23XI statement on not signing Charter agreement

Speedbowl14 said:
Something I thought of this morning.... with few exceptions, the world of oval racing has contracted the past 15 years. At every level, drivers and teams have been asked to do more with less year after year. Hamlin is one of the last drivers that was here for the peak of NASCAR. Seems like he wants to hang onto the private jets, the $10 million mansion, and get the big investors, brands, and sponsors for his team. The ROI is not there because 23XI spends money like crazy then run like dog**** most weeks. The longer this trial goes on and the more that comes out it seems like Hamlin and 23XI are on their own island actively battling NASCAR but aloof from the other teams as well. 23XI could win this trial and get everything they want and more and there's still not enough $$$ in the sport to run the business like its 2006.
Click to expand...
They’ll probably need to implement some kind of cap on what the teams can spend to save them from themselves. 20 years ago Nascar averaged 8.5 million viewers per race and I’m not sure it was even 2.5 this year. Apparently Denny didn’t get the memo.
 
wi_racefan said:
WOW! I would ask for a mistrial right there! You can say what you want about profits, but they've shown losses in areas that are attempts to grow the sport. (Chicago, Mexico, LA...)
Click to expand...
LMAO, the point of all of the loss leaders you just named is literally that. To be a loss leader; to generate more money on the back end because you did it. NASCAR claims they wouldn't have the Amazon deal without having done the Chicago Street Race. Who gets the bulk of the media rights again? That's right.
 
I’m enjoying this trial & this thread so much I cancelled my brain surgery! Well not exactly as I need more MRI’s & more trips to the neurologist. Everyone needs to get paid you know. At least I’ll get to see the trial & won’t have to shave my head yet!
 
AlTerego said:
They’ll probably need to implement some kind of cap on what the teams can spend to save them from themselves
Click to expand...
That was brought up as being discussed and JGR, Hendrick, and Penske didn't want caps while the small teams including FRM clearly did.
 
virtualbalboa said:
That was brought up as being discussed and JGR, Hendrick, and Penske didn't want caps while the small teams including FRM clearly did.
Click to expand...
I’m not surprised as the teams competing to win championships need an open checkbook. The lesser funded teams need to keep as tight a lid as possible on expenses.
 
virtualbalboa said:
LMAO, the point of all of the loss leaders you just named is literally that. To be a loss leader; to generate more money on the back end because you did it. NASCAR claims they wouldn't have the Amazon deal without having done the Chicago Street Race. Who gets the bulk of the media rights again? That's right.
Click to expand...
So the teams didn't get any of that additional money?
 
wi_racefan said:
WOW! I would ask for a mistrial right there! You can say what you want about profits, but they've shown losses in areas that are attempts to grow the sport. (Chicago, Mexico, LA...)
Click to expand...
Notice Bell said that while the jury was out but the whole press core was sitting there. It already is all over the internet. Instead of calling council to the bench and whispering to them the problems he has, Bell seems perfectly fine admonishing the lawyers with the press in the room and they go out and blast it on the internet.
 
What Heather said about what Joe Gibbs said is hearsay. Where is he BTW if he said that?
1764957803460.png
 
wi_racefan said:
So the teams didn't get any of that additional money?
Click to expand...
Apparently not enough of a share to make any of them particularly happy with their share and not enough to prevent two of them from suing NASCAR. I mean, O'Donnell himself is bringing up that the teams only requested 25% of the media rights originally as a defense for why NASCAR should get 75% in this very trial.
 
StandOnIt said:
Notice Bell said that while the jury was out but the whole press core was sitting there. It already is all over the internet. Instead of calling council to the bench and whispering to them the problems he has, Bell seems perfectly fine admonishing the lawyers with the press in the room and they go out and blast it on the internet.
Click to expand...
1) It being "blasted on the internet" isn't relevant
2) The fact is that growing the sport inherently means increasing NASCAR's bottom line. There's nothing biased about saying the obvious truth.
 
virtualbalboa said:
1) It being "blasted on the internet" isn't relevant
2) The fact is that growing the sport inherently means increasing NASCAR's bottom line. There's nothing biased about saying the obvious truth.
Click to expand...
Growing the sport can mean many things for many people. More teams, more manufacturers, more sponsors etc.
 
wi_racefan said:
WOW! I would ask for a mistrial right there! You can say what you want about profits, but they've shown losses in areas that are attempts to grow the sport. (Chicago, Mexico, LA...)
Click to expand...
How would that excuse operating as a monopoly? Aren't illegal actions still illegal regardless of profit or loss?
StandOnIt said:
Growing the sport can mean many things for many people. More teams, more manufacturers, more sponsors etc.
Click to expand...
Does the phrase have a legal definition? Maybe it's inadmissible because it's vague?
 
Blaze said:
A bias judge would've let people who don't like NASCAR be on the jury lmao.
Click to expand...
That's what I am looking forward to, the make-up of this jury. Theres a good chance
none of them are race fans and only one or two have ever been to a race. We will see
at the end of the trial, possibly. You know their eyeballs are just glassed over with
confusion shrouded with boredom of not understanding how all these different
business models are supposed to intertwine and keep everyone happy with out
breaking any business laws.

Maybe we just need a reset and have a season where you run what you brung,
pay an entry fee, top 40 qualify, and the field splits the gate according to finishing place.
Of course, that's just wishful thinking.
 
Hotrod said:
That's what I am looking forward to, the make-up of this jury. Theres a good chance
none of them are race fans and only one or two have ever been to a race. We will see
at the end of the trial, possibly. You know their eyeballs are just glassed over with
confusion shrouded with boredom of not understanding how all these different
business models are supposed to intertwine and keep everyone happy with out
breaking any business laws.

Maybe we just need a reset and have a season where you run what you brung,
pay an entry fee, top 40 qualify, and the field splits the gate according to finishing place.
Of course, that's just wishful thinking.
Click to expand...
I'm not buying that they found people in Charlotte that did not know about Nascar.
 
StandOnIt said:
That isn't true.
Click to expand...
NASCAR ostensibly *is* the sport of top tier stock car racing. It's absolutely true. There's no way to grow the sport without it improving NASCAR's bottom line. Everything you just named results in money going to NASCAR in some fashion whether directly in a partnership with an OEM or indirectly when new teams apparently have to pay through the nose for internet access at the track.
 
rd45usa said:
Growing the sport is not a defense.
Click to expand...
I was particularly amused with NASCAR arguing that having a cost cap was also an issue for them because they would have to administrate it and thus it "cost money". The point of NASCAR's basic existence is to administrate the events and series.

By contrast: Imagine if NASCAR instead came out and said they did zero capital expenditure intended to grow the sport.
 
virtualbalboa said:
I was particularly amused with NASCAR arguing that having a cost cap was also an issue for them because they would have to administrate it and thus it "cost money". The point of NASCAR's basic existence is to administrate the events and series.

By contrast: Imagine if NASCAR instead came out and said they did zero capital expenditure intended to grow the sport.
Click to expand...
What world are you living in. You think there is a hawkeye setup scanning the cars for the hell of it. How is Nascar going to tell when teams are spending money when they have to have a multi million scanning system for just the car?
 
StandOnIt said:
What world are you living in.
Click to expand...
This one. The one where I can see all the trial updates on the NASCAR subreddit in the assorted megathreads.

StandOnIt said:
You think there is a hawkeye setup scanning the cars for the hell of it.
Click to expand...
I dunno, I guess you should ask NASCAR. They're the ones doing a solid for the fans by paying to manage their own events, right?

StandOnIt said:
How is Nascar going to tell when teams are spending money when they have to have a multi million scanning system for just the car?
Click to expand...

How lots of people/organizations do: financial reports. It doesn't matter because they don't exist anyhow, though AFAIK NASCAR could certainly institute them at their leisure, right?
 
Chase on the naughty list. 😂
  • O’Donnell says he felt SRX became a competitor when he saw Chase Elliott race the stylized No. 9 in the series.
 
KTMLew01 said:
Define "growing the sport" for us.
Click to expand...
post #4937. It should be self explanatory. Growing the sport for everybody fans included, not just Nascar. A team gets a new primary sponsor, that is growth for them. A new OEM comes on board, that is a lot of opportunities for many people to go racing.
Here is what the judge said to a full courtroom full of reporters and interested people and it is already out on the internet. That is partially true, but biased against Nascar's argument.

NASCAR was told before jury came in that growing the sport is not a defense. Judge: “growing the sport is another way of saying increasing the revenues of NASCAR.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom