rifan muazin
The Western District of North Carolina courtroom buzzed with anticipation Friday afternoon as basketball icon Michael Jordan took the stand, marking a pivotal moment in the antitrust lawsuit filed by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports against NASCAR. The high-profile testimony capped off the first week of a trial that centers on allegations that NASCAR, as a monopsony—or a buyer’s monopoly—has used its market power to depress earnings for premier stock car racing teams.
Jordan, a co-owner of 23XI Racing alongside Cup Series driver Denny Hamlin and longtime associate Curtis Polk, is at the forefront of the 15-month legal battle that has now reached its trial phase. The core of the plaintiffs’ argument posits that NASCAR, by virtue of being the sole purchaser of premier racing teams, has wielded its influence unfairly, particularly during the recent charter extension negotiations. While 13 of the 15 Cup Series teams ultimately agreed to the charter extension after prolonged discussions, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, owned by Bob Jenkins, held out.
"Someone had to step forward to challenge NASCAR," Jordan stated during his testimony. He drew parallels to the National Basketball Association (NBA), where he achieved unparalleled success as a player and later as an owner, advocating for a revenue-sharing model closer to a 50-50 split between the league and its teams, along with a more equitable distribution of growth responsibilities. "If you share responsibility, the healthiness of the sport can grow," Jordan explained. "It needed to be looked at from a whole different perspective. That’s why we’re here."
NASCAR’s defense, articulated by attorney Lawrence Buterman, hinges on the assertion that the sanctioning body is a privately-owned entity, distinct from the team-owned structures common in many professional sports leagues. Buterman highlighted that NASCAR is not a "stick-and-ball league" where teams hold ownership of the sport itself. Jordan countered this by suggesting that privately owned sports ventures are "rarely successful."
Related News :
- Larson Offers Sympathy to Hamlin After Devastating Championship Loss at Phoenix
- NASCAR Explored Unprecedented Joint TV Rights Venture with IndyCar Amidst Market Shifts
- Denny Hamlin’s Ascent in Popularity Polls Signals Shift in Fan Perception
- NASCAR’s Elite Navigate Rulebook with Strategic Brake Pad Combinations
- It’s deja vu for Bell and another NASCAR final four dogfight
Despite these reservations, Jordan has made a significant financial commitment to 23XI Racing, which was initially branded as "Michael Jordan Motorsports with Denny Hamlin." As the majority owner, he has invested between $35 to $40 million into the team. This investment was made even after Curtis Polk, who has managed Jordan’s affairs for over three decades, advised him that NASCAR presented "risky to (his) brand and image" and could result in the loss of tens of millions of dollars. Jordan, a self-proclaimed lifelong NASCAR fan, was reportedly bought into Hamlin’s vision of achieving a projected profit of at least $900,000 per team. While Jordan acknowledged that the team has indeed been profitable, he maintains that the current structure of the charter system is inequitable. He entered NASCAR with optimism but found the "nature of the business to be unfair" as he delved deeper into its economic model.
The escalating cost of charters also became a point of discussion. The first charter was acquired for $4.7 million, the second for $13.5 million, and the third for a staggering $28 million. Jordan explained his continued acquisitions by stating, "There was a discussion between me and Denny about being successful… people who know me know I like to win and I will pursue anything to win and getting a third charter improves our chance to win the championship." He emphasized his "very invested" stake in the sport and the limited availability of charters as driving factors for these purchases, even amidst the contentious negotiations. Jordan’s ultimate hope, he testified, is to foster "more of a partnership between two entities" that would lead to a more valuable and growing business.
NASCAR, in its defense, has sought to portray Curtis Polk as an outsider whose primary objective was to disrupt the established order and initiate legal action. The prosecution presented discovered documents in which Polk allegedly described races as "boring as shit" and "painful to watch," suggesting a lack of genuine interest in the sport beyond its business implications. Buterman’s cross-examination aimed to highlight that while Jordan and Hamlin are passionate about racing, Polk’s perspective was purely transactional. Jordan conceded that Polk "obviously not" shared the same passion for racing.
Further evidence presented by NASCAR included a text message where Polk allegedly outlined a strategy to "be a pest and have a mosquito bite every week" during charter negotiations, including leaking financial proposals to the media. Jordan’s documented response to this strategy was a thumbs-up emoji. Similarly, when Polk discussed educating smaller teams on why their $11 million per charter proposal was unacceptable to larger teams, aiming for the $20 million per charter that 23XI and Front Row advocated for (and ultimately received $12.5 million in the 2025 agreement), Jordan again responded with a thumbs-up emoji. Polk also indicated plans to send a letter with "alternative evergreen language" to NASCAR, to which Jordan again responded affirmatively.
Despite the serious nature of the proceedings, a moment of levity occurred when Buterman thanked Jordan for his time, remarking that it made his nine-year-old son think he was cool. Jordan playfully retorted, "You’re not wearing your Jordans today," referring to Buterman’s customary attire of suits paired with sneakers.
While Jordan’s testimony generated considerable buzz, Heather Gibbs, the daughter-in-law of team founder Joe Gibbs, delivered what many observers considered the most impactful testimony of the day. She spoke publicly for the first time about the tragic death of her husband, Coy Gibbs, in November 2022, the morning after their son Ty won the Xfinity Series championship. Since that loss, Heather has become more deeply involved in the daily operations of Joe Gibbs Racing and the charter negotiations. She testified that she now fully understands the "very challenging" financial realities faced by teams, particularly those like Joe Gibbs Racing, which lack other business ventures to offset losses.
Gibbs recalled writing a "fiery letter" to NASCAR leadership in response to a statement by league commissioner Steve Phelps, who asserted that team spending was reckless. While she expressed respect for the France family, she believed NASCAR required a different economic model. She recounted the pressure to sign the charter agreement, which she described as a "gun to the head" proposition, with a tight deadline of one hour after receiving the final draft on September 6th. Gibbs also noted grammatical and syntax issues within the document, which NASCAR proposed to rectify with side letters, and expressed concern that the agreement did not guarantee broadcast revenue beyond the initial seven-year extension period.
When Gibbs contacted Jim France with their concerns, she stated his response was, "I’m done with the conversation" and "If I wake up and I have 20 charters, I have 20 charters." She explained her ultimate decision to sign was driven by a desire to preserve the legacy of Coy and JD Gibbs, and the risk of losing any agreement altogether was too great. During cross-examination, Gibbs clarified her use of "auto-renewal with terms" instead of "evergreen" or "permanent" charters, suggesting that the word "permanent" seemed to bother Jim France. However, she reiterated the teams’ goal was to secure the charter as a permanent asset to increase enterprise value, not necessarily permanent terms.
NASCAR President Steve O’Donnell spent nearly five hours on the stand over two days, including the initial hours of Friday. His testimony focused heavily on NASCAR’s perspective regarding potential competition, particularly from the Superstar Racing Experience (SRX). O’Donnell asserted that over 1,000 tracks exist in the U.S. that a competitor could utilize, and only 30 have NASCAR exclusivity clauses. He mentioned potential collaborations with IndyCar and the use of street courses as hypothetical scenarios for new racing series.
O’Donnell cited a phone call from NBC Sports executive Sam Flood, who questioned the viability of their rights agreement if CBS and ESPN were to broadcast a NASCAR variant, as a reason for his concern about SRX. He also expressed alarm at seeing Chase Elliott compete in an SRX race with NAPA sponsorship. O’Donnell claimed SRX was "coming back" to imply NASCAR had not damaged it, although Motorsport confirmed no comeback was planned. He characterized the non-compete clauses, which the plaintiffs view as anti-competitive, as a byproduct of negotiations, securing commitments from teams in exchange for guaranteed revenue and starting spots.
NASCAR’s defense also highlighted the increase in charter payouts and the rise in charter enterprise value from $1 million in 2016 to $45 million last season as evidence against anticompetitive behavior. O’Donnell attributed this growth to belief in the sport and increased private equity investment, noting that private equity partnerships were not permitted under previous agreements but are now allowed. However, 23XI and Front Row contend their charters would be worth significantly more, potentially over $100,000 on the open market, if they were permanent. O’Donnell countered that charters were "not originally put together to be permanent," citing evolving schedules and car designs.
Discussions also touched upon a proposed cost cap and cost floor for the 2025 charter negotiations, which ultimately did not materialize. NASCAR generally favors a cost cap to curb perceived "reckless spending," a point of contention with race teams. O’Donnell described team sentiment on a cost cap as split, with dominant teams like Penske, Gibbs, and Hendrick potentially less enthusiastic, while middle-tier teams are more receptive. He cited Formula 1’s cost cap system as a factor in increased team enterprise value. A cost floor proposal faced challenges, with some teams reporting they already operate below the proposed spending threshold.
The plaintiffs’ "four pillars" proposal, which included a request for $720 million (or $20 million per chartered entry), was met with surprise by O’Donnell, given the previous rights agreement was $800 million per year. He argued that such a payout would leave insufficient funds for tracks and hinder industry growth. He noted that IndyCar teams receive approximately 25% of revenue, equating to $2-2.5 million per car. In re-examination, plaintiffs’ counsel countered that IndyCar’s TV deal yields $8 million per entry, translating to $20 million or more to teams.
O’Donnell also reiterated his challenging interactions with Curtis Polk, describing them as the "most difficult meeting I’ve had with an individual in my 30 years in NASCAR." He characterized Polk as a businessman with no appreciation for the sport who threatened to disrupt meetings and did not operate with respect.
In a notable exchange, plaintiffs’ counsel seized upon O’Donnell’s use of the word "respect" to question whether NASCAR executives, like Steve Phelps, had always shown respect to team owners, referencing discovered text messages where Phelps allegedly referred to Richard Childress as a "stupid redneck" who "needs to be taken out back and flogged." NASCAR’s legal team objected to this line of questioning, as the inflammatory evidence was barred from being used as an exhibit.
Throughout the trial, U.S. District Judge Kenneth D. Bell has cautioned the NASCAR side against using "growing the sport" as a defense, suggesting it could be interpreted as an admission of increasing NASCAR’s own revenues. Judge Bell also indicated that the trial was likely to extend beyond its scheduled 10-day duration, acknowledging the burden on the jury and working to expedite proceedings. The current projection suggests the trial may conclude around December 15th or 16th, rather than the original target of December 12th.
💬 Tinggalkan Komentar dengan Facebook
Author Profile
Latest entries
Nascar CupJanuary 11, 2026Chris Gabehart Departs Joe Gibbs Racing in Unexpected Move, Fueling Speculation Across NASCAR Landscape
Nascar CupJanuary 11, 2026NASCAR Antitrust Trial Intensifies as Team Owner Details Financial Struggles and Executive Defends Controversial Clauses
Nascar CupJanuary 11, 2026Dale Earnhardt Jr. Expresses Astonishment at NASCAR’s Perceived Threat from SRX Amidst Antitrust Lawsuit Fallout
Nascar CupJanuary 11, 2026NTSB Focuses on Pilot Verification Amidst Ongoing Investigation into Fatal Greg Biffle Aircraft Incident
Ali Akbar Rosady
arthur roy sitompul
Anshari Taslim