In modern racing leagues, if a track does not have adequate safety preparations including proper run-off areas, racers will often threaten to boycott any events that visit that particular track. In actuality, the racing leagues in question have safety standards to which they hold tracks when selecting them; therefore, if the athletes have an issue with a track it is usually because there is some problem that is either beyond the scope of the rules, or that they interpret them differently from the league. In order to prevent such a
strike and to make themselves as attractive as possible to various racing sanctioning bodies in the hopes of attracting lucrative professional racing events to their facilities, park managements will often pay substantial attention to such facilities' features as safety devices, including run-off areas, and make substantial financial investments to add or improve such devices as deemed necessary. They will even go so far as to advertise safety as having been a central design tenet during the track's general construction or renovation. By making the facility as attractive as possible to racers, the hope is that the racers will put pressure on the leagues in which they participate to race at that venue. The other theory is that by making the venue as up-to-date, luxurious, safe, and
feature-rich as possible, that various racing leagues will want to hold events there and thus, not only will the park make revenues from gate fees, but they will also make more money from sponsorship deals for selling advertising space on track property (such as walls around the course, bridges, infield grass painting, etc.). Such advertising will be seen by many potential consumers, since the more popular racing leagues have more television viewers, so the rates that the facility can charge to advertisers will be higher than if the track received less television air-time, or air-time with lower
ratings. Therefore, making safety improvements makes financial sense to a track's management, since it leads to greater demand from event promoters and even larger and more popular events, which in turn increase a track's gate revenues, advertising revenues, and revenues from club racers and other users of the track while major events are not being held since the popularity of a track corresponds to its usage by non-professionals engaging in hobby pursuits. If top racers do not feel that a track is safe they may put pressure on their racing league to not schedule events at that particular venue. Or, if a league has documented safety standards for the tracks on their circuit, they may choose not to schedule events at a deficient facility until it has made the requisite changes. Until racers became actively involved with promoting race track safety, there was no market pressure on the tracks to make such improvements. Now that safety measures are an integral part of the demand equation (with the racing leagues being the consumers and the tracks being the suppliers), tracks must be competitive in terms of their safety facilities in order to be competitive in luring events from the most popular racing leagues. Because run-off areas and their associated safety devices (i.e. gravel traps, air fences, tire walls, etc.) are a primary safety feature of tracks, they hold enormous economic sway over the track, a consideration that is not lost on designers of new tracks and existing tracks' renovation projects. == References ==