Amazing how you judge this without any testimony or evidence presented by the defendant. If it was that much of a slam dunk the other teams would have been all over joining this litigation. The judge may very well rule that certain provisions of NASCAR policy violate antitrust law. But the close participation of team owners within the structure of the sport (and rule making) could limit injunctions and damages.
IMO, Jordan, Hamcrap and Jenkins are seeking to push NASCAR into a league model similar to stick & ball, where they own their teams as a franchise and direct much more of the revenue $ to themselves verses the league or tracks. It’s always about the money. They want their franchise forever and the right to make many millions back when they sell it. Maybe these teams deserve that. But they never paid NASCAR a dime for the charters, because those were not intended to be an owned asset. This will be part of the evidence and discovery, and it may diminish some claims from the plaintiffs.
Frankly, the complaints from the owners about making no profit fall deaf on my ears. Racers are forever spending every nickel they get to go faster, and rich racers pay themselves before the corporation bottom line is finalized (no corporate taxes to pay when that happens). The top teams build massive racing shops, gleaming headquarters, own jets and helicopters, and write off annually under depreciation for capital expense). The big boys employ hundreds of people and pay their drivers top $. They compete on the track and compete with themselves. The owners also pay themselves very well. So, what is left over? Almost nothing. After the write offs for expenses, I bet some even get tax refunds for their companies. Small teams don’t get prime sponsorship so they field cars on far less, yet spend everything they get.
As to the plaintiff’s claim that these teams cannot race in any other series, or that the car itself is so specialized that it helps constitute their monopoly? The car was developed in conjunction with team feedback and from complaints the owners had about costs, safety, etc. it is a proprietary model that any business would legally claim ownership of, due to intellectual property and development. As for limits on competing in other series? There is precedent for that…can NBA players also play for other pro leagues? No. Sports leagues can dictate participation requirements.
One of their strongest claims IMO relates to how NASCAR purchased a number of the racetracks they compete on. That could be construed as a conflict of interest, although proving how that restricts opportunity to participate in NASCAR events would be difficult. Look at how many non-owned tracks get added into the schedule. NASCAR has also cut races out from tracks they own, which helps their case.
I can’t and obviously don’t know anything about the agreements these folks signed or are part of this. It will be a battle royal.