PDA

View Full Version : here we go again, ky speedway sues isc/nascar for lack of a NNC date



CART T. Katz
07-14-05, 01:00 AM
will they ever learn? :shakehead


Kentucky Speedway Sues NASCAR


SPARTA, Ky. (AP) - Kentucky Speedway filed suit Wednesday against NASCAR and International Speedway Corp., alleging the companies have violated federal antitrust laws by illegally restricting the awarding of Nextel Cup races.

The speedway, which currently has NASCAR Busch and Craftsman Truck series races on its schedule, is one of several that have unsuccessfully sought a race in the elite Cup series.

The suit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky at Covington, also alleges antitrust violations relating to various restraints of trade involving the Busch and Craftsman races.

NASCAR sanctions and oversees its racing series, while ISC owns and operates nine of the 22 tracks at which the Cup cars currently race. Both companies are controlled by the France family.

"We have alleged that NASCAR and ISC have violated the federal antitrust laws," said Stan Chesley, an attorney representing the Kentucky track. "In my opinion, the facts clearly support a conclusion that NASCAR and ISC have colluded to exclude competition in order to financially benefit themselves.

"By doing so, they have harmed not only Kentucky Speedway but also all stock car racing fans nationwide. Stock car racing is the most popular spectator sport in the United States, and we intend to do our best to see that fair play and fair racing is re-established."

NASCAR officials were not immediately available for comment.

A lawsuit against NASCAR by Francis Ferko, a shareholder in Speedway Motorsports Inc., which also owns a number of tracks, was settled out of court last year. That suit contended NASCAR breached agreements by not awarding a second Cup date to SMI-owned Texas Motor Speedway.

As part of the settlement, SMI paid $100.4 million to buy North Carolina Speedway from ISC, closed the track and put its only remaining Cup race in Texas.



i sent an e-mail to local sportshack radioguy.

transcript follows:

while i think that the lawsuit is a good idea in principle, i don't think it will succeed because nothing has been put in writing. a verbal agreement basically means nothing in the big money business of nascar.

also, another thing lost in the previous example that you mentioned was that the irl which had 2 texas dates lost one to the nascar race because eddie gossage and the texas motor speedway didn't need that source of revenue anymore. reportedly from racing web boards, the irl only has one year deals with its tracks. i was the guy who wrote that danica patrick isn't all that "baghdad bob" nation and his ministry of propaganda make her out to be, so you could probably guess how i would feel if the k-speedway dropped the irl for the same reason.

ps. if the k-speedway is so interested in obtaining major racing series to their track, why haven't they made a push for the champcar world series? i have and will always contend that the k-speedway shouldn't only push for one major racing series and leave others by the wayside. they should publicly go after the champcars if only to say that they would be the only superspeedway to host races for both american open wheel series. should have added yearly after series in this sentance.

he only read the first paragraph.

personally, i hope k-speedway DOESN'T get a winston cup date, simply for the fact that they assumed that if it was built that they would come. keyword being assumed. in big business, you can't assume anything, doing so leads to someone getting fired. to me, this lawsuit is like a state of the art, nfl minimum ammenities stadium that was built, was home to a mid-major d1a school and hosted some high school games, suing the nfl for not being considered for the superbowl.

three things worked against them-
location- kentucky is considered south/southeast, the market that has/is already been/being saturated in winston cup. going to an area despite being in proximity of 2 top 50 media markets that already has plenty of dates that are relatively close by makes no sense. they are trying to grow their sport nationally by trying to get to seattle and new york. coming to this area doesn't help their cause.
timing- i think there are 36 points dates on the sched. while nascar is trying to make it a year round thing, i really don't see them adding on more races in the next 3 or 4 years.
ownership- as in lack thereof. isc or smi doesn't own any of the track (thank god) and none of the principals are interested in selling a piece of the track to them, so a date transfer isn't likely. i don't think that the owners of new hampshire or pocono are really interested in buying part of the k-speedway and moving one of their dates there, especially the mattiolis.

the ownership was aware of all three of those situations, were told that it would possibly be unlikely that they would get a date and still went ahead and built the track and expected nayscor to fall all over themselves to get a piece of that track. i think just from the sheer stupidity alone, they should lose. nascar is a private entity that can race where they damn well please and is responsible to no one not named france. although for jollies, i wouldn't mind seeing nayscor squirm, i don't think that the gallatin county contingent has much of a chance here.

Stu
07-14-05, 12:05 PM
while I don't like the Cup schedule, this is a stupid move by Kentucky, and I hope they lose the NCTS and Busch races in the process.

Racewriter
07-14-05, 12:49 PM
Jerry Carroll was told expressly by NASCAR, before a shovel ever hit dirt, that NASCAR would not give him a Cup date. He then took in Darrell Waltrip as a 5% partner, and DW mouthed a lot about a Cup date to get other investors.

In fact, Carroll was only given a BGN date. When he wanted a Truck and All Pro date, he bought the Louisville Speedway and asked NASCAR if he could move those dates. NASCAR agreed to move the Truck date and give him an All Pro date for KY Speedway on the condition that Louisville Speedway remain open as a Weekly venue and host the All Pro date. Within a year, Carroll had reneged on that agreement, selling Louisville Speedway (a profit making short track by all accounts) to developers.

CART T. Katz
07-14-05, 12:54 PM
selling Louisville Speedway (a profit making short track by all accounts) to developers.

yes. i'll have to ask belcher this because i never went there personally but from all accounts i have heard, it was not only profitable it also had a pretty cheap ticket for the amount of racing it had weekly.

Greg B
07-14-05, 03:06 PM
yes. i'll have to ask belcher this because i never went there personally but from all accounts i have heard, it was not only profitable it also had a pretty cheap ticket for the amount of racing it had weekly.
It was a cool little track. It was a strange little oval with about 5 corners. They had a ton of differnet brands of draft beer & lots of food choices. It's sad it's gone.

RichK
07-14-05, 03:10 PM
Jerry Carroll was told expressly by NASCAR, before a shovel ever hit dirt, that NASCAR would not give him a Cup date. He then took in Darrell Waltrip as a 5% partner, and DW mouthed a lot about a Cup date to get other investors.

In fact, Carroll was only given a BGN date. When he wanted a Truck and All Pro date, he bought the Louisville Speedway and asked NASCAR if he could move those dates. NASCAR agreed to move the Truck date and give him an All Pro date for KY Speedway on the condition that Louisville Speedway remain open as a Weekly venue and host the All Pro date. Within a year, Carroll had reneged on that agreement, selling Louisville Speedway (a profit making short track by all accounts) to developers.

:eek: That's an eye-opening post, RW. I hope Carroll gets what he deserves.

Andrew Longman
07-14-05, 04:46 PM
This was a good story when I read it in the paper this morning. This thread makes it a great story. Thanks RW.

Feel bad about Louisville. Reminds me of my own Flemington Speedway :mad:

coolhand
07-14-05, 05:14 PM
the suit may be unfounded but NASCAR is still afraid to handover their books to other side.

thats why they ended up settling the ferko suit.

Kentucky might get away with this

oddlycalm
07-14-05, 05:32 PM
the suit may be unfounded but NASCAR is still afraid to handover their books to other side.

thats why they ended up settling the ferko suit.

Kentucky might get away with this Absolutely right. There is no way that NASCAR or ISC wants to go through the discovery process. It means not only opening their books, but also all manner of internal communications and documents as well. The books probably don't have much to hide, but I'm guessing there are a lot of docs that those boys would not want to be seen by outsiders.

The bottom line is that NASCAR's ownership interest in ISC puts them in competition with other track owners. As long as that's the situation there will be sufficient grounds to sue.

oc

coolhand
07-14-05, 05:36 PM
Absolutely right. There is no way that NASCAR or ISC wants to go through the discovery process. It means not only opening their books, but also all manner of internal communications and documents as well. The books probably don't have much to hide, but I'm guessing there are a lot of docs that those boys would not want to be seen by outsiders.

The bottom line is that NASCAR's ownership interest in ISC puts them in competition with other track owners. As long as that's the situation there will be sufficient grounds to sue.

oc

the reason they dont want to hand them over is because they can and will prove that NASCAR has minipulated the racing market and probably has violated anti-trust to a degree.

its what we have known all along.

this is how lawyers operate, they attack on on issue and then probe all the evidence to find more stuff.

Racewriter
07-14-05, 08:51 PM
the reason they dont want to hand them over is because they can and will prove that NASCAR has minipulated the racing market and probably has violated anti-trust to a degree.

its what we have known all along.

this is how lawyers operate, they attack on on issue and then probe all the evidence to find more stuff.

Sure. Keep hoping. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I'd imagine that NASCAR will make their stand on this one. If they don't, it's free license for any jackass to build a race track and sue NASCAR for a date.

cart7
07-14-05, 09:18 PM
Idiots really. I guess they thought bringing ol DW in would buy them some influence within Nascar. :rolleyes:

I remember the first few years of Gateway, pre-finished construction and then the first couple years of operations. There was always talk of Nascar bringing the show to town and the need for the track to install more seating if that ever happened but it never happened. The cost to add the necessary seats just to attract Nascar could never be justified by the risk of not getting a date after the expense for the seat installation occurred. Yes, the extra grandstands were added in T2 several years after the initial opening but they've never filled the place. At least Gateway owners were smart enough not to get themselves in over their head building seating for 80-100k fans only to have Nascar yank the carrot away leaving them with the debt obligation on the construction.

I feel no remorse for the KY speedway folks.