Nascar says they have exhausted attempts to settle, Mishkin didn't get them closer to a deal. Nascar wants a sitting judge that can bring insights about a jury trial, the risks involved etc.
You just said your last post after you slammed sprint car racing for some reason that the cars series along with the NFL? was a better competitor. Now you say Cars isn't trying to compete? I'm confused. What this has to do with a monopoly or the Sherman act is beside me.
Maybe he wanted to sponsor his car with RFK Racing on it, but couldn't because of the non-compete rule in the charters. Brad said on Stacking Pennies that "There is a non-competition non-compete clause. If you're a Nascar Cup series owner, you're only allowed to compete in certain other sports. Not just with the car, just as a whole, your ownership group" (insert race team name here).
This is the equivalent to Patrick Mahomes playing in a flag football league during the off-season. It's not a competitor to the NFL and the NFL will not prohibit him from playing. The team might, but the league will not.
In this case In order for Nascar to be in violation of the Sherman Act Nascar would have to in some way sabotage either Brad's participation or SRX's ability in some way.
I thought you said that wasn't an example of the Sherman Act that I posted regarding Keselowski and SRX. It was a text book one.
Your turn to read closely. It's a If this had happened statement (which it didn't).
This would seem to indicate Penske is in violation (IndyCar and IMSA teams), along with Haas (F1), and Larson (participating in IndyCar and dirt series). =IF= that's the case (Ah say 'if', boy) and NASCAR hasn't enforced the restriction for those participants, it may have a hard time holding 23FRM to them.
i was wondering...
Yeah I thought so too. This came from AI so I found it hard to believe for the same reasons. I thought Nascar was doing the anti competitive clause for teams racing in other stock car series. I thought the argument was about teams taking the car and racing it elsewhere in direct competition with Nascar. I thought another argument was about permanent charters.
My post has no less relevance to the proceedings than anyone else's. Just trying to offer my contribution. Actully was looking for something in my computer and stumbled onto those pictures. It's kind of a funny story. Except the engine I put in was slap worn out. Whoops! They brought it with them. I just did what i was told.
Same thing here if Blaney fired up a sprint car at a track he co owned. He's participating in any automobile or Truck racing not sanctioned by Nascar.
Maybe a few teams have an exclusion on that non-compete clause in their contract that they signed.
Considering that all teams are no wheres close to being the same it's a no brainer their deals were different. Some are producing parts for the car, others engines, multi cars, etc. Seriously doubt those were in the charter agreements. They could be, but probably separate deals covering separate contracts for those individual parts, pieces etc.
Eh, you may be in Luck. Nascar is asking the court to appoint a judge and the reason is so they can advise both of them the legal ramifications if they go to trial. Nascar says they have exhausted the mediation process so they want a judge to look at it.
I never said it wasn't. I'm guesstimating at least 20% of this discussion is off-topic
I wasn't offended by ur comment. Just saying, whole lot of drivel here. Almost as bad as my shed thread.
Lol, I read Muskin's credentials and I thought what the hell was Nascar thinking? Muskin is probably on a first name basis with everybody on the 23XI group lol. I gave Nascar the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they thought this would be a good way to see what hand they were going to play going forward. Ha.
