California Speedway Demo / Rebuild

virtualbalboa said:
Wait, I missed that on the plans. I figured they'd be reusing pit road sorta but also figured they'd just build backwards to at least give themselves a chance of making it work and that of course they had tested it. Am I imagining here that they were shooting to have the current pit lane not change and just be on the outside of the conceived turns? Like THAT tight?
Click to expand...

Yes sir

1732240624432.png
 
Naitch said:
I would have torn the whole thing down, dug up the blueprints for Rockingham and copied them.
Click to expand...
Rockingham is great because of the harsh Sandhills climate/environment.

Darlington, Florence and Jacksonville (New River) are amazing racetracks for the same reason.
 
BobbyFord said:
I hope they get their ass kicked in court.
Click to expand...
It just kills me.....and yeah, there is a part of me that wants some payback. I thought that they would keep the Clash....but now that is gone. So, just nothing for SoCal. How can that be? I am pissed, and I really miss my migration south in early spring. Terribly.
 
Revman said:
It just kills me.....and yeah, there is a part of me that wants some payback. I thought that they would keep the Clash....but now that is gone. So, just nothing for SoCal. How can that be? I am pissed, and I really miss my migration south in early spring. Terribly.
Click to expand...
Because CA wants nothing to do with the internal combustion engine and Nascar is the direct opposite of that. I get it they have some fans there, but for the most part you need to stop going to places that don't want you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sdj
wi_racefan said:
Because CA wants nothing to do with the internal combustion engine and Nascar is the direct opposite of that. I get it they have some fans there, but for the most part you need to stop going to places that don't want you.
Click to expand...

Southern California is still a hub of car culture though, there IS demand there.

Hopefully the next track isn’t a mediocre bore fest because that community deserves better.
 
Naitch said:
Southern California is still a hub of car culture though, there IS demand there.

Hopefully the next track isn’t a mediocre bore fest because that community deserves better.
Click to expand...
I always hear that, but when I'm out here I don't really see anymore than anywhere else I go. Every place has pockets of car enthusiasts
 
wi_racefan said:
I always hear that, but when I'm out here I don't really see anymore than anywhere else I go. Every place has pockets of car enthusiasts
Click to expand...
I look at a list of the best oval racers in the country and it's a laundry list of guys from California. Weird how CA both hates racing and dominates it simultaneously.
 
Naitch said:
The biggest problem is SoCal is the price of land. Ontario and Riverside closed for similar reasons. This is a problem that goes back decades.
Click to expand...
The money they got from that compared to all the taxes they were having to pay for what little income the track was making. From a business standpoint it was time to sell. Sucks bad.
 
Naitch said:
The biggest problem is SoCal is the price of land. Ontario and Riverside closed for similar reasons. This is a problem that goes back decades.
Click to expand...
It's not really the price. The price is irrelevant if your goal is to operate a race track and not cash in on the real estate. I guess it's understandable for the owners of Riverside and Ontario to do that, but NASCAR? Since when did being a real estate developer take precedence over holding races? My house has tripled in value since we built it in 1992. So what? We aren't going anywhere, so what difference does it make? All it means to us in practical terms is our taxes and insurance are higher. I totally get it if NASCAR wants to sell off SOME of the unused land, but they have have clearly painted themselves into a real corner here IF they ever had any real intentions of keeping a race track here. And if they didn't, why the dog and pony show? Just sell it and be done with it. Once again, understand what your core business is and play to that business, don't weaken it. Go ahead and TRY to convince me that ANY member of the living France family TRULY understands what the hell they are doing and how they got here.
 
What is left is worth more now. As they build around it that area is a shipping hub that supplies the L.A. area. The longer they hold out the higher it is going to be.
 
StandOnIt said:
What is left is worth more now. As they build around it that area is a shipping hub that supplies the L.A. area. The longer they hold out the higher it is going to be.
Click to expand...
I"ll ask the question again. Is the goal of the France family to sanction stock car races, or be real estate speculators? For decades we were told how important the Southern California market was. Now it seems they would rather just have the money. So in other words, they were just shoveling bull**** all along, just like they do with so many things.
 
It's a business, they run it as they please. They don't have to ask for anybodies permission. I'm pretty sure they knew some fans would have a problem with it. But I don't think they are willing to gamble on a track in California being a success. Tracks are dropping like flies in California.
 
Formerjackman said:
I"ll ask the question again. Is the goal of the France family to sanction stock car races, or be real estate speculators? For decades we were told how important the Southern California market was. Now it seems they would rather just have the money. So in other words, they were just shoveling bull**** all along, just like they do with so many things.
Click to expand...

I think NASCAR should make an announcement on this either way. I support the short track idea, but NASCAR is dragging their ass with it and it appears may have sold too much land to make it viable.
 
I thought Penske owned the track in California.
 
StandOnIt said:
It's a business, they run it as they please. They don't have to ask for anybodies permission. I'm pretty sure they knew some fans would have a problem with it. But I don't think they are willing to gamble on a track in California being a success. Tracks are dropping like flies in California.
Click to expand...
Then have the balls to just come out and SAY that, don't keep playing this dog and pony show.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
The goal is to make money. When a company can make more money by selling an asset than from utilizing it, it should sell it. That's true regardless of business sector.

Glad I took another look.
Click to expand...
But you have to look at what your core business is, and decide what is MORE important. GM could probably make a LOT of money selling all of their assembly plants, but THEN WHAT? Once again, we were told how important this market was. Even if they make a huge profit on selling this property, are they going to be able to build another property in that market with that money, assuming you could even get a race track BUILT in current day California? I would think the land Daytona sits on would bring in a bunch of cash. Why not sell THAT?
 
StandOnIt said:
Click to expand...

It looks from that picture, everything that was going to be kept, remained kept. I don’t understand the doom and gloom, looks exactly as it does in those blue print photos that leaked a while back.
 
Formerjackman said:
Then have the balls to just come out and SAY that, don't keep playing this dog and pony show.
Click to expand...
I agree in a way. The So Cal fans and fans in particular of this track have really been left in the dark due to the lack of transparency about what is the plan going forward from the NASCAR Honcho’s imo. I feel bad for them , I know what it’s like losing your home track. The only thing keeping me optimistic about the short track being built is the blue prints leaked about 2 years ago now? I might be misremembering maybe nascsr showed us them, my point is there’s not much being said about this endeavor and yea nascar can run the business how they want, but updating the progress or lack thereof just seems a bit slimy in my view.
 
Jorge De Guzman said:
It looks from that picture, everything that was going to be kept, remained kept. I don’t understand the doom and gloom, looks exactly as it does in those blue print photos that leaked a while back.
Click to expand...
I think the reason for this is more or less that they've had a lot of time to get cracking on the renovations necessary to have a functioning race track based on those designs they had, and instead, what's happened is that they have done nothing other than clear land. Occam's Razor would suggest that the most likely reason for this is that they aren't going through with those plans; same would be said about NASCAR's overtures to buying the LBGP. We can speculate on the why all day/night but I doubt we'll ever get a straight answer as to whether it was valuation that killed it (presumably) or that it turned out those plans were dogs#it and unworkable in reality. We may never even hear that it's not coming back. If NASCAR screwed up the Southern California market, how does it benefit them to admit that?
 
Formerjackman said:
But you have to look at what your core business is, and decide what is MORE important. GM could probably make a LOT of money selling all of their assembly plants, but THEN WHAT? Once again, we were told how important this market was. Even if they make a huge profit on selling this property, are they going to be able to build another property in that market with that money, assuming you could even get a race track BUILT in current day California? I would think the land Daytona sits on would bring in a bunch of cash. Why not sell THAT?
Click to expand...
I understand what you and Charlie are both saying here. Charlie is right - if you have an asset that is worth more to sell than to keep, then you sell it. But at the same time, you're also right. NASCAR isn't a real estate investment/development firm. If the valuation of the track as a sports venue has not kept up with real estate values around it, frankly, who's fault is that? It's NASCAR's. They have owned it since 1999 (2019 is just the ISC/NASCAR merger), they are the ones running the series, they're the ones negotiating monster media rights deals worth literal billions only to be completely absent in the #2 media market in the US.
 
wi_racefan said:
Because CA wants nothing to do with the internal combustion engine and Nascar is the direct opposite of that. I get it they have some fans there, but for the most part you need to stop going to places that don't want you.
Click to expand...
As you noted, Fontana drew well, and Sonoma is pretty successful. Not sure that this isn't more about a money grab and paying down debt than any government road block.
 
sdj said:
FWIW, I don't care if they race there again or not.:idunno:
Click to expand...
I don't either TBH but I also don't live in Southern California where this was my sole Cup option aside from trucking myself out 5-6 hours to Vegas/Phoenix. If this was my home track I'd be furious.
 
virtualbalboa said:
I understand what you and Charlie are both saying here. Charlie is right - if you have an asset that is worth more to sell than to keep, then you sell it. But at the same time, you're also right. NASCAR isn't a real estate investment/development firm. If the valuation of the track as a sports venue has not kept up with real estate values around it, frankly, who's fault is that? It's NASCAR's. They have owned it since 1999 (2019 is just the ISC/NASCAR merger), they are the ones running the series, they're the ones negotiating monster media rights deals worth literal billions only to be completely absent in the #2 media market in the US.
Click to expand...
I think the more important thing to remember is that once you are out of that market, the cost and the governmental and nimby hurdles involved in getting back in are likely insurmountable. (Remember New York City?) Sometimes assets have a built in value that is worth far more than its book value. Once again, remember what business you're in. When Chrysler was flirting with bankruptcy circa 1979-1981, one of the assets they gave up on to help their balance sheet was valuable real estate holdings in key market centers that COULD have been used to launch new dealership locations. Iacocca talks about it in his first book and admits that it was a huge loss for the company in the long run, but at the time, they were bleeding cash so bad and trying to convince the government they were worthy of loan guarantees that they felt they had little choice. Selling the M1 tank business was another one that hurt long term because it was quite profitable, but Iacocca felt he had no choice in the short term. Chrysler flat out needed money NOW, not later. If NASCAR needs the money THAT bad, maybe the future isn't as bright as we think.
 
Formerjackman said:
But you have to look at what your core business is, and decide what is MORE important.
Click to expand...
When I say 'make more money selling that using', it's up to the business analysts to include all possible uses, continuity of operations, non-physical gains such as good will, publicity value. etc.
Formerjackman said:
Once again, we were told how important this market was. Even if they make a huge profit on selling this property, are they going to be able to build another property in that market with that money, assuming you could even get a race track BUILT in current day California?
Click to expand...
Even before COVID rubbed our noses in it, it's clear there's more profit from TV revenue than track attendance. The TV market is obviously important, but is it necessary to have a track in the area to build and maintain that viewership?

They may make only a minimal profit on the sale. =IF= the track was losing money, any profit is better than continued losses.
Formerjackman said:
GM could probably make a LOT of money selling all of their assembly plants, but THEN WHAT? ... I would think the land Daytona sits on would bring in a bunch of cash. Why not sell THAT?
Click to expand...
GM has closed and sold plants before when they are no longer profitable. They don't sell all of them since that probably wouldn't be more profitable than operating them. NASCAR isn't selling all its tracks. Daytona has more non-tangibles in its favor. It hosts two internationally famous races. The town is behind it. NASCAR is headquartered there.

We haven't seen the business analysis behind the original decision, or how the numbers have changed since then. I agree with the complaints regarding a lack of transparency and information on NASCAR's part. I also agree with @virtualbalboa; the lack of new information indicates nothing is going to happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom