NASCAR's True Markets

NASCAR's attempt to get a speedway built in Kitsap, WA is still going nowhere fast despite continued effort, and that they're still even discussing such a project shows how off-track NASCAR has become with regard to its own identity.

NASCAR still thinks the Pacific Northwest and New York City are necessary markets, this despite the failure of Ontario Motor Speedway and Riverside International Raceway in the LA area and the mediocre popularity of the tracks at Fontana and Chicago. No one who supports building tracks in the Pacific Northwest and NYC can cite any instance where sponsors either left the sport or did not participate because of lack of speedways in so-called "big" markets like New York City, nor can one think of where the Fontana and Chicago tracks have brought in new sponsors or any serious influx of new fans.

The California area certainly has racing history, but not in LA or the big cities; it's been like it's been everywhere else in the US - the rural areas. Blogger MD80891 has noted how Hanford Speedway in central California was in a demographic far more suited to racing than big cities; the same is also true of Kansas Speedway and Kentucky Speedway. Most of NASCAR's other tracks are in superb racing demographics - a track like New Hampshire International Speedway would go nowhere in the greater Boston area, but in rural New Hampshire it sells out every year and is within easy communting of Boston, so that major market does get served. The same is true of Pocono, located within fairly easy range of NYC and Philly and which sells out every year even with its two Winston Cup dates so close together.

Rockingham was closed ostensibly because that demographic was saturated, although that argument is just a smokescreen by NASCAR's powers-that-be, shown by their effort to let Darlington die out. Darlington was cut to one date in 2005, but a funny thing happened - the fans refuse to let it die. Indeed, one can see where Fontana will eventually have to give back its second date to Darlington, since Fontana really isn't doing a good job supporting two dates and is in a poor racing demographic to begin with - and if anyone tries to cite Will Ferrell's abysmal NASCAR movie as proof that Fontana has helped expand NASCAR's demographic is more delusional than I thought.

One can even argue that a big superspeedway in California should never have been built near LA, but instead in the Hanford area. Certainly a Talladega-style superoval at Hanford would suit the sport's West Coast needs far better than Fontana has.

In the final analysis it comes down to what it's come down to for the sport forever - it is not suited to big urban demographics and should stop pretending to be something it isn't. It needs to stick to its true rural identity; go after rural areas and especially shore up those demographics the sport already has - which means keeping the dates presently taken at those tracks that serve the sport's true demographic.