Fan Commentary

At the Expense of the Sport and Its Fans

by Grandstand Bob

I never had a big brother, but I always wanted one. In my neighborhood, the kids with big brothers had ready protection from the older kids, while those of us without had to align ourselves with someone else’s big brother when the bullies came along.

It’s been a long time since those days, but I recently discovered that someone is looking out for my fellow race fans and me. Surprise of surprises, NASCAR is concerned not only about itself, but me as a fan.

If there was ever any doubt, it should be eliminated by NASCAR’s recent response to the lawsuit against it. NASCAR’s precise words were that Speedway Motorsports, Inc. was trying to “enrich itself at the expense of the sport and its fans.” I guess that NASCAR takes offense to this, and would never stoop to such levels itself.

As most already know, SMI and NASCAR have a tolerance-hate relationship. I think that it’s safe to say that love is absent. SMI needs NASCAR events to fill seats at its tracks, and NASCAR needs SMI because SMI owns some of the most popular tracks on the circuit. SMI’s major complaint against NASCAR is that new race dates have been given to International Speedway Corporation tracks, which are owned and operated by people “intimately” involved with the sanctioning body itself, while one of SMI’s crown jewels sits with just one date.

I believe that both sides have valid arguments. The Texas Motor Speedway is a popular track that was built with the purpose of hosting two Winston Cup events per season. You have to believe that they wouldn’t have built such an enormous facility believing that they would only fill it once per year. And, it has to be frustrating to see NASCAR award races to ISC tracks. If you’re a shareholder, you probably wonder just how legal the relationship between ISC and NASCAR is, and that’s the basis for the lawsuit.

On the other hand, NASCAR is right to spread races around the country. The more people who can attend events, the more fans the sport will have, and without fans, there is no sport. Still, NASCAR opens itself to criticism when new race dates are awarded to ISC tracks.

NASCAR also opens itself to criticism by wagging its finger at others for doing things “at the expense of the sport and its fans.” The cynics among us might seize upon the relationship between NASCAR and some of the companies affiliated with it, including ISC, as something that thrives at the expense of the sport and its fans, particularly its fans.

We cynics might point out seat licenses, cooler restrictions and preferential trackside scanner sales as moves that were made at the expense of the sport and its fans. Granted, NASCAR isn’t directly responsible for these, but those in charge at NASCAR have heavy influence on the culprit, ISC. Does it surprise anyone that there was no official criticism directed at ISC following these tactics?

It is easy to criticize, but much more difficult to offer suggestions, except in this case. If NASCAR is truly interested in its fans, there are several things that it could do. First and foremost is encouraging ISC to make race tickets more accessible to fans with average to lower incomes. I know that tickets by nature are expensive, but a single ticket is much more affordable than a package of four, like ticket holders at the Kansas Speedway are forced to buy.

Similarly, restricting coolers is nothing more than a slap in the face to fans who are trying to save money after digging deep for their tickets. I’m not saying that everyone deserves a 12-pack during a race, but just try to get your kids’ sandwiches and drinks in a small cooler and you’ll see the inanity of cooler restrictions.

Aside from that, there are many questionable agreements involving NASCAR and ISC which directly gouge the fans with sales of concessions, souvenirs and scanners both inside and outside the track. NASCAR could definitely make things a little easier, if they chose to.