23XI statement on not signing Charter agreement

StandOnIt said:
The win and you are in, points champion, the whole ball of wax applies. But they aren't going to get charter money unless they can get an injunction.
Click to expand...

Imagine if they win a race and get in then fail to qualify for a playoff race.
 
StandOnIt said:
Charter trading should be managed from within. That when a Charter is given up. It should go back to NASCAR, and NASCAR or an independent group manage the sale and transfer of each Charter.
Click to expand...
Okay, why that way instead of teams having direct ownership and control of sales / transfer?

Thanks.
 
rd45usa said:
Filed response to preliminary injunction motion.
Click to expand...
Quoting from NASCAR's response to 23FR's injunction request:
Second, Plaintiffs’ demand for a 2025 Charter contradicts their Complaint, which calls the Charter anticompetitive. This defies Fourth Circuit precedent, which firmly establishes that claiming a contract “violates the Sherman Act cannot, as a matter of law, support an injunction requiring [the defendant] to remain involuntarily in a contractual business relationship with [the plaintiff].”
Click to expand...
Interesting.
 
hmmm298 said:
Imagine if they win a race and get in then fail to qualify for a playoff race.
Click to expand...
That would seem to be statistically unlikely. Only eight races in the 2022-24 seasons have had full 40-car fields. (Six of those eight races were at Daytona or Talladega.) Only the three D500s had more than 40 entries; two cars went home in each of those. Indeed, in '22 and '23, the D500s were the only races with 40 cars. While there were six full-field races this year so far, that's skewed slightly by the entry of part-timer SVG in selected races.

Loading…

www.racing-reference.info
 
Team Penske said:
I think some people are going to be sorry for their actions or lack thereof.
Click to expand...
1729864959386.png
 
I wonder if Denny will give his ride up to the 23X1 driver who gets lost in the court battles??
 
To me the whole injunction thing is very interesting.

On the team side they want money from the contract that they refused to sign because they said its an unfair deal, while being in a lawsuit to try to get more money out of them.

On Nascar's side they are saying we're are not preventing you from competing (open teams) and in fact you've already publicly stated that you will compete as an open team in 25 if need be. Nascar has even took the stance of if you win this thing then we will settle up afterwards. I can't blame them for that stance. "So I'm going to pay you several million dollars while your in a lawsuit against me, and if I win I get nothing out of this (except what I already had minus the millions I paid you while you sued me)" This doesn't make any business sense.

To me if these two teams feel they have a good case they need to take it on the chin until they win. You can expect the person you're suing to finance your lawsuit while your suing them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pat
StandOnIt said:
Denny was already complaining that he wasn't making enough money being a team owner. I wonder what he looks like when he sees his lawyer's bill.
Click to expand...
I don't think any of this is really any of Dennis's money to begin with.
 
wi_racefan said:
I don't think any of this is really any of Dennis's money to begin with.
Click to expand...
I didn't care to join the earlier conversation when people were saying it wasn't anybodies money. Unless you have a corporation with stockholders it's your money. You can have multiple LLC's but if it is only you, it's your money.
 
StandOnIt said:
I didn't care to join the earlier conversation when people were saying it wasn't anybodies money. Unless you have a corporation with stockholders it's your money. You can have multiple LLC's but if it is only you, it's your money.
Click to expand...
He's come out and said MJ is the money man
 
Hamlin is obviously one of 3 shareholders, 2 of whom are in a minority position to Jordan’s share.

None of this is relevant to the matters at hand.
 
aunty dive said:
Hamlin is obviously one of 3 shareholders, 2 of whom are in a minority position to Jordan’s share.

None of this is relevant to the matters at hand.
Click to expand...
It is important to a point when bills need to be paid, but hearing Hamlin doesn't have any skin in the deal is pure B.S.
 
StandOnIt said:
It is important to a point when bills need to be paid, but hearing Hamlin doesn't have any skin in the deal is pure B.S.
Click to expand...
Denny definitely has money in the team, and will be financially affected by the outcome. MJ may be paying all the legal bills himself. Regardless, funding isn't likely to be an issue.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Denny definitely has money in the team, and will be financially affected by the outcome. MJ may be paying all the legal bills himself. Regardless, funding isn't likely to be an issue.
Click to expand...
It's an issue. When you have the Front Row owner Jenkins saying he might not make it a full season, it's an issue. When you have Hamlin saying he couldn't believe how little he was making from owning a team, it's an issue.
 
StandOnIt said:
It's an issue. When you have the Front Row owner Jenkins saying he might not make it a full season, it's an issue. When you have Hamlin saying he couldn't believe how little he was making from owning a team, it's an issue.
Click to expand...
My apologies for not making myself clear. I meant funding for the lawsuit would not be an issue.
 
Allenbaba said:
I mean, even if I didn't actually know these people, why would anyone assume otherwise? You'd have to be dense just to ignore the sheer logic of it. If your neighbor is willing to spend whatever it takes to fight your county over elevated property taxes and unfair land ownership issues, you can still be "fine" paying the taxes and living on the land you may or may not actually own, but trust me...you won't just be rooting for your neighbor to win, you'd be helping them how you can.
Click to expand...

Ask SOI lol
 
wi_racefan said:
I'm not sure how the other owners feel has any relevance to the lawsuit though.

They already voluntarily entered into contract with nascar. Now it's up to the legal system to determine if nascar is in any way acting outside the law.

IMO they're not and I'll stand by that. It's a private company and no one is forced to compete and they're definitely not forced to compete without compensation. Teams are allowed to leave at any time.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I agree.

But there have been some takes around here that indicate the team's willingness to sign indicates that Denny and Co are being greedy and NASCAR hasn't broken any laws.

I'm just pointing out that specific narrative isn't true
 
aunty dive said:
If any or all of them are called to testify, what they have to say and provide evidence of will be more than relevant.

Discovery is yet to occur. No evidence of any kind has been presented to the court or to the public.

It isn’t possible to conclude their guilt or innocence without it … as you correctly state above “it’s up to the legal system to determine if NASCARi is in any way acting outside the law.”

If you were in the jury pool, you wouldn’t make it past the first examination question. The position you’re standing by is automatically disqualifying.
Click to expand...

Ding ding ding!
 
Allenbaba said:
I mean, even if I didn't actually know these people, why would anyone assume otherwise? You'd have to be dense just to ignore the sheer logic of it. If your neighbor is willing to spend whatever it takes to fight your county over elevated property taxes and unfair land ownership issues, you can still be "fine" paying the taxes and living on the land you may or may not actually own, but trust me...you won't just be rooting for your neighbor to win, you'd be helping them how you can.
Click to expand...
The first problem with that is that the team owners wouldn't be testifying against Uncle Sugar in a court of law, but against a group in which you signed an agreement with for 7 years if you are one of the 13 owners. Those same people can make your life miserable getting thru inspections, car tear downs, fines/penalties, missed business opportunities, stolen sponsorships etc. They made Hendrick racing an example over the hood louvers, don't think they can't do that to anybody else. They can cost a team millions with a swipe of the pen legally.
 
StandOnIt said:
The first problem with that is that the team owners wouldn't be testifying against Uncle Sugar in a court of law, but against a group in which you signed an agreement with for 7 years if you are one of the 13 owners. Those same people can make your life miserable getting thru inspections, car tear downs, fines/penalties, missed business opportunities, stolen sponsorships etc. They made Hendrick racing an example over the hood louvers, don't think they can't do that to anybody else. They can cost a team millions with a swipe of the pen legally.
Click to expand...
Making someone’s life hell because they testify against you seems pretty illegal. Are you saying NASCAR would commit illegal acts?
 
StandOnIt said:
The first problem with that is that the team owners wouldn't be testifying against Uncle Sugar in a court of law, but against a group in which you signed an agreement with for 7 years if you are one of the 13 owners. Those same people can make your life miserable getting thru inspections, car tear downs, fines/penalties, missed business opportunities, stolen sponsorships etc. They made Hendrick racing an example over the hood louvers, don't think they can't do that to anybody else. They can cost a team millions with a swipe of the pen legally.
Click to expand...
Sounds like bullying.

Pretty sure Kessler has used that word a couple of times. 😎
 
StandOnIt said:
Prove it.
Click to expand...
“Michael Jordan and the Michael Jordan of sports antitrust litigation—attorney Jeffrey Kessler—say in a new court filing that NASCAR and its CEO, James France, are acting like a “monopolistic bully” by attacking those daring “to question their authority.”

www.sportico.com

Michael Jordan, NASCAR Escalate Feud With Antitrust Briefs

The antitrust battle between 23XI Racing, which Michael Jordan co-owns, and Front Row Motorsports and NASCAR continues in federal court.
www.sportico.com www.sportico.com

“The France family and NASCAR are monopolistic bullies. And bullies will continue to impose their will to hurt others until their targets stand up and refuse to be victims. That moment has arrived.”

 
aunty dive said:
“Michael Jordan and the Michael Jordan of sports antitrust litigation—attorney Jeffrey Kessler—say in a new court filing that NASCAR and its CEO, James France, are acting like a “monopolistic bully” by attacking those daring “to question their authority.”

www.sportico.com

Michael Jordan, NASCAR Escalate Feud With Antitrust Briefs

The antitrust battle between 23XI Racing, which Michael Jordan co-owns, and Front Row Motorsports and NASCAR continues in federal court.
www.sportico.com www.sportico.com

“The France family and NASCAR are monopolistic bullies. And bullies will continue to impose their will to hurt others until their targets stand up and refuse to be victims. That moment has arrived.”

Click to expand...
Rhetoric, nothing more. What they can or can not prove is another story. BTW they don't award damages for somebody saying they are a bully.
 
Blaze said:
Making someone’s life hell because they testify against you seems pretty illegal. Are you saying NASCAR would commit illegal acts?
Click to expand...
If they would do that (cough,cough), then what else would they do and how far would they go.
 
StandOnIt said:
Rhetoric, nothing more. What they can or can not prove is another story. BTW they don't award damages for somebody saying they are a bully.
Click to expand...
It’s hyperbole.

I understand that and didn’t claim otherwise. Neither did I suggest damages might ensue but thanks for keeping me informed on that aspect of the case. 😇
 
StandOnIt said:
Prove it.
Click to expand...
As you point out, Nascar could make life pretty Hell-ish for any team they choose to target, and that team would find it difficult or impossible to "prove it" to gain legal relief. So let me ask you, Brother SOI... why do you choose to throw your total, all in support in favor of the outfit that can (and has in the past) acted that way In order to impose its will on a Race Team. Why do you choose to support Nascar and heap your disdain on the Racers in this equation? I'm genuinely curious about that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom