In a significant development in the ongoing dispute between NASCAR teams and the stock car series, it has been revealed that the teams have enlisted the services of Jeffrey Kessler, a renowned antitrust and sports lawyer. The decision to bring Kessler on board underscores the escalating tensions between the teams and NASCAR regarding a proposed new revenue-sharing model, reported AP.
The announcement of Kessler’s hiring came after a pivotal meeting at Daytona International Speedway, attended by the majority owners of the 15 chartered teams in NASCAR. Despite extending invitations to NASCAR representatives, none were present at the meeting, indicating a growing gulf between the two parties.
The negotiating committee, comprising five team owners, disclosed the hiring of Jeffrey Kessler to The Associated Press on the eve of the rain-postponed Daytona 500. This move follows a breakdown in negotiations between the teams and NASCAR, culminating in the 36 chartered teams opting not to extend their exclusive negotiating window with the sanctioning body.
At the heart of the dispute lies the expiration of the current charter agreement at the end of the season. Two years of discussions between the teams and NASCAR have reached an impasse, exacerbated by NASCAR’s simultaneous negotiations for a lucrative $7.7 billion television rights deal announced in December.
NASCAR’s economic proposal to the teams, which arrived shortly after the TV rights announcement, was met with dissatisfaction due to its lack of flexibility. According to reports, the offer provided no room for the teams to negotiate or counter, further straining relations between the parties.
Jeffrey Kessler, partner and co-executive chair of Winston & Strawn LLP, brings a wealth of experience to the table, particularly in antitrust matters within the realm of professional sports. His involvement signals the teams’ determination to address what they perceive as unfair treatment in the negotiations with NASCAR.
The hiring of Kessler underscores the seriousness of the situation and suggests that the teams are preparing for potential legal action if a resolution cannot be reached through negotiation.
Source: AP News
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand