 | | Ray Evernham left a successful career as a crew chief to be the point man for Dodge's return to NASCAR. Credit: Autostock |
By Marty Smith, NASCAR.COM
May 12, 2006
12:07 PM EDT (16:07 GMT)
Recent scenario witnessed on Interstate 95, somewhere south of Richmond, Va.: A Jeep Cherokee, packed floorboard-to-sunroof with infant playthings, is easing down the highway toward Charlotte, N.C., amid a cold spring drizzle, when alongside pulls a silver Chevrolet Monte Carlo, black trim, snazzy red pinstripes. In the lower right portion of the rear window, a palm-sized sticker of the No. 29 proclaims devotion to Nextel Cup Series driver Kevin Harvick. Across the way, on the left, a silhouette of comic strip menace Calvin relieves himself on the number 97, Kurt Busch's digits at Roush Racing before this year's migration to Penske's No. 2. Breaking the monotonous pitter-patter a passenger utters, "Good thing for them Harvick re-signed with Childress. Buying a new Camry would suck." Obviously, this machine was purchased for the sole purpose of supporting a NASCAR driver. Harvick drives a silver Chevrolet Monte Carlo, black trim, snazzy red pinstripes. He doesn't like Kurt Busch. This vehicle lends credence to the old "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday" adage. But does that truly apply in today's economy, in a sport where only the slightest cosmetic factors distinguish one make from the next, with a car on the horizon that will accentuate those differences even less? "I think so," said Dodge team owner Ray Evernham. "When you have 70 million people watching [NASCAR], they get excited about it. You look at all the surveys and people say they consciously purchase NASCAR-sponsor products. I'm sure they do the same thing with automobiles." General Motors Racing director Mark Kent echoed Evernham's opinion; took it a step further, even. From a GM perspective, he said, "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday" applies now more than ever, due largely to better integration between at-track marketing and fan experience, on-track performance and, ultimately, dealerships. "Because of that we're now selling on Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday," Kent said. At Phoenix last month, GM offered a unique incentive to customers that test drove Chevy Impala SS sedans at local dealerships. Kent said GM gave some 900 hot laps around Phoenix International Raceway, as well as tickets to a race, to those customers. Programs like that, he said, have proven successful. "If you look at the demographics of NASCAR, there are 75 million fans worldwide," Kent said. "Seven million of those went to races live last year. And of those NASCAR fans, over 40 percent own GM products. So it's a great marketing opportunity for us." Former head of GM Racing Doug Duchardt, now vice president of development for Hendrick Motorsports, isn't certain the "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday" equation is so finite. "That's probably too simplistic," Duchardt said. "It's participate on Sunday and leverage it. And if you win, leverage that even more. I think, certainly, though, manufacturers [race] to move iron." John Fernandez, Dodge Motorsports' operations director, said the return on investment the manufacturer seeks has changed. "It certainly has changed for us just in the few years we've been into it," Fernandez said. "Our initial reason for getting back into NASCAR was the 75 million fans. "We felt it was a tremendous way to get exposure for our Dodge brand and promote the message of what the Dodge brand is about -- the performance and capable design of our vehicles. I think we've been able to project that message through NASCAR." Four years later, though, Fernandez said Dodge is looking beyond that, to determine an intangible next step. Duchardt feels his pain. "It's sometimes hard to say, 'We race and [because of it] we sell this many more cars,'" Duchardt said. "Sometimes you should ask, 'If we didn't race, what would happen to our sales?' Would they stay flat or would they go down? Those are tough questions." That particular question is easily answered, from Kent's perspective. "NASCAR fans are five times more likely to buy from manufacturers that participate in auto racing," Kent said. What if we didn't race? A recent Internet report suggested that one of the three manufacturers currently represented in Nextel Cup racing -- Ford, Chevrolet or Dodge -- wishes to discontinue its NASCAR presence. The initial thought was Chevrolet, due largely to the recent financial decline of its parent company, General Motors, which reportedly lost $10.6 billion in 2005 and $323 million in the first quarter of 2006. More recently, though, garage sources continually mention Dodge. Officials from both manufacturers, as well as those from Ford, vehemently deny any intention of leaving. "We've commented several times over the last year that General Motors and Chevrolet are committed to competing in NASCAR in the long haul," Kent said. "We weren't taken aback at all [by the report]. We know rumors get started every week, and we weren't concerned because we knew it didn't pertain to General Motors." That doesn't mean they didn't proactively respond, however. "Every manufacturer personally has had people come in and visit with us to tell us that they're totally happy and totally committed to NASCAR in all of our three series," said NASCAR vice president of competition Robin Pemberton. "So that article got everybody stirred up. "They were pretty upset with that article, the manufacturers were. It had no basis. To a man, or woman, everybody that came by wanted to emphasize it wasn't them. It took about seven or eight days before they all had an opportunity, but they all made a point to get there." NASCAR wasn't the only stop made in response to the rumor. Manufacturers contacted and/or visited their respective teams, as well. "They've been very up front about their commitment to the sport and being involved in the sport," said Jeff Burton, driver of the No. 31 Chevrolet. "Their heritage goes back through racing. I have no inkling of concern that Chevrolet is going anywhere." Duchardt said GM officials consider NASCAR part of the fabric that makes up the bowtie. "I've been away for a little over a year now, but when I was at General Motors, the racing programs were ones that gave really good value for the marketing dollar," Duchardt said. "Chevy's had a long commitment to NASCAR, probably more so than any other manufacturer, and a lot of success, so it's hard to fathom that would be a potential place where they would cut completely out." But what about narrowing the breadth of its team support? Some 19 full-time Cup Series teams currently run Chevrolets. Is that too many? "We continually look at how many teams we can support, and with Toyota coming in next year I would anticipate there will be a redistribution of teams," Kent said. "We may lose some by their choice and not ours. Every year we look at what we spend and make sure we're spending our motorsports budget properly." Kent said GM has been given no indication that any of its teams are contemplating a switch to another manufacturer for 2007. Duchardt says Chevy's depth is an advantage. "I always felt when I was in that job that the key to success in this sport is, first you have to have good partners, and second you have to have good technology, and if you have those two you'd probably be successful," Duchardt said. "It gets down to how many horses you want to have in the race. So they have to make a decision on that. Part of Chevy's success, though, is they've had four very successful organizations running their cars with RCR, DEI, Gibbs and Hendrick. "Stuff's going to happen in races, so when you have that much depth it allows you to be more successful, and I think that's shown over the years." If Chevy was to remove teams from its umbrella, smaller team owners would likely suffer. But Cal Wells, a single-car owner that runs Chevrolets, has been given no indication Chevrolet isn't behind his effort. "Quite the opposite," Wells said. "They have taken the time to explain to me how important of a sales tool NASCAR is for them. They are in the sport forever." Ditto for Dodge and Ford. "They've not wavered one little bit since day one," Evernham said. "They have long-term contracts with several of the teams. They have plans out into the double-digits in the 2000s, so I'm pretty confident that whatever rumors are out there about this, it's not Dodge." "Racing is part of our DNA at Ford going back to our founder, Henry Ford, who was a racer himself," said Ford Racing director Greg Specht. "We take that technical ability and competitiveness and develop that spirit among our employees. "Plus, it's a terrific marketing program, and builds our brand image for the race fan and casual consumer. It affects how they view Ford." What would it signal? Opinions vary greatly on what a manufacturer departure would signal, if anything. "It would signal many things -- mostly it would test the loyalty of many fans who pull for said manufacturer," Dale Earnhardt Jr. said. "NASCAR would come out the other end OK, though. "I think there will be times, as in the past, where manufacturers weigh the upsides and downsides to being in the sport, and over years and years they will come and go. "It's been done before, so it wouldn't mean much at this point to most people. Owners would miss the factory support, but there are always other makes to choose from." That factory support is nothing to scoff at. "At the highest level, sponsorships are $20-$25 million. Then you have manufacturers that have factory teams," Fernandez explained. "They're all a little different, and all looking for something a little different. "Some want more financial backing and some want more technical expertise, like wind-tunnel time that they don't have to pay for." All said, according to Fernandez manufacturers can spend between $3 million to $10 million per organization in monetary and resource backing. Toyota's entrance will greatly escalate that, one driver that wished to remain anonymous said. Ford Racing director Greg Specht said he is contractually prohibited from disclosing information regarding who gets what, but did say Ford Motor Company strives to take factory support to the highest level. "It entails financial support, which we think is kind of secondary because teams can get money from many sources," Specht explained. "Our technical expertise and business acumen and the resources that Ford Motor Company has as a manufacturer are things teams can't get from other sources. "I believe we have the best technical support of all the manufacturers. We do more to help our teams be competitive on track, and work hard at doing what we do best, and letting the teams do what they do best." Which is? "Well, take the Car of Tomorrow," Specht continued. "In the development of the Car of Tomorrow, we as a manufacturer have been working with NASCAR for a year and a half on the aerodynamic model. We've done considerable testing with them in the wind tunnel, had brainstorming sessions, gone to their on-track tests. "So rather than each team having to do that and spend time and focus on that, we do that. We have that capability. So we relieve the teams of having to do that, and when the time comes to build the Car of Tomorrow we'll cascade that information to teams to get ahead." Ford's R&D effort on the Car of Tomorrow enables its teams to focus on the race of today. No wonder Robert Yates isn't concerned with building a COT model. Like Earnhardt, others were quite nonchalant about the ramifications of a potential departure. Others say it would merely be the residual effect from a sluggish domestic automobile market. "I don't know if it would signal anything about NASCAR as much as it would signal what's going on with the economy and the American car market," Evernham said. "American manufacturers are losing the market share to foreign companies every quarter. So I don't think it's a matter of NASCAR. NASCAR is still the biggest factor to bump marketing, it's just a matter of how many marketing dollars you have. "So if a company's in financial trouble they don't really have a lot of marketing dollars so they look at the budget they're spending in NASCAR and pull that back." Wells knows a thing or two about manufacturer support. He's run two of the three currently in NASCAR, and ran the Pontiac Grand Prix before GM discontinued Pontiac's NASCAR presence following the 2003 season. Again, the marketing dollar is crucial. "I think if you look at the three manufacturers currently competing, they all have some kind of drama going on within their organizations that go well beyond the sport of NASCAR," Wells said. "I think if marketing initiatives change, it would affect more than just NASCAR. I think you would see a change in ad buys for the Super Bowl, for example, along with other initiatives. They would all take some kind of hit." "Any sponsor, you're measuring your investment, and sometimes you try to put objective measures to it and it's difficult," Duchardt said. "Take the highest level of racing, Formula One. How do you justify $300 million investment, and divide that by the number of cars you build? "Pretty soon it just becomes a fiber of the company. That's the intangible with racing, especially with auto manufacturers -- fact that you build cars and naturally want to compete racing cars. "We did it when we were kids. The first time you got mom and dad's car you go find your buddy and find out what it could do, right? That's just natural. Pretty soon when you compete in the showroom and on the track, and it just becomes part of the fiber of who you are." Roush Racing president Geoff Smith said a manufacturer would depart if it felt it could no longer compete. "I think if a manufacturer left it would not affect the fundamental relationship of fans and drivers in the sport," Smith said. "I think if a manufacturer left it would signal more that they no longer believe the playing field was level enough for them to stay. "It could also signal they don't have enough money. I don't believe it's a signal that NASCAR racing, in any way, doesn't work in their North American market places, because there's just too much data to show how strong the sport is to all the manufacturers' customers. "So my take is more that it's a symptom that the economic balance of the sport tipped in a way they didn't think they could compete." Camry of Tomorrow Is Toyota's pending entrance one such tipping point?  |  | | Toyota has held the headlines since it announced a move to the Cup Series in January. Credit: CIA Stock Photo |
| |  | TOYOTA TO CUP | NASCAR and Toyota announced in January the manufacturer's plans to expand its racing program by competing in the Nextel Cup and Busch series starting in 2007, fielding the Camry model.
|
| REACTIONS | Toyota's decision to go Nextel Cup racing will fire up the competitive juices of teams representing the other three makes.
|
|
"I don't think so," Fernandez said. "There's a lot of talk about Toyota coming in. They've come into Truck and are doing very well. But they've put a good solid effort into their program. They'll be in Cup next year, and I know we look at them as very committed. "But GM and Ford are committed, too. We're the low guy on the totem pole right now, and we're battling to get on a level with GM and Ford. [Toyota] will come in and struggle like they did in Truck for a few years trying to get on par." Harvick agrees. "I think the impact [of Toyota] is not going to be what it was in the Truck Series," Harvick said Friday following the announcement that he had re-signed at RCR for the next three years. "This is not Truck racing, and it's going to be a little bit different than what it is in the Trucks." Toyota's impact is already evident, though, long before it ever hit the racetrack. Dale Jarrett is headed to Michael Waltrip Racing. That gives Toyota a guaranteed spot via Jarrett's champion's provisional. And the manufacturer isn't done. It's dangling big money in front of other marquee drivers, as well. Many folks felt that the Roush/Yates Engine program was a direct result of Toyota's past business model. Pool resources. Specht said no. "It didn't have anything to do with Toyota," Specht said. "We just looked at how we were operating and said it wasn't best way to operate. We had people working with the Roush package to make it the best it could be, and we had people working with the Yates package to get it the best it could be. "We weren't maximizing the total package. So we went to Jack [Roush] and Robert [Yates] and said, 'Hey guys, we need one engine program.' Obviously it's worked well." And what about the aforementioned Car of Tomorrow? Might that effect manufacturer stability and integration? "It wouldn't be any different than what we have now. The cars already look very similar," Earnhardt said. "I think that won't have an impact at all, but I'm sure you can find someone with some good points on how it will." Wells made a run at it. "NASCAR is in a complex position because it is trying to provide parity and product identification -- two things the manufacturers want but are very difficult to attain," he said. "They are not mutually exclusive." In other words, 10 years ago when Chevrolet, Ford and Pontiac were cosmetically different, manufacturers were constantly bickering about who had what advantages. NASCAR heard constant complaints. The "common-template" alleviates many of those arguments, but sacrifices obvious brand identity. And the COT takes that to yet another level. "The challenge obviously [with the COT], is getting the cars to resemble products the manufacturers sell," Wells said. "Unfortunately, like every other type of racing, other than SCCA, without very complex and expensive equivalency formulas, NASCAR is doing the best job of making the cars the same." | 
© 2001-2012 NASCAR | Turner Sports Interactive, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
NASCAR.COM is part of Turner Sports Digital, part of the Turner Sports & Entertainment Digital Network.
