Military Sponsorships on Chopping Block?

[.]

It's not clear what that means.

• Are you making some assumption about the financial status of people here? That seems awfully presumptuous since the cost of entry here is all of $1.
• Are you saying the people here don't pay taxes and therefore don't have a right to disagree with the expenditures? How would you know that?
• Are you somehow denying people here the fundamental human right to complain about their government? That seems patently unfair.

Rather, it seems simply like a snide shot and not at all constructive.

You obviously don't get what I am saying. We do not take care of our soldiers. How many of them are losing their homes to foreclosure. Some in part to extended tours.

 

[Raconteur]

Very few people in this thread should ever complain about their taxes.

Now this is getting odd...

 

[clwill]

You obviously don't get what I am saying.

That's what I stated from the outset.

We do not take care of our soldiers. How many of them are losing their homes to foreclosure. Some in part to extended tours.

And that has what to do with your comment?:

Very few people in this thread should ever complain about their taxes.

As you and I agree, I don't get what you're saying.

 

[.]

Now this is getting odd...

Whats so hard for you to understand?
Your tax money is being spent to finance a race team that the owner could do out of his own pocket, but won't. Really not that hard Darr.

 

[clwill]

Money that USED to be my money is being spent to advertise with someone the military clearly feels is an effective spokesperson for their service. The financial status of the spokesperson is none of my concern any more than it is of the baseball player I pay money to see, the actor I pay to watch, or the spokesperson for Fruit-of-the-Loom.

 

[Raconteur]

Whats so hard for you to understand?
Your tax money is being spent to finance a race team that the owner could do out of his own pocket, but won't. Really not that hard Darr.

I understood your rant, just ODD.

 

[twostep]

It's not clear what that means.

Crystal clear. Moon is saying that since most people participating in this thread are OK with tax dollars being wasted supporting a race team, we have no right to complain about anything else our tax dollars are used for...or taxes, period, for that matter. You make the call.

Moon sez to Carl: "I have a first name, you know" - immediately following my post that starts out "OK, Greg, you're in charge.... - and then he doesn't answer the question I asked. Which, of course, is a typical selective response tactic used by bombthrowers both right and left. The reason? Because the proper answer is both sensible and non-confrontational and that's not why Greg is here.

But Moon isn't the issue to begin with and I'm weary of the back-and-forth which will never resolve because he won't allow a resolution - ever. Back to the proposal. I'll be honest; I had no idea this deal was being voted on today. Caught me with my pants down, that's for sure.

And a pretty smart move on the part of Congresswoman McCollum, I'll say that. The Republican majority in the house has two choices - either vote against a spending cut which makes them look fiscally irresponsible, or vote for defunding military sponsorship of auto racing which they know will not only anger their voter base but is nothing but a political ploy in the first place. In either case, the Republicans lose and McCollum is a hero. Don't you just love the way things work on Capitol Hill?

Rats, I'm talking politics again. But I'm not choosing sides. Such maneuvering is equal-opportunity, used constantly by all 535 of those idiots at our expense. We can sit here and debate all day long whether or not the US Army's involvement in racing is worthwhile or not. It DOESN'T MATTER. It's a political tool, PERIOD. Get used to it; there's a lot more of the same coming.

 

[JB3]

Yep, probably more than that.

When the AF academy goes to play at another location the Air Force provides at least 2 large aircraft to transport them. They take the AF academy band too. KC-135 tankers cost at least $4000 an hour to operate, not to mention the aircrew costs, hotels, food, car rentals, etc.

If there is money to be saved, cut the military football teams and everything associated with them. After all, that's not what our military is hired to do, right?

I passed the Navy convoy headed north on the Jersey Turnpike last year. It was the Friday before the Army / Navy game. We counted 26 motor coaches (not greyhound buses). If they are all full, imagine the expense. Hotel rooms for all players, coaches, band, cadets (even @ 2/ room). I bet they get at least one banquet style meal at the hotel, if not more. That was just for Navy ... I assume the parade from West Point was very similar.

Games between the other academy's must be similar.

 

[Rajunz]

................read online yesterday army annual adv't. budget approx. 250M, now this article states a figure of 1.35B; those two numbers are not even close................

That was for a 5 year contract so your numbers are on par.................

Whats so hard for you to understand?
Your tax money is being spent to finance a race team that the owner could do out of his own pocket, but won't. Really not that hard Darr.

Once again Moon, just as McCann Erickson are providing a marketing service to the ARMY, so is DSR, and a very good one I might add.

So back to my original question to you, why don't you have an issue with the ARMY's TV, radio and newsprint advertisements, or is it that you just really have some resentment towards Shoe???


This is also an interesting quote, especially when you look at the overall yearly advertising budget.

But NASCAR backers say McCollum ignores the value of the dollar spent at NASCAR. According to Col. Derek W. Crotts, who manages the Army's NASCAR marketing and advertising program, nearly one-third -- 46,000 -- of the 150,000 leads Army recruiters get each year come from motorsports events.

Fox News' Chad Pergram and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

 

[clwill]

I passed the Navy convoy headed north on the Jersey Turnpike last year. It was the Friday before the Army / Navy game. We counted 26 motor coaches (not greyhound buses). If they are all full, imagine the expense. Hotel rooms for all players, coaches, band, cadets (even @ 2/ room). I bet they get at least one banquet style meal at the hotel, if not more. That was just for Navy ... I assume the parade from West Point was very similar.

Games between the other academy's must be similar.

As Bruce already pointed out, college football is a huge profit center for most universities, probably so too for the military, since they play in NCAA Div 1.

 

[Paul]

The amendment to ban military sponsorship of NASCAR fails 281-148.

 

[mick]

here is very good article pertaining to the military and it's
recruiting efforts in the last half century; notably the escalating
costs since 9/11 and the lesser product achieved.

the 2009 adv't. budget number given in this article
(for the army) is $15.5B (unbelievable, but that's what it says)

if $20M is spent in nascar & nhra - that is about a tenth of 1% of budget.

staggering to say the least.

13 Stoploss: The Role of Advertising in the US Army Recruiting Process Before and After 9/11

 

[Rajunz]

The amendment to ban military sponsorship of NASCAR fails 281-148.

Army?s $7.4 million NASCAR sponsorship safe after proposed ban fails in U.S. House | NASCAR News Now - SceneDaily.com

 

[Rollout96]

I get that part.

But, do we really have to pay for some millionaire to have some fun? He has money, just wont spend his own.

But if they were to sponsor... say... Zizzo you would be good with it. Got it!

I am sure that all of DSR's employees are very glad that Shoe wants to "have some fun".

 

[SundayNiagara]

I get that part.

But, do we really have to pay for some millionaire to have some fun? He has money, just wont spend his own.

And why do you think Paul Candies Sr isn't racing?

 

[mick]

whatever side you're on in this debate, one thing is for sure.
the USA war machine just keeps on turning.

the story i linked to in the previous post, the proposed 2009 adv't. and
recruiting budget for the army was $15.5 billion.
their target number of annual new recruits is 80,000

hold on to your hats........that's $193,750 per new recruit
and you haven't even clothed, housed, or trained the kid yet.
if that's not gov't. waste, then i don't know what is.

very informative thread - i've learned a lot in last couple days
i'd rather not know.

 

[Crash]

So when private industry fails, look to the government?

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, or what the hell you think I am saying....
I was being sarcastic (I do that a lot) and referring to the exodus of private industry sponsors in motorsports, and how funny it was that you might think that he should turn away the Army $$$ because someone will step right up and fill the void!

 

[Rajunz]

O

whatever side you're on in this debate, one thing is for sure.
the USA war machine just keeps on turning.

the story i linked to in the previous post, the proposed 2009 adv't. and
recruiting budget for the army was $15.5 billion.
their target number of annual new recruits is 80,000

hold on to your hats........that's $193,750 per new recruit
and you haven't even clothed, housed, or trained the kid yet.
if that's not gov't. waste, then i don't know what is.

very informative thread - i've learned a lot in last couple days
i'd rather not know.

I just went back and read that link, and seriously that makes absolutely no sense.
That needs more research, a lot more to validate, I mean seriously, why not just cut all advertising and just offer $50 an hour to all that join the ARMY?

 

[Greg]

Personally, I could care less whether Shoe and his team have this sponsorship. I'd rather see the military figure out a way to invest more money in the actual recruits by giving them better pay, and better equipment. While soldiers are not technically living in poverty, they aren't too far from it. I don't think we pay them near enough, especially when you consider the inherent risks of the job. I think if you gave them the choice of better pay, or watching an Army car go down the track, the choice would be obvious.

 

[James]

"Rats, I'm talking politics again. But I'm not choosing sides. Such maneuvering is equal-opportunity, used constantly by all 535 of those idiots at our expense. We can sit here and debate all day long whether or not the US Army's involvement in racing is worthwhile or not. It DOESN'T MATTER. It's a political tool, PERIOD. Get used to it; there's a lot more of the same coming. "


Somebody on this board gets it.