D
Nitro Member
That would be interesting, Bernstein ran some USAF decals on the Copart car, but I'm sure they didn't have recruiters in the pits.
S/F
D
Nitromater
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Army Sponsorship
- Thread starter Paul
- Start date
S/F
D
cephus
Nitro Member
understand all ur post, but the money that is spent on shue's cars wuld be better spent taking care of the vets, and giving the boots on the ground a well deserved raise that wuld compete with the idiot congress suits benefits
sure this will pissed some of the keyboard racers off
sure this will pissed some of the keyboard racers off
Last edited:
D
Nitro Member
understand all ur post, but the money that is spent on shue's cars wuld be better spent taking of the vets, and giving the boots on the ground a well deserved raise that wuld compete with the idiot congress suits benefits
sure this will pissed some of the keyboard racers off
True, the VA is underfunded and undermanned, but believe when I tell the race teams sponsorship are a drop in the bucket of the of the defense budget is way better bang for the buck than a lot of things. Of course in the mad rush to look like they doing something meaningful, it doesn't mean that they won't face the ax and make the recruiters on the street hard job even harder.
S/F
D
understand all ur post, but the money that is spent on shue's cars wuld be better spent taking of the vets, and giving the boots on the ground a well deserved raise that wuld compete with the idiot congress suits benefits
sure this will pissed some of the keyboard racers off
Guy...I don't have the numbers but I was told the U.S. Army sponsorship of Tony Schumacher is nowhere close to what they spend running that car, as with a LOT of sponsors we see on these cars!
timebombkal
Nitro Member
understand all ur post, but the money that is spent on shue's cars wuld be better spent taking of the vets, and giving the boots on the ground a well deserved raise that wuld compete with the idiot congress suits benefits
sure this will pissed some of the keyboard racers off
I agree with you on this.
d'kid
Nitro Member
Congress shutting down motorsports sponsorship
Will the hammer fall on military sponsorships?
House committee vote squashes military NASCAR sponsorships ? USATODAY.com
McCollum: National Guard?s $26 million Sponsoring NASCAR?s Dale Earnhardt Jr. Results in ZERO Recruits | Congresswoman Betty McCollum
Committee Approves Amendment to Ban Military Sponsorship of Professional Sports | Congressman Jack Kingston - First District of Georgia
Will the hammer fall on military sponsorships?
House committee vote squashes military NASCAR sponsorships ? USATODAY.com
McCollum: National Guard?s $26 million Sponsoring NASCAR?s Dale Earnhardt Jr. Results in ZERO Recruits | Congresswoman Betty McCollum
Committee Approves Amendment to Ban Military Sponsorship of Professional Sports | Congressman Jack Kingston - First District of Georgia
Mr. Fix It
Nitro Member
Re: Congress shutting down motorsports sponsorship
“In fiscal year 2012, the National Guard has been contacted by more than 24,800 individuals interested in joining because of the race sponsorship. Of those, Creech said 20 were qualified candidates and that none joined,” according to the USA Today story.
None out of 24,000 people joined? Now that's really hard to believe. Despite that, at least 24,000 people went through the effort to join according to their story. How many more gave it some thought? Isn't that the idea behind any form of advertising? To get people to think about the product, even if they don't buy it today still has an impact. Perhaps NASCAR is the problem. I see Tony Shoemaker play his role well with his sponsorship. In my humble opinion, drag racers are a little farther up the food chain than NASCAR. That's just my opinion.......
“In fiscal year 2012, the National Guard has been contacted by more than 24,800 individuals interested in joining because of the race sponsorship. Of those, Creech said 20 were qualified candidates and that none joined,” according to the USA Today story.
None out of 24,000 people joined? Now that's really hard to believe. Despite that, at least 24,000 people went through the effort to join according to their story. How many more gave it some thought? Isn't that the idea behind any form of advertising? To get people to think about the product, even if they don't buy it today still has an impact. Perhaps NASCAR is the problem. I see Tony Shoemaker play his role well with his sponsorship. In my humble opinion, drag racers are a little farther up the food chain than NASCAR. That's just my opinion.......
Re: Congress shutting down motorsports sponsorship
I agree, wholeheartedly. If the story was in USA Today, it was probably wrong. I am surprised they've succeeded in consecutive pagination.
There is another reason for service sponsorship: re-enlistment. Training costs in our military services are enormous. When morale is high and many candidates for re-enlistment, those costs become a great deal more manageable as the services lose fewer high quality members. Being part of a winning team is a natural, human desire. Observe how many college alumni follow their school's teams, as an example.
Frankly, I think that all of the services would benefit if all of the servies were free to participate in our sport. What's the best location for a car dealership or a restaurant? Next door to a car dealership or restaurant.
Each of the services has a separate appeal and a variety of opportunities to offer. The more options people have; the more likely they are to apply to join.
That's the way I see it.
Cheers,
Ed
P.S. Just for clarification: the VA and the Defense Department are separate, cabinet level agencies with separate budgets. The VA serves all veterans.
I agree, wholeheartedly. If the story was in USA Today, it was probably wrong. I am surprised they've succeeded in consecutive pagination.
There is another reason for service sponsorship: re-enlistment. Training costs in our military services are enormous. When morale is high and many candidates for re-enlistment, those costs become a great deal more manageable as the services lose fewer high quality members. Being part of a winning team is a natural, human desire. Observe how many college alumni follow their school's teams, as an example.
Frankly, I think that all of the services would benefit if all of the servies were free to participate in our sport. What's the best location for a car dealership or a restaurant? Next door to a car dealership or restaurant.
Each of the services has a separate appeal and a variety of opportunities to offer. The more options people have; the more likely they are to apply to join.
That's the way I see it.
Cheers,
Ed
P.S. Just for clarification: the VA and the Defense Department are separate, cabinet level agencies with separate budgets. The VA serves all veterans.
mw6789
Nitro Member
You beat me to this comment. I though all that attended NHRA races were old grey hairs like myself.
I don't want to see the Army leave, I think Don has given them a good return on their investment over the years.
But I'm sure DSR will survive without them if that happens. With the marketing ability of that organization, I have no doubt they will find something for the 7 time World Champion that is less than 1 round out of first.
But I'm sure DSR will survive without them if that happens. With the marketing ability of that organization, I have no doubt they will find something for the 7 time World Champion that is less than 1 round out of first.
How many teams is that funding?
Norman, if you saw what wasteful programs our tax dollars get wasted on, the money Motorsports gets promoting our Military wouldn't seem that bad trust me!
If the sponsorship earns the military the highest return for their investment compared to other programs do you feel the same? If you do, you aren't a very smart businessman.
Gipraw
Nitro Member
So do you want to trim the recruiting budget, or just limit what they can spend the recruiting dollars on? You don't want your money going to DSR, but you are ok with it going to NBC, or Fox, or Clear Channel?
All this proposed amendment does it limit where the dollars can be spent, it doesn't cut the budget. It doesn't save the taxpayers a single penny. All this amendment would do is force the branches to spend their recruiting dollars in less effective places, which in a lot of ways is typical government: Go into a situation, ignore the opinions of the people on the ground that actually know what they are talking about, and make the process less efficient.
Similar threads
