welcome race fans to krazyaboutracing.com we are now in our 23rd year of being the leader in motorsports coverage on the world wide web

WE MAY NOT HAVE ALL THE WHISTLES & BELLS OF OTHER SITES , hOWEVER  have THE most complete MOTORSPORTS COVERAGE on the web !

(HOME) (CONTACT US)   (LOCAL RACING)  (DRIVER BIO PAGE)  (TRACK BIO PAGE) (PREVIOUS NEWS)  (PREVIOUS RACING)   (SITE NEWS)  (MEET THE STAFF)   (HALL OF FAME)  (MONTHLY NEWSLETTER)  (THE OLD'N DAYS)  (MULTIMEDIA)   (SPECIAL EVENTS)  (MONTHLY INSTALLMENTS)  (ANNUAL AWARDS)  (DRIVER & TEAM RELEASES) (LOCAL TRACK NEWS) (MISC RELEASES)

 

   

   

 for more coverage on the series click on the series lOgo

CRAFTSMAN truck series

CRAFTSMAM truck series 

www.nascar.com

Celebrating its 75th Anniversary in 2023, the National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, LLC (NASCAR) is the sanctioning body for the No. 1 form of motorsports in the United States and owner of 16 of the nation’s major motorsports entertainment facilities. NASCAR consists of three national series (NASCAR Cup Series™, NASCAR Xfinity Series™, and NASCAR Camping World Truck Series™), four regional series (ARCA Menards Series™, ARCA Menards Series East & West and the NASCAR Whelen Modified Tour™), one local grassroots series (NASCAR Advance Auto Parts Weekly Series™) and three international series (NASCAR Pinty’s Series™, NASCAR Mexico Series™, NASCAR Whelen Euro Series™). The International Motor Sports Association™ (IMSAŽ) governs the IMSA WeatherTech SportsCar Championship™, the premier U.S. sports car series. NASCAR also owns Motor Racing Network, Racing Electronics, and ONE DAYTONA. Based in Daytona Beach, Florida, with offices in eight cities across North America, NASCAR sanctions more than 1,200 races in more than 30 U.S. states, Canada, Mexico and Europe. For more information visit www.NASCAR.com and www.IMSA.com, and follow NASCAR on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat (‘NASCAR’).

 

 

National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing

www.nascar.com

Celebrating its 75th Anniversary in 2023, the National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, LLC (NASCAR) is the sanctioning body for the No. 1 form of motorsports in the United States and owner of 16 of the nation’s major motorsports entertainment facilities. NASCAR consists of three national series (NASCAR Cup Series™, NASCAR Xfinity Series™, and NASCAR Camping World Truck Series™), four regional series (ARCA Menards Series™, ARCA Menards Series East & West and the NASCAR Whelen Modified Tour™), one local grassroots series (NASCAR Advance Auto Parts Weekly Series™) and three international series (NASCAR Pinty’s Series™, NASCAR Mexico Series™, NASCAR Whelen Euro Series™). The International Motor Sports Association™ (IMSAŽ) governs the IMSA WeatherTech SportsCar Championship™, the premier U.S. sports car series. NASCAR also owns Motor Racing Network, Racing Electronics, and ONE DAYTONA. Based in Daytona Beach, Florida, with offices in eight cities across North America, NASCAR sanctions more than 1,200 races in more than 30 U.S. states, Canada, Mexico and Europe. For more information visit www.NASCAR.com and www.IMSA.com, and follow NASCAR on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat (‘NASCAR’).

 

NASCAR antitrust trial starts second week with a blizzard of numbers

 

December 8, 2025

 

By Reid Spencer

NASCAR Wire Service

 

CHARLOTTE, N.C.—In the Western District of North Carolina courthouse on Monday, participants and onlookers in Judge Kenneth D. Bell’s courtroom spent most of the afternoon in “but for” world.

 

Economist Edward A. Snyder, an expert witness for the plaintiffs in the “23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports v. NASCAR” antitrust litigation, spent hours on the stand first presenting and then defending his thesis that anti-competitive practices on the part of NASCAR damaged 23XI and Front Row during the period 2021 through 2024.

 

Plaintiffs used Snyder to try to establish the amount of monetary damages the two race teams have suffered under the 2016 charter agreement during that four-year period. NASCAR’s alleged anti-competitive behavior and the amount of damages, if any, are matters in dispute in the trial.

 

Snyder contended that 23XI and Front Row both would have made more money and that their organizations would have been worth much more, but for NASCAR’s alleged anti-competitive actions.

 

Citing issues that have become familiar themes during the proceedings, Snyder pointed to the goodwill or non-compete provisions of the charter agreements with NASCAR Cup Series race teams, the exclusivity clauses in sanctioning agreements with race tracks and the intellectual property restrictions placed on NASCAR’s Gen-7 race cars, which were introduced into the Cup series in 2022.

 

Snyder based his analysis on the supposition that a competing premier stock car racing series would have been viable by 2021 in “but for” world—had the above provisions not existed.

 

On cross-examination, however, NASCAR outside counsel Lawrence F. Buterman brought out the fact that no equivalent series had ever come into being in NASCAR’s 77-year history. That was true even before 2016 charter agreements were adopted by Cup Series teams, during a lengthy period when no such restrictions existed.

 

Using Formula 1 racing as the closest benchmark to NASCAR, and incorporating a multiple of 4.3 times annual earnings, Snyder postulated that 23XI would have made an additional $41 million and Front Row and additional $43 million over the four years in question.

 

Added to that were Snyder’s calculations of reduction in market values of $163.8 million for 23XI and $96.4 million for Front Row, based on the 4.3 multiplier.

 

Buterman questioned Snyder of the presumption that NASCAR would have paid its chartered teams an additional $1.06 billion had a rival league actually existed, a figure that was a fundamental part of the calculations.

 

“I don’t know how NASCAR’s going to respond (to competition),” Snyder acknowledged.

 

Snyder’s estimates of potential profits and market value also were dependent on raising the share of NASCAR revenues paid to teams from 25 percent (as under the 2016 charter agreement) to 45 percent (the rate Snyder incorporated from F1).

 

According to the plaintiffs’ own chart, as Buterman pointed out, the amount of revenue F1 paid to its teams in 2023 and 2024 was 37 percent.

 

Snyder also acknowledged under cross that his estimates did not take into consideration any potential decrease in NASCAR revenues based on competition from a rival series.

 

Buterman also challenged Snyder’s contention that NASCAR “paid for exclusivity” in its contracts with Cup race tracks. In fact, evidence submitted during trial indicates that NASCAR paid 65 percent of broadcast rights revenue to the tracks before and after exclusivity provisions were added to the sanctioning agreements concurrent with the adoption of the charter system in 2016.

 

Snyder’s testimony followed the completion of the cross-examination of Race Team Alliance executive director John Marshall, who acknowledged that no other racing series had provided permanent charters to its teams (a prevalent issue in the trial).

 

Marshall also testified that, after an initial request of an aggregate $720 million annually during 2025 charter negotiations, the majority of NASCAR team owners reacted positively to an offer from NASCAR between $410 million and $451 million in the new 2025 charter agreement, based on a fixed 45 percent of broadcast revenue.

 

In fact, 13 of the 15 teams signed the 2025 charter agreement. Only 23XI and Front Row did not.

 

The trial will continue on Tuesday morning with Snyder on the stand. The plaintiffs are expected to call NASCAR commissioner Steve Phelps, Cup Series team owner Richard Childress and NASCAR chairman and CEO Jim France as their next witnesses.

 

 

Michael Jordan’s testimony highlights fifth day of NASCAR antitrust trial

 

December 5, 2025

 

By Reid Spencer

NASCAR Wire Service

 

CHARLOTTE, N.C.—After Friday’s lunch break in the “23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports v. NASCAR” antitrust trial, Judge Kenneth D. Bell entered to a packed courtroom in the Western District of North Carolina courthouse.

 

“I take it Mr. Jordan is the next witness,” Bell said wryly. “Anyone who’s not already in the courtroom will not be permitted.”

 

Mr. Jordan, of course, is former NBA superstar Michael Jordan, majority owner of 23XI Racing, one of the two plaintiffs in the litigation.

 

During direct questioning, Danielle Williams of Winston & Strawn reviewed Jordan’s history as an athlete.

 

“I heard that you were pretty good in basketball,” she said.

 

“I used to be,” allowed Jordan, who led the Chicago Bulls to six NBA championships.

 

Though Jordan has little to do with the day-to-day operations of 23XI Racing, he was conversant with the issues that led the organization not to sign the 2025 NASCAR Cup Series charter agreement and ultimately to file the lawsuit.

 

As part of a recurring theme in the plaintiffs’ case, Jordan pointed to four items race teams sought in the 2025 charter agreement: 1) a larger share of NASCAR revenues, 2) governance in terms of voting power over specific cost increases, 3) permanent charters and 4) a one-third share of new business.

 

Those provisions were not included in the 2025 charter agreement, which was signed by 13 of the 15 Cup Series teams. Front Row Motorsports joined 23XI in declining to sign and deciding to sue for damages under the 2016 charter agreement.

 

Under cross-examination by Lawrence E. Buterman, Jordan acknowledged he had relied on long-time financial adviser Curtis Polk for due diligence in deciding whether to join NASCAR star Denny Hamlin in founding the race team he now co-owns.

 

Hamlin’s initial profit projections in his proposal to Jordan were modest—$900,000 a year. In 2022, the company netted more than $2 million. In 2023, profits were more than $3.5 million.

 

A lifelong NASCAR fan, Jordan said he had not read either the 2016 or 2025 charter agreements cover-to-cover, but he acknowledged he had praised the charter system concept in the past.

 

In fact, Jordan communicated to NASCAR chairman and CEO Jim France that “you and your family did a great service to the sport by starting the charter system.”

 

Asked by Buterman whether the charter system is good for the teams and NASCAR, and whether the charter system provides value to the teams by attracting sponsors and investors, Jordan replied in the affirmative.

 

Before Jordan took the stand, Joe Gibbs Racing co-owner Heather Gibbs provided emotionally charged testimony in favor of permanent charters, reiterating a request she had made in a May 2024 letter to NASCAR.

 

“I think they’re absolutely vital to the teams,” said Gibbs, whose husband, Coy Gibbs died at age 49 on Nov. 6, 2022, the day after their son, Ty Gibbs, had won the NASCAR Xfinity Series championship at Phoenix Raceway.

 

Gibbs said she saw permanent charters as a safety net. Joe Gibbs Racing, founded by three-time Super Bowl-winning coach Joe Gibbs, has no outside sources of revenue, she asserted.

 

NASCAR president Steve O’Donnell, in concluding his testimony earlier in the day, explained NASCAR’s rationale in opposing permanent charters. O’Donnell cited the uncertainty of revenue streams, broadcast rights and racing schedules as a major drawback to permanent charters.

 

“We need the ability to be flexible,” O’Donnell said.

 

Friday’s session ended with the cross-examination of John Marshall, executive director of the Race Team Alliance (RTA), a non-profit consortium of NASCAR Cup Series team owners.

 

Marshall compared franchise values in other sports with NASCAR teams, but under cross-examination, he conceded that the sanctioning body, a family-owned enterprise, differed from so-called “stick-and-ball” franchises where the teams own their respective leagues and the buy-in is enormous.

 

Marshall, whose cross-examination will continue when the trial resumes Monday morning, acknowledged that the RTA had trademarked the name “U.S. Racing League”—suggesting an alternative to NASCAR—but had not pursued the prospects of a rival series.

 

 

NASCAR president Steve O’Donnell testifies in NASCAR antitrust trial

 

December 4, 2025

 

By Reid Spencer

NASCAR Wire Service

 

CHARLOTTE, N.C.—In late morning of the fourth day of the “23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports v. NASCAR” antitrust trial, NASCAR president Steve O’Donnell took the stand as an adverse witness called by plaintiffs’ lead attorney Jeffrey Kessler.

 

What soon became abundantly clear on Thursday at the Western District of North Carolina courthouse were the points of emphasis Kessler would use to try to establish anti-competitive behavior on the part of NASCAR toward its chartered race teams.

 

Kessler asked O’Donnell repeatedly about the exclusivity provisions in NASCAR’s sanctioning agreements with race tracks, most prominently properties owned by Speedway Motorsports.

 

Other significant issues included the potential threat to NASCAR of competing racing series—notably SRX; the lack of permanence of the charters under the 2025 agreement; and governance of the sport, given the specific exclusion of the so-called “three strikes” provision in the current charter agreement.

 

To that last point, O’Donnell testified, NASCAR wanted to eliminate team owners’ veto power over cost increases in order to grow the sport.

 

With the three-strikes provision (owners with voting power) in place, O’Donnell said, “We would not have been in Mexico City (in 2025), and the TV partner (Amazon Prime Video) would not have paid the money they did.”

 

Similarly, three years of races on the Chicago Street Course—initially a hard sell to the NASCAR board headed by chairman and CEO Jim France—cost NASCAR an estimated $55 million, but the enterprise served a broader purpose.

 

“Amazon said there was no way they would have engaged with our sport without that,” O’Donnell told NASCAR outside counsel Chris Yates after Kessler finished his questioning. “It was a long shot, but we were able to pull it off, and it was a successful event.”

 

O’Donnell explained that the sanction agreements with Speedway Motorsports were expanded from a single year to five years in 2016 to coincide with the initial term of the charter agreements, which changed the economic paradigm of the sport.

 

The exclusivity provisions in the sanctions were expanded starting in 2016, as NASCAR strove to establish a predictable revenue model that would function under the charter agreements with the race teams.

 

In his initial questioning, Kessler asked O’Donnell about a litany of contingency plans NASCAR had considered, if race teams opted not to sign the 2025 charter agreement.

 

Kessler pointed to SRX as a potential competitor to NASCAR, and O’Donnell acknowledged the sanctioning body had become more concerned with the new series as it evolved in a direction more closely resembling a NASCAR product.

 

However, both NASCAR drivers and team owners (23XI principal Denny Hamlin, Brad Keselowski, Chase Elliott and Justin Marks) drove in SRX races, which took place exclusively on short tracks.

 

O’Donnell also pointed out that SRX was owned by Tony Stewart, who simultaneously held NASCAR Cup Series charters as co-owner of Stewart-Haas Racing.

 

O’Donnell’s testimony, which will conclude Friday, followed the completion of the cross-examination and redirect of Front Row Motorsports owner Bob Jenkins, one of the plaintiffs in the case.

 

Earlier in the morning, concluding his testimony, Front Row Motorsports (FRM) owner Bob Jenkins admitted he incorrectly stated Wednesday that it costs FRM $20 million per season to a run a single car in the NASCAR Cup Series. The Defense cited FRM’s own financial records, which showed that the most it has spent in a year on running two Cup Series car was around $28 million ($14 million per car).

 

At the close of the court session on Thursday, Judge Kenneth D. Bell expressed displeasure with the pace of the trial and urged attorneys from both sides to use discipline in the questioning of witnesses.

 

As a parting shot, Bell added that some of the questioning involved “beating the horses well beyond their deathbeds.”

 

The pace of the trial may affect the appearance of team owner Roger Penske as a witness for NASCAR. Yates said Penske’s only available day is Monday, and the plaintiffs have not agreed to let him testify before they have rested their case.

 

Front Row Motorsports owner Bob Jenkins takes the stand in NASCAR antitrust trial

 

December 3, 2025

 

By Reid Spencer

NASCAR Wire Service

 

CHARLOTTE, N.C.—The third day of the “23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports v. NASCAR” antitrust trial ended Wednesday with one of the plaintiffs, Front Row Motorsports owner Bob Jenkins, on the witness stand.

 

Jenkins is a former manufacturing plant manager from eastern Tennessee who assembled a portfolio of fast-food franchises that includes approximately 400 Taco Bells, 30 KFCs and 50 Long John Silver’s.

 

In 2011, Jenkins and a group of investors acquired Long John Silver’s in its entirety. Ownership now resides with Jenkins’ four children.

 

Jenkins also operates a regional trucking company and a warehousing enterprise in addition to his ownership of Front Row Motorsports.

 

In 19 years of full-time NASCAR racing, Front Row has never turned a profit, Jenkins said in his direct testimony under questioning from plaintiffs’ attorney Danielle Williams of Winston & Strawn LLP.

 

Nevertheless, the Front Row owner loves the sport. He was a charter member of the Dale Earnhardt fan club who vowed one day to own a race team.

 

“One of these days, I’m going own one of those things,” Jenkins testified he had said while watching a NASCAR race. “My wife said, ‘We don’t even own our own car yet,’” Jenkins added, eliciting laughter throughout Judge Kenneth D. Bell’s courtroom in the Western District of North Carolina courthouse.

 

Jenkins was party to the NASCAR Cup Series’ 2016 charter agreement, and he signed the renewal in 2020 that carried the agreement though 2024 even though he said he viewed the contract to be anti-competitive. But Jenkins joined 23XI in declining to sign the 2025 charter agreement and in filing the antitrust action against NASCAR, claiming $145 million in damages (to Front Row) under the 2016 agreement.

 

Asked why he signed the 2016 agreement, Jenkins testified he thought it was a step in the right direction.

 

“I was in favor of a charter system,” Jenkins said. “I think it helps owners, drivers and fans and gives us some stability.”

 

Under cross examination by NASCAR outside counsel Lawrence E. Buterman of Latham & Watkins LLP, Jenkins made a distinction between the charter system and the charter agreement, claiming he was damaged by exclusivity provisions governing race teams and race tracks and rising cost of parts and pieces necessary to build race cars to NASCAR’s specifications.

 

“The charter system is an absolute win for the teams and the sport,” Jenkins said. “The charter agreement is not.”

 

But Jenkins said he had never asked NASCAR for an exception to race elsewhere and had received every penny due from NASCAR under the 2016 agreement.

 

“This is not about bashing the France family (NASCAR principals),” Jenkins testified. “I admire their entrepreneurial spirit. They’ve done a lot of great things over the years, but this charter agreement is not one of them.”

 

Under cross-examination, Jenkins acknowledged that the charter agreement had provided one aspect he considered extremely important—guaranteeing chartered teams starting positions in all 36 Cup Series races and limiting the number of open teams allowed to compete for prize money.

 

Jenkins also confirmed he had sold and leased charters under the 2016 agreement and realized $12.5 million from those activities.

 

With the advent of the Gen-7 car in the Cup Series in 2022, Jenkins said his average cost for parts grew from $1.8 million to $4.7 million. He also testified that his sponsorship revenues grew from more than $3.5 million in 2016 to nearly $9 million in 2023.

 

Buterman, who will continue his cross-examination on Thursday, also questioned Jenkins’ commitment to making Front Row as profitable as possible, noting that Jenkins had given sponsorship free of charge to Long John Silver’s for five races (including the Daytona 500) when the team failed to sell sponsorship elsewhere.

 

Jenkins’ appearance on the stand followed the completion of the direct examination, cross and re-direct of NASCAR executive vice president of global strategy Scott Prime, with plaintiffs’ lead counsel Jeffrey Kessler trying to establish that NASCAR had acted in an anti-competitive manner and defense counsel Anna Rathbun eliciting testimony that NASCAR had acted prudently in planning for contingencies if teams declined to sign the 2025 charter agreement.

 

Thirteen of 15 Cup Series teams signed the 2025 agreement. Front Row and 23XI were the only two that did not.

 

Testimony from Denny Hamlin highlights second day of NASCAR trial

 

December 2, 2025

 

By Reid Spencer

NASCAR Wire Service

 

CHARLOTTE, N.C.—Sparks flew in Judge Kenneth D. Bell’s courtroom on Monday after Denny Hamlin took the stand for his second day of testimony in the 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports v. NASCAR trial in the Western District of North Carolina courthouse.

 

In the conclusion of direct examination from Jeanifer Parsigian, Hamlin acknowledged that 23XI Racing, co-owned by Hamlin, former NBA superstar Michael Jordan and Curtis Polk, had turned a profit of more than $2 million in 2022 and more than $3.5 million in 2023.

 

Hamlin argued that the company’s profits should have been considerably higher than the stated 2.26 percent of revenue if not for what he termed the unfairness of the NASCAR Cup Series charter agreement 23XI signed with NASCAR after the launch of the team in 2021.

 

“Our costs were not covered,” said Hamlin, who testified that the profitability of the race team was dependent on outside sponsorship.

 

“I have spent 20 years in this sport trying to make it better and make it grow,” Hamlin added later in his testimony, when discussing 23XI’s decision not to sign the 2025 charter agreement.

 

“All I know is that we were right and they were wrong, and they needed to be held accountable.”

 

Under rigorous cross examination from NASCAR outside counsel Lawrence E. Buterman of Latham & Watkins LLP, Hamlin was quizzed about his initial pitch to Jordan for the formation of the race team, where he projected annual profits at $900,000.

 

Hamlin testified he relied on NASCAR’s projection of 40-perent savings with the advent of the Gen-7 race car, but Buterman pointed out that, in his pretrial deposition, Hamlin stated he had also done his own due diligence before outlining the benefits of the car to Jordan.

 

Further, Hamlin opined on a podcast with former-NASCAR-racer-turned curmudgeon Kenny Wallace that the Gen-7 car—portrayed in the lawsuit as burdensome to race teams—was actually “a net positive for the sport.”

 

Hamlin, who earns approximately $14 million per year driving for Joe Gibbs Racing while co-owning 23XI, testily explained that he felt obligated to “paint a rosy picture” of the sport in his public statements to avoid a potential summons to the NASCAR transporter for a tongue lashing.

 

All told, Buterman stated from discovery that the total investment from the 23XI principals in the race team has amounted to $23.9 million - far lower than the $45 million Hamlin claims to have invested using his own funds.  An expert witness 23XI plans to call later in the trial pegged the value of the company at the close of 2024 at $160.2 million.

 

In texts to his partners introduced into evidence on Tuesday, Hamlin stated that a 10-percent annual profit would be a worthy target.

 

Yet, Buterman said, 23XI is seeking $205 million in damages for lost potential profit under the 2016 charter agreement, roughly a 900-percent return on investment.

 

“Do you think that’s fair?” Buterman asked.

 

Hamlin said he would leave it to the expert to answer.

 

At one point, Buterman quoted a past comment from Hamlin followed by the question, “Those are your words?”

 

“And I see what you’re trying to do with them,” Hamlin shot back, drawing a chuckle from Jordan, who was seated behind the plaintiffs’ rows of tables.

 

Hamlin was on firmer footing after the morning break when questioned on a letter he sent to NASCAR in September 2024 outlining eight conditions that would have to be met before 23XI would sign the 2025 charter agreement.

 

Hamlin had plausible reasons for each of the conditions, none of which he said were met.

 

Hamlin’s testimony concluded with one request from Parsigian on re-direct, asking him to read a passage of the letter to NASCAR in which Hamlin said he feared the new agreement would depress the value of charters.

 

On re-cross, Buterman asked Hamlin whether he was aware that the current value of NASCAR Cup charter was $45 million.

 

“I only know that we paid $28 million for the last one,” said Hamlin.

 

All told, 23XI bought three charters for $4.7 million, $13.5 million and $28 million, respectively.

 

In a day that included only two witnesses, the plaintiffs next called Scott Prime, NASCAR executive vice president of global strategy, who was involved in both the 2016 and 2025 charter negotiations.

 

On direct examination, the plaintiffs’ lead attorney, Jeffrey Kessler, made a major issue of NASCAR’s exclusive arrangements with race tracks, most notably those owned by Speedway Motorsports, Inc.

 

Through the introduction of text messages and the questioning of Prime, Kessler also established that there had been disagreement among NASCAR officials about potential provisions in the 2025 charter agreements, with commissioner Steve Phelps and president Steve O’Donnell arguing for more concessions to the teams.

 

Ultimately, 13 of the 15 chartered teams signed the agreement in 2024. Only 23XI and Front Row did not, choosing to file the antitrust action instead.

 

 

 

Denny Hamlin takes the stand after opening statements in antitrust trial

 

December 1, 2025

 

By Reid Spencer

NASCAR Wire Service

 

CHARLOTTE, N.C.—After strong opening arguments by attorneys for both sides in the 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports v. NASCAR antitrust case, the first day of trial ended with 23XI co-owner Denny Hamlin on the stand.

 

Under direct examination in Judge Kenneth D. Bell’s courtroom from Jeanifer Parsigian, one of plaintiffs’ attorneys from Winston & Strawn, Hamlin on Monday had barely begun to touch on the substantive issues of the case before the trial in the Western District of North Carolina Courthouse adjourned at 5 p.m.

 

Hamlin testified, for example, that 23XI Racing had paid $4.7 million, $13.5 million and $28 million for a succession of three NASCAR Cup Series charters as the race team he co-founded with former NBA superstar Michael Jordan grew from a business proposition to a three-car organization with a $35-million headquarters in Huntersville, N.C.

 

Those were the same figures cited in opening statements by John Stephenson of Alston & Bird, one of three firms representing NASCAR and chairman and CEO Jim France in the litigation.

 

The charter system, instituted by NASCAR in 2016 at the request of Cup Series teams, resides at the core of the case. When charters came up for renewal in 2025, 23XI and Front Row (owned by Bob Jenkins) declined to sign, whereas the 13 other chartered Cup teams opted to do so.

 

Plaintiffs’ lead attorney Jeffrey L. Kessler contended in his opening statement that NASCAR, as a monopsony in the highest level of stock car racing (in other words, as the only buyer of services in that realm) had used its power to depress prices paid to race teams and that teams were hurt by the exercise of that power.

 

Stephenson countered that the original charter agreement had conferred benefits to Cup teams that did not exist previously: guaranteed starting spots for all 36 chartered cars, additional money paid to the holders of charters and an asset (the charter itself) given to charter agreement signees in 2016 that has steadily increased in value, with reported sales of up to $45 million.

 

“NASCAR paid every cent that was due to the teams for nine years,” Stephenson said. "You won’t hear that NASCAR broke its word to the teams under the charter agreement.”

 

Kessler contended that NASCAR’s ownership of Cup Series race tracks and exclusivity agreements with other venues, particularly those owned by Speedway Motorsports, Inc., prevented race teams from achieving fair market value for their services.

 

Stephenson pointed out that the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division had reviewed NASCAR’s acquisition of International Speedway Corporation (and its portfolio of race tracks), which closed for $2 billion in 2019.

 

Stephenson also contended that none of the anticompetitive issues alleged in the complaint—whether race tracks, the Gen-7 race cars and associated intellectual property restrictions or the charter system itself—had not been raised in the two-and-a-half years of charter negotiations nor in an eight-point letter sent by 23XI to NASCAR before 23XI and Front Row filed suit.

 

“This is not a case about anti-competitive conduct at all,” Stephenson asserted.

 

In his testimony, Hamlin estimated that the average cost to put a race car on the track for one year is $20 million. He stated further that each charter paid an average of $12.5 million to respective race teams in 2025 versus approximately $9 million under the previous charter agreement.

 

Hamlin, who recounted the financial support from his parents early in his racing career, cited the need for teams to have a voice in NASCAR-mandated expenditures as one reason for not signing the 2025 charter agreement.

 

“Schedule, car changes, rule changes—all those things directly affect our bottom line,” said Hamlin, who will return to the stand on Tuesday for continued direct testimony and cross-examination.

 

As an example, Hamlin cited the Cup Series race in Mexico City as burdensome in terms of overtime to employees and complicated logistics.

 

Jury selection on Monday morning went relatively quickly and with just one snafu. One of the jurors chosen subsequently was released for necessary family obligations and replaced in short order. The jury that will determine the facts of the case consists of six men and three women.

 

Bell repeatedly admonished the jurors not to discuss the case with any outside parties.

 

 

CRAFTSMAN truck series

 Copyright 2002- 2025 Motorsportsgarage productions

no part of site site can be copied or duplicated without written permission from Motorsportsgarage productions

all logos and images are copyrighted to the racing series and used for editorial purposes only

 

     

follow up on

This site is dedicated to my father " hoot " who introduced me to the Great sport of auto racing when I was a very young child

Thru the years I have befriended several people Thru Racing that have passed on and I honor them here

Larrt Criss. Charlie Patterson. Carrol Horton, Todd shaffer, gary lee and Judy Morris