In Charlotte, North Carolina, a dispute is heating up in the NASCAR community over the current revenue-sharing charter system, as highlighted in a recent counterclaim filed by NASCAR against Michael Jordan’s 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports. This tense situation arose after negotiations aimed at forging new charter agreements fell through, leading to allegations concerning antitrust law violations. The 30-page document submitted by NASCAR accuses Curtis Polk, Michael Jordan’s business manager, of orchestrating anti-competitive actions concerning these agreements.
The issue has its roots in 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports being the only two out of 15 teams to reject signing the new charter agreements. These agreements, presented with little notice just before NASCAR’s playoff start last September, were part of an ongoing arrangement that supports NASCAR’s franchise-like charter model. Previously, the teams managed to secure charters before the 2016 season, which were subsequently extended to a seven-year term. Such charters provide guaranteed race spots and financial payments, but the two teams opted out and are now alleging that NASCAR operates as a monopoly.
In this ongoing legal battle, NASCAR has recently been defeated in a preliminary court round, acknowledging the two teams as chartered organizations through 2025. This case is evidently making its way through the judiciary system, with NASCAR still attempting to see the lawsuit dismissed.
Representatives of 23XI and Front Row, like attorney Jeffrey Kessler, argue that the NASCAR counterclaim is merely an unwarranted distraction. According to Kessler, NASCAR had once agreed to collective negotiations but defaulted to pressuring individual teams into accepting the terms anyway. Polk has been heavily criticized in the counterclaim as the one leading resistance against NASCAR’s proposals. Polk, known for his role as co-owner of 23XI and business manager to Michael Jordan, is accused of misunderstanding NASCAR’s unique business model, unlike sports leagues like the NBA.
NASCAR’s allegations against Polk center around a supposedly orchestrated boycott of a critical qualifying event for a major race, which allegedly jeopardized other teams and the sport’s growth. The complaint states that instead of merely walking away from the 2025 Charter Agreements, 23XI and Front Row, particularly under Polk’s influence, have sought to manipulate the legal system to force change.
In a counter-effort, NASCAR seeks to reclaim the charters held by 23XI and Front Row prior to any legal action. NASCAR’s lawyer, Christopher Yates, mentioned that there is a misconception that other teams might benefit if the two protesting teams receive concessions, which Yates strongly refutes. He remains steadfast that no further renegotiations will occur and the continuation of the charter system isn’t essential for NASCAR’s operations.
The 23XI and Front Row teams have declined to provide a clear objective regarding what they anticipate from the lawsuit, leaving NASCAR’s legal team seeking clarification. NASCAR maintains that the current charter structure gives teams almost half of revenue share, a beneficial arrangement according to the 32 teams that have agreed to the terms. On the other hand, Jordan opposes, advocating for equal opportunity for all, including smaller teams, within the motorsports arena.
Despite the improvements introduced in the 2025 charter agreements concerning more equitable revenue distribution, a clause to make these charters permanent was not included. NASCAR retains the ability to revoke charters from underperforming teams or dismantle the system. The parties now await the opportunity to resolve their differences in court, with the trial planned for December unless the case resolves beforehand. NASCAR insists its economic model cannot be reshaped against its interest and that the demands made by 23XI and Front Row are unrealistic.
