Search results

That's right, because it isn't pertinent to the trial. And again, it isn't Judge Bell's job to let NASCAR tell whatever story it wants. It is Judge Bell's job as the judge to keep them focused on relevant factors in the trial specific to them. You open it up to be a discussion about the CART/IRL...

Lmao yeah, of course not. ????

It's not Bell's job to let NASCAR "present their case" and that contract you keep talking about doesn't justify anticompetitive behavior. At all.

He has actively sanctioned NASCAR multiple times and...wait, that's right, because it's NASCAR that must mean NASCAR is being wronged, not that NASCAR is doing wrongs.

Huh.

Yeah, NASCAR let out protected info they shouldn't have had access to which is a wild thing to just act like was cool to do. ESPECIALLY when one of NASCAR's most loyal sponsors now putting them on blast. People put illegal clauses in contracts all the time! That doesn't make them enforceable...

NDAs/noncompetitive contracts have zero to do with anticompetitive behavior by a monopsony. On top of that, NASCAR might have just committed tortious interference in this trial with relation to Childress!

That NASCAR may feel motivated to act in an anticompetitive fashion doesn't mean that they legally can!

1) They already race in alternative venues/series 2) There's nothing requiring anticompetitive behavior to prevent an alternative series (which is what the trial is about; whether or not NASCAR exercised it's power as the sole entity in top tier stock car racing against the laws of the US) You...

Sponsors sound thrilled.

Bingo. NASCAR could of course keep itself the only major stock car series by not engaging in anticompetitive behavior too. Instead, as we learned yesterday via Ben Kennedy's own text messages, the France family has been planning for years for this "inevitable" showdown with the teams. Turns out...

NASCAR didn't have a problem with HendrickCars.com on a different sort of stock car!

They don't have to and if the do they never had to. It will be for the same reason Tony George is (maybe) just a part owner of Ed Carpenter Racing.

Why does this thread exist?

Huh. Who owns half the tracks and sanctions 100% of the races?

What is your intention? If your intention is to provide benefits to the most successful by paying the most successful the bulk of the money, the downside of that is it probably creates a feedback loop similar to F1 pre-Liberty where the same teams on top are always on top and always win all the...

Bingo. Allow me to jog people's memories: when charters were brought in, NASCAR was already a decade into their existing slide from an interest perspective and teams were getting rocked. NASCAR acquiesced and created these charters not out of the goodness of their own hearts, but to prevent...

Even TMS has some TIFs in place, which is why they have to have two NASCAR Cup events every single year in perpetuity. Oh, and this.

Nothing in here about taxpayers subsidizing race teams which it shouldn't; that isn't a real thing. To your larger point: NASCAR could have put together way bigger purses to try and lure in race teams from all over to enter. They didn't. They have, however, paid over $100 million dollars each...

Jim France wants his Game 7 moments but he doesn't want to pay for a league that produces a Game 7, so we got what we got, LOL