Alex Meshkin

Mayfield leaving the U.S. District Court: Source AP

For those who are unfamiliar with the complexities of the judicial system, the legal threshold for receiving equitable relief is “irreparable harm” and without a question, IF Jeremy Mayfield is innocent, his continued inability to race, meets and exceeds this threshold for the U.S. District Court to intervene and provide relief to Mayfield. Or in the words of U.S. District Court Judge Mullen:

“Harm to Mayfield significantly outweighs harm to NASCAR”

While many in the NASCAR community may see this court proceeding as an isolated issue between Jeremy Mayfield and NASCAR – I believe this case could have significant rippling effects on the entire sport. Ultimately, it will challenge the “dictatorship” of the France Family and most likely require far greater transparency in NASCAR’s future actions. NASCAR’s arrogance may have finally caught up with them. Unlike any other major sport, NASCAR refuses to publish a list of banned substances – and Jeremy Mayfield claims (through his attorney) that NASCAR’s drug testing program does not meet federal workplace guidelines or follow proper procedure of SAMHSA [substance abuse and mental health services association].

But the greater dilemma that NASCAR faces is how to proceed with the ongoing Jeremy Mayfield legal battle. After NASCAR spokesman, Ramsey Poston, made accusations that Mayfield tested positive for methamphetamines, NASCAR would face a significant credibility challenge if they decided to settle the continued legal actions of Mayfield to circumvent continued discovery and future hearings/trials. However, on the flipside, the continued legal battle (Permanent Injection Hearing and Possible Civil Trial for Financial Damages) could expose very damning evidence for NASCAR and other competitors. It’s no secret that NASCAR “plays favorites” with their application of the rule book and other policies, so IF other competitors have tested positive for banned substances, and NASCAR failed to enforce their “policy”, it could cause severe and lasting damage to NASCAR. So everyone, watch out in the days and months ahead – lots of debris could be flying through the air.

Rumors are running rampant that Danica Patrick is going to jump from IndyCar to NASCAR. Is this a negotiating tactic with Andretti Green Racing and Chip Ganassi Racing or is she seriously considering a move to stock car racing? One must wonder why the poster child of IndyCar Racing would take the risk and make a move to NASCAR, which undisputedly, is crumbling as I speak. I can image NASCAR dangling HUGE financial incentives and prepackage endorsements, but why take the risk?

On the flipside to NASCAR’s continued problems with retaining the support of the automakers, IndyCar Racing is poised for a significant rebound in sponsorship demand and automotive support in the coming years. There is widespread speculation that Volkswagen/Audi, and possibly Toyota, BMW and Mercedes-Benz may join the IndyCar series in 2012. This is the result of IndyCar’s long-term vision and planning to strategically position itself as a “green” marketing platform for the automakers. A few of years ago, a move to NASCAR may have been considered a “step up” – but one most wonder if that still holds true today. Two of the most prolific IndyCar racers in this past decade struggled (and I am being kind) in their attempt to cross over to NASCAR. Dario Franchitti, the 2007 Indy 500 and IndyCar Champion failed miserably in his 2008 NASCAR foray and Sam Hornish continues to struggle. I don’t mean to be disrespectful to Danica – but she couldn’t remotely keep pace with Sam Hornish or Dario Franchitti in IndyCar, so I don’t expect her to be any more successful than Dario or Sam in NASCAR (Note: Dario and Danica were teammates 2006-2007). The odds are clearly against her if she makes the move.

My sources indicate that NASCAR, led by Brian France is offering significant guarantees to lure Danica to NASCAR. So if her primary motivation is money – we should expect her to make a debut later this year in preparation for the 2010 NASCAR season. A more intriguing question remains – why is NASCAR focused on attracting one driver, when the entire sport, (namely race teams), are facing financial annihilation? This not only is short sighted, but outrageously blind to the real problems facing the sport.

Many believe Danica is NASCAR’s bandage to stop hemorrhaging sponsors, fans and other commercial interest. I remain skeptical. While I agree she would drive a short term bump in ratings- the fundamentals of NASCAR racing is spiraling out of control – and no amount of estrogen is going to stop the bleeding. NASCAR needs to focus on fixing the business model challenges for teams and improving the COT – so the on-track racing can return to what fans deserve and expect.

Treating NASCAR like an amusement park and adding a new “attraction” may seem like a good idea – but in the end, it will only disguise the fundamental challenges that may devastate the sport that many still love. And Danica, well, she may be just another bump in the road for NASCAR – and at the end of the day, regret her move in the wrong lane.

According to Sports Media Watch, FOX has its lowest rated NASCAR season ever.

A year of declines has concluded with FOX drawing its lowest average rating for NASCAR since the net began airing races in ‘01.

Excluding the rain delayed Coca Cola 600, 12 NASCAR races averaged a 5.1/11 rating and 8.5 million viewers on FOX during the 2009 season, down 11% in ratings and 9% in viewers from a 5.7/12 and 9.3 million last year, and the lowest rated season ever for NASCAR on FOX.

Last Sunday’s Autism Speaks 400 drew a 4.0/10 final rating on FOX, down 11% from a 4.5/11 for the same race last year.

Every single, solitary NASCAR Sprint Cup telecast on FOX — all twelve races, the Budweiser Shootout and Daytona 500 Qualifying — saw declining ratings this season. 10 of the 12 races saw double-digit declines, including the last nine.

Despite the declines, NASCAR on FOX easily topped its competition. The 5.1 rating for NASCAR races on FOX is 65% higher than the 3.1 average for the ‘09 NBA Playoffs (not including the ongoing NBA Finals) and 16% higher than the 4.4 for last year’s MLB Playoffs (including the World Series).

Additionally, the 8.5 million viewers is 42% higher than the 6.0 million for last year’s college football bowl games (including the BCS), and is only slightly off from the 8.9 million viewers for last year’s NCAA Tournament (including the Final Four).

Ratings for NASCAR on FOX in 2009.
Asterisk (*) indicates race was moved to another day because of rain.

Questioning the future of Dodge’s continuing involvement in NASCAR is nothing new – back in September 2008, I wrote about the pending withdrawal of Dodge from NASCAR and unfortunately this appears to be the plan for 2010. (http://tinyurl.com/dlymm8)

Many, at first glance, didn’t feel that the Chrysler bankruptcy filing on Thursday would have any effect on the Sprint Cup teams backed by Dodge. And Chrysler was quick to issue a statement on Thursday reaffirming their commitment to NASCAR. It really should not come as a surprise that the new management from Fiat realizes the current iteration of the COT and the marketing platform offered by NASCAR is too expensive and doesn’t align with their new focus. Fiat/Chrysler’s new focus is on small fuel efficient cars and not on outdated large cars that inspired the NASCAR “Car of Tomorrow”.

Many sources strongly believed that Chrysler (Dodge) may pull its NASCAR funding in 2010. As many know, Dodge already slashed its motorsports budget by 30 percent this year. Then the question becomes this: What would happen to the teams that Dodge financially supports, if indeed they pull their support? That is the great unknown.

As I have professed for over two years, NASCAR is facing a crossroad; but yet, it continues down an ill-fated pathway of an outdated “Car of Tomorrow” instead of adopting a fresh approach that would leverage “green technologies” such as, biofuels and renewable energy, and a branding platform that is attractive to companies like Fiat. As I stated in July 2008,

You must wonder – why is NASCAR asleep at the wheel? Over the past decade, NASCAR has developed a phenomenal market platform for all types of companies – but without the financial and marketing support of the carmakers – NASCAR teams can’t afford to operate.
The time is now for NASCAR to embrace tomorrow’s future – alternative energy and fuel efficiency branding is required for the long-term viability of the sport as a marketing platform for the automotive manufacturers. (See: http://tinyurl.com/cwcjpj)

I am a strong believer that negative events create opportunities. NASCAR and the Big 3 (GM, Ford and Chrysler) at one time were going down a parallel road, but unfortunately as NASCAR started to become a rapidly growing mainstream sport in the early part of the decade and corporate sponsors rushed into the sport with their large marketing budgets looking to tap into this brand-loyal demographic, NASCAR lost sight of the value proposition and ROI required to keep the Big 3 involved in NASCAR. In the next couple of years, many will ask, why didn’t NASCAR do more to keep the Big 3 involved? The answer is quite simple, NASCAR and their Teams have a huge disconnect, and what’s good for NASCAR isn’t always what’s best for their Teams. Unlike all other major sports, like the NHL, NBA, MLB, and NFL; NASCAR team owners don’t have any say in the direction and decisions of the sport, nor do they participate in the financial upside during the good times. But what I do know is that they do bare the majority of the consequences during the difficult times. When Chrysler/Dodge leaves NASCAR, many teams will suffer and likely shutdown, but NASCAR Corporate will face very little short-term repercussions.

With the economic recession, dreadful environment for automakers and falling ratings of NASCAR racing, NASCAR has the opportunity to implement needed changes to put the sport in a position for growth and long term sustainability.

The solutions and answers for NASCAR are quite simple: race a car that is aligned with the automakers objectives, provide a fair distribution of revenues to competitors (teams), implement rigid cost controls; and, equally as important, please allow the drivers the freedom to race without the fear of penalties for relatively harmless actions. NASCAR, after all is said is done, should be entertainment.

The Associated Press (AP) has reported Brian France, CEO of NASCAR, has directed his management to work with teams in developing new business models that can help them withstand the current economic crisis. As we are all aware, NASCAR teams rely on corporate sponsorship to fund the majority of their operating budgets, which is substantially different than any other major sport. Whereas, NFL, NBA, NHL and MLB teams participate in higher levels of revenue sharing as a result of a franchise business model.

“We’re trying to do more with less. That’s the difficult part of this economy,” France said following his state-of-the-sport address to media at NASCAR’s Research and Development Center. Just back in December, NASCAR issued a statement stating that NASCAR heading into 2009 was “strong”.

This outlook is a rather quick reversal, but perhaps the gravity of the current economic climate and mass sponsor deflections is making an impact.

Doing more with less? Working with teams to develop new business models? I apologize, but in my humble opinion, it’s a little too late for a half-baked plan. But even worse and what is frustrating is NASCAR’s continued unwillingness to restructure the distribution of television revenues to rightly supplement teams’ operating budgets.

What NASCAR needs is a business model which more closely replicates Formula 1 or a franchise structure like every other major sport. As a fervent advocate for team rights, I have repeatedly voiced the need to develop a franchise model that would enable teams to weather macroeconomic difficulties; and subsequently, become less cyclical and more stable during recessions and economic turmoil. The time for leadership, sacrifice and decisive action on behalf of the France Family is NOW. But to the contrary, the Brian France plan is nothing more than reinforcing their past strategies of working with teams to help locate and secure sponsors. While his intentions may be honorable; they are nevertheless naïve when considering there is a global economic recession; and specifically, when the NASCAR industry is in a depression of historic proportions. At this moment, I don’t believe there is a single corporation that is considering spending $15-$30 million required to fund a primary sponsorship program for a NASCAR Sprint Cup team. So I am rather befuddled with Brian France’s simplistic strategy to save the sport, which unfortunately in its current form will contribute to the sport’s certain collapse.

Is it possible that the past success of NASCAR is blinding Brian France from seeing the light? Reflecting back to 60 years ago to the earlier days of NASCAR, Bill France Sr. (Brian France’s grandfather) executed a flawless business plan to convince the then stock car racers and event promoters to become part of his newly formed organization and sanctioning body (NASCAR), whereby he gained complete control over stock car racing. The foundation of NASCAR’s “business model” problems ironically stem from the grand success of Bill Sr. and his unilateral control of a racing empire, including control over the majority of racing venues (International Speedway Corp) and the stock car sanctioning body. Over the past half-century, teams competing in NASCAR relied almost exclusively on corporate sponsors to fund their operations – enabling the France Family to retain a majority of the sports revenues and amass a large network of racing venues, and establishing NASCAR Holdings, an incredibly profitable wholly owned private company.

Those times have dramatically changed and for too long, NASCAR teams have tolerated the exploitation and willingly bore the total burden to exclusively fund their operations through advertising and sponsorship. The rapid increases in costs of racing and teams’ operating expenses of the past 5 years, combined with the minimal increase in sponsorship value – have brought the teams’ very existence into question.

One must wonder, how long can the France Family continue their racing monopoly? Historically, race teams have avoided conflict with the France Family; and the only entities to challenge the France Family’s monopoly have been race track owners, such as Burton Smith and Speedway Motorsports. Even through the France Family has weathered many possible anti-trust challenges with settling most disputes outside the judicial system; I believe the current financial crisis and advertising recession is about to test the resolve of the France Family and their prehistoric business model.

In a stark contrast to the past decade, NASCAR is falsely promoting an image of growth and strength by stating that 15 new organizations have applied for licensing to compete in the Sprint Cup Series. What they fail to mention and what many novices are unaware – almost all of those “new” teams are merely opportunistic racers attempting to profit by a method called: “start and park”, which allows them to collect sizable race winnings (in comparison to their expenses) with a team and car specifically built to just run one or two laps, enabling them to collect profits – all without adding ANY value to the sport. What a sad day it is for the diehard NASCAR fan.

As many of you know, I was the founder of Bang Racing which was NASCAR’s most successful first year team in history. At the young age of 23, I built and operated this highly successful team and we made history finishing 2nd in our first race (Daytona) and winning our 13th race (Michigan International Speedway), which was the first win for Toyota in NASCAR history. While all this is now historical facts found in the archives of NASCAR history, what is typically not understood is that even as a very competitive team, our business model was fundamentally flawed because generating a profit was nearly impossible. Simply put; the cost of running a NASCAR team far exceeds its sponsorship/advertising revenue potential and without significant “business model” changes by the France Family, teams are doomed for failure.

NASCAR must be the only sport where the most profitable teams are the biggest losers’ and where finishing dead-last or not even attempting to win makes more money than being a top competitor. Something is dreadfully wrong when the most competitive teams with great on track performance cannot survive because the costs of running their teams far exceed their revenue potential. The problem is clear: without teams receiving a larger share of the sports’ multi-billion dollar television contracts – there will be no strategy that can make viable a long-term solution for the sport – that is the simple reality.

However, being the “optimist”, I hope Brian France and will realize quickly that his family has the unilateral ability to deliver the change in business model the teams and sport require to survive.

Sources are telling me that instead of focusing on reinventing themselves, NASCAR is anticipating a future without automotive sponsors. Is this an omission from NASCAR that they lack a value proposition? Regardless of the poor economy or slump in automotive sales – if NASCAR sponsorship has a positive ROI, automakers would not be consider jumping ship. The reality is simply the ROI for the automakers are far below most other mediums and NASCAR may finally be getting the message. But unfortunately, it may be too late for NASCAR to adjust and to keep the financial support of the Big 3 and Toyota, but surely it’s worth a more concerted effort to evolve their business model and objectives to try and retain the majority of their automotive partners.
NASCAR today must be more than just a marketing platform. It needs to become a technical platform and support R&D objectives for the automakers. Evaluating NASCAR in the most cynical viewpoint, one could argue that the archaic technology, i.e. the use of carburetors, instead of fuel injection, is continuing the public persona that the Big 3’s product portfolio is less than innovative. It’s time for NASCAR’s leadership to make the necessary changes in the best interests of their lifeblood – their teams and automakers.

I want to enforce my statements in my post on July 21st:

NASCAR has a real opportunity for leadership – and can provide automotive manufacturers a real marketing platform that demonstrates alternative energy as performance cars – that are viable, affordable and energy efficient – and return NASCAR to its roots as “stock car” racing at its best.

NASCAR is standing at the crossroads, where the wrong decision could be the final nail in the coffin. Their choice may be a future of IROC style racing or one of a balance of innovative technology with the proper cost controls in place to secure the long term stability of all stakeholders. Unfortunately, if NASCAR becomes the next IROC, I am afraid their future will most likely be rather bleak.

RE: NASCAR Says: Sport looks strong heading into 2009

Quoting the former Presidential Candidate and Senator Hillary Clinton, NASCAR statements on Friday truly requires a “willing suspension of disbelief” if they want us to think the “sport looks strong heading into 2009.”

Nothing could be further from the truth and it pains me to see the sport I love destroyed by in-action and failure to comprehend the gravity of the economic times. The Big 3 automakers are on the cusp of bankruptcy, unless President Bush provides an immediate multi-billion dollar bridge loan from the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP). Without the Big 3 – the NASCAR economy will rapidly contract and a large percentage of teams will be added to list of defunct organizations. And with that – NASCAR thinks the sport is “strong” – but in reality – teams are dissolving faster than Kyle Busch racked up victories in the beginning of 2009; and without competitive teams – NASCAR is heading for a death spiral.

Without sweeping changes to the fundamental way NASCAR operates – the long term future is bleak. In comparison to Formula 1, following the announcement of Honda to close their F1 Racing operations, the FIA, the sanctioning body of Formula 1 racing, immediately acted with the support of their constructors (teams) to implement meaningful cost cutting measures for the 2009 and 2010 seasons. Formula 1 Cost Reduction Plan

This type of leadership and decisive action may curb future team closures and ensure the viability of the sport. Contrasting the bold leadership of FIA and F1 to NASCAR’s failure to address their challenges is cause for great concern. NASCAR’s value proposition for automakers and corporate sponsors is decreasing rapidly and they must act not only to increase their value proposition; but act to immediately cut costs and increase teams’ participation in the television revenues.

Without describing my complete cost reduction plans, the key areas that MUST immediately be changed by NASCAR are the following:

• Length of the race weekends – two day shows instead of three days at the track
• Reduction of race team members allowed at the track
• Elimination of credentials and “hard card” for necessary race team personnel
• Limitation of number of sets of tires available for use per race weekend
• Elimination of track testing at non-sanctioned race tracks
• Limitations of wind tunnel testing for aerodynamic development

As always, I offer my opinion to strengthen the sport and help ensure its long term viability.

Ad Sponsors Peeling Away From NASCAR, Too

Looking to catch a NASCAR wreck? Here’s one: The racing association’s sponsors are pulling out, NASCAR CEO Brian France told a Reuters summit. France insists he’s talking to potential new sponsors, but wouldn’t name names.

NASCAR saw a $150 million gain in sponsorship revenue in 2008, a gain France says won’t be repeated. “The question is, are we going to back up,” he said.

Frustrated over the lackluster excitement of the 2008 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series – I feel I am not alone. The racing was bland, personalities were muffled and there was not a compelling reason to watch most races. I tend to be a traditionalist in my view of the sport and the championship points system – but times have changed; and subsequently, their needs to be a dramatic adjustment to ignite fan interest.

We all agree that NASCAR has a lot of problems. Simply but, this may be an example of the “chicken or the egg” syndrome. The fundamental metric which must improve is fan viewership. While this is not the end all solution – it would significantly improve teams’ ability to attract more corporate sponsors. At the same time, increasing fan viewership alone will not fix the sponsorship depression and teams’ ability to finance their operations. NASCAR needs resurgence – and if fan viewership is a MUST to reverse the current trend to drive more sponsor interest – then HOW do they make it happen?

Unlike any other major American sport – NASCAR rewards consistency over victory. So basically, under the current points system – you could finish second in every race and pretty much be guaranteed the Championship in the Sprint Cup Series. I don’t know about you but I have never celebrated my favorite driver’s runner-up finish. The famous philosopher Ricky Bobby once said, “If you ain’t first, you’re last”. Or, as legendary driver Dale Earnhardt put it, “Second place is just the first loser”. It’s time for NASCAR to incentivize and reward winning! Fans celebrate winning drivers and sponsors reward winning teams – the Championship and monetary system needs to reward “winning” and not “staying out of trouble”.

I’m curious – is there anyone else out there wondering why a driver can win the Sprint Cup Championship without a single race victory? It doesn’t make sense to me! And furthermore 4 of the 12 that qualified for the 2008 Chase for the Cup didn’t even win in the regular season. Sorry guys, while I have the greatest respect for Jeff Gordon and Kevin Harvick – honestly, you didn’t win in the regular season (or the Chase for that matter) – so you shouldn’t have the opportunity to be the Sprint Cup Champion.

So here are the basics of my proposal to increase on-track excitement and create more fan interest:

• You must win a race during the regular season to be a part of the Chase for the Cup and the Chase should be limited to a maximum of 10 drivers.

• The Chase Contenders should have a completely different points system which makes the championship more competitive and puts an emphasis on race victories.

• Redistribute the championship fund year-end bonuses to individual race victories. For example, if you were to take $20M from the year-end points fund and add $550K to each race victory – that would increase the average race winnings for 1st place to about $1 million per race. This would encourage drivers to take risks and forgo their “points racing” mindset which is ruining the sport.

NASCAR’s failure to act and evolve – if continued down this slippery slope – will result in further sponsor deflections, which could cause an irreversible contraction in all aspects of the sport we all love.

Over the past several weeks, I have been inundated with inquiries about a variety of topics that I have discussed about the state of NASCAR and the sponsorship crisis. I feel compelled to address and clarify some of my previous statements and respond to a recurring theme of certain readers’ comments.
Many of the NASCAR faithful have repeatedly stated: “the sky is not falling NASCAR has a larger television audience today than in 2001”. While this may true – it has little to do with the enormous problems facing NASCAR today. The problem is one of economics that simply don’t add up.
As a former team owner, I can speak to the fact that there is an alarming disconnect between the highly profitable NASCAR Corporate; and the costs of operating a team and the corresponding costs to sponsor a team. It is NASCAR’s “disconnect” and perhaps even ignorance to the fact that NASCAR teams are facing a sponsorship depression that is the fundamental problem – and it is this blindness that will ultimately cripple NASCAR if they continue down this same pathway.
On Sunday, Brian France, Chief Executive Officer of NASCAR was asked; Are you certain you’ll have 43 car fields next year?

We’re pretty confident about that. I said before to many of you, you know, we’re also criticized for having too many cars.

I don’t know if he is taking lessons from the former Iraq Information Minister – Baghdad Bob.

But unless he is counting on Dave Marcus and Morgan Sheppard – having 43 competitive cars is extremely unlikely.
Just like the global financial crisis, the problems were not created overnight and may require the governing body to stimulate the NASCAR economy. But NASCAR needs far more sweeping changes than just the teams receiving a larger share of the television revenues. A variety of topics that must be addressed include; dramatic cost savings for the teams, incentives which drive fan interest – larger focus on winning -- less on consistency, and greater shares in revenues so teams can sell sponsorship packages for considerably less -- increasing the value proposition for corporate sponsors.
The basic message which seems to be lost in the entire dialogue over the sponsorship crisis – is not that companies haven’t wanted to become involved in NASCAR marketing – it is just cost prohibitive; too much risk and the ROI is difficult to measure. If we withdraw ourselves from the current economic crisis and rewind the clock to 2007; and if teams could have marketed Sprint Cup primary sponsorships for $10 million – do you think we would have the dramatic sponsor shortage of today? I don’t think so – the problem is primarily the price not the product.
Now I want to be clear – the product needs innovation and a fresh approach to bring die-hards back into the fold and make the sport more interesting to all sports’ enthusiasts. However, Brian France has only focused on the latter; and subsequently, by attempting to reach out to non-core fans he not only failed to grow the fan base, but he alienated many loyalists which has diluted the value proposition for many NASCAR sponsors.