IndyCar Maxim #5

Roggespierre's Maxim #5
Courtesy of Philip Kotler, Northwestern University Kellogg School of Business

"Who should ultimately design the product? The customer of course."

This begs the question: who is "the customer" with regard to IndyCar racing? We have argued that race fans in Middle America would be a good place to start because the Indianapolis Motor Speedway needs to attract hundreds of thousands of them over the course of a month.

The Target Audience has Spoken

These consumers have proven to be a robust market for NASCAR (sans-culottes!) Cup and Grand National. There is no reason to believe that they would not also enjoy an IndyCar product that is designed for them.

Begin with cars that are low-tech in terms of aerodynamics and electronics. These technologies have proven to add more cost than market value. The schedule should consist primarily of oval tracks, although road courses and street circuits should not be taken off the table so long as they enhance market competitiveness.

Of course, the IndyCar product requires easily detectable elements of differentiation - it should not be an open wheel imitation of NASCAR. Engines that are either turbocharged or supercharged would be helpful in that regard because they would lend a distinctive sound to IndyCar racing. Open cockpits must be kept. Conversely, wings and chassis tunnels are costly and unnecessary.

We would like to see the fuel tanks reduced to 10 gallons eventually and 15 gallons immediately. Fuel conservation leadership in U.S. motorsports would give IndyCar a relevant advantage over NASCAR. That is not to say that Indy cars should be slowed to NASCAR speeds; they absolutely must remain faster.

If the teams want an engineering challenge, then they would certainly have one, trying to simultaneously increase mileage and speed. More important, the challenge would be correlated with something that has become important to many fans. The same can not be said for the "overtake button" and wicker adjustments.

Tire supply should be severely restricted - one or two sets per race is reasonable. This would save money and put a premium on the drivers' ability to maintain pace without wearing out the tires. Danton notes that he is unimpressed with Firestone's ability to build a racing tire that is great for all of 80 miles. He would prefer that the teams run the same set of tires in all 17 races, just as the rest of us expect a set of tires to last at least a year.

But that would be too much, too soon. Limiting each team to one or two sets of tires (plus spares) per race is change enough, for now.

This is a brief and incomplete outline, we admit. But it would give the league a differentiated, relevant product that is designed to attract drivers that could draw the core fans that IndyCar racing desperately needs. Some teams would hate it. So what? The days of creating racing series for teams rather than customers are long gone.

Roggespierre