Pretty comprehensive article about what happened today in court.
23XI statement on not signing Charter agreement
- Thread starter Blaze
- Start date
Part of the challenge in antitrust cases is to determine size/scale relative to the business, and if a business entity is using methods or means to ILLEGALLY restrict competition. A business is NOT a monopoly if they create a superior product that leads the marketplace, even one as dominant in stock car racing as NASCAR. So many forms of professional racing exist. The fact that the growth of NASCAR was built on the shoulders of the France family, promoting, growing, building tracks with partners, adding junior series to keep the main product healthy while adding more racing opportunities. No other series comes close. Can’t penalize that.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2014
- Messages
- 40,217
- Points
- 1,033
“The legal battle continues, with the teams seeking a permanent injunction to restore their chartered status.”
Some of the stuff I have read on social media from people who think it is child's play to build what Nascar has built and think it is just fine to give parts of that away to failed basketball franchise owners, Hambone and the possibility of large private equity firm ownership's? I'll take warts and all the collective leadership of the France family over the possibility of that. Let them take their dog and pony show elsewhere.
Really good summary thanks for posting. Jordan was allowed to speak by cartoon Kessler outside the courtroom. He said:
"I've been a fan of the game for a long period of time,” Jordan said. “When we first started this whole process, I've always said that I want to fight for the betterment of the sport. "Even though they (NASCAR) try to point out that we made some money and we had a successful business, that's not the point. The point is that the sport itself needs to continually change for the fans, as well as for the teams, as well as for NASCAR, too, if they understand that.”
“I feel like we made a good statement today about that, and I look forward to going down with the fire. If I have to fight this to the end for the betterment of the sports, I will.”
Jordan the big man…Jordan the Gambler….doubling down. He wants change, as in HE controls it. Hamlin is also such a d*€£. Says he despises the France family and is in it till the end.
I hope they are crushed. Air speed crash and burn. Hamcrap reduced to selling memorabilia and a falling podcaster.
Blaze
The Midnight Rider
Because NASCAR never received any compensation for the charters, as they are contract leases, not property. If the court wants the teams to own these charters forever, similar to franchises, then make the teams all pay NASCAR market value for them.
Secondly, the teams would really never approve NASCAR having permanent veto power over approving new buyers. After denying selective buyers they would sue.
Again, that isn't a problem in other sports. Why would it be here?
Naitch
Reads history books
“Plenty of racing”
But only one high level stock car racing series that owns the majority that high level racing venues, thus putting up a barrier to entry for anyone looking to start a competitor.
(Random aside: AT&T didn’t build in very remote rural areas. Local coops got money from the federal government to build.)
Blaze
The Midnight Rider
They made the charters up themselves, NASCAR wouldn't have lost money if these things had been permanent from the start because it never has cost them money. You who who it has cost money? Teams who have since bought them. Why should NASCAR be able to just decide one day to just say **** the charters? This is the one thing other sports do that NASCAR should. I don't think the NFL gets paid by teams, MLB, NBA, etc. Why should NASCAR? Why can't they work with the teams better? You wanna act like the teams are greedy, well NASCAR is too.
They hardly ever veto as it is so that also wouldn't be a problem.
most people who have the money to buy a charter, I'm positive NASCAR would approve of, because no team will sell off a charter to some broke down team who's going to field cars that fall apart all the time.
Blaze
The Midnight Rider
It would be like if TKO owned most of the big arenas in the United States, so no other wrestling company could even try to get on the level of the WWE, by being able to book these arenas. Like yeah, you got wrestling at the VFW, or some small garage or something in your hometown but that's not the same level.“Plenty of racing”
But only one high level stock car racing series that owns the majority that high level racing venues, thus putting up a barrier to entry for anyone looking to start a competitor.
(Random aside: AT&T didn’t build in very remote rural areas. Local coops got money from the federal government to build.)
They are leases that NASCAR voluntarily gave away and from which it voluntarily receives no compensation under previous or current contracts. Since it's receiving nothing, there's nothing to lose if it gives them away.
C'mon man, stop with the round n round. You know that among others Nascar has to approve the transfers of the charters.
But it is a monopoly if it takes illegal steps to maintain that dominance at the expense of potential competitors. That's what the December trial will determine.
Blaze
The Midnight Rider
Which they can still do, by allowing teams to actually own them. If other sports can do it, NASCAR can. Unless you think the France family isn't smart enough to do that?
Agreed, but approval isn't what @Conover said in the post I replied to. He said if NASCAR turns charters over to all teams, each should have to pay it for them. Neither he nor I touched on approval in our most recent posts.
I fully support NASCAR approving sales. They can do that if the teams hold the charters. It works in other sports.
Does anyone know if the 'no antitrust lawsuits' clause was present in the original charter contracts?
Naitch
Reads history books
For the good of the sport, I hope we get a settlement. This is a lose-lose endeavor for all involved.
Matt Weaver added to what I had posted earlier. Scroll down to the lower part of the Doc for it. Some interesting stuff in there.
In a text between them, Prime and O'Donnell expressed concern that the teams were attempting to make their own version of a series under a 'LIV Golf model,' which led to all the changes with the track sanctioning agreements and NextGen IP restrictions.
In a text between them, Prime and O'Donnell expressed concern that the teams were attempting to make their own version of a series under a 'LIV Golf model,' which led to all the changes with the track sanctioning agreements and NextGen IP restrictions.
Precisely. This was the direction Jordan was pushing the teams to go unless NASCAR radically altered the provisions of the charter contracts. The initial position of how much the teams should receive in revenue was enormously excessive compared to previous terms. NASCAR ownership positioned for much less, certainly it appeared too little. Per the articles linked by @StandOnIt, it was actually Phelps and some others who were pushing back on the France family to “meet the teams in the middle” on compensation terms and some other things, in attempting to get agreeable resolution. They KNEW the Jordan team was pushing their own agenda, attempting to divide and interfere with NASCAR partners. Ultimately the terms were found acceptable enough that every team agreed and signed, other than those pushing hardest to totally disrupt the business.
I have no doubt the France family ownership gets ticked by all they’ve had to give up. It’s the family business, yet outsiders seek to tear it away from them. Bravo to Phelps and other executives who took some risks in challenging the family to give ground. No wonder NASCAR is pissed at the MJ/Hambone/Jenkins cabal.
Also, to address the other comments earlier about “giving” teams “their” charters, so it’s more like other leagues. Well, did the NFL, NBA, MLB, et all just GIVE franchises to their owners? Heck no…they paid a VERY high price for being in that league. Why shouldn’t NASCAR also receive just compensation for awarding permanent charters if forced to do so by the court? And if such a change is forced on them, they should also have approval power over any sale of a charter, AND receive a percentage of the sale price, just like the other sports leagues do. I mean, if a charter is to become actual property, it would be communism to strip such an asset from NASCAR without market level compensation.
Let’s say, for s’s and giggles, December comes around and the court judgement is that NASCAR is a monopoly. What do courts do when they deem a business has become a monopoly? They force that company to divest segments of the business as necessary to demonopolize. The AT&T example previously cited didn’t mean those portions of the parent company were just GIVEN AWAY to new owners….they PAID AT&T for the business. Similarly, in a deconstruction of current NASCAR structure, teams could become stakeholders in the business by purchasing the divested stake/charter at fair market value from NASCAR. I don’t think the France family wants that to happen, but it’s a possible outcome.
I hope that helps illustrate where I’m coming from.
Blaze
The Midnight Rider
The NFL, MLB, and NBA, you know how the ownership works right? The owners of the teams own the league. If the owner of the Chicago Bulls choose to sell, 23 of the 30 owners have to approve of said sell to the buyer. It works the same way in the other two. MLB I think its 20 of 30 and NFL 24 of 32. The only people getting any money in those sales is the owner or owners who sell. There isn't any percentage of sell prices going to any other owners. Like you do realize that none of those leagues have one family who owns them right?
Blaze
The Midnight Rider
Because as I mentioned. This is a case where it makes sense. This isn't the gotcha you think it is. Playoffs suck.
Indeed, and you help highlight just how DIFFERENT this racing business is from all of those! It is Jordan wanting to push and legally coerce NASCAR into a similar franchised model, thereby grabbing much more wealth for the teams than they would have relative to any other racing platform. Why is that so bad, you may say? It destroys the wealth earned by NASCAR owners without compensation, and does so through Lawfare verses a transaction process of buyers and sellers.
Blaze
The Midnight Rider
This is why I've been saying they should meet in the middle and settle. Because you don't have to go the whole way with it. Like its literally nothing wrong with just saying that the charter system will never go away, it's permanent, but also "Hey we have to approve of any sell." Its zero wrong with that. I mean why should someone looking to enter the sport risk money when they know in a few years what they bought could be worthless?
There's a difference between comparing business models and comparing playing rules.
Tell me, how does transferring the charters to the teams take a dime out of anyone's pockets? The Frances? The charters cost them nothing to create, they get nothing when a charter changes hands, they get nothing when they take a charter away from a team, all by their own design. Apparently they can create more at will. Team owners? They'll get what everyone thought they were getting all along, control of an asset. The market value won't decline; indeed, knowing NASCAR can't take charters away may make charters look more stable to other potential team owners.
@StandOnIt, you and I may not agree on a single thing about this circus but you've been doing a great job of finding and posting updates from the day this kicked off.
Thank you.
Thank you.
MRM
Team Owner
If NASCAR wins this, I can see this being the end of 23XI racing given what Jordan had to say in those text messages. No wonder Reddick is looking to get out.
Thanks C.S. It's been interesting. Like the judge said. He doesn't think anybody is going to be happy with the outcome. I think that is something to remember watching this train wreck.
Charlie, and Blaze, I would bet you both agree that the “charter” has a value….am I correct in that assumption? I mean it has to have a value, since to “buy” a charter has cost anywhere from 20 to 40 million $ over the last several years…correct?
If we all agree on that, and the decision is made to create a permanent owned asset in a Charter, then WHY should the real owner of the current charter (NASCAR) NOT receive compensation for the transfer of ownership to the new owners? After all, the charter today is nothing more than a rental home. Teams may live and work within it, but the lease is only for a total of 7 years, with no guarantee of renewal. NOW, we’re talking about a TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP for this home, this charter, to the occupants. Why should NASCAR give away the house to them?
Meeting in the middle is a nice idea, but is there a middle ground with the Jordan Hamsters? Based upon statements, positioning and the disclosures in court, it’s clear they want far more than “charters”.
Blaze
The Midnight Rider
It has value to the teams yes, because its how you are guaranteed a spot in the race every week. That is what makes it valuable to a team. But for the France family they aren't losing out on anything. They didn't spend a dime making it, and yeah they are teams who didn't spend a dime either on getting them. But it being a permanent thing helps those teams also if they ever want out.
Like would YOU really be okay spending MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of dollars like the teams who weren't there at the start had to do who got them free, knowing you could have it taken in a few years, or would you rather know its yours to own, until you yourself want to sell it to someone?
What is continually missed is not only did the teams have ample time to sell their charters but they bought more instead during that time. The deadline of sign/sell or else was after two years of negotiations. This B.S. of saying the charters can be ripped away at any time is just that. In all the years that the charter system has been in place that never happened. Teams were given time to sell or buy if they desired.
Reading between the obvious lines, 23XI having a problem with the no sue clause is exactly what they set out to do is sue. Jordan was playing the big fish in a little pond and was trying to get other teams to follow his lead.
29 minutes of Jeff Gluck's reporting of what happened in court. I haven't listened to it all yet, but so far this is the most detailed account of what happened in the courtroom.
Blaze
The Midnight Rider
I'm not saying anytime. I'm saying at the end of the agreement. You don't wait until something happens to do something about it. That would be dumb. But I mean, if its no way NASCAR would ever end the charter program, then why not make it permanent? The only reason they would have to not make it permanent, is so the teams have to bend the knee to them and accept whatever there terms are when it comes to how the TV money is given out. They can use pulling the charters away as away to make teams just sign and accept what THEY want to give them.
The charter system is permanent. Where you are getting temporary from who knows. They/Nascar started to negotiate the terms of the charters after the TV deals are made. That is months before the season starts.
This is simple. You want to win in racing? You aren't going to make any or very little money. Do you see any of the top owners who are poor? Penske with 100 dealerships, or Hendrick?
You don't want to win, be a mid packer? You can make decent money. But a winner will spend every dime to win and leverage all of their resources to do so. That's why you see Ally on the side of the 48, Hendrick uses them to finance cars at all of his dealerships and they pay handsomely to be on the side of the car.
Blaze
The Midnight Rider
No they aren't. At the end of the current deal, they could end the charter system if they so please, because it's only as good for the amount of time as the agreement each contract.
What in the hell kind of law suits would come out of that? lol. Wake up. Saying they will when courthouse posturing and doing it are two entirely different things.