With more and more figures coming forward to give their testimony in the ‘NASCAR vs. 23XI/FRM’ trial, things have gotten both interesting and complicated at the same time. The emerging details have also given the teams an upper hand on several occasions; however, it has not been all sunshine for the suing parties.
In the most recent court proceedings, the analysts at 23XI presented data comparing NASCAR with F1 to strengthen their case. However, the claims were far from satisfactory for the sport’s legal team, who wholeheartedly fired back at the teams for presenting weak and inaccurate claims.
How Edward Snyder Calculated The Teams’ Losses And Compared NASCAR With F1
When Edward Snyder, the economist for 23XI Racing and FRM, gave his testimony in court, he presented some data to support his thesis. Snyder crunched numbers from NASCAR as well as F1 to prove how F1 teams were more profitable than NASCAR teams.
In his calculations, Snyder used 2.6 times the teams’ revenues, which were derived from FRM’s purchase of the SHR charter. His formula consisted of six steps, where he took into account the team market value and damages to calculate the final damages value of both teams.
According to Snyder, 23XI Racing’s total damages for a reduction in market value amounted to $163.8 million, whereas the figure for FRM stood at $96.4 million. The overall total damages for both teams, though, came at $215.8 million for 23XI Racing, whereas FRM incurred losses of $148.9 million.
To reinforce his stance that NASCAR engaged in antitrust practices, Snyder even cited examples from F1 and the PGA Tour. He highlighted that when the threat of a competitor emerged in F1, it was beneficial for the teams that ultimately received more money as a result of better financial terms.
He also noted that, unlike NASCAR, F1 was not a monopoly and was advantageous for the teams.
The Counterattack By NASCAR’s Legal Defense
Now, Snyder came up with calculations that looked airtight, and his numbers hinted that it might be another reason for worry for NASCAR. However, NASCAR attorney Larry Buterman had other plans.
Buterman insisted that Snyder’s calculations were not strictly accurate. He further argued that comparing NASCAR to F1 was not valid, as both operate quite differently. Buterman even fired shots at Snyder, who called himself an expert economist.
ALSO READ: Expert Slaps Mammoth $364.7 Million Price Tag on Michael Jordan’s War Against NASCAR
The NASCAR attorney declared that the $1,650-an-hour economist hired by 23XI Racing and FRM to run their numbers lacked sufficient knowledge about the teams in NASCAR and the functioning of the tracks in the sport. He further added that Snyder had not done his homework thoroughly and that the basis of his thesis was fundamentally broken.
In the shots fired by Buterman, he had a few valid points about the functioning of NASCAR. However, his points still do not mitigate the other evidence presented by the teams that strongly indicates NASCAR is a monopoly and that the governing body supports antitrust practices.