Some teams getting some Sponsor funds from NASCAR

[Flintstone Flyer]

A report on jayski.com touches on a contract clause between NASCAR and the Networks.

The Gazillion $$$ TV rights package that NASCAR has with FOX and NBC evidently has some holes in it.

According to the article unless a race has a full field of 43 the Networks don't pay full pop as stated in the Gazillion dollar deal.

Tha BAM racing and Dave Marcus racing teams had planned on skipping Darlington last week, but NASCAR assured them the trip would pay off even if they just ran a few laps.

The same scenario is comming up in Cally. The 49 and 71 teams are not scheduled to race and its looking like the 26 team will close its doors soon as well.

To me this borders on rigging a race or giving some breaks here and there to take care of the fat daddys bank roll.

I have to wonder how much less the Networks would have to pay if the field is less than 43. Would it be worth NASCAR to sponsor a team for 8 or 12 races a year? Talk about getting the fix on.

Example:NASCAR.com sponsors the 26 car. The 26 car wins, but fails post race inspection. Does NASCAR fine themselves? Who grts the lions share of the purse?

I hope it happens, they are slapping us silly anyway.

The wat I see it, that would be the same as taking money out of your left pocket and placing it in your right.


Food for thought, brought directly to you from the kings of capitolism...NASCAR!

[Lee Janotta]

Hmm, sounds rather Enron-esque!

Though seriously, might NASCAR be one of Authur Anderson's customers?

Eh, too much speculation right now. NASCAR's still raking in the cash. Could be one benefit to their implosion, though: CART and IMSA at the Glen! Woohoo!

[Ax Slinger]

Well, as far as this example goes, "Example:NASCAR.com sponsors the 26 car. The 26 car wins, but fails post race inspection. Does NASCAR fine themselves? Who grts the lions share of the purse?", Flintstone Flyer, remember that NASCAR, the sanctioning body, and NASCAR.COM the contracted "official website" of NASCAR are two different things. NASCAR itself doesn't give sponsor funds to teams, but winnings for even completely lousy performance in races, while NASCAR.COM is Turner Broadcasting (or more specifically Turner Sports Interactive, a Turner Broadcasting company), which is a TV\Media company driven by advertising.

And if you're wondering how NASCAR.COM could get away with advertising on a car, you answered that too in the first sentence of your post, "a contract clause between NASCAR and the Networks.", and NASCAR.COM is part of said "Networks".

[Flintstone Flyer]

Most of what I said was 1/2 serious and 1/2 not.

Your right NASCAR sold NASCAR.com a while back, so that doesn't work.

You and I are both wrong on NASCAR paying finishing position winnings..

I am pretty sure the track pays the purse thru the Sponsor,(ie;this weekends Food City 500) so NASCAR couldn't win that back. Just collect a bigger fee so to speak.

The track pays for the sanctioned event or date.


What would work though: Fall race at Talladega, no event sponsor, NASCAR who owns the track foots the total purse. Only 42 cars show up. The 3rd car is sponsored by Daytona Speedway promoting the Daytona 500.

Go figure??

[Lars]

Too bad I never won the race driven #6 Mark Martin car that Valvoline used to give away. Wouldn't mind showing up at the track with it, not have to worry about qualifying it, be able to park it after 1 lap & collect the 35 to 40 thousand 43rd place finishers $$$.

[Ax Slinger]

Originally posted by Flintstone Flyer
Your right NASCAR sold NASCAR.com a while back, so that doesn't work.

You and I are both wrong on NASCAR paying finishing position winnings.

NASCAR signed a limited time contract with Turner (which I believe expires in 2005 when the current TV deal is up for renewal), to run a website for them, but they didn't sell it. It was a "license" deal, not a sale.

As far as the winnings go, I have no idea who actually pays, but the fact remains that if you enter a race, no matter how well you do, you get something. No teams go home empty handed from a NASCAR race. They may not break even, but they get something. If you total a $150,000.00 race car and only "win" $50,000.00 you're still out $100,000.00, but $50,000.00 is better than nothing I suppose... If this were not the case, how long do you think teams that do awful week after week could afford to keep coming back?

[Ax Slinger]

Oh yeah... NASCAR doesn't own any tracks either. If I'm not mistaken, there's ISC (which may be owned by the France family, but even if it is, it's another company which does contracts with NASCAR), Speedway Motorsports, and the rest are private.

[Flintstone Flyer]

Like I said, Its the same as ISC taking money out of their left pocket and puting it in their right pocket (NASCAR)!

My point being, could NASCAR profit by placing a team in a race if only 42 where scheduled to enter.

How much do they lose from the networks due to this clause?

Yep last place at MArtinsville may only pay $34,000 , especially if your team is not on the winners cirle program, and yes it may be $150,000 car. But if you only run 30 laps and stay out of trouble, the only real money you are out of is the travel expense. Which by the way is what the 49 and 71 car did Sunday @ Darlington.

If NASCAR covered the expenses, and the team went home no worse for the wear, NASCAR picks up their full pop from the networks, then its double dipping in my book!

[Ax Slinger]

So in other words, you're saying that NASCAR's greed bothers you? Heh... Join the club.

[Ian-S]

Don't know what the fuss is about, this happens in all the major championships worldwide, and example is the FIA has been covering travel expenses for the "first 10" in the previous years F1 championship for years.

[NASCARWidow]

NASCAR won't be out a lot if the fields aren't full because what is lost is the TV money the teams get. The deal is, if there isn't a full field, FOX doesn't have to pay the entire tv money. If the field is short the teams that are there lose out on some of their money.

The tracks have to come up with the purse either through ticket sales or a sponsor.

The ISC and NASCAR are cousins with mutual family members but are 2 entirely different organizations. NASCAR is the sanctioning body and the ISC owns and operates many of the tracks. Their purposes in life aren't always the same and each looks out for their own wellbeing. The NASCAR officials were told at their meeting before the season not to forget that they work for NASCAR and not the ISC. What is good for one isn't always good for the other.

I don't think NASCAR will help sponsor a team it invites to come. Said teams will probably buy 2-3 sets of tires for the weekend, run a couple of practice laps, qualify, and run a couple of race laps before having engine failure. They don't wreck and they don't spend a lot of money. In the Busch Series, we call it grocery racing. Make enough to pay the expenses and the salaries of the guys back in the shop or on the road with you.

[Joe Fan]

ISC is basically owned by the France family but Roger Penske and some others have interest in it as well.

As far as the story of skipping the race, I can assure you that once the #71 and #49 knew that there would be only 41 teams entered, they would change their plan and show up. If not, many mutli-car teams would enter one of their back-up cars in a worse case scenario. As NASCARWidow has pointed out, grocery racing is reality and it does happen even at the Cup level.

[Lars]

Also should mention that ISC owns MRN & PRN which has exclusive radio broadcast rights for the Cup, Busch & CTS series.

[Ax Slinger]

Not to mention, speaking of double dipping... Isn't Roger Penske the track owner, also the owner of the #2 Miller Lite\#12 Alltel teams of WC cars?

[Lars]

That would be one in the same Roger...but I think he gave up controlling interests in MIS, California, Nazareth? My Mich tix's come from ISC now.