23XI statement on not signing Charter agreement

KTMLew01 said:
NASCAR flinched?

apnews.com

23XI and Front Front Row can compete in 2025 while suing NASCAR after clause removed from contracts

The two teams suing NASCAR over an antitrust complaint said Saturday they will compete in 2025 as “open teams” after the sanctioning body removed anticompetitive release claims that will allow them to race while the legal process continues. 23XI Racing, the team owned by NBA Hall of Famer Michael Jo
apnews.com apnews.com
Click to expand...
All I got out of that was that nascar changed some wording to allow them to compete as an OPEN team. Which I guess I didn't even know existed because I thought the plan was to compete as an open team next season if this fell through in the first place?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
wi_racefan said:
All I got out of that was that nascar changed some wording to allow them to compete as an OPEN team. Which I guess I didn't even know existed because I thought the plan was to compete as an open team next season if this fell through in the first place?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Open teams have to sign a contract that has the same 'no lawsuits' clause as the charter teams. That's what changed this morning. The contracts 23FR signed are as open teams but without that clause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pat
aunty dive said:
Perhaps the sanctioning body’s newest lawyer suggested that freezing the plaintiffs’ teams out might be seen as an example of NASCAR’s “monopolistic bullying”.

Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Or good faith that Nascar does want the teams in the sport and wants them to continue to compete while the contract dispute is being settled.
 
Whizzer said:
That doesn't read as much like a real concern for what 23XI and RJR are trying to do as it sends the message of hoping they fail so Denny haters can blame and laugh at him.

These are not stupid people who created this litigation. They are not going into this legal action blindly but feel they have a legitimate opportunity to make things better for all teams because how this ends up will directly affect all teams and not just 23XI and RJR. It would seem that is something race fans would support.

In reading the various responses to this thread find so many of those who criticize, or gloat over possible failure of this effort, is done mostly because of the, "hate Denny factor."
Click to expand...
Maybe if I had ever heard of any other team having this issue.. there are only 2 teams who have a problem and I can't help but think this was the intention behind Denny starting a team in the first place.

This reminds me of when I tried to get into a laborers union and was told the only way I could was to have them send me into a company that isnt unionized and working toward unionizing it. You know what happens then? If they fire you or try to not hire you they get sued by the union. Sure unions are great but sneaky underhanded tactics like that are not something I can get behind.

If I'm wrong I'll say it. I don't wish anything bad on them I just don't see the merit in their claims when we have all these other teams who don't have a problem with it. If they started the team with this intention that's no good. They're toying with people's income who aren't millionaires. What happens to the guys at the shop if this team goes under? Because I couldn't care less about how much money goes on the pockets of Michael Jordan and Denny Hamlin make.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Has this been even hinted at outside this discussion? It's common for me to miss stuff, especially on other social media.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. It just seems odd to me that they didn't have this problem when they first came into the sport. They got their charters and ran their seasons. Now when it's time to re-sign all of a sudden they have an issue with the fact they weren't given time to negotiate? What about the last 2-3 years? I'm probably wrong.. but I just have a feeling this was their intention since before deciding to start a team.
 
rd45usa said:
Didn't Nascar just set precedent for the other Open teams by allowing 23XI/FRM to compete without the no suing clause?
Click to expand...
That depends on if they go back to the previous charter when that clause wasn't in the contract which they probably will do because they are suing and still operating under the older contract that doesn't have that clause in there.
No proof, but that no sue new clause is probably in there because of all of the mouthing Hamlin has been doing in the media about every little thing.
 
aunty dive said:
How is NASCAR harmed if they grant permanent status to the 36 charters?
Click to expand...
They would lose control of who races in the series and open the gates on who could possibly buy or control most of the charters over time. That could include networks or certain groups or oligarchs being able to influence how Nascar is going to be run. Nascar is a solely owned family business.
They are not and can not be forced to sell or change because somebody(s) bought out controlling interest in available stocks because there isn't any stock traded on the open market.
By not controlling who owns the charters leaves themselves open to a hostile takeover or at the minimum others having influence about how the business is run. I don't think some here realize that or have chosen to ignore that fact behind the hoopla "they are bullies" or I hate Nascar.
Options are quit watching if you don't like it for fans, (some are here just to complain) and if team owners, see ya later if you don't like the way they do business, you can sell your golden parachute(s) charter to whom we approve of and go race elsewhere.

The two outlier teams don't think so.
 
aunty dive said:
Currently, NASCAR has to approve charter sales/transfers.

If they were made permanent, that wouldn’t have to change.
Click to expand...
That is nonsense. They could sell the charters to the shiek of Arabic, or any Tom Dick or any Harry and Nascar would have no say in who they did business with. I imagine they aren't that happy now, but they either honor the contract, or run neckid, or hit the bricks as it stands. They are independent contractors, not part owners.
aunty dive said:
I have a recurring thought … if 2 charters found their way into the hands of Kelley Earnhardt-Miller and her brother, NASCAR’s objection to permanence would melt away.


JMO, of course.
Click to expand...
If 23XI and Front Row lose, those two are a possibility...if they get a good deal on them. ;)
 
StandOnIt said:
That is nonsense. They could sell the charters to the shiek of Arabic, or any Tom Dick or any Harry and Nascar would have no say in who they did business with. I imagine they aren't that happy now, but they either honor the contract, or run neckid, or hit the bricks as it stands. They are independent contractors, not part owners.
Click to expand...
There is no professional sport that permits the transfer of a franchise without the consent of that sport’s owners.
 
StandOnIt said:
That is nonsense. They could sell the charters to the shiek of Arabic, or any Tom Dick or any Harry and Nascar would have no say in who they did business with. I imagine they aren't that happy now, but they either honor the contract, or run neckid, or hit the bricks as it stands. They are independent contractors, not part owners.

If 23XI and Front Row lose, those two are a possibility...if they get a good deal on them. ;)
Click to expand...
I can see, you aren't a lawyer.
 
aunty dive said:
There is no professional sport that permits the transfer of a franchise without the consent of that sport’s owners.
Click to expand...
Might be so, no proof of that, they have little trouble moving a franchise to another city, getting bonds from tax payers, tax breaks to build stadiums and a plethora of stockholders to satisfy? Another stick and ball comparison owned by many many stockholders compared to a family business.
 
aunty dive said:
Perhaps the sanctioning body’s newest lawyer suggested that freezing the plaintiffs’ teams out might be seen as an example of NASCAR’s “monopolistic bullying”.
Click to expand...
StandOnIt said:
Or good faith that Nascar does want the teams in the sport and wants them to continue to compete while the contract dispute is being settled.
Click to expand...
Given a choice between the two, my cynical outlook has me leaning toward the first one.
 
KTMLew01 said:
Don't believe 23xi signed anything.
Click to expand...
From the linked article,
In a Saturday morning update from the attorney for the two teams, Jeffrey Kessler said NASCAR “has removed the anticompetitive release requirement in its open agreement” to allow 23XI and Front Row to operate as open teams.
Click to expand...
While the overall tone implies they signed, you're correct that the article doesn't explicitly say either team signed.
 
SlicedBread22 said:
I don't think so. It just seems odd to me that they didn't have this problem when they first came into the sport. They got their charters and ran their seasons. Now when it's time to re-sign all of a sudden they have an issue with the fact they weren't given time to negotiate? What about the last 2-3 years? I'm probably wrong.. but I just have a feeling this was their intention since before deciding to start a team.
Click to expand...
Respectfully, I don't see Denny or MJ starting a team just so they can toss money at lawyers to sue NASCAR. Both have better things to do with their resources, and I doubt either is THAT altruistic. That also doesn't account for Front Row being in this too. That team was around long before Denny and MJ's partnership.

If you want a theory, try that they started the team with the expectation other owners, including FRM, already had - that the new contract would make the charters permanent.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Respectfully, I don't see Denny or MJ starting a team just so they can toss money at lawyers to sue NASCAR. Both have better things to do with their resources, and I doubt either is THAT altruistic. If you want a theory, try that they started the team with the expectation other owners already had - that the new contract would make the charters permanent.
Click to expand...
Boy that was stupid. What ever gave them that idea?
 
Does NASCAR have to approve a sale of a charter?

Yes, NASCAR does have to approve the sale of a charter. The charter system, introduced in 2016, includes provisions that give NASCAR the authority to approve or deny any charter transactions. This is to ensure that the teams involved meet certain standards and that the sport maintains its competitive integrity.
 
aunty dive said:
There is no professional sport that permits the transfer of a franchise without the consent of that sport’s owners.
Click to expand...
StandOnIt said:
Might be so, no proof of that …
Click to expand...
“Major League Baseball announced that the owners unanimously approved the sale of the Baltimore Orioles to a group led by private equity magnate David Rubenstein.”

www.sportico.com

MLB Owners Approve Sale of Orioles to David Rubenstein

MLB owners approve the sale of the Baltimore Orioles to David Rubenstein's group days after Peter Angelos' death
www.sportico.com www.sportico.com

StandOnIt said:
… they have little trouble moving a franchise to another city, getting bonds from tax payers, tax breaks to build stadiums and a plethora of stockholders to satisfy? Another stick and ball comparison owned by many many stockholders compared to a family business.
Click to expand...
The approval of all the other owners is required for a major sports franchise move to another city.

A pro sports franchise owned in whole or in part by a publicly traded corporation cannot circumvent a league’s ownership / management rules in order to satisfy their “plethora of stockholders”.
 
KTMLew01 said:
Does NASCAR have to approve a sale of a charter?

Yes, NASCAR does have to approve the sale of a charter. The charter system, introduced in 2016, includes provisions that give NASCAR the authority to approve or deny any charter transactions. This is to ensure that the teams involved meet certain standards and that the sport maintains its competitive integrity.
Click to expand...
and deny.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
From the linked article,

While the overall tone implies they signed, you're correct that the article doesn't explicitly say either team signed.
Click to expand...
What is there to sign? They are going to court over the 2025 thru???? Charter. 23xi and the other dude said, nope. Don't like the terms. Not gonna sign unless you change XYZ. Nascar says, take us to court, final offer. So they did. Now Nascar IS/HAS changed the original text of the new agreement. Was that X or Y or Z? We don't know. Chipping away at it they are.
 
aunty dive said:
“Major League Baseball announced that the owners unanimously approved the sale of the Baltimore Orioles to a group led by private equity magnate David Rubenstein.”

www.sportico.com

MLB Owners Approve Sale of Orioles to David Rubenstein

MLB owners approve the sale of the Baltimore Orioles to David Rubenstein's group days after Peter Angelos' death
www.sportico.com www.sportico.com


The approval of all the other owners is required for a major sports franchise move to another city.

A pro sports franchise owned in whole or in part by a publicly traded corporation cannot circumvent a league’s ownership / management rules in order to satisfy their “plethora of stockholders”.
Click to expand...
Ok my turn. What is the advantage to owning a charter?
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Respectfully, I don't see Denny or MJ starting a team just so they can toss money at lawyers to sue NASCAR. Both have better things to do with their resources, and I doubt either is THAT altruistic. That also doesn't account for Front Row being in this too. That team was around long before Denny and MJ's partnership.

If you want a theory, try that they started the team with the expectation other owners, including FRM, already had - that the new contract would make the charters permanent.
Click to expand...
^^^this^^^
 
StandOnIt said:
Ok my turn. What is the advantage to owning a charter?
Click to expand...
Guaranteed starting spot; that aids in attracting sponsors who know the car will be seen every week. Also assists in attracting top drivers who don't have to worry about making the field.

Bigger slice of the prize money. Makes it easier to afford top talent, both in and out of the car.

Probable return on investment when selling it.
 
StandOnIt said:
and deny.
Click to expand...
??????

You said the teams were free to buy/sell/trade? Now I have no idea what you are saying. But that's not unusual. since:
 

Attachments

  • moving-goalpost.gif
    moving-goalpost.gif
    2.7 MB · Views: 814
Charlie Spencer said:
Guaranteed starting spot; that aids in attracting sponsors who know the car will be seen every week. Also assists in attracting top drivers who don't have to worry about making the field.

Bigger slice of the prize money. Makes it easier to afford top talent, both in and out of the car.

Probable return on investment when selling it.
Click to expand...
I see it with last line first. Was the #1 reason for their creation. People got tired of losing their azzes when the decided to go home and watch on TV.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Guaranteed starting spot; that aids in attracting sponsors who know the car will be seen every week. Also assists in attracting top drivers who don't have to worry about making the field.

Bigger slice of the prize money. Makes it easier to afford top talent, both in and out of the car.

Probable return on investment when selling it.
Click to expand...
They have that now so what is the problem? I believer they were grousing about having to buy parts from approved vendors also, and not being able to race the car anywhere but with Nascar. All of those "monopoly makers" are nonsense IMO.

So what is the advantage to owning a charter?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom