Day 2 of NASCAR Antitrust Trial Unearths Internal Dissent Over Charter Terms

CHARLOTTE, NC – The second day of the antitrust trial brought forth significant revelations from within NASCAR’s leadership, as Scott Prime, Executive Vice President and Chief Strategy Officer, took the witness stand. His testimony, punctuated by the unsealing of private emails and text messages, painted a picture of internal discord regarding the terms of the charter agreement proposed by CEO Jim France to Cup Series race teams.

Plaintiffs 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports are seeking to prove that NASCAR has engaged in monopolistic practices that stifle competition and limit the financial viability of its teams. The evidence presented on day two suggested that some members of NASCAR’s senior management shared concerns about the fairness of the proposed charter terms, which they believed did not adequately compensate team owners compared to international racing series.

Internal communications revealed that Prime, alongside former COO Steve O’Donnell and former President Steve Phelps, privately expressed reservations about the charter terms that CEO Jim France appeared committed to enforcing. These messages indicated a belief among these executives that the Cup Series teams deserved a more favorable deal.

One particularly striking email, presented as evidence, showed Prime suggesting to his colleagues that team owners "have a point" in their negotiations. He cited his research indicating that Formula 1 teams receive approximately 50 percent of their series’ overall revenue, a stark contrast to the 20-25 percent typically allocated to NASCAR Cup organizations. This comparison highlighted a significant disparity in revenue distribution between the two premier motorsport series.

Related News :

In another email, Prime candidly stated, "We at NASCAR have all the leverage and the teams will almost have to sign whatever we put in front of them." This statement, questioned by lead attorney for the teams, Jeffrey Kessler, was used to illustrate a perceived power imbalance that the plaintiffs argue forms the basis of NASCAR’s alleged monopolistic control.

The defense, representing NASCAR, sought to frame these internal discussions as part of a standard negotiation process and not indicative of systemic anti-competitive behavior. They argued that the final charter agreement, while not entirely satisfying all parties, represented a fair compromise that ensured the long-term stability of the sport.

A series of text messages from May 21, 2024, further illuminated the internal tensions. In this exchange, O’Donnell, Phelps, and Prime discussed a meeting with Jim France and other NASCAR executives.

O’Donnell’s text indicated that Lesa France Kennedy had spoken with Gary Crotty (NASCAR Legal) and Mike Helton (President Emeritus), and that they viewed the meeting as productive, emphasizing the need to "keep trying to move the needle" and that "Teams won’t get everything they want and hopefully we can just meet in the middle." O’Donnell then expressed his own frustration, stating, "I just listened as she didn’t want to hear any opinions but I of course didn’t hold back. I just asked for someone in the mtg to point out how any of our positions are going to grow the sport and position us for a big rights renewal in the future."

Phelps’ response was sharp: "Productive? Insanity. Look at the Amanda (Oliver, Chief Legal Officer) chart – zero wins for the teams." He continued, "The draft must reflect a middle position of we are dead in the water – they will sign them but we are fucked moving forward. I feel better now. Thanks for that."

Prime’s reply was equally pointed: "The approach of ‘here is a bit more money, fuck off everywhere else’ is a bold strategy."

O’Donnell then characterized the approach as "Close to a comfortable 1996, fuck the teams, dictatorship, motorsport, redneck, southern, tiny sport."

Kessler pressed Prime on whether these messages reflected a genuine sentiment of frustration due to an inability to influence NASCAR’s patriarch, Jim France. Prime acknowledged frustration stemming from the meeting with team owners and regretted his choice of language.

However, Prime also contended that the NASCAR board of directors did consider feedback and incorporated some additional requests from the teams. The plaintiffs, 23XI and Front Row, characterized these concessions as minor, securing only "two or three" concessions out of thousands of proposed line items. When questioned by Kessler about what was ultimately granted to the teams, Prime cited "significant protections." The legal counsel for the plaintiffs countered that NASCAR still failed to offer charter permanency, additional financial remuneration, or a genuine voice in decision-making processes. "You kept all the power," Kessler asserted.

A significant portion of Kessler’s questioning focused on Prime’s awareness of the potential for a rival racing series and NASCAR’s strategies to preempt such a development. Emails dating back to 2020 showed Prime expressing concerns that a breakaway series "could demonstrate to team owners and drivers that there are alternatives" and that NASCAR should "want to avoid a CART/IRL scenario." This reference alludes to the detrimental open-wheel racing split in the 1990s that significantly weakened the sport’s mainstream appeal in North America.

Kessler presented evidence suggesting that Prime and his leadership colleagues began discussing more extensive track exclusivity agreements with Speedway Motorsports venues. The aim was to prevent these tracks from hosting competing series, thereby consolidating NASCAR’s position. An example cited was NASCAR preventing the Superstar Racing Experience (SRX) from racing at Speedway Motorsports Inc. (SMI) tracks, even when those tracks were seeking revenue to offset debt.

When questioned about an email where he thanked Amanda Oliver for her assistance in formulating track exclusivity details, Prime claimed limited knowledge of the agreement and minimal direct communication with track operators. He asserted that his role was primarily to gather and present information in PowerPoint slides for the broader NASCAR leadership. His title at the time, Vice President of Strategy and Innovation, was scrutinized by Kessler, who questioned Prime’s professed lack of understanding regarding track and exclusivity clauses, particularly given his salary. Kessler pointed out Prime’s compensation, which ranged from $200,000-$250,000 annually at the time and has since risen to $400,000, suggesting it was substantial for a role that purportedly only involved creating presentations. Prime responded, "That’s your opinion."

NASCAR eventually implemented two-year exclusivity agreements that extended an additional four years beyond the contract’s expiration. Prime’s earlier emails indicated a concern that single-year track agreements left Speedway Motorsports "vulnerable to outside offers," which he clarified referred to potential rival series launched by Cup teams or entities like SRX. Prime defended these agreements as a measure to protect critical racing venues and the teams that compete on them, arguing that financial incentives for exclusivity prevented properties from being repurposed for non-racing purposes, such as data centers or warehouses, by potential buyers like Amazon or Google.

The trial also delved into "Project Gold Codes," a contingency plan reportedly developed by NASCAR in anticipation of a potential boycott of races or a refusal by multiple charter-holding teams to sign the 2025 charter agreement before the Daytona 500. Prime described this as a "contingency plan." He also revealed that NASCAR had considered proactively engaging with the Saudi Private Investment Fund to prevent them from potentially partnering with alternative racing entities such as the Race Team Alliance or SRX.

As the day concluded, it was announced that Richard Childress, owner of Richard Childress Racing, is expected to testify. This is notable given Childress’s prior threats of legal action over text messages produced in discovery, which allegedly depicted NASCAR President Steve Phelps making disparaging remarks about him.

Furthermore, Judge Kenneth D. Bell addressed a request from an unnamed non-party team owner who sought to protect the confidentiality of their financial information during testimony. The owner had requested that the court proceedings be sealed to exclude the public and media. Judge Bell expressed his disinclination to close the court, citing the risk of a retrial. Instead, he instructed both legal teams to provide testimony in a general manner to safeguard sensitive financial records that have not been extensively detailed in discovery. Potential witnesses who might have made such a request include Richard Childress, Heather Gibbs, Rick Hendrick, Cal Wells, and Roger Penske. The individual was described as someone who supports the charter system but has incurred substantial financial losses under the current framework.

The trial is scheduled to resume on Wednesday morning with the cross-examination of Scott Prime by NASCAR’s legal representation.