The charter system has been a significant talking topic – and a source of contention – during the IndyCar offseason, reaching a fever pitch on the first day of the season on Friday, ahead of this weekend’s Grand Prix of St. Petersburg.
“I think it’s healthy for 10 owners to have 10 different things they want,” Ganassi told a small group of reporters, including Motorsport.com.
“I believe the series is working well because it is difficult to identify specific needs, which is a positive sign.
“I believe some of that is due to the offseason. I believe it gives guys time. It’s always fantastic to get back into racing, and it puts a halt to a lot of the nonsense.”
How the charter proposal divides IndyCar owners
The goal is to create a charter system similar to the one implemented by NASCAR in 2016, which would allow charter owners to have a guaranteed slot in each race and receive more prize money.
Penske Entertainment President and CEO Mark Miles admitted late last month that there had been “a couple of different concepts for charters in previous team owner meetings, and frankly, not been very close to a consensus on what it might look like.”
Ganassi and Roger Penske, proprietors of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway and IndyCar Series, are the only current team owners in North America’s main open-wheel championship who are familiar with NASCAR’s model.
Although Penske still has a NASCAR team, Ganassi left at the end of 2021 after selling his organization, which included two lucrative charters worth $10 million each. Motorsport.com asked Ganassi if other IndyCar team owners lacked the expertise to understand the equity because only he and Penske have experience with the NASCAR model.
“I think partially that, and partially they weren’t involved the first time we had a franchise system back in the CART days,” Ganassi went on to say.
“Back in the days of CART, a race cost around $25,000. And there were sixteen races, totaling $400,000. That is how much your franchise was worth. That’s a lot of money, then.
“You know, it seems like your team was worth at least $400,000. You were assured $400,000 in income. So your team was assured a multiple of that in terms of value. That was a wonderful thing. Can you imagine where we’d be today if we just stuck to that? We would be a long way down the road if we just stuck with that.”
In an IndyStar post on Friday evening, Andretti proposed Penske, who has a net worth of $3.2 billion, spend his own money rather than collecting from the team owners. Furthermore, if Penske wasn’t willing to do that, he should “sell the series.”
“There’s people out there willing to do it,” Andretti remarked. “I believe there are many people on the sidelines thinking, ‘This is a diamond in the rough if you do it right.'” However, enormous money is required to get it to that level, and if he is unwilling to do so, I believe he should step aside and let someone else buy it.
“I advised him, why don’t you sell a portion of the series to someone and utilize the proceeds as an equity stake. You preserve control, but take that money and invest it; he doesn’t want any partners.”
When Ganassi received such statements, he came to Penske’s help.
“Maybe if Michael was a billionaire, he’d see the view a little differently,” Mr. Ganassi remarked.
Ganassi added that respect should be given to what Penske has been through since purchasing the series late in 2019, including the coronavirus outbreak.
“Anybody that can run the Indianapolis Motor Speedway with no fans in the stands, he’s got my vote,” Ganssi remarked, noting that the 2020 Indianapolis 500 will take place in August.
“I’m fine with that. He coughed up the money to purchase the property, coughed it up throughout COVID, and kept the series going and running. I apologize, but I’m going to give him a pass for a couple of years. Let him get back on his feet.
“I do not want to forget about COVID so soon. It has far-reaching consequences beyond IndyCar racing itself. Let’s not forget that minor detail.”
Ganassi also admitted to spending his own money “from time to time and it’s paid off for me in the long run.” He also warned that Penske may be “keeping races propped up that we need.”
Despite this, Ganassi does not entirely agree with the current charter system ideals provided by IndyCar’s leadership.
“I think they were responding to some people, and they came out with an idea that wasn’t fully baked,” Ganassi told reporters.
“I’m like, ‘Wait, have you guys considered this?'” Have you thought about it?
“There were simply too many unresolved questions. I believe you must begin by defining what we hope to achieve through a franchise structure. Oh, and every other big sport has one. Okay. I wonder why they have them. Okay, what is the purpose of a franchise system? Okay.
“Start with that. If you can all agree on that, you may then decide how to proceed. But I believe you should start with why. What are we hoping to accomplish by establishing this as a franchise? That’s what has to happen first.”
Although each team owner in the sport has unique needs related to their own agenda, Ganassi feels there is a chance for everyone to leave satisfied once everything is addressed.
However, he stated that he was taken aback when asked to pay to join.
“My attitude was I’ve been paying for that for 20-30 years,” he stated.
Furthermore, given how difficult it has been to develop an agreed-upon framework, Ganassi is open to something comparable, albeit less official, to the Race Team Alliance (RTA) used by NASCAR teams. The RTA serves as a venue for open communication among team members about common issues, as well as a point of contact for dealing with the sanctioning authority.
“I think the one thing that it’s the same old thing with the owners, we need to get one voice talking for the owners and one full-time person on it and then it would get done instead,” Ganassi told reporters.
“You know, everyone sits about, and this guy says this, and that one says that. How about this? “What about that?”
Another problem raised by Andretti was for IndyCar to design an engine package that could also be used in IMSA, allowing team owners to enter two series at a low cost. Ganassi did not appear enthusiastic about the same notion.
“I believe that manufacturers enter racing formats when the sanctioning body contacts them and asks, ‘How can we interest you in our formula?’ “Okay,” Ganassi replied.
“I’m not sure if engine formulas are set by an owner who wants a specific type of engine. When you look back in history, I believe that is how engines have been put into series. That sounds like an excellent concept. But thus far, I have not heard any manufacturers remark, ‘That’s a good idea.’
“I mean, it’s up to the sanctioning body to meet with the company. Do you know what else IMSA has? Balance of Performance (BoP). So I’m not sure if altering the rules every week is what the series needs either.
“I believe there is a forum for it. And I’m not sure whether Michael blurting out his opinions in the media is the best way to go about it.”
Leave a Reply