Manuel identifies a vacuum of organizational structures within SimRacing and is missing a central institution which could shape the development of SimRacing. He points on the relatively weak and sensitive organizational structures in SimRacing and adresses potential threats and risks, when external interests force into this weak construct. Right now, SimRacing seems to be easy-influencable, for example through manipulation and competition of event organizers. He is concerned, that the hype about eSports in general is endangering a bottom-up development and identifies the need of supporting teams with their development by intersted or active market players. Only repeated cooperation between two actors will create structures and this colaboration might institutionalize at some point. There is no fast return of investment, hence, investments should target the process of sustainability. SimRacing as an eSport needs to subsidize professional labor force to form organizational institutions and tackle its weaknesses and potential risks for non-related market players.
Manuel is head of Rennsport Online and is moderating the discussion panel on how to shape the future of SimRacing at the SimExpo 2017
Manuel, the challenges of SimRacings development are well-elaborated by Rennsport Onlines last preview, as are the risks, potential and opportunities. From your experience and perspective as a teammanager, what is it that SimRacing as a whole needs to master this development?
First of all, it is a good sign, that we will have the opportunity to discuss these aspects during the discussion panels at the SimExpo. And I think, I speak in the name of most of the teams and drivers, when I express my thanks towards Marc Hennerici and raceunion, to enable all of us by involving us on the mainstage. This shows, that we already mastered the important first step of awareness. To answer the question I would have to predict the future. In my opinion, the best way to predict the future is to shape it. So, if we talk about “shaping the future of SimRacing”, it will be interesting and crucial to learn about the experiences and needs of all the different actors and discuss these together with the interested auditorium. Clearly, a core institution, like the FIA, the ADAC or DMSB are missing in SimRacing to fill the vacuum of lacking communication, cooperation or event organization. Most of the efforts go back to the motivation and work of individuals and have to be coordinated with a real job, families and social life. Hence, “the potential” everybody sees, often is somehow restricted by timerelated contingencies and individual competences. A bottom-up process is hardly possible, due to these circumstances. Meanwhile, organized and well-structured companies push into these structures and have hard times finding partners to help them realizing their ideas, intentions or interests. This is something like the status quo of SimRacing today, I think there is a huge divergence between the high level of competition we have in the sport and the individual opportunities for teams and drivers to help creating organizational structures. To really shape our future, we need collaboration, transparency (at least to a certain extent) and a central institution which can moderate the development. Maybe teams should think and be structured like companies, design workpackages or outline specific tasks and search for suitable labor force. But definitely they need help, again I think this vacuum must be filled. The ISRF can have this role, but from my perspective needs further support, first.
Speaking of market players and diverging intentions, how can all these interests be unified for a sustainable future of SimRacing?
While SimRacing-related hard- and softwaredevelopers generally might have interest to sell their products, connect to the real world and compete against other companies, the non-related ones only have the perspective to access new markets, work their image and in a long term increase their revenues. The same applies to non-related manufacturers. At the same time, they cannot calculate any precise outcome of this investment and therefore have to evaluate whether to take this risk or to sit and wait.
However, this behaviour is well known from the theory of diffusion of innovations by Scott (2003), and we definitely can understand an investment in SimRacing as innovation. While this obstacle of decision-making is preventing the growth through more ressources, (event) organizers have hard times to create successful business models and establish themselves on a contested playground. SimRacing Deutschland e.V. is a good example for that: behind this organization which could be a central actor (and yet they are, even if they are struggling), stand only few individuals and their voluntary work, and still they don’t receive the appreciation they should receive, not talking about any appropriate payment for their work here. And as long as this state doesn’t change, we won’t have enough incentives to trigger a bottom-up development from the scene itself. What I think, we need as a sport, is a head-institution like the ones I mentioned which could help coordinating, moderating and supporting the growth of resilient structures; at least resilient enough to help possible investors to channel their investment to the right spots. Huge price moneys like at the Vegas eRace are nothing which can have a long-lasting effect on the development of SimRacing, although they help attracting attention on SimRacing through their sheer number.
Who is investing into SimRacing and why? How does it affect Rennsport Online?
Early adopters: sponsoring SimRacing is still something on the early stage of innovation, however, sponsors benefit from the ability to influence the take-off-process of SimRacing (Rogers 2003: p.11).
Beside all the potential SimRacing offers, which risks endanger its development? Did Rennsport Online experience any negative examples for those risks?
Investors, potential sponsors or partners should be aware of the weak structures they find right now. It could be important to rather help teams, organizers and developers with their learning and forming process, than metaphorically speaking, make it rain in the club and expect everybody to dance. Let me work with an example here: Ressources are scarce, competition and envy are high, what makes SimRacing a sensitve construct right now. If you have a championship with a price money of 50k, from January to June, and you have another championship starting in April with a double amount of price money, what do you think which of the two championships will have more competitors in May? Racing series are not coordinated; the one with the bigger pocket has better competition, which leads to better races, more viewers, and so on. At the same time, we haven’t discussed the weakness of SimRacing towards manipulation. If, during the same championship, someone from let’s say Asia pays you 50k to not win a race or crash a certain driver out of the race, what do you think happens? Compared to other disciplines, SimRacing is “easy to buy”. In a discussion with ESIC, I learned that illegal bets on eSports become more and more popular in Asia and therefore, endanger competition. And we whitnessed comparable situations in SimRacing recently, and yet I am not starting to talk about doping aspects, like in other disciplines. What I say is, SimRacing is underdeveloped and rather needs help to build structures, than high price money and nonsense-competition between organizers. SimRacing is not LoL, DOTA, CS:GO or Starcraft, we are a niche in eSports and things go different.
Speaking of not negative but I would call it difficult situations at my team: This summer we were planning a marketing event with an external company for their business clients. We were supposed to organize simulators, guide their clients through hotlap contests and at least point out crossovers of real and virtual motorsport. However, when it came to costs, organizational details and hospitality, we were left behind with no securities, decisions and communication. We then did not want to bear the full risk and cancelled the event, even though we would have loved to realize it. Lesson learned: we were not apprehended as equal partners but inferior contractors, another challenge for us. Many investors, don’t see the people behind SimRacing: its a diversity of talented humans, not only within their hobby, but in real life, in their profession, with their families. And we will welcome some of them to the discussions during the raceunion panel. Why don’t investors see that aspect, when they start negotiations? Clearly, communication and information are minor developed and we have to start increasing communication to the outside to convey SimRacing to the non-related.
You were pointing on the lack of a central organizational institution now several times, can you specify this idea?
Thank you! Everybody!
Last but not least, Manuel, as well as the whole team of Rennsport Online want to express their deepest thanks to all the involved actors: thank you Marc Hennerici, for enabling this discussion to happen, thanks to Alex Herbst and raceunion for building the framework, thanks to all our invited experts, we will welcome on stage: René Buttler, Wani Finkbohrer, Olli ‘moustache fanboost’ Phakala, Javi Guerra and of course, thank you Philipp Schallenberg, for organizing this event in the background and contributing to this whole topic in an extraordinary, motivated and qualitative way! Gentlemen, please start your discussions!
#goRSO <3
Saturday, 16th: Live coverage by SRD TV of the 1st day of the SimExpo
Saturday, 17th: Live coverage by SRD TV of the 2nd day of the SimExpo
Literature
- Nielsen Sports (2017): eSports – Trends & Potenziale – Marktanalyse für Deutschland. Report 2017. URL: click (accessed: 8.9.2017)
- Rogers, E.M. (2003): Diffusion of Innovations. 5th Edition. Free Press, New York.