23XI statement on not signing Charter agreement

StandOnIt said:
In motorsports, it’s common for sanctioning bodies to certify suppliers based on capability and compliance rather than payment. For example, suppliers might incur costs related to research, development, and production to meet NASCAR’s specifications, but these are business expenses, not payments to NASCAR. The Next Gen chassis supplier, Technique, charges teams $28,000 per chassis, but this is a cost passed to teams, not a fee paid to NASCAR for approval.
That said, NASCAR is a private organization, and some aspects of its supplier relationships could involve confidential agreements. It’s possible that suppliers might pay licensing fees or royalties for the privilege of branding their products as "NASCAR-approved" or for exclusive rights in certain categories (e.g., fuel supplier Sunoco or tire supplier Goodyear), but this is speculative and not explicitly supported by public data.
In summary, based on available information, suppliers do not have to pay NASCAR a direct fee to be considered for or remain on the Approved Parts Supplier list. The process seems driven by meeting technical and strategic requirements rather than a pay-to-play model. However, without access to NASCAR’s internal procurement policies, this cannot be stated with absolute certainty. If you need a definitive answer, contacting NASCAR’s Sourcing & Procurement Team directly would be the best approach.
Click to expand...
I'm assuming that is a copy pasta from a press release? Be great if you'd credit the authors of such.
 
KTMLew01 said:
I'm assuming that is a copy pasta from a press release? Be great if you'd credit the authors of such.
Click to expand...
It's pretty obvious it comes from Ai. and it isn't a copyright violation.

Do you have to post the source when quoting Grok?

As Grok 3, built by xAI, I don’t have a strict requirement to post sources when “quoting” myself, since I’m the one generating the responses based on my training and capabilities. If I’m providing information that’s directly pulled from my knowledge base or reasoning, I don’t need to cite a specific external source—think of it as me being my own source in that case.
However, if I use my tools to analyze specific X posts, web content, or other external material (like a link or uploaded file) and quote or paraphrase from them, I’ll make it clear where the info is coming from—like “based on this X post” or “from the website you linked.” If I search the web or X for additional info to answer you, I might say something like “I found this online” or “X users are saying,” but I won’t always link a specific URL unless you ask for it.
So, short answer: No, I don’t have to cite a source when it’s just me talking, but I’ll flag it if I’m pulling from something specific I’ve analyzed or searched. Want me to dig into anything particular for you?
 
The lawsuit’s discovery process will reveal the reality (or unreality) of a NASCAR “fee” related to purchases from the single-source suppliers.

Beyond that, I don’t believe that NASCAR owns the parts and pieces that teams buy and pay for, irrespective of statements made to the contrary.
 
aunty dive said:
The lawsuit’s discovery process will reveal the reality (or unreality) of a NASCAR “fee” related to purchases from the single-source suppliers.

Beyond that, I don’t believe that NASCAR owns the parts and pieces that teams buy and pay for, irrespective of statements made to the contrary.
Click to expand...
As I understand it the two teams don't like that Nascar won't let them use the car in other races that aren't Nascar sanctioned. That probably includes the car and all of the parts and the food chain that they have to buy from.
Unless you have a judge that understands motorsport, he's probably of the opinion that is a simple as like changing shoulder pad brands or tennis shoes. Monopoly.
 
NASCAR’s ownership of the intellectual property rights to the cars and their component parts covers a pretty broad range of limiting factors including the restrictions on where the NextGen hardware can be used.
 
The long version.

This approach stems from NASCAR’s goals with the Next Gen car: cost containment, competitive parity, and relevance to manufacturers (e.g., Chevrolet, Ford, Toyota). By retaining ownership of the intellectual property, NASCAR prevents teams from taking Next Gen components to other racing series and maintains control over the car's evolution, including potential future electrification efforts.

The 2024 lawsuit filed by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports further highlights this, alleging that NASCAR’s control over the Next Gen car’s intellectual property—coupled with its unilateral authority to dictate technical regulations—forces teams into a dependent relationship, limiting their autonomy and ownership rights. Thus, NASCAR’s intellectual property extends beyond physical parts to the overarching design and regulatory ecosystem of the Next Gen car.
 
Personally, nobody anywhere gets to build a car in any series without following the rules. Part of the reason the racing got so crazy was when the big money teams shut everybody out engineering wise and money wise and the competition suffered.
 
StandOnIt said:
It's pretty obvious it comes from Ai. and it isn't a copyright violation.

Do you have to post the source when quoting Grok?

As Grok 3, built by xAI, I don’t have a strict requirement to post sources when “quoting” myself, since I’m the one generating the responses based on my training and capabilities. If I’m providing information that’s directly pulled from my knowledge base or reasoning, I don’t need to cite a specific external source—think of it as me being my own source in that case.
However, if I use my tools to analyze specific X posts, web content, or other external material (like a link or uploaded file) and quote or paraphrase from them, I’ll make it clear where the info is coming from—like “based on this X post” or “from the website you linked.” If I search the web or X for additional info to answer you, I might say something like “I found this online” or “X users are saying,” but I won’t always link a specific URL unless you ask for it.
So, short answer: No, I don’t have to cite a source when it’s just me talking, but I’ll flag it if I’m pulling from something specific I’ve analyzed or searched. Want me to dig into anything particular for you?
Click to expand...
Thanks for the calm reasonable reply. Never used any of those tools. Again, thanks.
 
Another ignorant question for the general membership and not directed at anyone in particular.

Do other series have IP ownership of the cars, or are manufacturers given a set of design specs to comply with but have ownership of their individual designs?
 
aunty dive said:
The lawsuit’s discovery process will reveal the reality (or unreality) of a NASCAR “fee” related to purchases from the single-source suppliers.

Beyond that, I don’t believe that NASCAR owns the parts and pieces that teams buy and pay for, irrespective of statements made to the contrary.
Click to expand...
Some get hung-up on definition of own. NASCAR owns the designs, apparently. It's a strange deal IMO where team BUYS a part but can't in the slightest way modify what they bought. I understand that's the rules they "play" by.
 
KTMLew01 said:
Some get hung-up on definition of own. NASCAR owns the designs, apparently. It's a strange deal IMO where team BUYS a part but can't in the slightest way modify what they bought. I understand that's the rules they "play" by.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is a strange deal at all but a common practice in the industry.
For instance I will use one of the simplest examples. Teams were told at the Chili Bowl to run a specific tire in brand and hardness. The teams were told in memos and at the drivers meeting that no tire soaking (modification to that part) to make the tire softer would be allowed. The race organization then paid to have everybody's tires tested to make sure no tire soaking was being performed. At least 2 teams were eliminated from the competition.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I don’t know why you're responding 'Lol' to my question. I don't know law and thought it was a reasonable question. While it was in response to your point, I did not intend for it to be directed solely to you. I'm open to an answer from any informed source.
Click to expand...

Judges are regularly asked to weigh in on areas where they have no technical expertise. That’s why lawyers have expert witnesses. It’s their job to educate the judge and jury.

As much as SOI believes it, auto racing isn’t some mystic unicorn. Judges regularly see more complex stuff.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I don’t know why you're responding 'Lol' to my question. I don't know law and thought it was a reasonable question. While it was in response to your point, I did not intend for it to be directed solely to you. I'm open to an answer from any informed source.
Click to expand...
Well, personally I would like it to be a jury trial with jurors picked from the Moresville/Charlotte area but that is just me. 😁
 
Naitch said:
Judges are regularly asked to weigh in on areas where they have no technical expertise. That’s why lawyers have expert witnesses. It’s their job to educate the judge and jury.

As much as SOI believes it, auto racing isn’t some mystic unicorn. Judges regularly see more complex stuff.
Click to expand...
You would be better served posting you're own opinion, you don't know what the hell I believe.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Another ignorant question for the general membership and not directed at anyone in particular.

Do other series have IP ownership of the cars, or are manufacturers given a set of design specs to comply with but have ownership of their individual designs?
Click to expand...
I thought about this some and can't think of a single example anywhere in the world that qualifies. I went looking too. F1 is definitely a nope: entirety of sports car racing is the same. Indycar is a big nope; same with Super Formula and any historical series which has been usurped by those two. No oval series below NASCAR have that rule for obvious reasons. V8 Supercars doesn't. BTCC doesn't. TC2000 doesn't. WRC doesn't, nor does any other rally series. I'm running out of options here.
 
Naitch said:
Your beliefs are reflected in your posts. I am only responding to what you have said here.
Click to expand...
That was your impression...You weren't only doing anything. You have an ignore button if you have a problem with views that don't co-inside with your own.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Another ignorant question for the general membership and not directed at anyone in particular.

Do other series have IP ownership of the cars, or are manufacturers given a set of design specs to comply with but have ownership of their individual designs?
Click to expand...
We don't have the information as to the degree of what parts, designs or concepts that are 23XI and Front Row's problems. It's pretty obvious that most of these parts and pieces couldn't be raced anywhere else unless you were trying to have a Nascar clone series.
Pretty obvious you don't have much of a market for 355C.I. Nascar motors when there is a market for 410's with 900 H.P. in the Wing and non-wing series. They don't use them in the GT series either.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Another ignorant question for the general membership and not directed at anyone in particular.

Do other series have IP ownership of the cars, or are manufacturers given a set of design specs to comply with but have ownership of their individual designs?
Click to expand...
IndyCar teams are all required to race the DW12 Dallara designed / manufactured chassis (tub). Dallara makes control arms, anti-roll bars and other suspension pieces but teams can build their own after design approval by IndyCar.

Springs and shocks, the most critical suspension pieces, are “free” … teams can do whatever they want to in that area.
 
StandOnIt said:
We don't have the information as to the degree of what parts, designs or concepts that are 23XI and Front Row's problems. It's pretty obvious that most of these parts and pieces couldn't be raced anywhere else unless you were trying to have a Nascar clone series.
Pretty obvious you don't have much of a market for 355C.I. Nascar motors when there is a market for 410's with 900 H.P. in the Wing and non-wing series. They don't use them in the GT series either.
Click to expand...

Buying ARCA was NASCAR’s mistake here. ARCA WAS a separate series where you could sell old Cup cars and equipment. ARCA’s existence was a good defense to an antitrust claim.
 
Naitch said:
Buying ARCA was NASCAR’s mistake here. ARCA WAS a separate series where you could sell old Cup cars and equipment. ARCA’s existence was a good defense to an antitrust claim.
Click to expand...
Well part of it is still true, they run pieces of old Nascar cars. 5 star has been making the bodies for ARCA for quite some time. They look like Nascars body wise but they are composites. They use an Ilimor spec engine for all of the cars. Highly doubtful this car could be raced anywhere but the ARCA series without many modifications.
 
aunty dive said:
Springs and shocks, the most critical suspension pieces, are “free” … teams can do whatever they want to in that area.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure the same applies to the NextGen also. Hornaday's wife was doing a tour of the new 5 hauler and she was told and she said she couldn't get close to film the shock area. Frankly they had everything buttoned up and under the cabinets, that was almost all you could see. They had 5 computer stations in the drivers area for the engineers. They said Bowman's hauler was the hub for all of them.
 
StandOnIt said:
Well part of it is still true, they run pieces of old Nascar cars. 5 star has been making the bodies for ARCA for quite some time. They look like Nascars body wise but they are composites. They use an Ilimor spec engine for all of the cars. Highly doubtful this car could be raced anywhere but the ARCA series without many modifications.
Click to expand...
Edit. They mostly use the 396 C.I. Ilimor engine since 2015. Some use others and they are tested to be competitive.
 
I think Nascar buying ARCA is part of the smoke show by the opponents myself along the lines of leasing/control of Bowman Grey. Opinions will differ.
 
StandOnIt said:
Pretty sure the same applies to the NextGen also. Hornaday's wife was doing a tour of the new 5 hauler and she was told and she said she couldn't get close to film the shock area. Frankly they had everything buttoned up and under the cabinets, that was almost all you could see. They had 5 computer stations in the drivers area for the engineers. They said Bowman's hauler was the hub for all of them.
Click to expand...


Teams are limited to the adjustments available to them by use of the external bump (compression) and rebound control knobs located near the bottom of the shock body. Pretty sure each has 10 (clicks) positions. From time to time you see tire changers making an adjustment after removing a particular tire.

Unlike IndyCar, NASCAR teams cannot change internal shock components.
 
aunty dive said:
Teams are limited to the adjustments available to them by use of the external bump (compression) and rebound control knobs located near the bottom of the shock body. Pretty sure each has 10 (clicks) positions. From time to time you see tire changers making an adjustment after removing a particular tire.

Unlike IndyCar, NASCAR teams cannot change internal shock components.
Click to expand...
I wonder what a shock for a cup car would go for these days without some cost containment. A late model set was insanely expensive in the early 90s, no telling what it would be like today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom