Zealot: partisan: a fervent and even militant proponent of something.

So, with all that's been written, whispered, and opined about the AMA over the past couple of years, Soup thought it was about time to ask "the man with two first names" a few questions about the Association and his association with said Association (wow, talk about redundant). Here's what Larry Lawrence had to say. He followed up on some of his answers in e-amil and we've included them here.

Longtime AMA supporter Larry Lawrence gives his view of the current state of the AMA in this interview. image, thanks, LL

Q We should start by familiarizing people with what your relationship with the AMA has been.

A I started doing some contract work for the AMA as far back as the early '90s, and then they hired me as Communications Manager for Pro Racing in 1995. And I was basically there for a little over two years, working in the old Westerville office. And then, just for family reasons, I moved back to Indianapolis, or Brownsburg and they kept me on as a contractor. So I worked for them through the '07 season. I was basically there for, I don't know, probably 15-16 years, in one way or the other, doing communications. Besides Pro Racing, I worked in a lot of different departments. I did a lot of work for the amateur department with Bill Amick when he was heading that up. I did a ton of work with the museum. I was actually chairperson for the election committee for years. So I had my hands in a lot of areas of the AMA.

Q And you've been a member since?

A I'd been a member since, it wasn't continuous, but probably since I started riding in the late '70s...

Q I would describe your relationship with the AMA as that you are a zealot. You truly care about the Association.

A Well, I do. I'd been a member for so long, and I'd worked there, I saw all the good people that were there.

Like a lot of people, there was a time when I was critical of the AMA, before I went to work there, on certain issues, when I worked at American Roadracing. They were slow. They were slow to address safety. They were - in the Pro Racing side, they were a little bit lax in trying to get good purse money for the riders. But when I went to work there, I saw that the people were really ... you think about how the AMA was structured. People filter up from the club organizations and all the different genres of racing, and the best people filter up to the AMA, and they really had some good people there. And I discovered that when I was there. And I discovered all those problems I thought were easily solved, were a little more complex. It really made me appreciate the Association even that much more.

Q Can you give an example of AMA's complex problems, that you went in thinking could be quickly solved?

A Well, obviously, in the area of rider safety, being sort of adamant about it, I'm like, "We just won't go to this track. Sears Point is too dangerous. We shouldn't go there. Mid-Ohio won't move this wall, we just won't go there." That's sort of a young rebel type attitude that you have when you come in and you think all the AMA has to do is play hardball and everything's going to work. You find out that maybe, if you didn't go to every track that had some deficiencies, maybe you wouldn't have a racing series. So you see how people are working sort of behind the scenes to make changes incrementally, and eventually things were improved at some of these tracks. I think for the most part, people will remember that the AMA was heading in the right direction as far as safety was concerned. It was too slow for a lot of people, granted. But I think they were heading in the right direction.

Q You had a pretty unique position there at the AMA. In that you had to work intimately with the Association, with the factories, with the riders, with the tracks, with outside media interests, etc. Could you talk about that a little bit?

A I was sort of fortunate in that the stuff I did sort of brought exposure to the riders, brought exposure to AMA Pro Racing, and I was sort of looked at as the hero when I went there, because some of the people that worked there before me, they were good in one area or the other, but I sort of - I worked really hard, I didn't have my family over there, so I was working 'til eight or nine o'clock every night, and I got a lot of things done. We started doing news releases for every event, calling the media for every event.

Some of these things, when (Former AMA Pro Racing President) Tom Mueller hired me, didn't think I'd be able to get done. We just got a lot of things done, and I was sort of considered the golden-haired boy after I'd been there a year or so, because I was getting so much work done. We made better media guides. Fortunately for me, I didn't have to make the rules. I didn't have to enforce the rules. I was just sitting there making heroes out of guys because I was getting them in USA Today or the Washington Post or something like that. So I was the big hero in that way, and I was fortunate that that position helped me to ... gave me that reputation as being a guy who really got a lot of stuff done. And really, I wasn't doing anything more than just really working hard, and making sure the detail work was done, and follow-up, and all the normal things that someone should do in a job.

Q So are you still contracting with the AMA?

A Well, that came to an end in 2008, sort of in different parts. When Rob Dingman came on board, I sort of knew my time at the AMA was short, because they were talking about getting out of pro racing. And then when Dingman fired Greg Harrison and Bill Wood, two of the best employees the AMA ever had and ever will have, I just couldn't, I couldn't understand it. I wrote a letter of protest, and that was pretty much the end of my days at the AMA. They basically didn't renew my contract, is basically what it boiled down to. And then I was still doing some work with the museum, but they eventually got me out of that position as well.

Q So you have absolutely no professional relationship with the AMA at all, right now?

A No. None whatsoever. But I still follow it with great interest. (Lawrence also offered a link to an opinion piece he wrote on his blog in answering this.)

To sort of segue into what's going on today, the subject of them selling Pro Racing to DMG, I always thought it was a bad idea. Because, Dean, you've been around long enough. You understand what it was like in the mid-'80s when we came on the scene, to what it was like by the early 2000's. We're only talking 15 years. And we had no TV back in the mid-'80s. There was maybe one team that had a - they didn't have a semi, I think Honda had a big box truck. And we saw the thing evolve ... no riders were getting paid money. And we saw that evolve to where there were a lot of guys who were making a really good living there. We saw, at one time, there were probably, what, 25 semis there? From the factories and support teams. We had national TV coverage. Safety was getting better. The purses were going up. I saw the progression, and what happened, I believe, is when Dingman came in in 2006, 2007, things ... they had just lost, Pro Racing had just lost the Chevy sponsorship, and they were getting a lot of criticism on various sides, and the economy was starting to slow down ... and I think he saw it as nothing but trouble. And not having the history, the background in racing, he just looked at it as something to unload. So they sold it.

Q Would it be truthful to say that you really had a bad vibe when AMA President Rob Dingman came on? Sort of a feeling of impending doom for racing?

A Well, I didn't at first. But then when I saw their vision for the AMA, to get out of racing because it was just generating controversy, that's when I started having... What actually was really interesting to me is, he sent me an email, four or five days before they announced this new vision for the AMA, and asked me what I thought about it. And I wrote him back with my concerns, and told him I wasn't really thrilled about the idea of the AMA getting out of racing. Then I see this announcement two or three days later, that came out. So I don't know - knowing what I know about it now, I don't know if it was just sort of a test of where my loyalties were going to be, or what, but I just thought, "Why even ask me if you don't really care what my opinion is?" So yeah, that's when I really started getting a bad vibe, if you will, about what may be happening at the AMA.

Q I can't understand why you're not on the Board of Directors for the AMA. Do you just not want to run?

A Well, no, I think I would love to serve in some capacity there. But unfortunately, since Dingman has come on board, the way they've structured the Board, and the way they've structured the way you get on the Board ... he's consolidating his power, is basically what it boils down to. He puts his own appointees on the Board. He's made it nearly impossible to run for the Board if you don't agree with his policies. They actually put an amendment in the rules of the Board. They used to say that if you'd worked for the AMA, that you couldn't be on the Board for ten years. Which doesn't make a lot of sense. If you worked with the AMA, you know the Association intimately, yet they don't want you to serve on the Board for ten years after you've worked for the AMA? I think if we all read between the lines, we might know why that rule's written in there. It's probably to keep people out of the Board that they don't want in there. But it was interesting that when they wrote that amendment in there just recently, since Dingman's been on, I think they realized that I hadn't worked as an employee of the AMA since 1997. And I went back on to look at the rule again a little bit later, and they had written an amendment to it that stipulated that contractors, also, that had been working with the AMA, for ten years couldn't run for the Board, as well. So even if I wanted to be on there, I couldn't be, because of the way that they have the rule structured.

Q I find that amazing. Another thing: you have a really close relationship with Daytona International Speedway. You've worked the media center for them in the past, and you've been a big, big supporter of Daytona and the Daytona 200. So DMG taking over, has got to be an interesting situation from your perspective.

A Yeah. I've been good friends with Jim France for a long time. I think the first time I met him would've been very early '80s. I was a photographer, and he picked me up ... I was walking back in between races, and he picked me up in his car and gave me a ride back, and we just struck up a conversation and got to be friends. And we've corresponded back and forth ever since then, and he's invited me down there for various functions. So I was initially ... even though I didn't want the AMA to get out of racing ... I was sort of happy that Jim was going to take it over. Because I knew how much he cares about the sport, and I thought, "Well, with the money and everything they have, they'll be able to really make a go of this." But obviously, I think, there was just some bad decisions made.

"So essentially, I think what you have here is, the Coombs family is basically paying for Jim France to own AMA Pro Racing lock, stock, and barrel. It's brilliant. He's a genius businessman. But it also shows you that the Pickerington bunch, they're not very good negotiators."

Jim's a brilliant businessman, obviously. Think about this for a second: They sold Pro Racing for basically $1,000,000 a year. He bought Pro Racing for $1,000,000 a year. (And) He bought it on the layaway plan. They didn't even have to put any money up front. He subcontracted out the AMA motocross series to the Coombs family. So essentially, I think what you have here is, the Coombs family is basically paying for Jim France to own AMA Pro Racing lock, stock, and barrel. It's brilliant. He's a genius businessman. But it also shows you that the Pickerington bunch, they're not very good negotiators. And Pro Racing was worth way more than $1,000,000 per year. I mean, it's just ... it's just a travesty that they sold it for that. It really is.

Q The reported figure, now, that was paid, is either $10,000,000 or $12,000,000. Do you believe that's an accurate figure?

A Well, I could believe the $10,000,000. But you know, it's $1,000,000 a year, is basically how you have to look at it. If somebody said they're going to pay you $1,000 for a story, you might be happy, until you discover they're going to pay you over a ten-year period, and you were going to get $100 per year. That's a big difference. So basically, they're getting $1,000,000 per year. I understand it's tough to evaluate property like that. But there are guideposts out there that can give you some clues. When I was there, just the publicity work alone that the PR Department was doing, was worth in the area of about $100,000 in value per race. So you know, you take that times 12 races, and you're talking over $1,000,000 in value just from the media work we were doing. And that's just in roadracing. So you take that in motocross and flat track, Supercross, it gives you an idea of how much value is there in racing. And that's just on the publicity side.

Think about Superbike teams. How much were Superbike teams, factory teams, spending, per year? Five to seven million dollars?

Q Mat Mladin told me that in 2005, with salary and bonus, he made either $6,000,000 or $7,000,000. The top rider in the series, the best rider in the series, made that kind of money, per year And then, a few years later, the entirety of AMA Pro Racing is sold for $10,000,000?

A So each team was spending, say, $5,000,000 to $7,000,000, each factory team. So you take that times four or five, and that gives you what, $20,000,000 to $30,000,000, conservatively, of what was being spent in that paddock. So there's another clue about how much your series is worth. Think about this: Sixteen years ago, Roger Edmondson ... he was running Supersport racing, and he was paid $3,000,000 for the rights to just Supersport. And that was 15-16 years ago. So you add the value of motocross, flat track, Supermoto, everything in that stable, and to sell that thing for $1,000,000 a year.

Think about this, Dean: Here's the thing that really gets me. When the whole JamSports/Clear Channel mess happened, where they had that litigation, Clear Channel was hit with a $90,000,000 suit. They got nailed for $90,000,000 just for Supercross. So they sell Pro Racing for $1,000,000 a year?

That, I mean, is just stunning to me. You're talking about 100 years, when you count the predecessors of the AMA, of blood, sweat and tears. It's the birthright of the AMA, is basically the biggest reason the Association was founded. And they sold all of that history and that indispensable value, the very soul of the Association, for $1,000,000 a year. It's pathetic, really.

Q I recently viewed the original papers of incorporation of the AMA . I'm sure you've seen them as well. It said the "American Motorcycle Association" was being formed, basically, so they could sanction motorcycle races.

A Yeah. It's just incredible to me that there was such a small cadre of people that actually pushed this thing through. I don't even think the whole Board got to vote on this. I think it's just a travesty that it sold for that.

Q You worked for the AMA on the outdoor motocross series for several years, as well. Is it accurate to say that outdoor motocross is a successful, thriving motorsports series?

A Oh, absolutely. I was just amazed, going to those motocrosses. I mean, I knew a little bit about it before, because I'd been to some. But just a week after week basis, going to those things, and seeing the crowds they get there, the amount of factory participation, it was really stunning to me. And you know, just talking to the media. When you would ask them ...when you would pitch them on story ideas, they knew what motocross was. You didn't really have to explain it to them. There was a lot of times, when I'd call them up for Superbike, you'd have to, "Oh, is that where they do those big jumps?" I'd say, "No, this is the one where they drag their knees." "Oh, okay, yeah, that one, okay." But they knew what motocross was. The publicity we got was probably greater than what we even got in Superbike racing. So yeah, it's a very thriving business there, and probably just as much as roadracing was in its prime days of five or six years ago.

And don't discount flat track. Flat track, as well. Flat track still - even though it's not, it doesn't draw huge crowds at all the events ... they get really substantial crowds at races like Springfield and Indy and Peoria. It's a viable series. They have something to really - the tradition is there, and they could build on these things. So it's just stunning to me. Just getting out of ... the other thing that really hurts the AMA, in my feeling, is that if they're getting out of racing, first of all, they were getting out because of the controversy. That was really smart, wasn't it? Letting DMG use the AMA's name. So they're still basically mired in the controversy, because their name's associated with it. But AMA Pro Racing was basically the most dynamic part of the AMA. If you looked at web traffic and everything, there was not even a comparison. The people that came in to see AMA Pro Racing was just far and above everything else. And now that the AMA doesn't have that association with Pro Racing, that direct association, I think that their hope of getting young members is greatly diminished, let's put it that way. Because that was the one really exciting part, that really got people interested in AMA, was the pro racing aspect. And it was just a great advertising tool. It was indispensable for them. And I think it was worth a lot more than $1,000,000 a year, for sure.

"Honda and Suzuki had talked about giving an AMA membership with purchase of motorcycle and Dingman said at an AMA congress meeting, and I'm paraphrasing, "I'm not sure that's a good idea... you give up so much control." That quote encapsulates everything you need to know about Rob Dingman. Here are two major manufacturers talking about doubling, perhaps tripling the AMA's membership and all he can think about is some control he might lose."

Here's a stat for you. There are fewer AMA members today than there was a decade ago. Dingman blames this Nationwide program for the loss in membership, but the numbers simply don't add up. There were 270,000 members when the Nationwide program started and membership reached a peak of 300,000. They said 50,000 came in from Nationwide. If you add 50,000 to the starting point of 270,000 members you'd have 320,000. So that means they lost 20,000 regular members somewhere during that timeframe alone. Dignman is trying to get people to believe that the Nationwide program was largely sold to people who didn't even own motorcycles and that they retained no members from that program. That's just total BS. I suspect the real membership number is less than the 245,000 Dingman is claiming. Pickerington is not sealed tight. There are sources of information. The bottom line is that since Dingman has come on board the AMA has lost nearly 60,000 members. That represents a loss of $2.3 million per year in potential revenue to the AMA. Selling Pro racing for a million bucks a year isn't going to make up for that. No matter how they try to spin it, that's a 20 percent drop in membership in less than three years. There have been recessions before and never have they lost these kinds of numbers. It's the largest drop in membership in AMA history.

Q It's interesting to me that they're going to try and sell AMA memberships to a younger generation now without racing. Is their foundation of membership going to be legislative efforts? This is going to draw young people in? Some of them are stunt riders and stunt enthusiasts. How are you going to sell an association which is trying to protect motorcyclists' right to ride, to people who don't care about people's right to ride?

A Yeah, if you do these stunts, and you crack up, now, if you're an AMA member, you can get that roadside assistance, at least. No, but seriously, since Dingman came on board, it's been almost three years now, and membership has plummeted. It's plummeted 60,000 members since he's come on board. And the one premier program they've come out with is this roadside assistance. I'm not saying that's not a great feature, but man, I'm telling you what, that's not going to get people excited about joining the AMA. It's just not. And if you look at some of the interviews he's done recently, and they ask him what he's going to do to get membership up, I mean, that's his shot. That roadside assistance program. And I don't think they have a whole lot beyond that. It's going to be interesting ... if that's all they've got, I can see their membership continuing to dwindle. In the (AMA) magazine, Dingman said his goal is to get back to 300,000 in 2010. If that goal isn't met I hope someone starts asking questions.

He goes on to say those representatives of these manufacturers said they weren't sure they believed enough in the AMA to try a program like that. I think Dingman takes that as an indictment on the then AMA board members, not for one second understanding that it may have been a case where the board members were trying to tell Dingman, in a not so subtle way, that maybe they didn't trust his leadership.

Without the excitement of Pro Racing or programs where members come in through purchase of motorcycles or insurance I don't see any way the membership is going to grow. I see it continuing to dwindle. If it keeps on the path it's headed now the AMA will rapidly become irrelevant.

The MIC could start an individual membership division tomorrow, give membership to all motorcycle and ATV purchasers and in a matter of a year dwarf the AMA in size and importance.

Instead of making enemies with the industry leaders Dingman better start building bridges and fast.

Dingman said no way would have entered into the deal if they knew it was going to be run by Edmondson. How disingenuous is that? Last year they gave "Motorcyclist of the Year" to Stan Simpson, Dingman's boss, but Dingman was quoted as saying it was a tough decision because of the great contributions to the sport made by Roger Edmondson. I'm not kidding. Then he had Edmondson come and speak at AMA congress. Roger was the toast of the town as far as Dingman was concerned and now, supposedly, he has the gall to say they would not have entered the agreement had they known Edmondson was going to run it.

There is no credibility with anything coming out of Pickerington these days.

Q Were you ever able to figure out who Dennis Rhee was and ascertain what his role was in the sale of AMA Pro Racing to DMG?

A No. That's one of the most mysterious things about this whole sale to the DMG, was Dennis Rhee apparently was the architect of selling Pro Racing. He was brought in sort of as a fixer-upper. Look and evaluate and see what we can do. And he came up with this idea to sell AMA Pro Racing, I understand. Then after the sale was done, he just sort of quietly left. I'd like to know if that guy was ... I'd like to know a little bit more about that. Was he given some sort of bonus money or something for this sale? Did he have some incentive behind this? No one's ever answered that question. It's a very mysterious coming and going, if you will, of someone that made such a profound change in the way the AMA did business.

Q Did he come from Daytona, geographically?

A No, no, no, he had worked for Mid-Ohio for a number of years, and then he'd left Mid-Ohio and had gone on to other things. I don't remember what exactly. But then came to the AMA for a few months during this, when Dingman came on board.

Q Really, in the long term, people may lay this entire travesty of AMA Pro Racing being sold, and Dingman taking over, at the feet of Ex AMA President Patti DiPietro. What are your feelings on that?

A Well, no. She was basically ... she had stepped aside when all this stuff happened. AMA Pro Racing may have been costing the Association a little bit of money when Dingman came on board, but I think he's even admitted over the years that it's cyclical. Sometimes it brings in money to the Association, and sometimes it lost money. I'm sure when the Chevy sponsorship was there, they were doing okay with it. But you know, to me, that's just a lack of - instead of just throwing the baby out with the bathwater, they should've looked for ways to develop relationships with potential sponsors, and really tried to make a go of it. Because if you think about it, Pro Racing could've been a major money-generating thing for the AMA, if they'd have just worked at it a little bit. And now, that $10,000,000 - that $1,000,000 a year - is going to be gone after ten years, and they're going to be left high and dry. And like I said, without the excitement of pro racing, I don't know how they're going to get young people enthused about joining the AMA. Because government relations and roadside assistance, for a 25-year-old, means nothing.

I guess the one thing is that they just had a Board election. There was a guy named Jim Viverito that was just voted onto the Board for the North Central region. Jim called me and shared...- he said he shared some of the same concerns I had over the AMA and the way it's governed right now. It's really governed in a lot of secrecy. I just hope somebody like that can get in there, do the homework, investigate ... not take what the President feeds them at face value. It's not an easy job. It's a lot easier for a Board member to come in there, drink some coffee, slap each other on the back, and go about their merry business. But they should take their position very seriously and put some work into it. Do some digging. I believe if they get some people in there that will do that kind of thing, that they'll eventually figure out what's really going on, and some changes, hopefully, can be made. For Pro Racing to ever come back to the AMA, that ship may have left. It may never happen again. But for the AMA to be viable again, they're going to have to come up with some really innovative ways to get younger people excited about the Association. And like I said, right now, they just don't have ... they're just coming up empty on those things.

Think about this. In the last 10-15 years, websites like yours have sprung up. When you put that information online about the financials of the AMA, I'd venture to say that was the first time that was ever done. So you get people like you, and some bloggers and whatnot, and I think for the first time people can hold the AMA's feet to the fire. Because the glossies (print magazines) would never have done that. Ten-fifteen years ago, no one would have ever printed something like that. I think that people have a chance now to really get to know, and get to understand, the inner workings of what's going on there.

Q Have you ever requested records from the AMA? Being that it's a member organization, and just simply asked to see the financials for AMA Pro Racing? As a non-profit membership organization, the books are supposed to be open to all members.

A I have not. I understand, as a nonprofit, those books are supposed to be open to anyone that wants to see them. And they were very, very late on reporting this year. Obviously there wasn't any money in there from the Pro Racing sale. So that's how we know that this thing was bought on the layaway plan. So it's going to be interesting. You've published that, the financials for, what was it, fiscal 2007?

Q That ran through mid or late 2008.

A So when that gets published next year, if they continue to report like they should, and then you publish it again, you'll be able to compare side by side. There's just so many things that I've heard that I can't substantiate. But when we get the financials, we'll be able to see. They've had pay freezes for employees for a while there, I understand ... what I've been told. Yet there may be people in management who are getting big raises, and things of this nature, and we'll be able to see that, when that comes out next year.

Q Are you afraid for the future of the AMA?

A I really am. Because, with the current leadership, ... I have to be honest with you. I have a hard time envisioning why young people would want to join the AMA right now. I can see why they wanted to, prior. In the old days, when they were associated with Pro Racing, there was just a lot of buzz about it. You could come to the races. If you were a member, you'd get a premium parking spot. They even had a tent for you there at a lot of the races, where you could get refreshments, you could check your helmet. They just had a lot of really cool benefits for members, when it was associated with Pro Racing. And it was just sort of a cool thing, to be able to, "Hey, Miguel Duhamel's a member, and we share something in common." And now, with Pro Racing not being associated with the AMA, I think that was one of their biggest ways they kept bringing in younger people to the Association. Without that, I don't know. Are they going to start sponsoring these stunt contests, like you say? I don't know what they're going to do to attract young people. Because I don't care what you might think, you might be passionate about government relations ... and there's something to be said about that ... but it does not excite young people.

Q On a final question, will we be seeing you at Daytona this year?

A I don't think I'm going to go this year. It's unfortunate. I really, I would like to go, but there isn't any reason for me to go. In the past, I've always had a reason to go, as far as a job to do. And I don't really have a job to do this year in association with the races. And it's really sad, because it would be the first time I've missed Daytona in, probably, I don't know, since maybe the late '70s sometime.