jack_sparrow
Super Anarchist
- 37,393
- 5,094
With a two week breather now in Newport I thought this thread and discussion might help keep interest afloat.
With the owners of the VOR, being Volvo Cars (Zhejiang Geely Holding Group a Chinese Private Co) and Volvo Commercial/Other (AB Volvo a Swedish Public Co) looking to offload the VOR subject to interest, what are the mistakes or opportunities lost (or maybe still there) since Volvo took it over from Whitbread in 2001?
The reason for looking to identify those is to try and acertain why it has struggled to remain relevant since 2001 when alternative RTW formats have flourished and also give some indicator to its commercial value today and asertain if it indeed has a future?
To kick discussion off my two quick headliners are;
1. Slow to Adopt to Change and Recognise Competitor Self Interest.
While this example pre-dated Volvo ownership of the race, they were the one writing largest cheques at the time. That example was not biting the bullet and persevering with a mixed class format in the 93/94 Edition putting Maxi's and the W60 up against each other. That simply sent a mixed message to how the Race Organiser valued sponsors and that carried over into subsequent editions when it became a single class event.
Behind that is an argument this was done solely to appease the demands of Grant Dalton having the backing for a Maxi.
2. Put Too Much Value on Stopover Income/Single Entry Encouragement.
The best example of this is the Abu Dhabi stopover introduction in 2012 where the entire course was put on its ear, arguably losing many fans, even those regarded as "rusted on". The rediculous race on top of a freighter was a another subset of that decision.
After two goes, and then winning the title in the 2014/15 edition using the new OD VO65, that replaced the V70, Abu Dhabi simply walked away from the VOR despite the capital invested in accommodating their demands. If Dongfeng win this edition do we see a repeat of that?
Is the lesson one that more effort be applied to securing long term stopover commitments, even though they don't necessarily field a team, to preserve RTW course integrity?
Australia being in and out since the races inception, yet fundamental to a decent race course incorporating the entire SO is one example. Another is the bizzare decision of NZ getting just a 48 hour pitstop (Wellington) in 2006.
With the owners of the VOR, being Volvo Cars (Zhejiang Geely Holding Group a Chinese Private Co) and Volvo Commercial/Other (AB Volvo a Swedish Public Co) looking to offload the VOR subject to interest, what are the mistakes or opportunities lost (or maybe still there) since Volvo took it over from Whitbread in 2001?
The reason for looking to identify those is to try and acertain why it has struggled to remain relevant since 2001 when alternative RTW formats have flourished and also give some indicator to its commercial value today and asertain if it indeed has a future?
To kick discussion off my two quick headliners are;
1. Slow to Adopt to Change and Recognise Competitor Self Interest.
While this example pre-dated Volvo ownership of the race, they were the one writing largest cheques at the time. That example was not biting the bullet and persevering with a mixed class format in the 93/94 Edition putting Maxi's and the W60 up against each other. That simply sent a mixed message to how the Race Organiser valued sponsors and that carried over into subsequent editions when it became a single class event.
Behind that is an argument this was done solely to appease the demands of Grant Dalton having the backing for a Maxi.
2. Put Too Much Value on Stopover Income/Single Entry Encouragement.
The best example of this is the Abu Dhabi stopover introduction in 2012 where the entire course was put on its ear, arguably losing many fans, even those regarded as "rusted on". The rediculous race on top of a freighter was a another subset of that decision.
After two goes, and then winning the title in the 2014/15 edition using the new OD VO65, that replaced the V70, Abu Dhabi simply walked away from the VOR despite the capital invested in accommodating their demands. If Dongfeng win this edition do we see a repeat of that?
Is the lesson one that more effort be applied to securing long term stopover commitments, even though they don't necessarily field a team, to preserve RTW course integrity?
Australia being in and out since the races inception, yet fundamental to a decent race course incorporating the entire SO is one example. Another is the bizzare decision of NZ getting just a 48 hour pitstop (Wellington) in 2006.
Last edited by a moderator:
