23XI statement on not signing Charter agreement

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.
Well, I look at all of the jets, the hundreds of employees, the mansions the drivers live in and the lifestyles that Nascar has provided for the families. Nascar started out on a beach at Daytona, they built most of the fields of dreams that are raced on unlike outside billionaires who soak the taxpayers to build their stick and ball stadiums. I am proud to be a life time fan. Like Larry Mac, I don't appreciate a newcomer coming in and saying what is fair or not. I don't appreciate what it is doing for the sport although publicity of any kind is publicity. I think many of the so called Nascar fans are jealous of the success that Nascar has had. I'm not one of them.

Now it is your turn, just why do you think these two organizations merit more money than their contract provided, and why are they trying to bring that about by going around the issue which is the contract and trying to prove a meritless anti trust suit?
 
Well, I look at all of the jets, the hundreds of employees, the mansions the drivers live in and the lifestyles that Nascar has provided for the families. Nascar started out on a beach at Daytona, they built most of the fields of dreams that are raced on unlike outside billionaires who soak the taxpayers to build their stick and ball stadiums. I am proud to be a life time fan. Like Larry Mac, I don't appreciate a newcomer coming in and saying what is fair or not. I don't appreciate what it is doing for the sport although publicity of any kind is publicity. I think many of the so called Nascar fans are jealous of the success that Nascar has had. I'm not one of them.

Now it is your turn, just why do you think these two organizations merit more money than their contract provided, and why are they trying to bring that about by going around the issue which is the contract and trying to prove a meritless anti trust suit?
The current generation of NASCAR built none of NASCAR. They changed so much that the sport is hardly recognizable, as it were; spec car, goofy stickball playoffs, eliminations...I'm sure this isn't what big Bill imagined. The lawsuit will continue to draw interest as it progresses.
 
Has there ever been a defendant’s official response to any civil lawsuit, antitrust or otherwise, that didn’t include the words meritless or baseless, or both, in its first paragraph?

LOL
 
You were fantasizing several days ago that the other team owners were going to be "star witnesses for NASCAR".
You are confused. This was in answer to team owners getting up on the stand for 23XI and Jenkins.
I personally will be surprised if any owners for any side are needed to testify.
 
I'm sure this isn't what big Bill imagined.

Big Bill had some point systems that makes the playoffs look straight forward. He also presided over an active union busting effort.

He built the weird as **** governing structure where one family has a totalitarian hold on a major sporting body.
 
Big Bill had some point systems that makes the playoffs look straight forward. He also presided over an active union busting effort.

He built the weird as **** governing structure where one family has a totalitarian hold on a major sporting body.
what sporting body, USAC, F-1, Indycar, ARCA, World of Outlaws, High Limit? All of those are totalitarian holds also? I'd call them businesses. High Limit and WoO are the only ones that you can race the same car for both.
 
You are confused. This was in answer to team owners getting up on the stand for 23XI and Jenkins.

I personally will be surprised if any owners for any side are needed to testify.

I agree, as I believe it is unlikely that the case proceeds to trial rather than reaching a settlement. However, this is not what you stated when you were positing that other teams could be star witnesses for the defendants to discredit the plaintiff's claims, which was absurd:

We'll see about that if other team owners are star witnesses for Nascar and they are able to help prove that their relation with Nascar is contractual.

It should go without saying that what follows is my opinion. IMO, you have badly misjudged the nature and scope of the dispute here. You have continued to operate under the misconception that two greedy malcontent teams have gone rogue against the wishes of the other team owners. That isn't what is happening at all. The sooner you recalibrate to understand that this is about team owners vs. the France family, not Hamlin and Jordan vs. the entirety of NASCAR, the better.

I fear instead that as this becomes clearer than day, those with their heels dug in to defend the France family's honor and authority will instead pivot to smearing all of the team owners across the board.
 
I agree, as I believe it is unlikely that the case proceeds to trial rather than reaching a settlement. However, this is not what you stated when you were positing that other teams could be star witnesses for the defendants to discredit the plaintiff's claims, which was absurd:



It should go without saying that what follows is my opinion. IMO, you have badly misjudged the nature and scope of the dispute here. You have continued to operate under the misconception that two greedy malcontent teams have gone rogue against the wishes of the other team owners. That isn't what is happening at all. The sooner you recalibrate to understand that this is about team owners vs. the France family, not Hamlin and Jordan vs. the entirety of NASCAR, the better.

I fear instead that as this becomes clearer than day, those with their heels dug in to defend the France family's honor and authority will instead pivot to smearing all of the team owners across the board.
If you had any proof of that you may be on to something. But as it stands there are just the two teams requesting an injunction trying to get their charter rights restored on the 4th.
 
I thought Nascar would give them their charters back while they sorted everything out but that isn't the case. They say if they lose, they will have to re adjust everything then. They are playing hardball. I think that gets decided by a judge on the 4th.
Hell, I could be mistaken and they call witnesses, but I don't think they will for an injunction about the contract.
 
Like Larry Mac, I don't appreciate a newcomer coming in and saying what is fair or not. I don't appreciate what it is doing for the sport although publicity of any kind is publicity.
Respectfully, this sounds like shooting the messenger, or like those politicians who criticize whistleblowers in lieu of addressing their complains.
 
Quoting from NASCAR's response to 23FR's injunction request:

Interesting.
Here are the pertinent sections from NASCAR’s response to the injunction request:

NASCAR’s rebuttal to the injunction filing from 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports stands on four key pillars: there are no extraordinary circumstances, demanding a 2025 charter contradicts their complaint, the damage is far from irreparable, but rather self-inflicted, and that antitrust complaints are unlikely to succeed on merit.

In this filing, NASCAR says the motion is “a masterclass in contradiction” in the way that both teams denounced the 2025 Charter Agreement and referred to it as anti-competitive but are now asking the courts to intervene so that NASCAR is forced to provide them with a Charter (and all its benefits).

NASCAR says the Plaintiffs are asking the court to excise Section 10.3, which provides NASCAR with a release from Charter teams, but ignore Section 10.4, where NASCAR reciprocally releases claims. According to NASCAR, the teams agreed to that same release when acquiring charter and never objected during the ongoing negotiations.

“These contradictions expose Plaintiffs’ motive: to use this Court to extract more money and better contractual terms from NASCAR,” the sanctioning body added in a filing.
 
Tell ya what sparky, you can go on down the road with that and see how far it gets ya. You seem to hear what you want to hear. Myself, I see all of the teams have signed on the dotted line except 2. Nobody held a gun to their head. Those that signed have seven years to find another path for their lives if they don't like it.
The likelihood of "donations" for the lawsuit is very real there bud.
 
How do you separate the France family from NASCAR?

Pick any multi-billion dollar privately owned business - racing, sports, or otherwise. Ask yourself if the company is more than the individual owners.

The reason I make the point is because it's shorthand to say 23XI and FRM vs. NASCAR, but this creates the perception that an entire industry is being sued by two teams. That's not what is happening. If the plaintiffs succeed, only NASCAR's owners would potentially part with portions of revenue or control over the sport. The rest of the teams would benefit, it could be argued that their employees and drivers would as well, and so on.

It was credibly reported that the Frances were exploring a sale several years ago. They ultimately decided against it. If NASCAR were sold, it would go on in much the same form. I don't state that to deem them irrelevant, but to draw a distinction between them and "NASCAR" writ large.
 
Maybe I'm not seeing your point because I don't have that perception.

The way I see it is 2 teams that participate in NASCAR Cup are involved in legal action against NASCAR. I realize Jim France is also a defendant but it still doesn’t change my perception. Of course my perception could be dead wrong.

The hyperbole of the legal documents are amusing and I look forward to reading more!
 
Maybe I'm not seeing your point because I don't have that perception.
It's an alternative universe. Two teams are suing Nascar, nobody else is listed in the court documents. Another big hill to climb would be if the judge awards the two teams a favorable judgement because it would affect all of the other teams that didn't participate in the contract dispute. A judge has to consider the far reaching affect of their ruling on the whole organization that could benefit or not depending on the ruling.
 
Both. Jim France is a defendant.

I'll try it this way: if 23XI and FRM win, which parties within NASCAR lose?
If 23FR win, who has to change behaviors, NASCAR or the Frances? Whose contracts with the other teams may be invalidated? Who may lose control of the charters? Who may have to give up a slice of TV money?

Not the Frances.
 
If 23FR win, who has to change behaviors, NASCAR or the Frances? Whose contracts with the other teams may be invalidated? Who may lose control of the charters? Who may have to give up a slice of TV money?

Not the Frances.

There is substantial reason Jim France is a named co-defendant. Yes, his behaviors will definitely be changed if the plaintiffs prevail.

The distinction I'm making is thus. If 23XI and FRM win, Rick Hendrick and Richard Childress don't lose. In fact they win too, as @Allenbaba has confirmed. The drivers don't lose. Steve Phelps doesn't lose as a salaried executive. NBC and Fox don't lose. It really is only the ownership structure of NASCAR itself that is under threat of potentially losing an additional share of revenue and control. That ownership group in this case is quite small.
 
There is substantial reason Jim France is a named co-defendant. Yes, his behaviors will definitely be changed if the plaintiffs prevail.

The distinction I'm making is thus. If 23XI and FRM win, Rick Hendrick and Richard Childress don't lose. In fact they win too, as @Allenbaba has confirmed. The drivers don't lose. Steve Phelps doesn't lose as a salaried executive. NBC and Fox don't lose. It really is only the ownership structure of NASCAR itself that is under threat of potentially losing an additional share of revenue and control. That ownership group in this case is quite small.
Pretty sure the people listed on the lawsuit who are considered independent contractors are the only parties involved and any damages would be applied to them. This isn't like a stick and ball league. This is on the contract dispute part. The Anti trust if it ever comes to trial could be different.
 
It really is only the ownership structure of NASCAR itself that is under threat of potentially losing an additional share of revenue and control.
Ownership? What leads you to think ownership of NASCAR could change hands as a result of this suit? If that's been your point, I don't see how you reached that conclusion.
 
Ownership? What leads you to think ownership of NASCAR could change hands as a result of this suit? If that's been your point, I don't see how you reached that conclusion.

That has not been my point. I said that NASCAR's ownership group, which is the France family, is the only entity that stands to lose in any significant fashion if 23XI and FRM prevail.
 
Pretty sure the people listed on the lawsuit who are considered independent contractors are the only parties involved and any damages would be applied to them. This isn't like a stick and ball league. This is on the contract dispute part. The Anti trust if it ever comes to trial could be different.

We will wait and see, obviously. Damages would be years away. A pre-trial settlement is much more likely, and such a settlement would likely take the form of modified charter agreements across the board.

I believe the injunction is likely to be granted. The court will view it as means to maintain the status quo while the case slowly moves forward. That would be typical.
 
I guess a good hypothetical is what happens is FRM and 23XI don't prevail? Do they just go away? Would they have to buy new charters again?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
Well, I look at all of the jets, the hundreds of employees, the mansions the drivers live in and the lifestyles that Nascar has provided for the families. Nascar started out on a beach at Daytona, they built most of the fields of dreams that are raced on unlike outside billionaires who soak the taxpayers to build their stick and ball stadiums. I am proud to be a life time fan. Like Larry Mac, I don't appreciate a newcomer coming in and saying what is fair or not. I don't appreciate what it is doing for the sport although publicity of any kind is publicity. I think many of the so called Nascar fans are jealous of the success that Nascar has had. I'm not one of them.

Now it is your turn, just why do you think these two organizations merit more money than their contract provided, and why are they trying to bring that about by going around the issue which is the contract and trying to prove a meritless anti trust suit?
@SOI, thank you for that thoughtful reply. I don't agree with all of it, but I now have a better idea where you're coming from. It's certainly true that Big Bill France recognized a market opportunity and organized and nurtured an industry that has provided good income and wealth generation for thousands of stakeholders over the decades. France made a sizable fortune. Car owners and drivers did too, at least the best of them did. The Nascar industry was a good ol' American success story, a meritocracy based on talent and work ethic and a consistent guiding vision of what this stock car racing thing could become.

In the 1990's, Nascar suddenly and rather inexplicably became a white hot cultural fad. Millions of new fans had an insatiable thirst for everything Nascar. It was fueled primarily by a lifestyle fantasy. No one knew it at the time, but it couldn't possibly last.

And it didn't last. Nascar's fan base peaked circa 2005-07, and then quite suddenly the fad fans moved on to graze in a new pasture, leaving the grandstands and TV audience populated by the genuine niche racing fans who had been there all along. Many nostalgia buffs like to attribute the departure of the fad fans to various examples of Nascar mismanagement (primarily led by Brian France), but I believe the dominant reason is just that fads come and fads go... and this one went.

At least there was a hefty pile of TV money to soften the blow. Nascar the sanctioning body skimmed 10%, which is over $100 million per year... not too shabby. The race teams got 25% via race purses, and after the 2015 charter agreement this money was paid primarily to the charters plus a few nickels and dimes for open cars. It wasn't enough for the teams to operate... they continued to depend on increasingly difficult-to-obtain sponsorships. And the tracks were awarded 65%, which overcame the decline in ticket sales. As I wrote earlier in this thread, this was a gold mine for the tracks.

In this new economic environment that has existed for the last ~15 years, the sanctioning body remains fat and happy. The track owners remain fat and happy. But the race teams, the true racers that put on the weekly show, are facing a borderline non-viable business model. About half of the original 36 charter holders have gone bust. The best teams have become highly sophisticated and thoroughly modern - comparable to F1 teams in their professionalism and sophisticated race preparation and execution (not in engineering design and fabrication, however). And their sources of sponsorship revenue have dwindled. It is a double whammy cost and revenue squeeze.

Nascar team ownership is not an attractive investment opportunity. We currently have some great, great owners, primarily fueled by passion more than economic sense - gotta love 'em for that - but most of them are well past retirement age. A few new owners have invested, such as 23XI, Trackhouse, and Kaulig. I think that is terrific, but we need more. I support the efforts of 23XI and Front Row to improve the economic viability of team ownership because I believe the legitimacy of stock car racing as a sport depends upon it. The France and Smith families are too greedy and need to be taken down a notch. That's my dos centavos, and sorry to run on longer than the World 600..:dual9mm:
 
We will wait and see, obviously. Damages would be years away. A pre-trial settlement is much more likely, and such a settlement would likely take the form of modified charter agreements across the board.

I believe the injunction is likely to be granted. The court will view it as means to maintain the status quo while the case slowly moves forward. That would be typical.
I thought at first they would win the injunction. After reading Nascar's attorney's answer I am not so sure they will grant it.
 
I guess a good hypothetical is what happens is FRM and 23XI don't prevail? Do they just go away? Would they have to buy new charters again?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
NASCAR wins, they aren’t returning the charters to those teams next year, as the plan is set for 32 chartered teams. Could they allow those teams charters in the future after settlement (or if they win)? They might. Or they might entertain a couple of new teams willing to field a NEW MANUFACTURER into the series. My guess is a settlement ultimately is reached that gets those back into these teams hands, with some caveats, and knowledge that they are not owned by the teams.
 
Back
Top Bottom