- Joined
- Mar 17, 2014
- Messages
- 40,224
- Points
- 1,033
23XI statement on not signing Charter agreement
- Thread starter Blaze
- Start date
What are you talking about. What 2 fragments are you having trouble with somebody saying? Is it the guy eating pop corn one, the deep state one, or the taking over of France one?These 2 consecutive sentence fragments are from the same post.
You pay more in prize money so famous drivers will race on a track that you rent. See something similar to the SRX series but instead use highly paid Nascar stars.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2014
- Messages
- 40,224
- Points
- 1,033
I quoted you and shortened your post down to the 2 fragments that appear in the quote box.
I’m simply highlighting your hypocrisy.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2014
- Messages
- 40,224
- Points
- 1,033
Judge Bell’s schedule call for the appointment of a mediator on January 31 and for the submission of his / her report on September 24.
I wonder if either side will feel beaten down enough to agree to mediation by the end of January?
sportsnaut.com
I wonder if either side will feel beaten down enough to agree to mediation by the end of January?
Judge sets NASCAR antitrust lawsuit timeline, including trial date
Judge Kenneth Bell aims to wrap this up before the 2026 season ... as unlikely as that may be with appeals and delays
sportsnaut.com
January 8th and 10th should be pretty interesting. I think that is the who hit John stage.Judge Bell’s schedule call for the appointment of a mediator on January 31 and for the submission of his / her report on September 24.
I wonder if either side will feel beaten down enough to agree to mediation by the end of January?
Judge sets NASCAR antitrust lawsuit timeline, including trial date
Judge Kenneth Bell aims to wrap this up before the 2026 season ... as unlikely as that may be with appeals and delays
Who's paying that prize money? NASCAR can no longer sign a single Cup title sponsor and has to split it four ways. Unlike LIV golf, the Saudis won't be sacrificing unlimited 'good will' bucks to prop up their image.
I don't know how much SRX was getting from CBS but I never heard of drivers leaving other series to get a slice. I doubt another start-up series will be able to tap into enough money to attract even second-tier Cup talent. Owners have to fund the rest of the team too; who pays for that? Few Cup teams can nail down a full-season sponsor these days.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2014
- Messages
- 40,224
- Points
- 1,033
Who thinks the France and the Smith families will be willing to do any business with a break-away series?
These folks control most of the tracks the Cup Series runs on.
These folks control most of the tracks the Cup Series runs on.
Jordan is worth over 2.5 billion, do you think there isn't anybody else around with that kind of money?
You weren't around for the Indy split I guess. That split ended up along money lines.
If you pay more you get more.
Well, there is the RTA as it stands now. With what 23XI is trying to bring about if it wins on all counts, Nascar type racing would be possibly forced wide open for similar competitions. Many would go for a better deal if one was offered.
I have no doubt the Smiths would be happy to quote a rental agreement. X dollars up front, Y% of the gate, Z% of concessions, etc. Pocono and Dover would probably also be open to deals.
Don't expect anyone to pay entry fees to get put on the schedule. And if you have to ask about Indy, you can't afford it.
So you think Jordan would run a new series out of his pocket? If that was his goal, he didn't need an anti trust suit to get started losing money. He could have fired up a series using the previous generation of cars. Hell, he could have bought naming rights to Cup and dictated changes, like Sprint did.
Sorry, I wasn't specific. I don't know how much SRX was getting from CBS but I never heard of drivers leaving other series to get into SRX for the money.
Where does it say that? You remember the word cabal right? Do you know for instance how many F-1 type tracks there are in the Middle East. The last one cost 1.3 billion dollars. I said, do you not think there aren't anyone around with that kind of money?
And we're back to our core disagreement. You think 23FRM is interested in winning the lawsuit as a step to using Next Gen cars outside Cup. I think the lawsuit is only a tool to their goal of owning charters.
I don't have any problem with that, but when you continue to ask questions about how it would be impossible to think other than that I'm going to reply to those questions because there is a possibility of that happening.
I don't think there's anyone around with that kind of money who is also willing to spend it propping up a new stock car series for the years it would take to become profitable.
How much was the combined Cup title sponsorship for the last couple of years? $10 or $12 million? For $15 million NASCAR would fall over backwards to run Cup however you wanted. That's cheaper and easier than starting from scratch.
I have never said it was impossible to think otherwise. I ask because I don’t understand how a startup series could be economically viable.
Suddenly we've introduced these unnamed shadow investors behind Jordan. If he has so much money, why does he need them?
You were saying it would be dumb for Jordan to finance it out of his own pocket a minute ago. Now having investors is a bad thing? You do know that many teams have investors.
Excuse my ignorance but is there evidence these outside investors actually exist, or is this pure conjecture on @Conover 's part? I don't recall hearing about them before this page.
If they do exist and MJ has been able to convince them there's a return on investment in a new series based on the NextGen, more power to him. The heck with NASCAR's records, I want to see that business proposal.
I think shortly more will be revealed. If the teams continue to press forward on the restrictions about racing on the Nascar tracks, and the ability to use the car and to be able to race in similar events, OR they press in a different direction, charter only, what ever that means.
KTMLew01
Team Owner
When I open this thread:
Respectfully, that didn't answer my question.
Are you aware of evidence of a cabal of investors backing Michael Jordan's anti-trust suit for purposes of starting a competing stock car series? I'm NOT saying such a group is impossible but without evidence, why should its existence be considered relevant?
Why don't you do yourself a favor and don't open it.
I did. If those claims disappear, what I am concerned about lessons.
Can I get a 'Yes.' or a 'No.', please? I ask as someone who was recently accused of dancing around straight answers.
KTMLew01
Team Owner
Why are you so invested in this site? Do you NOT have anything else that interests you? I truly worry about your health.
SOI is a grown boy. If he chooses to spend his time here, that's his call.
What part of private investors or what is called a cabal are you having problems with. The word Private or Cabal? Either one are individuals that want to remain nameless.
I don't worry about your shed or lack of one. I have faith in your building skills over father time or the blessed mother of oh my back. .
Let's nail YOUR feet to the floor. Charter, just what exactly will the teams be suing for in this court case that they are entering? Remember you said it is just about the charter.
Do you have any evidence such a group exists, yes or no? I'm not asking for names. Hell, at this point I'm not even asking for the evidence itself. I'm asking only if you personally know of the existence of such proof.
Uh uh, don't try changing the subject again. Answer the question, please. Evidence of outside investors behind Jordan, yes or no? Then I'll present my feet for nailing.
Thank you.
I continue to maintain 23XI and FRM are pursuing this lawsuit with the goal of gaining permanent ownership and control of the charters they held prior to the expiration of the 2016 contract. I've modified that position to now include ownership and control of the charters those two teams want to buy from SHR. My opinion is no one associated with either team's owners has any interest in winning the lawsuit as a prerequisite to running NextGen cars outside of the NASCAR Cup series. They want control of their charters so the charters can be sold for ROI without the threat of NASCAR canceling, revoking, or otherwise the charters away from the teams.
I base that opinion on what many team owners said about charter ownership being the major sticking point during the new contract negotiations over the last couple of years. I haven't read -everything- the owners of FRM and 23XI have said on the subject. If I've missed something, I'd appreciate any quotes from the owners to the contrary. If I've left something unclear, please let me know. If I have contradicted an earlier post, it's through a lack of recollection on my part, not an actual change of position.
Some of you are taking things way too personally. None of us actually KNOWS anything but what the
press releases want us to know. We don't know the reasons behind the reasons for this court action -- we may never know. It will
all come to an end at some time and we may never know the particulars.
But please don't try to kill each other over personal opinions.
I do realize that a lot this back and forth is just something to do during the off-season, but that's no reason
to go looking for someone's blood.
Keep this "discussion" at least somewhat civil.
I'm just happy it's not my money that being forked over to those high dollar lawyers.
press releases want us to know. We don't know the reasons behind the reasons for this court action -- we may never know. It will
all come to an end at some time and we may never know the particulars.
But please don't try to kill each other over personal opinions.
I do realize that a lot this back and forth is just something to do during the off-season, but that's no reason
to go looking for someone's blood.
Keep this "discussion" at least somewhat civil.
I'm just happy it's not my money that being forked over to those high dollar lawyers.
I think the teams want that above but also want the freedom to race elsewhere out of Nascar events, The two teams want to be able to either fabricate their own parts or buy from others who aren't designated sellers.
Wasserman U.S. managing director of Will Pleasants told the Sports Business Journal they’ve, “been hired to explore exhibition race opportunities, both domestically and internationally — very exploratory.”
With this news, the RTA has now publicly stated that they’re exploring hosting races outside of the NASCAR sanction while using top NASCAR talent. That’s a worrisome development.
I think all involved remember the Indy split and understand there's no profit for anyone in going down that road again.
I don't understand NASCAR's reluctance to hand over a legal construct that doesn't appear to profit them. It could still mandate appproval of charter sales, just as stick and ball leagues approve ownership changes. It could still charge a transfer fee. What would it lose that's worth all this effort on its part?
Yes, that reluctance might support the opinion that as from NASCAR's side, this IS about more than the charters. But if that is NASCAR's concern, it's easy enough to hand over the charters and call the plaintiffs' bluff. What's to lose?
I don't understand NASCAR's reluctance to hand over a legal construct that doesn't appear to profit them. It could still mandate appproval of charter sales, just as stick and ball leagues approve ownership changes. It could still charge a transfer fee. What would it lose that's worth all this effort on its part?
Yes, that reluctance might support the opinion that as from NASCAR's side, this IS about more than the charters. But if that is NASCAR's concern, it's easy enough to hand over the charters and call the plaintiffs' bluff. What's to lose?
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2014
- Messages
- 40,224
- Points
- 1,033
More of the same from November, 2022. First posted this morning # 2467.
https://racingnews.co/2022/11/30/nascar-teams-could-soon-host-exhibition-races-without-nascar/#
Is this currently relevant?
What do you think. This is what is in the lawsuit. If you would look at that date again, that is in the 2 year window they have been in negotiation and it is included in the lawsuit.
Anti-trust issues.
1. Teams cannot race elsewhere
2. Teams cannot choose their own race car parts and suppliers
3. Tracks cannot hold other similar race events
4. NASCAR purchased competing race tracks (ISC) and race series (ARCA)