"23XI & FRM argue NASCAR deprives them of fair chance to earn profit": Insider explains teams' latest response amid ongoing charter war
23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports have clapped back at NASCAR as they opposed the sanctioning body's case dismissal suggestion. This comes after Jim France & Co. submitted the motion before the federal court to dismiss the case, citing that plaintiffs have sued the organization due to their displeasure with the contract terms.
However, 23XI and FRM's attorney, Jeffrey Kessler, reiterated that the lawsuit stemmed from NASCAR's monopolistic influence over stock car racing, which has nothing to do with the charter contract. Moreover, the plaintiffs alleged that NASCAR prohibits charted teams from forming their own 'elite racing series,' depriving them of a fair chance to wash hands in more money.
The aforementioned teams also claimed that NASCAR owns the majority of tracks and doesn't allow a similar event to be hosted by anyone except NASCAR. The blame dragged on the officials' decision to appoint a single-source supplier which bans teams from buying NextGen parts from other vendors, depicting a monopoly in various branches.
NASCAR expressed that the elite racing series is too narrow of categorization for an antitrust claim as it can include several motorsports. They further alleged that plaintiffs 'disliked' charter terms, so NASCAR cannot be forced to enter into an agreement with them.
That being said, motorsports insider Bob Pockrass shared an excerpt of the ongoing war between the teams and NASCAR.
"23XI/FRM argue an elite stock-car series/product requires elite teams & NASCAR deprives them of fair chance to earn profit by prohibiting charter teams from doing similar series, controlling tracks (Cup tracks can't have similar races), cars (single-source suppliers) & payouts."
"And basic NASCAR response is elite stock-car racing is too narrow a definition of a market in determining antitrust, that the market incl at the very least other racing series/motorsports. And just b/c 23XI/FRM disliked charter terms, NASCAR can't be forced to do business w/them."
If the Judge didn't dismiss the lawsuit, deposition of finances, documents, and more would begin.
"Defendants motion to dismiss is a fantasy": 23XI and FRM issues a scathing reply to NASCAR's dismissal claim
The controversy began a month after 23XI and FRM refused to sign the charter proposal. The teams accused NASCAR of exercising undue power of its monopoly over the sport, forcing teams to sign the deal or risk losing existing charters.
As soon as a team inked approval on the paper, it reportedly waived its right to file a case against NASCAR for antitrust. Thus, many felt that plaintiffs might've been brewing a plan to sue NASCAR ever since the proposal was shared, the week preceding the playoff opener at the Atlanta Motor Speedway.
However, NASCAR has been trying to dismiss the plaintiffs' claim since the battle began. They recently removed the rule that bans race organizations, with an active lawsuit against the sanctioning body, to participate as 'open teams.' With that, 23XI and FRM's 'irreparable harm' claim became weak and Judge Frank D. Whitney denied the preliminary injunction to race as chartered teams.
But after the sanctioning body's major move to block the SHR charter sale and dismiss the case, 23XI and FRM didn't hold back from issuing a stern response.
“Defendants (NASCAR) motion to dismiss is a fantasy. It is based on their contested version of the facts, instead of the Complaint’s allegations. It is also based on a mischaracterization of Plaintiffs (23XI/Front Row) legal claims, a mischaracterization of the relevant input market, and a mischaracterization of governing law. It is draped in rhetoric about this being a contractual dispute when Defendants know that the Complaint is alleging facts plausibly showing Defendants’ unlawful maintenance of monopoly,” via Sportsnaut.
The charter transfer deadline with SHR is approaching but NASCAR is adamant on blocking the sale unless the lawsuit is dropped.