|
|
Post by Vader0309 on Feb 9, 2016 19:15:46 GMT
How does this model help NASCAR bring in new owners? The way I see it, Owners may not be able to expand to more teams because they may not have a Charter. With only 4 cars being able to race their way in, we may see races with less than 40 cars.
|
|
|
|
Post by WILBUS_714 on Feb 9, 2016 22:27:56 GMT
The way I understand it is, that it is going to be very difficult for new owners if not impossible.
Now Kauffman is holding two charters from the now closed MWR and it looks like they are going to be sold to the 19 and 41 for a few million each. Which is insane... nobody should be profiting from a sale of a charter spot the first year it is put into place. The 46 car is "leasing" a charter for one year for 1.6 million. How is that helping a underfunded team grow stronger when they have to pay that much to just have a spot!
It is going to be difficult saying that out of the 36 teams with a charter, at least two other cars are listed as running full time are not even on the charter list.
So that is two spots for any teams looking to expand, run a partial schedule or try and get into Sprint cup. Saying that HMS, SHR, and JGR are the only four car charters it will be almost impossible for any other teams to expand.
So the rich get richer, the slow stay slow, and you can still technically start and park if you want to waste the money for your guaranteed spot or are one of those lucky two cars.
NASCAR is now officially no longer a sport but purely a business that blatantly protects which ever driver sells the most merch!
|
|
|
|
Post by not azspud00 on Feb 10, 2016 0:10:17 GMT
It's a great, yet incomplete idea by NASCAR. IF the charters were from NASCAR and NASCAR only, with a flat, low rate for all teams, it could be beneficial, as long as charters aren't bought in advance and can't be reserved, and so on. If charters open at the start of February, at a flat rate across the sport, this could give smaller teams a chance to buy in.
Another idea to help the smaller teams is to give a max of 3 charters to a team. This might sound ridiculous because then 25% of fan favorite organizations isn't guaranteed to race Sunday, but hear me out. Right now, charters can be sufficient for a minimum of 9 4-car teams. Obviously only HMS, JGR, and SHR are at that point right now, but if new teams are formed and thrive, teams very well could expand. And, if this becomes reality, a 3-car max could supply 12 separate organizations with atleast 75% safe-zone for the race. Again, this scenario is completely hypothetical, but it could work out down the road.
Looking more present day, however, I don't see it doing much unless NASCAR decides to sacrifice a few bucks to intervene. No team should be selling or leasing a charter, that is entirely preposterous. Again charters should be sold by NASCAR at a flat rate to race teams, so that teams can't hold on to more than needed to sell or lease them for a few more bucks.
Another alternative to help smaller teams out is a secondary charter. Say the number of guaranteed charters is reduced to ~24. This opens up room for NASCAR to sell secondary charters at a cheaper price to teams, but force these teams to qualify against other teams with the same charter. If done right, this could still offer a buffer, almost like a provisional, but be at a more affordable level.
No matter what, it should be interesting to see how things work out this year, whether for good or bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vader0309 on Feb 10, 2016 0:44:22 GMT
I think the amount is fine if there are 43 cars. Also I do not believe you should get a charter if it is already known that you have shut down operations. Also does Kaufman get all the money from selling the charter or does Waltrip get a piece of the pie? Sadly the Wood Brothers didn't get one.
|
|
|
|
Post by WILBUS_714 on Feb 10, 2016 2:16:06 GMT
I don't think that NASCAR is "selling" these charters to teams in the first place, which is what makes the teams selling and leasing them and making money off of it even more crazy.
I found it funny that they had a poll on race hub that started at 68% and they stopped it because in the span of two minutes of them talking about it, it dropped to 53%
I am totally against this because it has turned the field into a 36 car provisional and the 5th fastest car in qualifying could technically go home (not like it will ever happen, but still)
|
|
|
|
Post by not azspud00 on Feb 10, 2016 2:43:22 GMT
I don't see why they couldn't just guarantee cars above a certain point in owners or drivers points or however they want to determine it to make the race. It almost seems as if this may be some sort of response to Stenhouse missing Dega in '14(?), when that could be fixed in a multitude of other ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vader0309 on Feb 10, 2016 3:27:09 GMT
They probably should have sold the charters to begin with. But like I said MWR shouldn't have gotten any. Wood Brothers should have. They didn't run all the races because they made a commitment to not start and park.
|
|
|
|
Post by WILBUS_714 on Feb 11, 2016 0:22:18 GMT
I have no idea why they couldn't just say the top 35 from last year are guaranteed a spot and trade points fr car #s like they have in the past.
The other thing I dont like is the purse difference between charter and non charter cars. Its not like a non charter car is going to come in and steal all of the purse money. Its just holding developing teams back forcing them to pay millions once a spot opens up. Thats not competition its a country club membership fee!
What they really need to do is pay out evenly like monster jam does. Have an appearance fee and have a drivers prize for select races. The racing would be better if the drivers were the ones getting the larger purses...
|
|
|
|
Post by Vader0309 on Feb 11, 2016 20:28:47 GMT
To be fair for NASCAR. Owners have been wanting this for a while. I am pretty sure the Wood Brothers were one of the first to bring it up. I just do not like the end result.
|
|
