23XI statement on not signing Charter agreement

This is what I was going by. I see they have larger cars also.
1737511979938.jpeg
1737512045716.jpeg
 
Conover said:
Please explain to us the details of this sanctioning agreement, what it exactly says, and what led the track to make this business deal in the first place. Was it made under duress? Did it involve any other partners relative to investment in infrastructure, paving, lighting, etc? Was the state of NC involved? Seems like a LOT of parties tied into this track were forced to participate against their will via a “monopolistic” bully. 🫢
Click to expand...
Throughout this thread, I have seen many posts defending NASCAR's position in this case by pointing out the plaintiffs were not forced to participate in the sport and/or the business of stock car racing. Not just posts by @Conover, but also several others in this thread who are adamantly in NASCAR's cheering section. People, that's not a valid defense. If that defense were valid, there would never be an antitrust conviction, ever... because every monopolist could offer that defense.

The antitrust laws make certain behaviors illegal. Those behaviors don't magically get regarded as 'no harm, no foul' just because the monopoly's customers could have chosen to invest in mutual funds or maybe fast food restaurants instead. Any company or individual seeking to participate in, or transact with, a market controlled by a monopolist could have chosen a different line of business. That's irrelevant. Anti-competitive monopolistic business practices are illegal because they are unfair to others in that market, and because they are bad for consumers broadly. It's a matter of public policy.
 
LewTheShoe said:
Throughout this thread, I have seen many posts defending NASCAR's position in this case by pointing out the plaintiffs were not forced to participate in the sport and/or the business of stock car racing. Not just posts by @Conover, but also several others in this thread who are adamantly in NASCAR's cheering section. People, that's not a valid defense. If that defense were valid, there would never be an antitrust conviction, ever... because every monopolist could offer that defense.

The antitrust laws make certain behaviors illegal. Those behaviors don't magically get regarded as 'no harm, no foul' just because the monopoly's customers could have chosen to invest in mutual funds or maybe fast food restaurants instead. Any company or individual seeking to participate in, or transact with, a market controlled by a monopolist could have chosen a different line of business. That's irrelevant. Anti-competitive monopolistic business practices are illegal because they are unfair to others in that market, and because they are bad for consumers broadly. It's a matter of public policy.
Click to expand...
You ever hear of a non disclosure agreement, or one that restricts you from being able to work for a competitor for a year? I have I have signed them, more then once. So quit with the nonsense. It is common practice.
 
StandOnIt said:
You ever hear of a non disclosure agreement, or one that restricts you from being able to work for a competitor for a year? I have I have signed them, more then once. So quit with the nonsense. It is common practice.
Click to expand...
Non-compete agreements were shot down by the FTC last year. I have no info whether non-disclosures are still viable.

www.ftc.gov

FTC Announces Rule Banning Noncompetes

www.ftc.gov www.ftc.gov

But being a common practice doesn't mean it's legal.
 
StandOnIt said:
You ever hear of a non disclosure agreement, or one that restricts you from being able to work for a competitor for a year? I have I have signed them, more then once. So quit with the nonsense. It is common practice.
Click to expand...
The track has a NASCAR sanction.

As per the terms of that contractual arrangement, NASCAR killed Rockingham’s deal with the Super Cup Stock Car series. This is not complicated.
 
StandOnIt said:
Why is it on their schedule then there not complicated?
Click to expand...
It's not the larger track the series has run on in the past. It's not there because the agreement with NASCAR prohibits it.

Have you seen 'Little Rock'? A few wooden grandstands, no bathrooms or food vending facilities. Hosting a race there will incur the extra expenses of bring in temporary grandstands, Port-As, etc. There aren't any gates, anyone can wander in. I guarantee none of that $9 million was spent on it. Why should they have to use it when there's a better facility on the same property?
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Non-compete agreements were shot down by the FTC last year. I have no info whether non-disclosures are still viable.

www.ftc.gov

FTC Announces Rule Banning Noncompetes

www.ftc.gov www.ftc.gov

But being a common practice doesn't mean it's legal.
Click to expand...
From the same article. See NDAs

Alternatives to Noncompetes​

The Commission found that employers have several alternatives to noncompetes that still enable firms to protect their investments without having to enforce a noncompete.

Trade secret laws and non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) both provide employers with well-established means to protect proprietary and other sensitive information. Researchers estimate that over 95% of workers with a noncompete already have an NDA.

The Commission also finds that instead of using noncompetes to lock in workers, employers that wish to retain employees can compete on the merits for the worker’s labor services by improving wages and working conditions.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
It's not the larger track the series has run on in the past. It's not there because the agreement with NASCAR prohibits it.

Have you seen 'Little Rock'? A few wooden grandstands, no bathrooms or food vending facilities. Hosting a race there will incur the extra expenses of bring in temporary grandstands, Port-As, etc. There aren't any gates, anyone can wander in. Why should they have to use it when there's a better facility on the same property?
Click to expand...
It doesn't say they are racing there. Keep us abreast in September on which track they race on ok?
 
StandOnIt said:
From the same article. See NDAs

Alternatives to Noncompetes​

The Commission found that employers have several alternatives to noncompetes that still enable firms to protect their investments without having to enforce a noncompete.

Trade secret laws and non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) both provide employers with well-established means to protect proprietary and other sensitive information. Researchers estimate that over 95% of workers with a noncompete already have an NDA.

The Commission also finds that instead of using noncompetes to lock in workers, employers that wish to retain employees can compete on the merits for the worker’s labor services by improving wages and working conditions.
Click to expand...
What do these kinds of of arrangements between employers and employees have to do with this subject matter?
 
StandOnIt said:
If you don't think that the owners don't get proprietary information I guess that shouldn't be a problem for you guys.
Click to expand...
....do you know what a nondisclosure agreement is? Because I'm really having a tough time trying to grasp how an NDA results in a racing series not being able to run a track over a clause from another series. It would, however, prevent the track owners from publicly saying that one series was blocking another. Clearly that didn't happen.

Speaking of which: What is the benefit to me as a racing fan that NASCAR can dictate to tracks who they can and cannot permit bookings of? Seems clear as mud as to what it is that I get if NASCAR tells a track owner Indycar can't run there other than I can't see Indycar.
 
virtualbalboa said:
....do you know what a nondisclosure agreement is? Because I'm really having a tough time trying to grasp how an NDA results in a racing series not being able to run a track over a clause from another series. It would, however, prevent the track owners from publicly saying that one series was blocking another. Clearly that didn't happen.

Speaking of which: What is the benefit to me as a racing fan that NASCAR can dictate to tracks who they can and cannot permit bookings of? Seems clear as mud as to what it is that I get if NASCAR tells a track owner Indycar can't run there other than I can't see Indycar.
Click to expand...
I figured you would have problems.
 
Oh I think you boys will figure it out when discovery happens and the loss of the gory details so many drool for are redacted. Lol.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Technically, the track didn't say it. The blocked series did.

But yeah, I didn't follow how NDAs came into this either.
Click to expand...
True, but that means the track said it to them. If you reveal information about, for example, my litigation that concluded in a settlement in 2023 with information given to you by the company I was in legal action against, someone let that leak and I can seek damages from the construction firm. I would guess NASCAR would probably be very unhappy to discover that a track let it slip that exclusivity clauses were why someone else couldn't race at Rockingham if there was also a NDA related to all business dealings or even specifics in the business dealings.
 
StandOnIt said:
Oh I think you boys will figure it out when discovery happens and the loss of the gory details so many drool for are redacted. Lol.
Click to expand...
“In most jurisdictions, discovery documents are considered part of the court record and are generally considered public record, meaning anyone can access them unless a court order restricts access due to privacy concerns or other legal reasons.”
 
aunty dive said:
“In most jurisdictions, discovery documents are considered part of the court record and are generally considered public record, meaning anyone can access them unless a court order restricts access due to privacy concerns or other legal reasons.”
Click to expand...
And even if records are blocked from the public, lawyers for both sides will be able to some or all of them.
 
I took a look at the Supercup website. 13 events on the schedule, 6 of which show the venues as TBA. 25 year old cars and drivers known only to people who attend the local tracks these guys race on.

In this case, I can see NASCAR’s point. Why would they want this rag-tag band “performing” on a track emblazoned with NASCAR Sanctioned signage?

There’s a place for this group. The Rock isn’t it and the sanctioning agreement in place enables NASCAR’s veto. It’s just business.
 
StandOnIt said:
Click to expand...

Interesting that the OEMs have dipped their toe in the F1 waters. I have ranted about relevance. O'Donnell et al. are hoping that the three OEMs choose cost savings over brand relevance. I don't see it. The clock is ticking.....for a series that prides itself on "stock." I still like this series, but as I am in the process of considering my next Toyota product purchase, I am not looking for a pushrod V8. Per Kez....never thought that WE would be so critical to NASCAR's future. Can you imagine if WE bailed? Two manufacturers is not enough of a reason for an OEM to go racing. Hello spec motor.
 
^I thought the new engine being the hang-up for potential new manufacturers entering the series meant it wouldn't be a spec motor. If it was, why would they care how many horsies it makes?
 
Revman said:
Interesting that the OEMs have dipped their toe in the F1 waters. I have ranted about relevance. O'Donnell et al. are hoping that the three OEMs choose cost savings over brand relevance. I don't see it.
Click to expand...
I may not understand how you're using the word 'relevance'. I can think of no form of motorsports with less relevance to the consumer market than F1.
Revman said:
Can you imagine if WE bailed? Two manufacturers is not enough of a reason for an OEM to go racing.
Click to expand...
Toyota leaving would be no more or less painful than if Ford or Chevy left.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I may not understand how you're using the word 'relevance'. I can think of no form of motorsports with less relevance to the consumer market than F1.

Toyota leaving would be no more or less painful than if Ford or Chevy left.
Click to expand...
1. I think the hybrid tech is relevant...or more relevant than a pushrod V8--particularly with the MGU-H removed.....although with the proliferation of turbo hybrids at Toyota, I would think that there might be some potential there.
2. I absolutely do not agree. Toyota will never be fully accepted in NASCAR. For some....many?....it would be a relief to see them leave. BTW...I have never really resented the reaction of some fans who resent the presence of a foreign manufacturer....and have never really supported the "built in America" retort of Toyota. This is a foregn manufacturer in a North American series. Additionally, I understand the resentment of Toyota as it is a non-union company.
 
Jimbo Slice said:
^I thought the new engine being the hang-up for potential new manufacturers entering the series meant it wouldn't be a spec motor. If it was, why would they care how many horsies it makes?
Click to expand...
Do we know that they care? We haven't heard anything firm from any other OEM, but we hear O'Donnell talk about interest every damn year. Who is interested?
 
Revman said:
2. I absolutely do not agree. Toyota will never be fully accepted in NASCAR. For some....many?....it would be a relief to see them leave. BTW...I have never really resented the reaction of some fans who resent the presence of a foreign manufacturer....and have never really supported the "built in America" retort of Toyota. This is a foregn manufacturer in a North American series. Additionally, I understand the resentment of Toyota as it is a non-union company.
Click to expand...
Whether Toyota is accepted by all of the fan base is irrelevant to the impact of it (or any OEM) leaving. Only two brands means less competition, regardless of which two.
 
I’ve never resented Toyota being part of NASCAR. Agree that more OEM’s can make for a healthier series. Would love to see Honda join as they have a racing platform. Would really love to see NASCAR enable each OEM to field a race car that absolutely resembles their stock auto, including all unique measurement and aero variables specific to that model (with needed accommodations for safety), so every OEM is trying to achieve its best result dependent upon the characteristics of its model.
 
Revman said:
Interesting that the OEMs have dipped their toe in the F1 waters. I have ranted about relevance.
Click to expand...
Revman said:
We haven't heard anything firm from any other OEM, but we hear O'Donnell talk about interest every damn year. Who is interested?
Click to expand...
=IF= NASCAR needs to be worried about potential OEMs bypassing it for other series, I don't see F1 as the main competitor. Manufacturers are jumping into sports cars and endurance racing right and left worldwide. Compared to F1 or Cup, those series are easier to get into, cheaper to compete, cars closer to production models, fewer internal political distractions and barriers to entry, fan base that's more interested in the competition than the spectacle, etc.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
=IF= NASCAR needs to be worried about potential OEMs bypassing it for other series, I don't see F1 as the main competitor. Manufacturers are jumping into sports cars and endurance racing right and left worldwide. Compared to F1 or Cup, those series are easier to get into, cheaper to compete, cars closer to production models, fewer internal political distractions and barriers to entry, fan base that's more interested in the competition than the spectacle, etc.
Click to expand...
Why aren't they immensely popular?
 
Revman said:
I understand the resentment of Toyota as it is a non-union company.
Click to expand...

Not at all, I commend them for being non union. They employ a lot of folks here in the USA. The other 3 big UNIONED Manufacturers have sh!t built all over the world and sent here for final assembly so, whomever has their panties in a wad about Toyota needs to grow up.
 
sdj said:
Not at all, I commend them for being non union. They employ a lot of folks here in the USA. The other 3 big UNIONED Manufacturers have sh!t built all over the world and sent here for final assembly so, whomever has their panties in a wad about Toyota needs to grow up.
Click to expand...

The irony of the rumor of Toyota being non-unionized is that they are heavily unionized in Japan, just not in the states. Although a few plants in the US have had UAW votes recently, they haven't passed.
 
StandOnIt said:
Why aren't they immensely popular?
Click to expand...
I don't have demo numbers or marketing survey results, so I can only offer semi-informed guesses regarding the US market.
  • The majority of motorsports fans in the US follow NASCAR. Most of those NASCAR fans like ovals better than road courses. Most of them like more beating and banging than is permitted in sports car racing.
  • We're in an era of where sports fans aren't as willing to watch longer events as they used to be. While six of this season's 11 IMSA races are under three hours, the other five (and all eight of the European WEC series races) are at least six hours. They're too long for a single US network to cover in one broadcast window, so watching some races requires switching networks and streams.
  • With races featuring multiple classes, dozens of cars, and hundreds of drivers getting in and out of cars, it takes more than casual attention to keep track of who's who and where they're running. It requires some practice to learn to keep track of their strategies and how they change as the race evolves.
On the other hand, attendance has been growing for the last several years, barring COVID. Tickets in the US are relatively inexpensive compared to Cup and far less than F1. Garage access is unparalleled. Weekends usually feature multiple lower-class races. There are few full-course yellow flags thrown to interrupt the racing; local yellows are used while cars are given more time to recover. The number of participating manufacturers is growing in both IMSA and WEC since the sanctioning bodies made it easier for teams to run in both series.

And the Miatas are a hoot and a half.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom