I was just wondering how many of you thought that the new TV contract and global exposure could be part of the influance of the top names and teams coming back?

For a sponsor i am sure that this has had some influance on any descision made.

Just a thought, as I may not be here to see it, I really hope the coverage is going to be great. Really going to miss this years racing.

DCLUCIE Wrote:I was just wondering how many of you thought that the new TV contract and global exposure could be part of the influance of the top names and teams coming back?

For a sponsor i am sure that this has had some influance on any descision made.

Just a thought, as I may not be here to see it, I really hope the coverage is going to be great. Really going to miss this years racing.

North One have been given a big slice of the £800k+ budget for the TT; in past years Greenlight have had to pay to record and broadcast the TT. Maybe if Greenlight had been given the same sort of financial assistance, then they too would have been playing on the same field.

And before anyone comes back and disputes the post, then I would suggest the same persons should post up the expenditure sheets for this years TT. as issued to Tynwald.

Hi George,

That wasn't the point I was trying to make. The point I was looking at was that if we increase the exposure globally that the TT can get and also manage to get a live race or races, then maybe this would attract teams who have larger sponsors. Especially with the financial situation the way it is, it would be more of an attraction for teams to say to prospective sponsors, or keep current ones by saying 'Yes we are also doing the TT which will have live coverage in X countries, giving your Company exposure in these Countries'. I am just thinking it would be a good thing not just for the Island, but also getting much needed cash into supporting teams.

Don't really know if this happens but it definately could be a plus.

I do get the point that your trying to make but lets get one thing clear; no Company would sponsor live coverage of the TT, and I also think that the previous film company would not agree to broadcasting it live, because they have morals.

Its well known that the TT has had more than its fare share of fatalities over the years and the team that are now at the helm of the event must be applauded for the safety measures that are now in place, which has shown a vast reduction of same. A company that was to sponsor an event live that has the possibility of a fatality runs the chance of creating negative advertising for itself.

The way that the event is broadcast now is the safest and the only way to broadcast it.

I think you have missed my point 'George'. I was not on about sponsoring the race, I was on about encouraging companies to either continue to sponsor a team or newly sponsor a team. I think that in these times of ression spending £15,000 say on a team sponsorship, and give global coverage, compared to the costs of a 30 second advert on a local TV station maybe a good idea. It may encourage more money into the sport we all love by providing a definate benefit to companies that may wish to expand their brand.

On the point you make about Greenlight, I think that even if Greenlight, and believe me I have loved the greenlight vidoes and I think have them all, but I think that even if they have had the 800K you mention, they wouldn't have had the technology or the Global Contacts, that NorthOne already have. If you look at virtual spectator and the contacts the NorthOne have made over the course of their production of the WRC, JWRC and PWRC, then I don't really believet hat Greenlight would have been able to match that. If they are looking for the TT to be shown 'LIVE' I think we have all agreed that this should never be shown actually live, but shown with a delay. So that if anything does actually happen, god forbid, the producers can switch the picture thats broadcast. I personnally believe that NorthOne was a good option as they already have a proven record in the Global market and already have the technology in place to bring the TT hopefully to more life this year, more than any other year in the past. I would have been worried that if the contract was given to Greenlight we would not have a step forward in the great productions they have done in the past.

Firstly Greenlight do have the Technology and the ability to use it and as for global access Greenlight are one of the top companies around and do a hell of a lot of work in the USA, South America, Far East and beyond.

They do the GT series, World Power Boats, Indy Series and are the private film company for many of the F1 teams. North One have not had to take a gamble with their own money to film the TT, whatever they produce even if its rubbish, wont lose a penny, not like Greenlight who have always used their own money to film the TT.

As for showing the TT live it will never happen and many people would object to any idea by the Government to allow it. One reason I could give is that the event only has to have a complaint to the Broadcasting Regulators that it could be an event not suitable for viewing by children, and that would be enough to stop it being broadcast live.

I am sorry 'George' but I guess you will never accept that they maybe better than Greenlight by the sound of it. Guess you may have a chip on your shoulder about this so I will leave it. If you read the thread properly this was never about if NorthOne were better than Greenlight, but you have to admit Greenlight has never gone to the lengths that NorthOne have to sell the coverage on a global basis.

To bring you back on thread, which is maybe the reason for your post being modified by ADMIN, but do you think that wider TV coverage would be advantageous to sponsors of teams? If no then why not? Simple question really.

To bring you back on thread, which is maybe the reason for your post being modified by ADMIN, but do you think that wider TV coverage would be advantageous to sponsors of teams? If no then why not? Simple question really.

Yes it may have a slight impact but only if edited and not live. After speaking to a sponsor of a TT race over this issue of live broadcasting the event, his response was that they would not sponsor an event that had the possibility of their company being exposed to the possibility of a fatality being shown. They same company do plenty of advertising on TV and although their adds show the result of an accident it never shows the true picture. A good example of this is the type of pictures shown on fag packets in the far east, they are very graphic and upsetting and have resulted in people turning their backs of smoking.

You mentioned the sponsors of a race, but my question was about sponsors of a TEAM.

The TT is held over a 37 mile circuit and the top 10 riders are/can be separated by a section of the circuit, this is a problem that I cant see being resolved. In a situation like this any broadcaster would only be able to follow a limited number of riders just as it has been for past broadcasters. There are over eighty bikes in any one race what chance do the majority of them have in being spotted on any TV coverage ? Its not like BSB or WSB, at these meetings the cameras can pan around to catch all the action without missing to much from the leaders, giving more opportunities for sponsors of the back markers to being exposed to TV. Another problem for the TT is that the high profile, big spending sponsors could put pressure on the TV companies to ensure that they get more coverage leaving the rest of the field getting little or no coverage at all.

Are you aware that the ACU charge sponsors to have their names on the bikes yet at the same time they cant even guarantee to get the sponsors names on the result sheets or programs.

In an ideal world yes it would benefit the TT if all the sponsors and riders were to get some sort of TV coverage, but its impossible for this to happen

Hi George, I think you may find that they charge for an entrant and not a sponsor. These are two totally different things entirely.

I take your point and it is a good one about guaranteed coverage. I guess if you were a sidecar you could always stick some underneath lol. Mad you may think, but in large yatch races the sponsors are always shown underneath as well as on the top of the boat. They will always get better coverage when the boat is upside down.

Entrant/sponsor they are both the same thing in my book

I think not George. Entrant is the Team itself no matter what sponsor they have. The sponsors name is usually applie dot the team name. A good example of this is Old TAS Suzuki and NOW Relentless Suzuki. Different sponsors of the same team or ENTRANT. Doesn't an entrant need some form of a licence from the ACU or is that something else I am thinking about. I definately know a Sponsor doesn't need anything apart from cash.

I hope thats now clear.

DCLUCIE Wrote:I think not George. Entrant is the Team itself no matter what sponsor they have. The sponsors name is usually applie dot the team name. A good example of this is Old TAS Suzuki and NOW Relentless Suzuki. Different sponsors of the same team or ENTRANT. Doesn't an entrant need some form of a licence from the ACU or is that something else I am thinking about. I definately know a Sponsor doesn't need anything apart from cash.

I hope thats now clear.

If you are the sponsor and want your name in the results ( TAZ 600 3rd) you have to pay the ACU for an entrants licence, which is another rip off by the ACU. Why do they always want their cut of any money available to a rider

So I am right then, there is a big difference between sponsor and entrant?

DCLUCIE Wrote:So I am right then, there is a big difference between sponsor and entrant?

What Planet are you on, the true entrant is the rider. The entrants licence is just another scam. If a rider makes the entry he does not need a entrants licence but if the likes of Taz make the entry they do, its sponsorship ie have your name on the bikes and results.
TAS (Temple Auto Salvage) is the sponsor

George we are not talking about a rider with no entrant putting in an entry. It seems to me you move the goal posts to suit yourself.

Let me try to make it clear for you. You said there is no difference between ENTRANT and SPONSOR. Not once did you mention the rider. Yet here you are bringing the rider into it. You have agreed though that there is a big diffeence between SPONSOR and ENTRANT so there you go, well done.

By the way the rider is the one that sits on the bike and turns the throttle and handles the business end of the riding. Just in case you weren't clear on that either.

By the way WHO ARE YOU? and you know why we are asking that question don't you......

DCLUCIE Wrote:George we are not talking about a rider with no entrant putting in an entry. It seems to me you move the goal posts to suit yourself.

Let me try to make it clear for you. You said there is no difference between ENTRANT and SPONSOR. Not once did you mention the rider. Yet here you are bringing the rider into it. You have agreed though that there is a big diffeence between SPONSOR and ENTRANT so there you go, well done.

By the way the rider is the one that sits on the bike and turns the throttle and handles the business end of the riding. Just in case you weren't clear on that either.

By the way WHO ARE YOU? and you know why we are asking that question don't you......

NO & WHY

http://www.motorcycle.com/images/content...man_04.jpg

Joey fan eh? So what have you done in the sport and what do you do now? Just asking? Always like to know the background of the people I am talking to so I can judge how much is made up or what they have heard rather than what they know. I am sure you can understand.

I have raced and also have put my hand in my pocket every now and again to help riders out with what ever they need. So I am not sure if you class me as a sponsor or entrant. I have never been asked for an ACU licence, apart from my race one. I have always been involved in motorcycle racing one way or another as far back as I can remember. I can also remember dropping my dad in it when I was about 4 as the family went up to Jurby one day my old man had an outing planned with George Oats on his latest buy. My mum was dead against him poping on for an outing and you should have seen her face when I said I was racing myself. But anyway, as we got into the car I said to my dad don't forget your crash helmet. All I can remember was alot of shouting mand me getting in the front seat. Just guessed my mum didn't want to go that day.

So thats a little about me. What about you? Its all freindly by the way.

And how is Willy these days, had plenty of Banter over the years with him, and I can recall you in the pram many years ago,



hope you still not a cheeky little sod



I promise no more Guiness


Dave you were nearly named Guiness