[Alan Roehrich]

This could be as constructive as anyone chooses to make it. However, when someone chooses to make it about how much a racer spends on his rig, it probably won't be, given that what a racer spends on his rig has absolutely nothing to do with what NHRA takes in and what they pay out. As a matter of fact, at one point, NHRA was actually getting money from some of the companies that make those rigs. But what the rig costs is completely and utterly irrelevant to the discussion.

Back to the real issue.

Whose fault is it that the stands are empty at LODRS races?

It is the place of NHRA, and by extension, the tracks, to promote the races, that is one of the biggest reasons NHRA exists to begin with. Or at least, it is what the founding charter said the reasons were. However, NHRA doesn't even advertise locally, and they don't give the tracks any money to do it, either. They sure do charge the tracks for the privilege of hosting an NHRA event though.

The list of things that NHRA could do to help fill the stands is endless. The list of things they actually do, does not exist.

As far as contingency sponsors are concerned, it is not nearly so much about how many fans are in the stands (although that does not help) as it is about how NHRA treats the sponsors and how much money NHRA takes from them out of the contingency fund that should be either going to racers or going back to the sponsors. I know exactly what it costs to be an NHRA contingency sponsor (I worked with one for a few years), and what it gets you. The return on the investment has gotten very poor, and it is no one's fault except NHRA.