NASCAR Executives Face Scrutiny in Antitrust Trial as Key Figures Offer Limited Recall

The ongoing antitrust trial involving NASCAR, 23XI Racing, and Front Row Motorsports has entered a critical phase, with senior NASCAR officials, including Commissioner Steve Phelps and CEO Jim France, taking the stand. The proceedings have been marked by repeated assertions of memory lapses and evasiveness from NASCAR’s leadership when confronted with specific questions about charter negotiations and the organization’s business practices. Lead attorney for the plaintiff teams, Jeffrey Kessler, has consistently employed a tactic of questioning officials on their substantial compensation, arguing it is improbable that individuals earning upwards of a million dollars annually would lack insight into critical operational decisions.

This strategy has been deployed against multiple NASCAR executives, including President Steve O’Donnell, and most recently, Commissioner Steve Phelps and CEO Jim France. Kessler’s central argument is that NASCAR officials were aware of the teams’ desire for more favorable terms during charter extension negotiations but were ultimately overruled by Jim France. Evidence presented includes emails authored by Phelps, to which he frequently responded with "I don’t remember" or "I wasn’t there," prompting Kessler to remark that his memory might improve with cross-examination from his own legal counsel. Despite these claims of forgetfulness, Phelps did recall specific dates related to the COVID-19 shutdown, noting it began on March 13, 2020, and NASCAR resumed on May 18, 2020.

While O’Donnell, described internally as a "team guy," presented a more collaborative demeanor, Phelps’ testimony indicated he eventually had to adhere to directives from Jim France. An email exchange involving O’Donnell and Prime revealed Phelps stating, "lots of options, but all have the same theme: Pick a date and they can sign or lose their charters. It is that simple." However, he claimed to have forgotten many details surrounding this period, despite prior communications reflecting frustration with France.

Kessler has meticulously built a narrative portraying Jim France as resolute in his refusal to offer more advantageous terms or permanent charters to teams, even when his senior staff suggested merit in doing so. An email from Phelps to Rick Hendrick stating, "we wish we could give you permanent charters but Jim doesn’t want that," was met with similar claims of no recollection from Phelps. When questioned about the inclusion of more extensive track exclusivity agreements in Speedway Motorsports contracts during a period when the Race Team Alliance was exploring independent racing series, Phelps responded with a definitive, "No idea."

Related News :

Further complicating matters for NASCAR are private text messages from February 2, 2023, where Phelps urged O’Donnell and Prime to "need to put a knife in this trash series." Kessler highlighted this communication as evidence of NASCAR’s aggressive stance against potential competitors, a stance Phelps attributed to frustration over teams using similar sponsorships and branding. He also acknowledged a prior communication to then-NASCAR President Brent Dewar, promising to "fight to protect" NASCAR’s domain from any competitor. Kessler’s core objective is to demonstrate France’s use of monopsony power – the ability of a single buyer to control a market – to impose unfavorable terms on teams lacking alternative competitive venues. Phelps vehemently denied this assertion.

In the closing moments of Phelps’ re-examination, Kessler probed whether France’s opposition to permanent charters stemmed from a desire to maintain greater control over the sport’s political landscape. Phelps denied this, but Kessler argued that permanent charters would prevent NASCAR from revoking them or implementing strategies like operating a series entirely in-house. Phelps’ response to Kessler’s question about trusting Jim France as a "benevolent dictator" was met with an objection from NASCAR’s attorney, Chris Yates, though Kessler’s point was understood.

Jim France Takes the Stand

Jim France, the youngest son of NASCAR founder Bill France Sr., testified that he maintained deep friendships with many prominent Cup Series owners but ultimately denied them their primary request: permanent charters. Owners such as Rick Hendrick, Roger Penske, Joe Gibbs, Jack Roush, and Richard Childress had all communicated their desire for "evergreen" or permanent charters through letters and personal conversations, a sentiment echoed by his top lieutenants.

When Kessler presented this evidence, stating, "They’re all telling you they need permanent charters and you said no," France responded, "We did not do evergreen or permanent charters, no." He further claimed not to recall these owners expressing such sentiments. Presented with the emails, France acknowledged their content but maintained his lack of memory regarding the specific requests.

Regarding a reported phone call from Joe Gibbs on the charter deadline of September 6, where Gibbs’ daughter-in-law, Heather Gibbs, testified that Coach pleaded, "please don’t do this to us," with an offer he deemed unfair, France stated he could not recall telling the elder Gibbs, "if I only get 20 charters back, I get 20 charters back." When pressed if he denied it, France responded, "I’m not sure I did." This pattern of not being sure or not remembering dominated France’s testimony, with him unable to answer approximately 90 percent of Kessler’s questions.

A notable exchange highlighted this disconnect:

Kessler: "Do you think NASCAR will have more or less revenue than last year?"
France: "Not sure. I haven’t looked at it."
Kessler: "How much in distribution money will you make this year?"
France: "I’m not aware of that, I’m sorry."
Kessler: "Does the France family own all the equity in NASCAR?"
France: "I think so."
Kessler: "Did Goldman Sachs estimate NASCAR’s equity as $5 billion?"
France: "I don’t recall."
Kessler: "Were you at the meeting on April 27, 2023 about acquiring Speedway Motorsports?"
France: "I might have been. I don’t know."
Kessler: "Do you have any reason to disagree with NASCAR’s equity being $5 billion?"
France: "I’m not sure."

France’s deposition with Kessler mirrored this pattern of limited recall. When asked about his salary, France initially estimated it in the "$3.5 million range," which Kessler corrected to "$3.8 million." France conceded, "Pretty close. We’ll go with that." This two-hour exchange was characterized by such exchanges.

The trial also revisited an emotional letter from Heather Gibbs that O’Donnell had described as causing France to "swear" out loud. When Kessler read the letter aloud, France claimed it did not upset him and that he did not remember reading it aloud at all. O’Donnell later qualified his earlier statement, admitting to exaggeration but not denying the letter was read in a meeting.

Further discrepancies emerged concerning a 2021 meeting of NASCAR senior leadership to prepare for charter negotiations. O’Donnell’s summary to his peers indicated France was opposed to a "most favored nations" clause, the elimination of the three-strike veto rule, and favored owning charters himself – all provisions ultimately ratified in the 2025-2031 agreement. France claimed no recollection of being involved in this meeting, only acknowledging it "appears that way" when shown O’Donnell’s email. O’Donnell’s email also quoted France with the overarching comment: "WE ARE IN COMPETITION. WE ARE GOING TO WIN." France stated, "I don’t recall making those comments."

Richard Childress’s Testimony Reveals Business Realities

While Richard Childress’s testimony was anticipated to be a focal point, it took an unexpected turn during cross-examination by NASCAR’s attorney, Chris Yates. Childress had previously testified that his desire for permanent charters was rooted in his aspiration to pass Richard Childress Racing (RCR) to his grandsons, Austin and Ty.

Yates’ questioning began by asking Childress the percentage of RCR he owned. After an initial reluctance, Judge Kenneth D. Bell instructed him to answer under oath, revealing he owns 60 percent, with the remaining 40 percent held by private equity firm Chartwell Investments.

The cross-examination then delved into conversations Childress had with former NASCAR driver Bobby Hillin Jr. regarding the latter exploring the purchase of a stake in RCR. This potential deal, which would have involved Hillin’s group acquiring shares from both Childress and Chartwell, was met with further resistance from Childress, who stated, "I don’t want to answer that," before being again directed by Judge Bell to respond truthfully.

Childress explained that Chartwell was seeking an exit from the sport and that Hillin had approached him with the inquiry. He expressed agitation at NASCAR’s attorney for making this information public, stating, "This isn’t what we are here for," and emphasizing that all parties involved had signed non-disclosure agreements. The proposed deal also conceptually included the purchase of a third charter, a detail Childress confirmed Hillin had discussed. Childress stated he issued a termination letter to Hillin’s group because they "didn’t have the money, period."

Hillin’s group had also reportedly audited RCR’s financial statements, which showed the team had maintained a positive Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization (EBITDA) throughout its 55-year history. This revelation also agitated Childress, who believed it was protected by an NDA. When asked if RCR’s consistent profitability was true, he responded, "I guess."

Following the jury’s dismissal, lawyers for 23XI and Front Row requested NASCAR produce documents related to Hillin’s claims and identify their source. Judge Bell directed both parties to discuss the matter and present a resolution by 10 p.m. that evening.

Childress clarified that while his other businesses operate from the RCR campus, they do not solely subsidize the race team. He stated, "I have other businesses to pay our bills for NASCAR. I’d be broke if I was just doing the Cup teams." These ventures include a manufacturing shop producing chassis for Xfinity Series teams, military equipment, ECR Engines which supplies powerplants across the industry, and a vineyard. Despite this, Childress maintained that the profits from these other businesses should ideally benefit him directly rather than being used to cover NASCAR operations. "That money should be going into my bank account (instead of) going to pay my NASCAR teams," he concluded.

💬 Tinggalkan Komentar dengan Facebook

Author Profile

rifan muazin

Latest entries

Nascar CupDecember 31, 2025NASCAR Executives Face Scrutiny in Antitrust Trial as Key Figures Offer Limited Recall
Nascar CupDecember 31, 2025Red Bull Unleashes Striking New Liveries for Shane van Gisbergen and Connor Zilisch in 2026 NASCAR Cup Season
Nascar CupDecember 31, 2025Antitrust Trial Kicks Off as NASCAR Faces Allegations of Monopoly Power
Nascar CupDecember 31, 2025Denny Hamlin Demands Apology from SiriusXM NASCAR Radio Hosts Following Lawsuit Settlement

Or check our Popular Categories...

Or check our Popular Categories...