| Author |
Message |
    
Trojan
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2011 - 04:24 am: | 
|
It is their profiteering and active promotion of the events that are troublesome.
The IOM government makes almost NOTHING from the TT races. By the time they have spent money on keeping teh road surfaces of the course up to standard, arranged for safety equipment and personel, paid police overtime and all of the other thousands of tasks that need to be performed in order to stage these races I'm pretty sure that actual governmental profit is neglible (certainly in comparison to the huge amounts of money they make from offshore banking and other IOM staple industries).
Sponsorship from Monster, Pokerstars etc just goes towards paying the expenses rather than filling the coffers of the IOM government.
People who do make some money from the event are the small traders, B&B owners, bar keepers, camp site owners and other small businesses that need the annual TT races to survive.
Back in the 1980's ther TT was not commercialised at all, but it still attracted many thousands of spectators every year and has ALWAYS been over subscribed by competitors, so your argument holds no water I'm afraid. |
Glitch
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2011 - 10:01 am: |
|
I love the TT, always have, ever since I was a little guy.
I'm not wanting to watch anyone wad their bike up or die in the crash.
That's not what it's about, at all. |
Honolulu_blue_esq
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2011 - 10:11 am: |
|
Blake,
I haven't seen examples of IOM government profiting of the event other than through increased commerce. If you have examples, it might change my perception. My belief though, is that the government's profit (if any) from the event comes by way of increased tourism, commerce, etc.
Your statement that governments don't profit from allowing the sale of alcohol and tobacco is just plain wrong. Google "sin tax."
The bottom line is that most people think smoking, drinking, etc. should be a personal choice - even if we all know that both have a high percentage of killing you. I don't see the distinction between that and IOM. And I don't see a difference between government involvement in either. |
Davegess
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2011 - 10:36 am: |
|
The TOTAL revenue from tourism in the Isle of Man, this includes the TT, the Manx GP, ISDT, vintage car events, steam traction events, scuba diving, and all other tourists coming to the country, is less than 2% of the GDP of the nation. The amount of money generated by the TT wouldn't cover the rent for ONE of the 600 banks in the country. Yes it generates money. Most everything it generates goes back into race.
The race does not continue because folks there want the money. The race continue because they love it.
The fatalities among spectators can be mostly blamed on alcohol. Riding on the wrong side of the road is hard, doing it drunk is seriously "not good"
Speed limits exist in all towns and some rural areas and are extended to many of the main routes during the TT. Most of the roads remain speed limit free but one must remember that the sheep don't understand about roads and motorcycles. |
Mr_grumpy
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2011 - 12:28 pm: |
|
One must also remember about the widely varying skill levels all running round on public roads.
When I went I had a whale of a time on the M2.
However it has to be said I wasn't particularly quick, enough to reach my limits most of the time & even the bike's in a few places, but I was still having to be very sharp-eyed to avoid slower riders & locals while keeping an eye in the mirror for the total head-cases who blew by like I was on a moped, riding on the ragged edge, with scant regard for others.
A Dutch rider staying on the same campsite was killed while we were there, not on the circuit. He clipped a curb trying to get too fast through an s-bend over a hump-back bridge.
Stone wall stopped him.
Sad, yes, but that's life.
I spend more time than most on the road & I'm well aware that the difference between life & death anywhere is the blink of an eye.
Ride safe & be lucky. |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2011 - 05:00 pm: |
|
Anyone care to quote what the IOM government has stated concerning their intentions in promoting the moto racing events there?
Matt,
You toss out a lot of vague claims. Do you have any actual data to support them? For instance...
>>> Back in the 1980's ther TT was not commercialised at all, but it still attracted many thousands of spectators every year and has ALWAYS been over subscribed by competitors, so your argument holds no water I'm afraid.
How many individual racers competed then versus now? Is there a listing of that year to year?
Dave,
How much in American dollars is that? How many MILLIONS? Percentage of GDP is not germane to any of the points I've raised. My point is that the IOM government are aiming to generate more revenue through promotion of racing at a venue that kills on average 1% of the participants every year. I don't know of a parallel anywhere else in the world.
Glitch,
If the course weren't so challenging and horrifically dangerous, would you be so intrigued by the race?
Justin,
>>> I haven't seen examples of IOM government profiting of the event other than through increased commerce.
Convenient to discount commerce. What else is there? Well there is sponsorship.
I admit that wrt the "government" that "profit" was the wrong word. I should have said "revenue." But the IOM government is surely acting on behalf of the folks who do profit. How many would lose a significant source of their livelyhood if the events ended? Quite a lot I suspect. So the government, who they elect, is acting on their behalf.
>>> If you have examples, it might change my perception.
Sponsorships.
>>> My belief though, is that the government's profit (if any) from the event comes by way of increased tourism, commerce, etc.
Mine too, which is exactly whey they seek to promote and expand the event. They state as much.
>>> Your statement that governments don't profit from allowing the sale of alcohol and tobacco is just plain wrong. Google "sin tax."
Agreed. I oppose sin tax.
>>> The bottom line is that most people think smoking, drinking, etc. should be a personal choice - even if we all know that both have a high percentage of killing you.
Really? Casual responsible consumption of either has a high percentage of killing folks? Do tell. I don't see it.
>>> I don't see the distinction between that and IOM. And I don't see a difference between government involvement in either.
Then you've failed to comprehend what I wrote earlier. Try again. The differences are clear and stark. One just need be willing to open eyes and see them. |
Glitch
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2011 - 06:01 pm: |
|
If the course weren't so challenging and horrifically dangerous, would you be so intrigued by the race?
Yep, I don't look at it as "horrifically dangerous" though, although I can see why you would think so, given the way you talk about this race.
I love the history as well, and all the TT racers. From Stanley Woods to Guy Martin.
Do you have the same horrifically dangerous view of Mount Everest climbing? |
Davegess
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2011 - 09:21 pm: |
|
Blake, you are being obtuse. 1000 bucks is a significant amount of money for me and I am sure the total revenue generated is a fair bit larger than that BUT it is all relative. The total wouldn't fund a days interest on our national debt.
But I am pretty sure you have not spent much time talking to people in the IOM and are relying on a press release to gather you facts so you are laboring under the disadvantage of not knowing much about the event except that some people die and the people (the government is the people particularly in very small nation) of the nation promote the event. |
Honolulu_blue_esq
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2011 - 11:20 pm: |
|
===Really? Casual responsible consumption of either has a high percentage of killing folks? Do tell. I don't see it.
No one said anything about "casual responsible consumption" but you. If I really need to go find links to scientific studies proving the causal connection between tobacco and alcohol use and eventual death, I'd rather not engage in this discussion.
===Then you've failed to comprehend what I wrote earlier. Try again. The differences are clear and stark. One just need be willing to open eyes and see them.
Just because you say the differences are clear and stark doesn't make it so. Why don't you try again. I'll try better to comprehend if you'll try better to put together a cohesive postition. |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2011 - 12:41 pm: |
|
Glitch,
When four men die on average every year due to competing in the racing there (about 1% or more of the participants), I don't know how you avoid seeing the competition as horrifically dangerous.
Yes, climbing Everest and many mountains is very dangerous. I'm not seeing anyone setting up bleachers for thousands of spectators or looking to promote the event via prize money. I do oppose those looking to profit/commercialize luring tourists to undertake the deadly "adventure." Like I keep having to repeat, I don't oppose that IOM allow the event. I oppose their promotion and commercialization of it.
Dave G.,
When I am speaking to the efforts of a fairly limited group of people looking to raise revenue and profit from events that inevitably kill participants every year, then comparison to GDP is what is obtuse. Nor are we talking thousands of dollars; it's well into the millions. Yet even 2% of GDP can make or break an economy.
Justin,
The clear and stark difference is between "allowing" versus "promoting", of "advertising/marketing" versus "warning-against/dissuading." If you cannot comprehend the clear and stark difference between "allowing" and "promoting", or between "advertising" and "dissuading", then further discussion is pointless. |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2011 - 01:07 pm: |
|
All,
I don't think we really disagree on the issue, more just the threshold where its promotion/commercialization becomes an issue.
Question: How many dead competitors every year would it take to turn you off of the commercialization of moto racing at IOM?
Would you be making the same arguments if 40 racers died there every year? No? Then what is the threshold for you? |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2011 - 01:10 pm: |
|
Answering the converse of that question, I'd say that avoiding any fatalities or traumatic paralyzing injuries for a few years running would be a good start. |
Glitch
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2011 - 01:29 pm: |
|
Maybe it's the lack of promotion we see here in the States skews my view perception? |
Honolulu_blue_esq
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2011 - 01:35 pm: |
|
---The clear and stark difference is between "allowing" versus "promoting", of "advertising/marketing" versus "warning-against/dissuading."
I haven't seen a single example of the IOM government promoting the event. Have you? |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2011 - 02:34 pm: |
|
quote:The Isle of Man’s profile has received a huge boost with increased television coverage of the 2009 TT races. The promotion of the event is part of a wide-ranging strategy by the (Isle of Man Government's) Department of Tourism and Leisure to raise the number of visitors to the Isle of Man TT. This year saw an increase of around 2,500 visitors compared to the 2008 TT fortnight. .
.
.Independent analysis of the Television coverage by media analysts TNS Sport has revealed that the Isle of Man TT brand received global exposure through the Television coverage to an equivalent advertising value of £4,914,550 of which £406,753 was in the UK. In addition a further £2,188,405 was generated in press coverage, including over £1.000,000 in UK titles.
Isle of Man Organizers (IOM Gov't) - 2009
http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?lnk=r ss&article=38047
quote:It is important that we (IOM Gov't) review all of our commercial arrangements as they expire to ensure that we are achieving the best possible returns.
We have recently completed a comprehensive review of all of the trademarks associated with the TT and now have a clear operating framework with regard to their commercial value. We will capitalise on that work to generate the revenue we need to maintain the continued success and growth of the TT.
Isle of Man TT Organizers (IOM Gov't) - Sep. 2009
http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?lnk=r ss&article=38047
quote:(The Isle of Man Government’s Department of Economic Development, the commercial rights holders of the TT Races) funds the TT Races to drive economic development on the Isle of Man, to generate tourism, and commercial income .
.
.the intention is to build a platform that will increase the return on investment for The Isle of Man Government....
.
.We want to develop and grow this global audience for the benefit both of the event and the Isle of Man.
Isle of Man TT Press Office
http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?artic le=43693
|
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2011 - 02:38 pm: |
|
>>> I haven't seen a single example of the IOM government promoting the event. Have you?
Yes. You'd have to try to avoid seeing it. It's on television. It's in motorcycle media. It's on BadWeB. It's all over their web site. There are even a number of press releases announcing it (see excerpts form some of those above). |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2011 - 02:47 pm: |
|
More such press releases...
http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?artic le=44708
The Isle of Man Government’s Department of Economic Development, promoters of the Isle of Man TT Races Fuelled by Monster Energy
The IOM government is THE "Promoter" of the events. ANY promotion/commercialization of the event is in the end by them.
Why do they promote the events?
In their own words from their own press release, the IOM gov't promotes the events there:
"to drive economic development on the Isle of Man, to generate tourism, and commercial income." |
Honolulu_blue_esq
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2011 - 03:22 pm: |
|
Great links, and they certainly strengthen your point and make my metaphor with tobacco/alcohol less apt (because governments don't typically overtly promote alcohol or tobacco use, but instead simply allow others to promote it, and sometimes offer crop subsidies and tax breaks to facilitate it).
That said, I'm not ready to crucify IOM gov't or commercial enterprises for capitalizing on the decisions of individuals to participate in or observe the event. And here is why: I don't know what the IOM gov't does with the extra revenue generated by its promotion. If they cut bigger pay checks to the politicians, then what they are doing is morally wrong. OTOH, if it allows them to feed hungry children or something like that, I can't say I think what they are doing is morally wrong. Because the 1% that die and the 99% that don't make a decision to run. The hypothetical hungry kids don't make a decision to be hungry. Perhaps it is a "ends justify the means" kind of thing. |
Davegess
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2011 - 03:29 pm: |
|
Blake what is your threshold of death? If 1 person died racing the TT each year? 1 every three years? |
|
