.

Here is part of the survey....there were many questions to be answered...probably 15-20 on mine. This was the final question...

As some of you may know, MAZDASPEED Motorsports and the leadership/management of the Sports Car Club of America (the Club) have had some difficult situations recently. Earlier this year, SCCA approved a suspension option package (MS-R) for the Mazda MX-5 for SSB class competition in 2007. Within two months, after some of our Mazda racers had purchased a 2007 MX-5, the option package, and raced with the option package, SCCA wrongly decided the package would not be legal for competition in 2007.
-
In October of this year at the SCCA Runoffs, one of our MAZDASPEED staff, there to support the Mazda competitiors at the event, was told by a prominent member of SCCA’s Board of Directors that “SCCA doesn’t need Mazda and Mazda doesn’t need SCCA". As you can imagine we were shocked that the club leadership felt this way about MAZDASPEED involvement.
-
Normally in the course of business relationships, when someone discounts your contribution to the point of saying we don’t need you, you take your business elsewhere. While that was our first reaction, it doesn’t take into consideration you, our customers and team members. These difficulties have affected many of our Mazda Team Support members and we have been working through them with your best interest as our #1 priority.
-
The long term commitment MAZDASPEED has made to our members and the results of these support programs has benefited Mazda as well. Mazda’s market share for street vehicles among club members is 3 times our industry average. Mazda is the most raced brand within the club, in fact over 50% based on the latest results. We benefit greatly by having team members as advocates for our vehicles as family and friends ask you what car to purchase. For all this support, we thank you.
-
Please read the following five (5) statements carefully and decide which one fits your feelings the best, then respond by clicking the box next to that statement. Please respond to only one link and respond only once. We would also appreciate any comments and suggestions you have on the matter and have provided a comment section for you to give any feedback. If you would like to copy any leadership of the club on your response, please feel free to do so. We suggest that your forward your comments to the National office as well as your local SCCA Region Executive.
-
While these choices don’t go into specific detail, they will give us an indication of the direction you (our customer) would like us to take and where we should apply our support. Please understand any support not given to SCCA in the future will still be invested into amateur (grass roots) racing. Our vision is to expand our position in this area, not pull back.
-
Again, thank you for your support in making MAZDASPEED Motorsports Development a great success and Mazda a success in the market place. We value your business and loyalty.

* MAZDASPEED is considering building stronger ties with other racing organizations such as NASA and scaling back involvement with SCCA. Please let us know if you support this idea. Following, are five statements, Please read all five statements and then select the one you MOST agree with.

1. Please continue the same level of support to SCCA Club Racing, I am satisfied with the Club and its leadership and plan to continue participating in SCCA events.

2. Please continue the same level of support to SCCA Club Racing. As a Mazdaspeed Motorsports Development member, I will get personally involved with club management to seek a solution to the current situation. If necessary, I will seek club office to protect the relationship between SCCA and with Mazdaspeed Motorsports.

3. I do not approve of the way SCCA Club Racing’s management and officials have acted or their comments. Don’t reward this bad behavior, but also don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. Examine alternative places to compete with Mazdaspeed (i.e. NASA or other grass roots organizations) and keep me advised. At this point I do not have any available options for racing with alternative racing organizations and am limited to the SCCA. If Mazdaspeed withdraws its support from SCCA Club Racing I will be negatively impacted as I have no other place to race. I will support Mazdaspeed Motorsports by getting personally involved with club management to seek a solution to the current situation.

4. I do not approve of the way SCCA Club Racing’s management and officials have acted or their comments. There are other racing organizations in my area and I will consider participating with them as an alternative or in addition to SCCA. I can compete with anyone (NASA, SCCA, Mazda Owners Club, etc.), but I would prefer to have as many options as possible.

5. Stop all involvement with SCCA Club Racing as soon as possible (2008 season). I have an alternative racing organization where I can compete that is better. I feel that Mazdaspeed’s involvement in that organization will be more appreciated. In my response I will tell you where the support should be directed.



EDIT: There is also this that came out on Oct 15th...

http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl...5003/1531/FREE


"Robert Davis, Mazda senior vice president and head of the company's racing program, said his company is "trying to spread our support more evenly among the SCCA and [the National Auto Sport Association]. SCCA is better known, but I would say right now NASA is better run."

Fault Bucket

I got the survey too and am curious about what's behind it. I know there was some issue with the recent MX-5 MS-R 'kit' being ruled ineligible in the road racing classes, but I haven't heard anything else. Up here in the PNW there is no NASA presence, but we do have a multitude of local clubs that sponsor both solo and track days.

I'm primarily just an auto-xer...plus a track day here and there for good measure.

Edit: The post above me was submitted as I was composing this ^^. I didn't get that part of the survey, I guess because I am not a club racer. I'm absolutely shocked that an SCCA board member would make the kind of comment referenced in the survey. Completely unacceptable, if true (which I tend to believe).

Black91n/a

While I'm not a racer (yet) I can see that there's some bad point to this. While I get the sense that the SCCA has been jerking racers around a lot lately and I know there's a lot of anger and frustration out there, NASA maybe isn't always the solution it's toted to be. First, if you've got a car built for an SCCA class and decide to go to NASA you may be forced into racing in a class where you're totally uncompetetive due to the differences in the class structures and modifications allowed. NASA also isn't available everywhere, they're a relatively new organisation and haven't made it to every corner of the US yet, so that's not an option for everyone even if they're willing to put up with maybe being uncompetetive or having to seriously alter their cars at a considerable expense to maybe be competetive.

I do agree that if it's really that bad then we need people to step up and do something about it by taking control of the club back and have it once again represent the best interests of its members. If everyone just quits the club could die and that'd be a real tradgedy.

As was just stated up here in the north west there's no SCCA or NASA, we've got ICSCC, but they still go largely on SCCA classing and rules, so what impacts them will impact us.

Whatever happens we don't want the club to get all pissed off at Mazda and Mazdaspeed and take it out on the racers through the rules, unfair "competition adjustments" or anything like that. The implications of that will spread farther than just the SCCA.

Kentetsu

I race only autocross, so I also did not get the parts of the survey that are listed above. The only complaint I have of SCCA is that the majority of the people seem to be very puckered at both ends....

By contrast, our local club events are very casual and much much more fun to be involved in. I don't see any reason why SCCA couldn't maintain that type of attitude.

slo

iTrader: (1)

Strange I didn't get the survey, but I am registered as a NASA member...

Zyrano

Well, SCCA has a lot of politics involved. I know one of the current issues with solo II in SCCA is that SCCA is pushing for requiring membership for all participants. While my chapter already does this, a lot of other chapters does not require the membership (on average $70-80). Also, i am fustrated as a SCCA member that non of my membership fee goes towards the solo II program (at least the local chapter doesn't get any of it anyway).

dpf22

I thought $15 of it went to the local chapter scca group. I could be wrong, its been a while since I have been on the scca boards and such. I primarilly auto-X, so I was baffled to see these kinds of comments made by the scca. Mazda is a large benefit to the club as a whole. Its almost like using scare tactics to beat them into submission and use them to their means. I dunno, but its rather unnerving.(sp)
I am a member and got the survey btw. I told them they were doing a great job supporting us grassroots racers.

dpf22

darkslide750

I chose Nasa mainly becuase of the classing. I have ran my single turbo FD in the TT series and I am getting closer to run in the Race series. The TT rules worked great for me in order to develop the car and my driving. When I looked into the SCCA, it appeared more involved, mainly because it was an older sanctioning body.

Overall, Nasa has been very good.

SCCAITS

iTrader: (3)

This should not be a discussion as to which organization is better. That's a whole other topic and would make an interesting thread. What is at issue here is where MAZDASPEED will put it's money for support. BTW, only MAZDASPEED members got the survey... not all SCCA and NASA members.

We will never know what really happened as things get spun to each parties agenda and it will be surrounded with rumors. This isn't going to trial and there is no discovery. On the surface it sounds like a corporate pissing match between two execs and an unforgivable blow on the SSB issue. SCCA may be in general a little to cocky towards Mazda or it may be limited to a single individual, one would hope the latter.

I do think MAZDASPEED should support other organizations. To do that though, both parties do not need to b*tch slap either. I can see some possible resentment from SCCA if MAZDASPEED is pumping $$ into their competitor.

Locally, we had an SCCA RE make a threat on a forum that sanctions would be imposed on those who participated in a NASA event that fell on the same weekend that SCCA had a race, which coincidentally NASA also had in place many months prior to SCCA. What immediately followed was a backlash from the racers to this RE. The racers did the right thing by chastising him. There was not an apology but rather a statement issued that it was all just a "misunderstanding" and that sanctions would not be imposed, run where you want. The statement was issued by the ES through another individual and blamed on computer problems. I wonder if these are isolated cases or there are too many SCCA leaders acting irresponsible.

Ultimately, I see this is as a 2 part issue, 1)SCCA and MAZDASPEED need to act more like partners by removing the poor leaders and get back to working for a common goal and 2) MAZDASPEED needs to continue branching out like it should to support other organizations. These should be unrelated issues and addressed separately. Issue one is difficult to correct, issue two is easy.

cpa7man

iTrader: (2)

I race a Mazda in SCCA, and I can tell you I'm really shocked at what this SCCA BOD member told Mazdaspeed. As a director of Texas Region SCCA I am curently pissed at our national director as we had our annual membership meeting this past Tuesday and he did'nt even show up. (as a matter of fact I think we saw him once all year, and he lives right by where we meet) There is a total disconect from the local SCCA RE and boards to the national organization. We really act as a bunch of seperate entities (which we are). We as a local board seem to have no input in anything that happens at national. The individual members elect the BOD members. I beleive we have 3 new BOD members, and many SCCA members are unhappy.
I certainly can't disagree that support should be given to other organizations, but as an SCCA member I would hate the current level of support to be reduced. I spend more than my fair share with Mazda, and most of us have Mazda street cars (I have 3) and promote the brand among our friends.
Bottom line is the director that said that (I would sure like to know who that was) needs to be run out of office like right now.

cpa7man

iTrader: (2)

Mark, what region RE told members not to run NASA. Can't be our Texas region RE as we have even talked about doing a NASA event before. BTW we are changing over are RE and board right now. I encorage you to consider running for my open seat in 2009. We need some forward thinking racers on our board. I will stay on as Treasurer.

SCCAITS

iTrader: (3)

It was not the TX Region RE but rather another RE in the DIV. I'm not going to post his name on here, but it was all over the SOWDIV forums. The post happened on 7/14/07 and was in the thread about race dates being changed (long thread). The clarification thread was shortly thereafter "From SOWDIV Executive Steward". I can PM you the links if you want.

Not to get off topic, but I'm going to see what 2009 brings for SOWDIV. I am very happy with NASA right now for many, many reasons and have frustrations with SOWDIV. It's a national DIV and that is fine. Most of the regional car guys have left or just don't race anymore, it really comes down to the schedule/tracks and the competition is kicking butt there. Attitude is another key component. I got started with SCCA, did their school and had no idea NASA even existed. It wasn't but a few months later and I was racing with them. I have talked with NASA and am probably taking up the NASA PT Director spot for 2008 and will try and build the class. The contingency $$ is also very attractive, whereas that is not available in SCCA regional due to the R/N distinctions. In addition, I have found the NASA PT rules to be more attractive than IT rules and as such am rebuilding my car to PT rules but will still run it ITE at the R/R's. I am not at the MSRH R/R this weekend which some could gripe about... "we give you R/R's and you don't go". This was an R/R by default and not planned. It changed many times, first an enduro, then R/N then... I made a choice not to go b/c 1) I was there 3 weeks ago with NASA, 2) Thanksgiving next week, 3) the next SCCA race is again at MSRH in Jan R/R, 4) the next NASA race is at MSRH in Feb... that's 4 races in a row at MSRH, so I skipped this one, 5) car is apart right now and my focus is NASA championships, not the MSRH cup. This is probably more information than necessary, but in any case I'll see how '08 plays out and maybe think about getting involved for '09. You ought to come run a NASA race Paul, we'd be in the same group PT (lets race again!) and so would Ralph I believe in his SSB if he still has it... there's an event 3/15-16 at MSRC, it's local and SCCA isn't running there this year. Sorry to the rest for getting off topic.

So, how about the MAZDASPEED contingency and support, is NASA really going to get more and how much if anything will be taken from SCCA?

DriveFast7

iTrader: (1)

I'm curious what, if anything will happen with the SCCA MX-5 Cup. Would Mazdaspeed be so displeased with the SCCA to move that very visible and successful MAZDA series to another sanctioning body?

http://www.mx-5cup.com/

mazda6guy

iTrader: (1)

I agree with you Kentetsu on this subject.

ULLLOSE

iTrader: (1)

Sure, as long as you don't race something like a Formula Mazda. I don't see one single open wheel class in Nasa.

Silkworm

cpa7, do you have any more info on what was said to mazda? I got the e-mail as well and it seriously peaked my curiousity, but haven't found anything about what exactly was said

cpa7man

iTrader: (2)

One of the SCCA directors told either Robert Davis VP of racing or one of his staff. "The SCCA doesn’t need Mazda and Mazda doesn’t need the SCCA".
This and the MX5 option package being disallowed are what started this storm. I'm sure the meeting (of the SCCA BOD) this weekend will bring out the name of the offending director, even though many it seems know who it was.

Silkworm

Thanks for the info, that certainly makes sense given the survey's tone.

David Dewhurst

iTrader: (2)

The main issue is the SS crap with the MX5. The comment by the BoD member was made to Tim Buck of Mazda. It would appear that the issues timming happened to come together.

"The SCCA doesn’t need Mazda and Mazda doesn’t need the SCCA".

Within my letter to the President & individually to each BoD member my point is that no BoD member (vendor) should **** off any customer (Tim Buck). Received a response from the President & 6 BoD members.

Kentetsu

David

Would you care to clue us in as to what type of response you received? I'm mostly wondering what their stance is on this matter...