Antitrust Trial: Michael Jordan's Racing Team vs. NASCAR

In a federal antitrust trial, economist Edward Snyder testified that NASCAR owes $364.7 million in damages to Michael Jordan's 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports due to a revenue-sharing dispute. Snyder, who has extensive experience in antitrust cases, argued that NASCAR operates as a monopoly, engaging in anticompetitive practices that disadvantage its teams. His calculations indicated that NASCAR's revenue-sharing model, which allocates only 25% of revenue to teams compared to the 45% offered by Formula 1, has resulted in significant financial losses for the plaintiffs from 2021 to 2024.

ESPNHagerty

NASCAR's charter system, established in 2016, guarantees 36 teams spots in the 40-car field and specific revenue distributions. However, the recent charter agreement presented in September 2024 was criticized by teams as a "take-it-or-leave-it" ultimatum, with Snyder asserting that NASCAR's exclusivity agreements with racetracks have further restricted teams' ability to compete elsewhere. This situation has led to claims that NASCAR's practices have harmed the financial viability of its teams.

ESPNHagerty

The trial features key figures such as Michael Jordan, co-owner of 23XI Racing, and Denny Hamlin, a three-time Daytona 500 winner and team co-owner. Bob Jenkins, owner of Front Row Motorsports, is also a plaintiff. NASCAR's leadership, including Chairman Jim France and Commissioner Steve Phelps, are central to the defense, which disputes Snyder's findings and claims that the plaintiffs' estimates are inaccurate.

ESPN

NASCAR has publicly contested Snyder's calculations, asserting that the 45% revenue-sharing model he referenced is not applicable. Defense attorney Lawrence Buterman acknowledged the expertise of NASCAR's upcoming witnesses, suggesting a robust defense against the claims made by Snyder. Meanwhile, the trial has drawn attention to the internal dynamics within NASCAR, with Judge Kenneth Bell expressing frustration over the trial's pace and procedural delays.

ESPN

Critics of the lawsuit, including NASCAR supporters and commentators, have expressed skepticism about the claims of monopoly and the implications of the lawsuit. Some argue that the charter system has provided teams with valuable assets, which have appreciated significantly since their introduction. Additionally, there are concerns that the lawsuit could destabilize NASCAR, with commentators noting the emotional responses from figures like Larry McReynolds, who felt the lawsuit threatened the integrity of the sport.

Hagerty

As the trial progresses, the outcome could have lasting implications for NASCAR's governance and revenue-sharing practices. The settlement discussions have already indicated potential changes, including permanent charters and increased revenue sharing from international rights. The trial's conclusion may reshape the relationship between NASCAR and its teams, influencing how the sport operates moving forward.

ESPN

• “the tracks, the teams and the cars.” — Edward Snyder, Economist

ESPN

• “The France family and NASCAR are monopolistic bullies,” — Excerpt from the lawsuit

Hagerty

• “It is painful for all fans to watch the current conflict and division occurring within the sport we love,” — Johnny Morris, Bass Pro Shops CEO

Hagerty

This antitrust trial highlights the complexities of NASCAR's business model and the ongoing tensions between the sanctioning body and its teams, raising critical questions about the future of stock car racing.

ESPN