23XI statement on not signing Charter agreement

If NASCAR didn't intend for teams to use charters for ROI, why did it include rules for selling them? It could have use language similar to the old transfer of points positions by car number, with no money involved.
 
You have to scroll half way to get to this:
In its Oct. 16 filing, NASCAR sums up the suit by stating: "Plaintiffs have filed a meritless suit against NASCAR alleging baseless antitrust claims in order to obtain commercial agreements they previously rejected, and to attempt to extort more favorable contract terms."

What to know about NASCAR antitrust lawsuit: Injunction motion filed | FOX Sports

Two teams — Michael Jordan's 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports — are suing NASCAR alleging a violation of antitrust laws. Here is the latest news and everything to know about the saga.
www.foxsports.com www.foxsports.com


Claiming extortion o_O
 
Conover said:
Show me where NASCAR stated specifically that charters were designed to provide owners with a tangible asset of value when they were introduced? Haven’t seen it and I doubt you will find it. The intent of charters was to guarantee a team’s participation in every race, with set funding they could count on, AND thereby enable them to guarantee sponsors availability over a guaranteed number of races. Nothing more. As this was a valuable part of participating in the sport, teams wanting to enter sought to aquire the rights from existing teams, leading to a market for those rights. The ownership of the participation slot was always kept by NASCAR. If a new team wanted to “buy” a charter, they were actually paying for a subleasing agreement, not a tangible asset with deed or title. NASCAR was still the arbiter of approval for a transfer of charter rights.

Now a court may rule that this process is somehow wrong, but it is a business practice conducted in other ways beyond a sports league.
Click to expand...
The link to it is earlier in this thread thread. It's on Jayski.
 
Conover said:
Show me where NASCAR stated specifically that charters were designed to provide owners with a tangible asset of value when they were introduced? Haven’t seen it and I doubt you will find it. The intent of charters was to guarantee a team’s participation in every race, with set funding they could count on, AND thereby enable them to guarantee sponsors availability over a guaranteed number of races. Nothing more. As this was a valuable part of participating in the sport, teams wanting to enter sought to aquire the rights from existing teams, leading to a market for those rights. The ownership of the participation slot was always kept by NASCAR. If a new team wanted to “buy” a charter, they were actually paying for a subleasing agreement, not a tangible asset with deed or title. NASCAR was still the arbiter of approval for a transfer of charter rights.

Now a court may rule that this process is somehow wrong, but it is a business practice conducted in other ways beyond a sports league.
Click to expand...
I'll add, Charters were "created" by the RTA, then agreed to by Nascar. Not created by Nascar.
 
Large part of this whole deal is that NASCAR's relationship with the teams is rather hostile. The it's my way or the highway might have worked 60 years ago but maybe not so much today.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
This country needs more songwriters like Mac Davis, Jerry Reed, Jim Stafford, and Ray Stevens. Weird Al can't do it all by himself.
Click to expand...

I love this thread. It has featured discussion about the issue between NASCAR and 2 of its race teams, flatulence, Jim “I don’t like spiders and snakes” Stafford and perhaps even Little Jimmy Dickens! I think we’re back to the issue at hand but I’m not betting on how long😁
 
StandOnIt said:
That's pretty impossible now that Nascar announced that there is only a 32 charter field now. Haas has signed the agreement or they wouldn't have charters also. Nascar has to approve the sale and use of the charters. 23XI and Front Row aren't going to be getting full share prize money unless they can get their charters back.
Click to expand...

I was surprised when I read that 23XI and FRM’s charters will be put back in inventory at season’s end. Like you said this could be the end of FRM & 23XI will be leaving a lot of the purse on the table.

Maybe this is NASCAR dropping the hammer or a negotiation ploy or both.
 
KTMLew01 said:
Large part of this whole deal is that NASCAR's relationship with the teams is rather hostile. The it's my way or the highway might have worked 60 years ago but maybe not so much today.
Click to expand...
If you want to count two years of meetings as my way or the highway I suppose so. Some people who have problems with authority of any kind will take my way or the highway and run with it (see Denny Hamlin). But since the 40's Nascar has been herding cats into a cohesive organized racing series. Are they 100% right every time? heck no, but they have created an industry that has brought success to many.
 
AlTerego said:
I was surprised when I read that 23XI and FRM’s charters will be put back in inventory at season’s end. Like you said this could be the end of FRM & 23XI will be leaving a lot of the purse on the table.

Maybe this is NASCAR dropping the hammer or a negotiation ploy or both.
Click to expand...
Sounds punitive. Maybe not good pre-trial optics…🤔
 
AlTerego said:
I was surprised when I read that 23XI and FRM’s charters will be put back in inventory at season’s end. Like you said this could be the end of FRM & 23XI will be leaving a lot of the purse on the table.

Maybe this is NASCAR dropping the hammer or a negotiation ploy or both.
Click to expand...
I'm not surprised at all. If you go back several pages, I suggested this was likely outcome. Only thing that might save NASCAR from this all going very wrong is allowing the two teams to compete w/o incessant penalties next season. Treat them same as all the rest. No better, no worse.

Unfortunately that hasn't been Nascar's modus operandi. Big stick, no carrot.
 
BobbyFord said:
Sounds punitive. Maybe not good pre-trial optics…🤔
Click to expand...
Amazes me how groups of people can see same thing and yet have entirely different opinions of what everyone saw. I'll not take this where I'm really thinking. I'm on probation here...kinda.

Also amazes me how personal some here seem to take this whole thing. Supposedly, SOI and others are NOT Nascar plants. Sure seem to be affected by this whole thing though. I'm just retired and enjoying some interaction with other racing fans.
 
I’m not sure if it’s been mentioned yet, but Bianchi did say a couple of weeks ago he heard the new split of TV revenue will have teams getting the highest allocation between them, the tracks, and NASCAR for the first time. It was technically 25% directly to the teams previously, but effectively ~ 40% once you included what was fed through the purse money from the tracks.
 
FLRacingFan said:
I’m not sure if it’s been mentioned yet, but Bianchi did say a couple of weeks ago he heard the new split of TV revenue will have teams getting the highest allocation between them, the tracks, and NASCAR for the first time. It was technically 25% directly to the teams previously, but effectively ~ 40% once you included what was fed through the purse money from the tracks.
Click to expand...
I think it was Marks that I heard him say on Harvick's show that they got a raise but he didn't get into the numbers.
 
As we’re all aware, there are currently two critical issues pending before the court.

We can’t possibly know what direction the charter issue is taking until Kessler’s application for an injunction allowing 23X1 and FRM to operate going forward as if their unsigned charters were active is adjudicated.

His petition for expedited discovery might be more significant. If NASCAR has to start turning over requested documents this early, it’s safe to say the plaintiff’s case isn’t “meritless”.
 
At this point I'm hanging back and waiting for the lawyers and courts to do their thing as that will be entertaining enough. However I do have to LOL pretty hard at the notion that horse racing is healthy. Horse racing is a damned disaster being supported by public subsidies related to native gaming. Without gambling it is completely unsustainable in the US.
 
I was thinking about a couple old sayings about NASCAR.

NASCAR is a benevolent dictator. I think the benevolent part might have changed.

To make a small fortune in NASCAR, start with a big fortune. Racing has always required sponsors. It used to be the local gas station or a wealthy benefactor, now it takes multiple sponsors.
 
It wouldn't happen, but what a sight it would be if the field parked on lap 23 as a sign of solidarity. That would freak the France family out good.
 
KTMLew01 said:
Amazes me how groups of people can see same thing and yet have entirely different opinions of what everyone saw. I'll not take this where I'm really thinking. I'm on probation here...kinda.

Also amazes me how personal some here seem to take this whole thing. Supposedly, SOI and others are NOT Nascar plants. Sure seem to be affected by this whole thing though. I'm just retired and enjoying some interaction with other racing fans.
Click to expand...
Hey retired here also. Not taking anything personal. Just a very lifelong dedicated nascar racing fan going back to my first Winston cup races attended as a kid at Hickory Motor Speedway. Seen a lot over those years in this sport. Covered it as a broadcaster for a time long ago. Friends with and grew up with the Jarrett family. Perhaps my take is more NASCAR centered, as they are the organization that built the sport, invested heavily in it, had good times and bad times, still make mistakes, but ultimately provide the basis for these teams to compete, employing thousands of people and make drivers and owners very wealthy.

I also understand business very well, having run an organization that generates annual revenue of $65M. My understanding is that NASCAR negotiated with the teams for 2 years trying to find a common ground acceptable to the France family. All teams ultimately signed the deal except two. “But they had a gun to their head!” folks say.

Nope, and here’s why. Clearly during this year, Jordan, Hamcrap and Jenkins had many opportunities to convince the other owners to JOIN THEM in their preplanned lawsuit. Had even HALF of the teams not signed in order to join the suit, it would have pushed a very unique response, perhaps even a dilemma, relative to next season. But, the teams did NOT choose to join it. No gun to the head.
 
Conover said:
Hey retired here also. Not taking anything personal. Just a very lifelong dedicated nascar racing fan going back to my first Winston cup races attended as a kid at Hickory Motor Speedway. Seen a lot over those years in this sport. Covered it as a broadcaster for a time long ago. Friends with and grew up with the Jarrett family. Perhaps my take is more NASCAR centered, as they are the organization that built the sport, invested heavily in it, had good times and bad times, still make mistakes, but ultimately provide the basis for these teams to compete, employing thousands of people and make drivers and owners very wealthy.

I also understand business very well, having run an organization that generates annual revenue of $65M. My understanding is that NASCAR negotiated with the teams for 2 years trying to find a common ground acceptable to the France family. All teams ultimately signed the deal except two. “But they had a gun to their head!” folks say.

Nope, and here’s why. Clearly during this year, Jordan, Hamcrap and Jenkins had many opportunities to convince the other owners to JOIN THEM in their preplanned lawsuit. Had even HALF of the teams not signed in order to join the suit, it would have pushed a very unique response, perhaps even a dilemma, relative to next season. But, the teams did NOT choose to join it. No gun to the head.
Click to expand...
That is the tell for me also. Guys saying I didn't have the balls or it was forced on me...after two years and numerous meetings? I call B.S.. If they were disgruntled and didn't talk with 23XI and Jenkins, and didn't join in they weren't serious. Of course they signed.
 
aunty dive said:
The case isn’t about any of ^ ^^ that. Nostalgia and sentimentality don’t factor in.

Has antitrust law been violated or has it not?
Click to expand...
That is a matter of opinion. If it is so unfair how come nobody else is involved. Could be even more of a factor if other owners who have signed are called in to testify about certain points.
 
StandOnIt said:
That is a matter of opinion. If it is so unfair how come nobody else is involved. Could be even more of a factor if other owners who have signed are called in to testify about certain points.
Click to expand...
Yeah … they could call Richard Childress in.

His reasoning was solid. 😎
 
StandOnIt said:
Childress still smarting from grandsons playoff less win lol. Yeah he will be a great one.
Click to expand...
StandOnIt said:
It could be a problem if the judge is a skinny 6'4" wearing checkmark shoes. :p
Click to expand...
No reach is a reach too far. Events will unfold in a courtroom, not on an internet fan forum.

Again … either US antitrust laws have been violated or they haven’t.
 
aunty dive said:
Again … either US antitrust laws have been violated or they haven’t.
Click to expand...
Anti trust are what the two outliers are saying. Nascar is saying that isn't antitrust, it is a contract dispute. So not only do they have to try to get their charters back but they have to prove it is an anti trust case. Both are going to take a ruling before they can proceed, one at a time. This is going to take awhile.
 
aunty dive said:
As we’re all aware, there are currently two critical issues pending before the court.

We can’t possibly know what direction the charter issue is taking until Kessler’s application for an injunction allowing 23X1 and FRM to operate going forward as if their unsigned charters were active is adjudicated.

His petition for expedited discovery might be more significant. If NASCAR has to start turning over requested documents this early, it’s safe to say the plaintiff’s case isn’t “meritless”.
Click to expand...

StandOnIt said:
Anti trust are what the two outliers are saying. Nascar is saying that isn't antitrust, it is a contract dispute. So not only do they have to try to get their charters back but they have to prove it is an anti trust case. Both are going to take a ruling before they can proceed, one at a time. This is going to take awhile.
Click to expand...
“The preliminary hearing for the injunction request is slated for Nov. 4. The teams are also seeking expedited discovery to pore through the documents of France, Phelps, NASCAR Executive Vice Chairperson Lesa France Kennedy, COO Steve O’Donnell, Executive Vice President Ben Kennedy and Senior Vice President Scott Prime.”

www.sportsbusinessjournal.com

Antitrust lawyer shares his take on lawsuit as NASCAR gets ready to play defense on charters

The racing industry continues to digest the move by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports to file an antitrust lawsuit against NASCAR, a case that could have a seismic impact if it isn’t quickly dismissed. With the negative publicly brought by the lawsuit, industry stakeholders were split last...
www.sportsbusinessjournal.com www.sportsbusinessjournal.com
 
aunty dive said:
“The preliminary hearing for the injunction request is slated for Nov. 4. The teams are also seeking expedited discovery to pore through the documents of France, Phelps, NASCAR Executive Vice Chairperson Lesa France Kennedy, COO Steve O’Donnell, Executive Vice President Ben Kennedy and Senior Vice President Scott Prime.”

www.sportsbusinessjournal.com

Antitrust lawyer shares his take on lawsuit as NASCAR gets ready to play defense on charters

The racing industry continues to digest the move by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports to file an antitrust lawsuit against NASCAR, a case that could have a seismic impact if it isn’t quickly dismissed. With the negative publicly brought by the lawsuit, industry stakeholders were split last...
www.sportsbusinessjournal.com www.sportsbusinessjournal.com
Click to expand...
Not going to happen I bet. Not needed for a contract dispute.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom