2009 MSA Fee's Hike

[Steve Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by Derwent Motorsport

I've been involved in running events and clubs for more than 30 years. I do feel that the MSA needs to offer more to clubs and the majority of club members and licence holders.
However unlike other sports where the governing body gets income from their major event and that is used to help clubs and recruitment, Bernie gets all that money from the GP and the MSA's commercial arm does not make a huge amount. The MSA gets pulled in many directions. there are those that think the MSA should be "helping" young talent for rallying and racing but should they do that with the money raised from licence fees and permit fees?
The Club Development Fund is actually a tiny pot of money and there is a limit of £5k per project, hardly enough to make much of a difference. There are also limits as to what you can get a grant for, it has to be for improvements or equipment etc, not for reducing entry fees etc.
I reckon that the MSA actually spend proportionally more money on "representing" the higher "professional" levels of the sport than those drivers bring in. Those drivers, teams, promotors, organisers etc that do it for a living do not in fact pay very much to the MSA compared to the average club or licence holder.

Apart from the BTCC which is an incredible money machine!

[johnbull]

[QUOTE=Bernard;17949]Passports cost a similar amount and last 10 YEARS!!!!!!!!!
If only there was an alternative![/QUOTE]

I presume you're referring to an alternative body to the RAC.

European regulations state that monopolies are to be discouraged. In Italy the same thing has happened. The CSAI have overstayed their welcome. Their fees have gone through the roof, but instead of everybody just complaining, they got off their backsides and did something about it. They persuaded CONI (Commissione Olimpica Nazzionale Italiana) and another National sports organisation called UISP to set up a motorsport division, and these organisations now provide insurance and personell - mostly disillusioned people from the CSAI to officiate at events. This year they have had their first championships which were a complete success.

Their fees, just to compare. National Hill Climb Licence (CSAI) something astronomical like 250 euro. UISP National licence 30 euro. Entry fees for hill climbs: CSAI National 280 euro, UISP 80 euro. They have also done away with all the beurocracy like homologation of vehicles and equipment. So long as the scrutineers feel that your equipment - seat belt, fuel tank, overalls, helmet, etc are safe, you can race. None of this stupidity of having to have new overalls every 2nd year.

Another thing with UISP, they will put on an event for half what CSAI ask the local councils for, so for example, this year CSAI asked the Adrano local council for something like 30,000 euro to organise their annual hill climb. Adrano council told them where to go and approached UISP who organised an excellent event for 10,000 euro, with 180 entries, and which son Josh incidentally won overall.

Average CSAI hill climb entry this year - under 100 cars. Average UISP entry - around 200.

You can fool some of the people some of the time ...............

[L.M.R.]

Through the MSA we have a common set of rules and regs meaning we can choose where to compete within the UK, knowing that our cars and personal safety equipment will be accepted, as the requirements are defined in the blue book. Assuming we do say 15 events a year and split the licence cost across them, that makes about £5 per entry for peace of mind that car and kit will be accepted, or about a gallon of petrol.

The alternative, local rules for local people, would not be easy to administer or be attractive to the competitor, and would raise the number of protests at meetings. And who would adjudicate if we did not have the MSA??????

[johnbull]

UISP run to the same rules as CSAI who in turn run to FIA rules. The only difference is in the fees and the question of homologation and lifing of clothing, helmets etc.

In fact most of the officials are disgruntled ex CSAI officials.

Basically, as I said it's just the more reasonable fees that are the difference.

[Steve Wilkinson]

I suppose it would be possible to set up in competition with the MSA.

The first problem may come about when trying to issue a set of regulations - lets call them the RED BOOK. If you look on page 1 of the Blue Book you will see that the contents are copyrighted. Thus anyone setting up an alternative to the MSA would have to write their Red Book from scratch - not a cheap exercise!

Then you would also be faced with the threat that anyone having a license with this new body - lets call it the BMC (British Motorsport Coalition) - would not be allowed to compete in MSA licensed meetings! This would lead to MSA and BMC only meetings and would effectively divide the motor racing community.

If the BMC were to be a success they would have to (a) under-cut the MSA, (b) they would have to have International recognition otherwise license holders would be restricted to competing in GB, (c) they would have to be able to finance a massive amount of initial expenditure in setting up the organisation, (d) they would have to get at least 40% of the current license holders to switch from the MSA to the BMC otherwise what would be the point, and finally (e) they would have to set up Championships that would recieve not only support from drivers but also the motoring media such as Autosport & Motorsport News.

I suspect that the MSA's stranglehold is far too tight to break free!

[redturner37]

During the early 60s when I was involved in competitive motorcycling, a breakaway union was formed because some one was disgruntled about how the way the A.C.U operated and quite a few riders did in fact join them, even though they were under threat from the A.C.U who stated that they would in no way be allowed to compete under their rules again. A few years down the road the new union folded and there were a lot of unhappy riders about who had nowhere to play. Better the devil you know than the one you dont know.

[Major Mallock]

Thank you all for responding, as always a collective opinion is always more valid than an individual perspective.

For your interest I have copied below the reponse I received to my email from the MSA. It came from Colin Hilton direct.

Thank you for recent email addressed to our Speed mailbox regarding the increase in competition licence fees for 2009. As an active motor sport competitor and valued customer of the Motor Sports Association, we take your points extremely seriously.

The annual increase in licence fees is discussed and approved in September by the MSA Board. This year’s increase was set according to RPI, as at the end of August 2008, which stood at 4.8%, the resultant figure being rounded up to the nearest pound. Having benchmarked the licence fees against other ASNs and other governing bodies, we believe that our prices are very much in line with similar organisations and activities.

It should be stressed, though, that the MSA recognises that the vast majority of motor sport in this country is funded by individual competitors. As a result, the MSA is extremely mindful of the current financial climate and will do everything it can to limit the impact of an economic downturn on the sport.

However, the MSA is responsible for the regulation, administration, promotion and development of the sport and undertakes a huge amount of work in order to deliver this. I accept that the majority of this work is something that most licence holders and competitors never see and nor should they; we are running the sport, so that you can get on with your enjoyment.

But whether it is liaising with authorities over noise limits or land access, or ensuring that safety measures are as good as they can be, or inspecting every venue you compete at, or ensuring that the sport attracts new marshals and officials, or getting new people involved in the sport, or arranging insurance centrally, or ensuring fair play for all – that is what the MSA does for you every day. And we do this with a very modest, but highly skilled and experienced staff of just 33 people.

The MSA's company report gives a fuller appreciation of some of the work that is undertaken in the name of UK motor sport and I would be pleased to forward you a copy if you would confirm your mailing address. From this you will see that, contrary to your assertion, the MSA is concerned with all 32,000 licence holders and, in fact, grassroots motor sport takes up a significantly greater proportion of our attention than the more ‘high profile’ disciplines.

I accept that price rises are never welcome, even less so at times like these. But I believe that the cost of the MSA licence fee represents exceptional value for the depth and breadth of the service that ensures that the vast majority of issues will never impact on you and your enjoyment of the sport. Your continued support and contribution to UK motor sport, not just in the licence fee, is significant and without the involvement of people like you, the sport would cease to exist. May I suggest therefore that if you have the inclination to represent your viewpoint within the sport, you could become involved with your Regional Association or seek to be nominated by your Club to one of the MSA Committees including Sprint and Hillclimb in order to bring your concerns to the top table?

[Fireblade]

Originally Posted by Major Mallock

or seek to be nominated by your Club to one of the MSA Committees including Sprint and Hillclimb in order to bring your concerns to the top table?

Vote Major Mallock your local representative. Take the dissent to the top table.

[Major Mallock]

I think I might just try and see if I can help the committee.

[BigYin]

An interesting example of the politics of the self-perpetuating oligarchy!

History teaches us that monopolistic or oligarchic power is difficult to replace, but that when the governed become intolerably disaffected the overthrow of the governing body is rapid, total and painful. Sadly also, that much that is good is lost in the disposal of the bad.

One may also observe the appearance of the man who tells you that the body is essential because it is the only body which can do what it does. A curious approach compared with one which seeks to estabish what NEEDs to be done and whether this governing body is the best one to do it.

The words of our "Dear Leader" quoted above reminded me of the American writer, Upton Sincair, who wrote - “It’s difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it”