Anti-trust Woes Continue

This week it was reported that Kentucky Speedway is filing an Anti-Trust lawsuit against NASCAR and the France family because they can't get a date on the Nextel Cup schedule. A lot of people are comparing this to the suit filed by Francis Ferko on behalf of Speedway Motorsports over a second race date at Texas Motor Speedway. Unfortunately, that comparison is weak, and if International Speedway Corporation doesn't give up a date or buy out the Kentucky track, this lawsuit could be a lot more damaging and force the needed divestiture of interests between ISC and NASCAR.

I'm no lawyer, but I'll still give my two-bit Texan opinion on the matter.

First, the Ferko case was based on the premise that TMS was told verbally by the folks in Daytona to expect two races dates. In fact Bruton Smith alleged he would not have built the Ft. Worth track if he thought he was only going to get one race date. The TMS issue wasn't so much an anti-trust case but more of a breech of contract, albeit sketchy and verbal. The anti-trust threat was thrown in there as extra leverage. If this suit had not been settled out of court, NASCAR, and privately owned company, would have had to open their books and disclose their interests to prove that they were not a trust. That threat alone is what probably got this case settled out of court. In short, NASCAR acting through their sister company ISC, gave up their race dates at Darlingotn and Rockingham to make room for another race at California and another at Texas. The blood of Darlington and Rockingham paid off the debt owed to Texas.

In comparison, this suit at Kentucky is a genuine anti-trust suit. Unlike Texas, Kentucky was never told the would get a race date. According to some sources (Ken Schrader on Inside Nextel Cup), the Kentucky owners were told that if they built their track in that location, they would never get a Cup race date. that's the sort of lockout that instigates an anti-trust lawsuit. It's not that fact that Kentucky doesn't have a Cup race date. It's that NASCAR is so intertwined with ISC that Kentucky isn't allowed compete for a race date. The oligarchy of SMS and ISC is another matter alltogether. When 2 of the 6 track owners own 76% of the race dates you have an oligarchy. When 1 of 6 track owners controls 50% of the race dates and 100% of the schedule, you have a trust. I don't see any other way around that logic.

In my estimation one of three things will happen:

1. NASCAR will let this thing go to trial and open their books for public dislcosure. Given the past history and what is at stake, I would not hold my breath. The end result would be that the France family would have to divest themselves of either NASCAR or ISC, and tracks would have to competitively bid for race dates. This is not in the interest of anyone currently holding a race date. Then again, if Brian France flies the coup to buy an NFL franchise like it's been runored, it could very well happen.

2a. ISC will forfeit a race date at one of their tracks (probably the last date at Darlington) and give it to Kentucky as a payoff to drop the suit. This will give them one more chance until another independent track owner files another suit. As Ken Schrader said, if Kentucky gets a Cup date, he's going to sue to get a Busch race at Pevely, the track he owns.

2b. ISC will buy out the Kentucky owners to shut them up much like has happened at North Wilkesboro and Rockingham.

Tighten your belts up. This one will be fun.