23XI statement on not signing Charter agreement

StandOnIt said:
Nascar has said they are perfectly fine to race 36 without those charters. Remember, all sales must be approved by Nascar. Awkward, but it is what it is. They didn't start this.
Click to expand...
That plan would be 32 chartered teams and 4 open. Really right now they only have 30 chartered teams committed to running next season.

If this is what is really going on it will really devalue the charts quickly. Unless this gets settled quickly there's 2 charters looking for a home. More supply than demand so to say.
 
wi_racefan said:
That plan would be 32 chartered teams and 4 open. Really right now they only have 30 chartered teams committed to running next season.

If this is what is really going on it will really devalue the charts quickly. Unless this gets settled quickly there's 2 charters looking for a home. More supply than demand so to say.
Click to expand...
No proof of that being true. They aren't for sale...sale pending. It could fall thru or not.
 
gnomesayin said:
Do you recall Jordan's attempt at professional baseball? I think his performance there would actually bolster their argument, silly as making that the focus is.
Click to expand...
It's far from silly, IMO. It goes to the very heart of the case... are we pondering whether Nascar maintains a monopoly in professional stock car racing, or is the question whether Nascar has a monopoly in the broader industry of sports and entertainment, including motor racing, NBA teams, etc. etc.? I believe how the court rules on defining the relevant market will determine the outcome of the case, or at least have a major impact. If Nascar's definition prevails (all professional sports and entertainment), the lawsuit is severely crippled, I believe. If 23XI and FRM prevail in how the relevant market is defined, the monopoly is much, much easier to prove to the jury.

I think the judge deferred the injunction to place more pressure on the plaintiffs to settle before a trial... just a guess.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
23FRM have more to lose by delaying than NASCAR does.
Click to expand...

Definitely true, but having this hang over the launch of a new season is not helpful for NASCAR either. They can pretend that the playoffs and championship weekend are the culmination of the season all they want, but the real pinnacle of every season takes place in February and the weeks that follow it. Headlines and media coverage about the lawsuit and a major team hanging by a thread are not helpful. While some seem to relish the idea of NASCAR crushing a couple teams who stepped out of line, it's not good PR.
 
LewTheShoe said:
It's far from silly, IMO. It goes to the very heart of the case... are we pondering whether Nascar maintains a monopoly in professional stock car racing, or is the question whether Nascar has a monopoly in the broader industry of sports and entertainment, including motor racing, NBA teams, etc. etc.? I believe how the court rules on defining the relevant market will determine the outcome of the case, or at least have a major impact. If Nascar's definition prevails (all professional sports and entertainment), the lawsuit is severely crippled, I believe. If 23XI and FRM prevail in how the relevant market is defined, the monopoly is much, much easier to prove to the jury.

I think the judge deferred the injunction to place more pressure on the plaintiffs to settle before a trial... just a guess.
Click to expand...

I think you're correct and that will be a crucial question if the case moves forward. The part I was calling silly was discussing Jordan as a multi-sport athlete.
 
LewTheShoe said:
It's far from silly, IMO. It goes to the very heart of the case... are we pondering whether Nascar maintains a monopoly in professional stock car racing, or is the question whether Nascar has a monopoly in the broader industry of sports and entertainment, including motor racing, NBA teams, etc. etc.? I believe how the court rules on defining the relevant market will determine the outcome of the case, or at least have a major impact. If Nascar's definition prevails (all professional sports and entertainment), the lawsuit is severely crippled, I believe. If 23XI and FRM prevail in how the relevant market is defined, the monopoly is much, much easier to prove to the jury.

I think the judge deferred the injunction to place more pressure on the plaintiffs to settle before a trial... just a guess.
Click to expand...
The first problem with that is to be able to prove Nascar has a monopoly which hasn't been even close to being proven. Not being able to get into the books, not having their charters could leave them with less drivers as a possibility. Drivers splitting non charter money compared to full charter money split I bet would be substantial. It isn't looking good. I would tuck tail and settle.
 
StandOnIt said:
The first problem with that is to be able to prove Nascar has a monopoly which hasn't been even close to being proven. Not being able to get into the books, not having their charters could leave them with less drivers as a possibility. Drivers splitting non charter money compared to full charter money split I bet would be substantial. It isn't looking good. I would tuck tail and settle.
Click to expand...
The proceedings have yet to begin. Nothing has been proven. The discovery process will unfold.

We don’t know what financial arrangements the owners have made with their drivers. Think of everything that’s happened so far as foreplay. 😎
 
aunty dive said:
The proceedings have yet to begin. Nothing has been proven. The discovery process will unfold.

We don’t know what financial arrangements the owners have made with their drivers. Think of everything that’s happened so far as foreplay. 😎
Click to expand...
Keep telling yourself that. Read the latest decision. Part of the hardship from 23XI is possibly losing their drivers without charters...which they don't have.
 
StandOnIt said:
Keep telling yourself that. Read the latest decision. Part of the hardship from 23XI is possibly losing their drivers without charters...which they don't have.
Click to expand...
I described it earlier as a specious argument. Lawyer’s version of hyperbole.

adjective
  1. superficially plausible, but actually wrong.
    "a specious argument"
    • misleading in appearance, especially misleadingly attractive.

 
The fact that HMS and JGR say nothing seems to imply that they have a different contract. 🤔
 
Clutch said:
The fact that HMS and JGR say nothing seems to imply that they have a different contract.
Click to expand...
Neither of them have had to try to recover the money they spent on overpaying for charters.

We'll see how it shakes out but the hardship argument is very tough for me.

-teams were given charters for free by nascar. Teams determined the price of them, not naacar.
- nascar presented the teams with a car to cut costs as they now longer would need fabricators and manufacturing. If anything teams still spent more money.
- I guess the point I'm making is yeah the teams are spending a lot of money, but that voluntarily. Nascar isn't saying you need simulators, an army of engineers, luxurious shops......

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
aunty dive said:
The original holders bore no cost.

A lot of water had flowed under the bridge since then.
Click to expand...
The point I was making is the teams are dictating the price of these things and then complaining they make no money

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Looks more like they were loaned the charters, since NASCAR is taking them away.
Click to expand...
The charters were never considered by NASCAR to be tangible owned property, like a deed. Nor were they considered a franchise, which is essentially what Jordan and company want. It is more like an exclusive rent agreement into a very exclusive apartment complex. In this case NASCAR awarded rental deeds to the initial teams that, in turn, committed to provide the level of support necessary to field a race car and team at NASCAR standards. The teams could either continue to provide that support and race competitively to NASCAR standards, or could sell their place in the exclusive club to a different owner, as long as NASCAR approved of that new owner/team. The “rights” to using the charter is all any of these investors ever purchased. It was never guaranteed, never intended to become property. Jordan, Hambone, Jenkins, and others who bought their way into the exclusive apartment building should have calculated the ROI on the cost of charter swap within the total racing operational costs prior to agreeing on a price to aquire the rental. Now they want it awarded to them after the fact.
 
wi_racefan said:
The point I was making is the teams are dictating the price of these things and then complaining they make no money

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Racing without one earns a team 65% less revenue. The argument is in part about permanently escaping that reality.
 
Conover said:
The charters were never considered by NASCAR to be tangible owned property, like a deed. Nor were they considered a franchise, which is essentially what Jordan and company want. It is more like an exclusive rent agreement into a very exclusive apartment complex. In this case NASCAR awarded rental deeds to the initial teams that, in turn, committed to provide the level of support necessary to field a race car and team at NASCAR standards. The teams could either continue to provide that support and race competitively to NASCAR standards, or could sell their place in the exclusive club to a different owner, as long as NASCAR approved of that new owner/team. The “rights” to using the charter is all any of these investors ever purchased. It was never guaranteed, never intended to become property. Jordan, Hambone, Jenkins, and others who bought their way into the exclusive apartment building should have calculated the ROI on the cost of charter swap within the total racing operational costs prior to agreeing on a price to aquire the rental. Now they want it awarded to them after the fact.
Click to expand...
I think you pretty much nailed it

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
wi_racefan said:
- I guess the point I'm making is yeah the teams are spending a lot of money, but that voluntarily. Nascar isn't saying you need simulators, an army of engineers, luxurious shops......
Click to expand...
I guess your stock car racing ideal world is one where *all* the car owners operate like Rick Ware Racing... and Jim France and Lesa Kennedy France (plus the Bruton Smith family) keep *all* the money for themselves.

That is *not* my ideal world. I know that, once a Real Racer learns how to make speed, it is a lesson that can never be un-learned. I respect and admire the competitive drive of Rick Hendrick and Roger Penske and Joe Gibbs and the others. The unending search for excellence. The passion to win. The drive to find a way.... These are the attributes that make it a sport, that differentiate Nascar from a mere travelling show such as Disney On Ice or the Barnum & Bailey Circus. So be careful what you wish for when it comes to the balance of power between the France family and the other stakeholders in big time stock car racing.
 
LewTheShoe said:
I guess your stock car racing ideal world is one where *all* the car owners operate like Rick Ware Racing... and Jim France and Lesa Kennedy France (plus the Bruton Smith family) keep *all* the money for themselves.

That is *not* my ideal world. I know that, once a Real Racer learns how to make speed, it is a lesson that can never be un-learned. I respect and admire the competitive drive of Rick Hendrick and Roger Penske and Joe Gibbs and the others. The unending search for excellence. The passion to win. The drive to find a way.... These are the attributes that make it a sport, that differentiate Nascar from a mere travelling show such as Disney On Ice or the Barnum & Bailey Circus. So be careful what you wish for when it comes to the balance of power between the France family and the other stakeholders in big time stock car racing.
Click to expand...
Seems to have worked pretty good for the last 75 years or so.
 
LewTheShoe said:
I guess your stock car racing ideal world is one where *all* the car owners operate like Rick Ware Racing... and Jim France and Lesa Kennedy France (plus the Bruton Smith family) keep *all* the money for themselves.

That is *not* my ideal world. I know that, once a Real Racer learns how to make speed, it is a lesson that can never be un-learned. I respect and admire the competitive drive of Rick Hendrick and Roger Penske and Joe Gibbs and the others. The unending search for excellence. The passion to win. The drive to find a way.... These are the attributes that make it a sport, that differentiate Nascar from a mere travelling show such as Disney On Ice or the Barnum & Bailey Circus. So be careful what you wish for when it comes to the balance of power between the France family and the other stakeholders in big time stock car racing.
Click to expand...
At the end of the day it doesn't matter who makes how much, that's just a poor argument.

If you're broke the first thing you need to do is look at your spending. And despite naacar trying to save them money they continue to find new ways to spend it.

Case in point. A coworker and myself make roughly the same income. I drive chevys, have about a 300k house and zero debt. He drives range rovers, lives in an 800k condo and complains he's broke and takes every bit of OT he can get. So in this case is the reason he's broke because the company owners make too much money off us?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
wi_racefan said:
At the end of the day it doesn't matter who makes how much, that's just a poor argument.

If you're broke the first thing you need to do is look at your spending. And despite naacar trying to save them money they continue to find new ways to spend it.

Case in point. A coworker and myself make roughly the same income. I drive chevys, have about a 300k house and zero debt. He drives range rovers, lives in an 800k condo and complains he's broke and takes every bit of OT he can get. So in this case is the reason he's broke because the company owners make too much money off us?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
So should pay or compensation be awarded on genuine need or the value they provide?
 
Charlie Spencer said:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." ;)
Click to expand...
We could just put a 200k cap on everyone's pay then, that way everyone probably would get at least 50k a year.

How dare the RTA owners wanting extra money while the France's have lived the benevolent life.
.
#StopAllThemGreedyEff'er's
 
gnomesayin said:
The teams should learn to do with less so that the France family can keep more, got it.
Click to expand...
Nothing illegal about making money. Teams could do it too if they didn't create new ways to spend it.

No one is forcing them to compete in the series and no one is telling then what they need to spend.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
aunty dive said:
Does this mean you’re no longer advocating for a cost cap?
Click to expand...
I definitely would be in favor of it. Right now they keep spending am much as they can and complaining they're not getting enough from Nascar.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
wi_racefan said:
Nothing illegal about making money. Teams could do it too if they didn't create new ways to spend it.

No one is forcing them to compete in the series and no one is telling then what they need to spend.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I was under the impression NASCAR required teams to improve each year or face losing or non-renewal of their charter. If that's the case then NASCAR is in fact telling teams they need to step it up to compete and stepping it up to compete means spending more money which means NASCAR is telling teams they need to spend more money.
 
Whizzer said:
I was under the impression NASCAR required teams to improve each year or face losing or non-renewal of their charter. If that's the case then NASCAR is in fact telling teams they need to step it up to compete and stepping it up to compete means spending more money which means NASCAR is telling teams they need to spend more money.
Click to expand...
They expect them to maintain a competitive level. Different than telling them they need to spend more money. RWR hasn't been threatened to have charters taken away

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
wi_racefan said:
They expect them to maintain a competitive level. Different than telling them they need to spend more money. RWR hasn't been threatened to have charters taken away

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
And in order to maintain a competitive level, they must spend more money. Got it?
 
aunty dive said:
^^ So… you’re taking both positions?
Click to expand...
No all I'm say is nascar isn't telling them they need to have an army of engineers, run sim, build giant shops, buy a hawk eye system......

That's a completely different discussion from a cost cap, which IMO would be great. That's we don't care what you spend your money on, you just can't spend more than "x".

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom