Ruh Roh Raggy

They are saying Charters are worth 50 million, up from last years estimate of 40 million. I don't see the ruh roh here.
 
Reading the entire article, it does a good job laying out the various negotiating positions. While I’m sure this gets solved, it has potential to get ugly. A couple of quotes listed below:

”Teams say they are largely unprofitable currently due to reduced sponsorship but high operating costs.”

”In the absence of a formal negotiation window, and with the current charter expiring in less than a year, teams could now technically go shop their rights to other racing series.”

”They each have something the other needs: NASCAR has more than 75 years of brand equity built up as a racing property. But drivers and the teams that pay them are the competitors who typically drive passion in the sport. Teams like Hendrick Motorsports, Team Penske, Woods Brothers Racing and Joe Gibbs Racing have decades of institutional knowledge and brand equity that would be difficult for NASCAR to replace. Nonetheless, the opt-out could trigger actions on both sides. While NASCAR is open to continuing the charter system, the sanctioning body might be able to seize teams’ charters if no agreement is reached. That would be devastating for teams because their charter values have increased 11-fold in recent years and are now trading at close to $40M.“

Entire article well worth reading.
 
NASCAR's self-proclaimed benevolent dictatorship is a misnomer (even if first called that by someone else). While the organization and its team owners may engage in charitable activities, their primary objective is profit maximization. The use of the term "benevolent dictatorship" is an example of self-aggrandizement and should not be taken at face value.

Nascar needs a Brown heres comes sime BS flag. As accurate as "The Benovlent RTA".
 
Denny claims the revenue in the sport is higher now than it ever had been.

Teams need to remember nascar isn't the one making them spend millions on things like engineers, CFD and simulation.

I think the real driver in this negotiation could be the manufacturers.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
Greg said:
NASCAR's self-proclaimed benevolent dictatorship is a misnomer (even if first called that by someone else). While the organization and its team owners may engage in charitable activities, their primary objective is profit maximization. The use of the term "benevolent dictatorship" is an example of self-aggrandizement and should not be taken at face value.

Nascar needs a Brown heres comes sime BS flag. As accurate as "The Benovlent RTA".
Click to expand...
I think Bill France Jr. was the EPITOMY of a benevolent dictator in my opinion. Yes, he ruled with an iron fist, and yes, I'm sure he was interested in making as much money as possible, but he was willing make adjustments to the business model because he understood that without the teams there was no product. Sure, he would play hardball at times, but at the end of the day I think he had the sport's overall health and continued growth as job 1. He was also smart enough to actually LISTEN to the biggest movers and shakers in the sport and not just pay them lip service. I think a RTA controlled series would be a dumpster fire waiting to happen, just as CART ended up being. And in a case of history trying to repeat itself, I keep hearing more and more rumblings of people dissatisfied with Penske's stewardship of the Indycar Series.
 
Conover said:
Reading the entire article, it does a good job laying out the various negotiating positions. While I’m sure this gets solved, it has potential to get ugly. A couple of quotes listed below:

”Teams say they are largely unprofitable currently due to reduced sponsorship but high operating costs.”

”In the absence of a formal negotiation window, and with the current charter expiring in less than a year, teams could now technically go shop their rights to other racing series.”

”They each have something the other needs: NASCAR has more than 75 years of brand equity built up as a racing property. But drivers and the teams that pay them are the competitors who typically drive passion in the sport. Teams like Hendrick Motorsports, Team Penske, Woods Brothers Racing and Joe Gibbs Racing have decades of institutional knowledge and brand equity that would be difficult for NASCAR to replace. Nonetheless, the opt-out could trigger actions on both sides. While NASCAR is open to continuing the charter system, the sanctioning body might be able to seize teams’ charters if no agreement is reached. That would be devastating for teams because their charter values have increased 11-fold in recent years and are now trading at close to $40M.“

Entire article well worth reading.
Click to expand...
This will get resolved. A split would be the death of stock car racing in America and everybody knows this.
 
NASCAR wants to keep as much money as they can. And the teams want as much money as they can. And the tracks want as much money as they can. Each side wants every dime they can get. This is all just talk from everyone.

If one party thinks they can get an extra million or two, they're going to take it. Would they refuse to sign an agreement over a few million and destroy the industry that made them wealthy? Absolutely not. But you don't exactly say that at the negotiating table.
 
Speedbowl14 said:
NASCAR wants to keep as much money as they can. And the teams want as much money as they can. And the tracks want as much money as they can. Each side wants every dime they can get. This is all just talk from everyone.

If one party thinks they can get an extra million or two, they're going to take it. Would they refuse to sign an agreement over a few million and destroy the industry that made them wealthy? Absolutely not. But you don't exactly say that at the negotiating table.
Click to expand...
Yeah like everybody is waiting for all the team owners to say boy, we are fine with the money the way it is. In the mean time Adam Stern gets his click bait$
 
Teams will end up getting more money, but not without NASCAR implementing some sort of operational spending cap or tax system. They aren't going to give teams more money without assurance they aren’t going to throw it all at R&D. NASCAR will also likely want in writing greater commitment from the teams and drivers towards marketing & promotional activities, and maybe at least some stake in what’s currently Racing America as well.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Teams will end up getting more money, but not without NASCAR implementing some sort of operational spending cap or tax system. They aren't going to give teams more money without assurance they aren’t going to throw it all at R&D. NASCAR will also likely want in writing greater commitment from the teams and drivers towards marketing & promotional activities, and maybe at least some stake in what’s currently Racing America as well.
Click to expand...
I think those are all very good points. It would be interesting to see how they would institute a spending cap but it would be more interesting to see what happened to the first team caught circumventing it.
 
How would a spending cap be enforced? Does any other sport have a spending cap (not strictly a salary cap)?
 
  • Like
Reactions: sdj
Charlie Spencer said:
How would a spending cap be enforced? Does any other sport have a spending cap (not strictly a salary cap)?
Click to expand...
They can't. It's like when big Bill tried to keep the large teams out of Nascar. They formed shadow companies that were actually financed by the OEM's.

So Nascar has all of the teams turn over their books so Nascar can go thru them and make sure they aren't spending too much? It's B.S., Nascar isn't going to do that.

I guess most fans don't understand that limiting practices, amounts of tires, very little testing, standardized parts from only approved vendors, engine usage limits, pit crew numbers restrictions, limiting backup car numbers and car inventories, limiting wind tunnel hours aren't spending controls?
 
StandOnIt said:
I guess most fans don't understand that limiting practices, amounts of tires, very little testing, standardized parts from only approved vendors, engine usage limits, pit crew numbers restrictions, limiting backup car numbers and car inventories, limiting wind tunnel hours aren't spending controls?
Click to expand...
I may be wrong (again) but weren't most of those restrictions were implemented at the owners' request, not imposed by NASCAR?
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
F1 has one.

www.cnbc.com

How an F1 spending cap made racing teams more investable

A more predictable balance sheet makes it easier to bring new sponsors on board.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com

us.motorsport.com

F1 cost cap: What is it and how does it work?

us.motorsport.com us.motorsport.com
Click to expand...
It looks like a lot of wiggle room and ripe for manipulatio8
AndyMarquisLive said:
F1 has one.

www.cnbc.com

How an F1 spending cap made racing teams more investable

A more predictable balance sheet makes it easier to bring new sponsors on board.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com

us.motorsport.com

F1 cost cap: What is it and how does it work?

us.motorsport.com us.motorsport.com
Click to expand...
It seems to be overloaded with exceptions and ripe for manipulation in my opinion. I just can't imagine any team owner who is the full disclosure type.
The disparity between the F1 haves and have-nots is still incredible, and they are virtually locking out any new startups.

NASCAR already controls so many of the parts, I am just not sure what a spending cap accomplishes. I doubt that they are insane enough to go after the big stuff like salaries, etc.

In my opinion, they should go all out a spending cap if that's what they really want and avoid any half-ass approaches at doing the impossible.
 
Much smarter to limit costs like I outlined than trying to get into everybody's business. Hint: If nobody was making money, the turnover of teams would be an indicator. Nobody is going anywhere and in fact more teams are wanting in the sport.
 
StandOnIt said:
Much smarter to limit costs like I outlined than trying to get into everybody's business. Hint: If nobody was making money, the turnover of teams would be an indicator. Nobody is going anywhere and in fact more teams are wanting in the sport.
Click to expand...
Steve Phelps said teams are still losing money, which is a part of why they’re looking at possibly implementing a budget cap. Not saying it’s the guaranteed path they’re going to take, but it’s part of their evaluation.

“Our race teams by and large are losing money at the Cup level and that is something we need to solve for them,” Phelps explained. “We can solve that with two key pillars. One is to make sure that they are getting additional revenue. They are interested in getting more money from the sanctioning body and the tracks through the purse and that is something we need to do.
Click to expand...

“Secondly, and not small, honestly, is some type of cost containment, whether that is in the form of a cap or whether that is in the form of the parts and pieces that make up the NextGen car, trying to limit those pieces,” Phelps continued. “I’m not sure where we are going to net out on that. I’m not saying our race teams can cut their way to success.
Click to expand...

sports.yahoo.com

NASCAR president: Cup Series teams 'by and large are losing money' - Yahoo Sports

NASCAR implemented a new car ahead of the 2022 season that was initially touted as a way for teams to save money.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
 
Charlie Spencer said:
How would a spending cap be enforced? Does any other sport have a spending cap (not strictly a salary cap)?
Click to expand...
F1 has both team operating budget caps and engine builder budget caps. It’s easy to look at Verstappen and say it hasn’t worked, but it’s compressed much of the rest of the grid and made for much more competitive midfield racing. A few years ago McLaren wouldn’t have been able to compete at the level of a Ferrari or Mercedes. Qualifying times are tighter while podiums and points finishes are being spread more equitably.

www.pitdebrief.com

Zak Brown on benefits of ‘outstanding’ F1 cost cap: “I think the budget cap has had the intended consequences of making the field much more competitive”

When Formula One introduced the cost cap at the start of the 2021 F1 season, one of its aims was to see it bring the field closer together. According to McLaren
www.pitdebrief.com www.pitdebrief.com
 
FLRacingFan said:
Yes, that is one other method they’re looking at. I would take that to mean, among other things, teams having even smaller spares inventories.
Click to expand...
Your article is over year old and they were talking about the up coming TV deal revenue that now has already happened and will go in effect in 25. They have suspended talks for now so it doesn't appear that the teams are in dire straights. Keselowski said he isn't worried, they will get it figured out.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Yes, that is one other method they’re looking at. I would take that to mean, among other things, teams having even smaller spares inventories.
Click to expand...
The cost caps remind me of the corporate JIT (just in time) days or meetings were everbody preached limited inventories.

I think a lot of them had their brick JIT houses to hide some extra comfort inventory that wasn't ever meant to be mentioned during an audit.

I admit that I cant prove that and it weakens my argument. I just dont see the racing crowd or culture being the type of conformist that would ever truly follow such a system.
 
In your article also.
One is to make sure that they are getting additional revenue. They are interested in getting more money from the sanctioning body and the tracks through the purse and that is something we need to do.
Click to expand...
“The only way we can do that is to have increases in your media rights, which is what we are doing today,” Phelps said, referring to ongoing rights negotiations.
Click to expand...
 
StandOnIt said:
Your article is over year old and they were talking about the up coming TV deal revenue that now has already happened and will go in effect in 25. They have suspended talks for now so it doesn't appear that the teams are in dire straights. Keselowski said he isn't worried, they will get it figured out.
Click to expand...
The article is from late November, just a few months ago, shortly before they announced the new TV deal. Increased revenue is one element, but part of the hold up in charter talks is that while the teams will end up getting more money, NASCAR wants them to show restraint in how they go and spend it. It’ll all be sorted out eventually, but both sides are going to end up compromising on some things - which will probably mean it’s a good deal.
 
Greg said:
The cost caps remind me of the corporate JIT (just in time) days or meetings were everbody preached limited inventories.

I think a lot of them had their brick JIT houses to hide some extra comfort inventory that wasn't ever meant to be mentioned during an audit.

I admit that I cant prove that and it weakens my argument. I just dont see the racing crowd or culture being the type of conformist that would ever truly follow such a system.
Click to expand...
A large part of the article were teams complaining that the car wasn't as cheap as it was supposed to be. It always costs more to start up from scratch. Now teams have more parts on hand, tasks to build the car are faster, fixtures have been built etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom