Kentucky Speedway lawsuit has faithful up in arms

NASCAR CEO Brian France (right) is tracking the politics of a court case between NASCAR and the Kentucky Speedway. Jeff Zelevansky/Getty Images

Amidst the monotony of single-car testing at Daytona, it was going to take one heck of a story to get the stock car faithful up in arms as '08 season preparations got underway.

Surprisingly, one came down the pipe -- but it took a courtroom, not a racing revelation, as another year of NASCAR started with important off-track news once again.

U.S. District Court Judge William O. Bertelsman's ruling to dismiss a lawsuit between NASCAR and Kentucky Speedway may not equal the excitement of cars running side-by-side at 200 miles an hour; but trust me, the sport's Daytona Beach offices were jumping up and down in excitement just the same.

The basis of the lawsuit was simple: independently-owned Kentucky Speedway opened its doors in 2000, upgrading its facilities since in hopes of landing a date on the Sprint Cup tour. Instead, it's been largely ignored while other tracks such as Chicagoland, Kansas, Texas, California and Phoenix landed coveted extra dates on the schedule.

Four of those five tracks are owned by International Speedway Corporation (ISC) -- a company owned and operated by the France family. In fact, the company currently heads up 12 of the 22 tracks listed on the 2008 Cup slate -- enough to raise some eyebrows, considering that NASCAR's CEO is none other than Brian France.

So, after Kentucky was repeatedly refused on the grounds of location -- the track is within a few hundred miles of several other tracks currently on the Cup schedule -- the Speedway turned to the courts. It claimed that NASCAR and ISC were working hand-in-hand to produce a monopoly and filed a lawsuit asking ISC to sell some of the facilities with which it holds Cup dates -- in addition to asking for $200 million in damages for being left off the Cup schedule for so long.

That's not going to happen -- at least for now -- as Bertelsman claimed in his dismissal the speedway failed to prove that NASCAR and ISC had conspired to prevent Kentucky from snagging the Cup date it desires. As the producer of a product, Bertelsman stated in his ruling, NASCAR is not a monopoly -- giving them the right to distribute that product (i.e. -- individual races) through whatever companies or distribution it wants. As a result, no matter what the link between NASCAR and ISC, Kentucky Speedway can be left out in the cold - with only Nationwide and Truck Series dates for their effort.

On the heels of the decision, NASCAR spokesman Ramsey Poston was quick to claim victory, saying, "It puts an end to any question about which locations and dates NASCAR can operate its races. Like other sports such as the NFL, MLB and the NBA, NASCAR can host its events where it decides is best for the sport and its fans."

With NASCAR reassured of its unquestioned authority over how to rearrange its schedule, expect the 2009 version of the Cup tour to move dates around. Given the recent sale of New Hampshire to Bruton Smith-owned Speedway Motorsports, Inc., NASCAR might move one of the its dates elsewhere, without fear of retribution from other tracks.

In the background, though, are the true losers of this lawsuit -- independent big-track owners, of which there are fewer and fewer these days. For companies like Dover Motorsports, Inc. -- which heads up big-time facilities without a Cup date that include Gateway Raceway, Nashville Superspeedway, and Memphis Motorsports Park -- its ability to even consider building another track now takes a serious step back.

Why? The answer is simple: money. After all, with Cup Racing revenue easily outpacing all other forms of racing in the U.S., any track that was built would need the allure of the series to maximize profits. And if NASCAR powers that be won't guarantee dates to independent track owners, the inherent financial risk in building a superspeedway is too much to consider -- projects like the Rusty Wallace-owned Iowa Speedway will be harder to come by.

That's the difference now; while any track built by France-owned ISC is almost assured a date on the Cup schedule, a track built by anyone else doesn't have the leverage to sway the sanctioning body enough to grant them a Cup date -- and now, they don't have the support of the courtroom to back them either.

The case isn't expected to completely close; in the long-term, Kentucky Speedway is planning to appeal the ruling, and the process will likely continue to drag out. But for now, ISC and Bruton Smith-owned SMI -- who owns seven additional tracks on the Cup schedule -- stand alone as the unquestioned distributors of stock car racing in America. And just like in most U.S. presidential elections, any third-party candidates simply don't stand a chance.