Mike Wallace sues Germain Racing over loss of sponsor

[MoparsRule]

Mike Wallace has filed suit against Germain Racing over the loss of his GEICO sponsorship in the Nationwide Series. Wallace is claiming that his deal with the insurance giant was pulled out from under him by the team and his business associate, Doug Barnette.

The three-year deal with Wallace was worth $6 million annually from GEICO directly to Wallace.


Wallace then moved the sponsorship to Germain Racing, where he had a two-year deal for the 2008-2009 seasons. For 2008 and 2009 with Germain, Wallace agreed to pay Germain Racing $4.7 million a year to field cars for him and $600,000 (10 percent of the GEICO contract) to Barnette, who runs the Player Management International sports agency and served as the business liaison between GEICO and Wallace. That left Wallace with an annual base salary of $700,000.


Wallace alleges that Germain Racing breached its contract by not providing him with a car in 2009, for violating an agreement that all communications with GEICO would be through Wallace and for soliciting GEICO for its Sprint Cup sponsorship of driver Max Papis. Wallace is suing Barnette for failing to work with him in retaining GEICO and moving the GEICO sponsorship to another driver. Wallace, who was eighth in the driver standings in 2008, seeks an unspecified amount in damages.



GEICO would not have been able to participate in the Nationwide Series next year anyway because the series title sponsor is GEICO's competitior. But GEICO this year began a limited sponsorship in the Cup Series with Max Papis.

Basically, it's getting ugly out there in the competition for the ever-dwindling supply of sponsors.

No word yet on whether there will be a custody battle for Lauren Wallace.

UPDATE: Statement from Germain Racing:

"Germain Racing is surprised and disappointed that Mike Wallace's attorney has made these allegations. We enjoyed our relationship with Mike and as recently as last week understood that the feelings were mutual. Germain Racing will aggressively and vigorously defend against these allegations."

Interesting insight into the driver/sponsor/car provider (owner) relationships that are currently going on in nascar.

[cbreez99]

Sponsors moving around on their own is very common. Happens all the time and feelings get hurt, but it goes both ways. Why that team did not give him a car this year, I don't know, but I could see Geico's leaving Mike for that reason (if they contractually could...). I guess he is pissed! A serious sponsor is always going to be on the look out for other teams to be with because things always change.

If he keeps the blatant "start and park" thing going, he won't need a sponsor!

[MoparsRule]

Watching the Pocono race yesterday, of the 8 "GOGH" cars, I noticed that only the #82 actually raced, the other did nothing but collect a check after taking the green.

If the trend keeps up, there may only be 30 cars actually racing come Daytona in February.

[cbreez99]

It blew me away...an embarassment to the Wallace racing heritage. Start the race with no pit crew at all...get the Black Flag...

This is a time I agree with NASCAR.

Maybe Mike has rode this horse as far as it will go.

[MoparsRule]

I didn't realize that. I watched portions of the tivo of the race (green to first yellow; yellow to checkers) & didn't see that he didn't even have a pit crew.

I just found this online regarding that: The Pocono entry was a pure case of start and park, as the team did not have a crew chief, or even a tool box, in the pit stall at the start of the race.

Wow.

[Hardscrabble]

Just to clear things up...

Would this have made Mike Wallace a ride-buyer?

[MoparsRule]

Hence the following comment referring to the "car provider (owner)" in my comment above...

Interesting insight into the driver/sponsor/car provider (owner) relationships that are currently going on in nascar.

[Seadog]

[font='Times New Roman', serif]

[font='Times New Roman', serif]You serve me
And Ill serve you
Swing your partners, all get screwed
Bring your lawyer
And Ill bring mine
Get together, and we could have
A bad time

Its affidavit swearing time
Sign it on the dotted line
Hold your Bible in your hand
Now all thats left is to
Find yourself a new band . . .

Were gonna play the sue me, sue
You blues
Were gonna play the sue me, sue
You blues

Hold the block on money flow
Move it into joint escrow
Court receiver, laughs, and thrills
But in the end we just pay those
Lawyers theit bills

When you serve me
And I serve you
Swing your partners, all get screwed
Bring your lawyer
And Ill bring mine
Get together, and we could have
A bad time

Were gonna play the sue me, sue
You blues

Im tired of playing the
Sue me, sue you blues[/font]

[/font]
[font='Times New Roman', serif] [/font]
[font='Times New Roman', serif]In memory of George Harrison.[/font]

[Bruce Spencer]

Just to clear things up...

Would this have made Mike Wallace a ride-buyer?

In a word, yes.

[Bruce Spencer]

It blew me away...an embarassment to the Wallace racing heritage. Start the race with no pit crew at all...get the Black Flag...

This is a time I agree with NASCAR.

Maybe Mike has rode this horse as far as it will go.

I totally disagree with NASCAR. If that's what teams hafta do to stay in business, that's what they hafta to do. Listening to D.K. Ulrich the other day, back in the 70's their whole goal was just to get to the next race.

[Automotive]

I totally disagree with NASCAR. If that's what teams hafta do to stay in business, that's what they hafta to do. Listening to D.K. Ulrich the other day, back in the 70's their whole goal was just to get to the next race.

Yea, if the opportunity is there to get some bucks, and it covers the cost and then some to move to the next carnival, so what? Rules allow only 8 cars to qualify. Race is what you want to make it. Should someone be black flagged for not having a competitive engine or setup and are lanquishing in 43rd?

[MoparsRule]

Not necessarily, but not having proper equipment or personnel in the pit should be reason enough to not be allowed to start an event, earn points, or prize money.

[Gateway Fan]

NASCAR could have that rule. It appears that they don't. You are going to have a hard time proving to me that the officials were unaware that the 'team' didn't have anything in their pit prior to the race. How many officials are on pit row? How long are the cars out before the race begins? I just wonder if there would have been a difference had the race taken place on Sunday. Would one of the ARCA crews have been retained to make an appearance?

[cbreez99]

That scenario is a bush league, old-time short track stunt...not needed in a professional series today. NASCAR is concerned about their "product" and rightfully so. If too many racers (I use the term generously ) took that lead, the value of the "product" would be devalued. Fans would stay away.

If have raced a time or two in my day, and have NEVER pulled a stunt like that. I would have been too ashamed to do that. I have a name.

The Wallace name means a bit less now...at this point, what company would want to sponsor him? None that I have been affiliated with.

[Jack Harrington]

What's next? Take a quick sweep of the local mission, grab a couple of guys to push the car off, then give 'em twenty, a bottle of Maddog, and C-ya! I remember my over the wall team...........MEMORIES
P.S. Sell Lauren to the Arabs............He's a little wanker!

[cbreez99]

That's funny.

[RA64]

good for those guys for at least making it onto the track. they are playing by the rules and it would be ridiculous for NASCAR keep a qualified car from starting or not pay them.

I always felt if NASCAR wants to encourage all 43 cars to race, they need to adopt more progressive payouts. how much more does a driver get for finishing 15th instead of 43rd? Not including the contingencies and stuff, which amount for much, maybe a majority of the modern day nascar purse, the difference is very small, I haven't double checked but in the case of a nationwide race a while ago I figure it was maybe a few thousand dollars!

so instead of guaranteeing 50k for last and 75k for 10th (these are just arbitrary numbers) what if last guaranteed 25k and 10th guaranteed 150k?

[Lucky161]

good for those guys for at least making it onto the track. they are playing by the rules and it would be ridiculous for NASCAR keep a qualified car from starting or not pay them.

I always felt if NASCAR wants to encourage all 43 cars to race, they need to adopt more progressive payouts. how much more does a driver get for finishing 15th instead of 43rd? Not including the contingencies and stuff, which amount for much, maybe a majority of the modern day nascar purse, the difference is very small, I haven't double checked but in the case of a nationwide race a while ago I figure it was maybe a few thousand dollars!

so instead of guaranteeing 50k for last and 75k for 10th (these are just arbitrary numbers) what if last guaranteed 25k and 10th guaranteed 150k?

I don't believe contingencies amount to a majority of the modern day nascar purse. I don't even believe they would qualify as particularly significant. Can you provide some examples that would make your case?

nascar's point system and payouts reflect an emphasis on entries/starting fields. There was a time when a "cup" race had less than 15 entries and many top teams cherry picked only the highest paying races.

Going from $50K for last and $75K for 10th to $25K for last and $150K for 10th MIGHT have the effect you desire. But it might also have a far different effect, such as smaller fields and not just for one race but several.

[cbreez99]

I apologize for hijacking this to a start and park thread...my bad.

[MoparsRule]

I apologize for hijacking this to a start and park thread...my bad.

Not a problem. Interesting how the two are intertwined, isn't it?

On the original topic, I am confused how Wallace got out of the circle on this & Geico ended up with Papis in the seat.

[Jack Harrington]

Not a problem. Interesting how the two are intertwined, isn't it?

On the original topic, I am confused how Wallace got out of the circle on this & Geico ended up with Papis in the seat.

Well gee, Mr. Wizard, what's behind the curtain? Never mind, it's not important! Ah, YES it is. It looks to me like there is some scammin' goin' on somewhere......The only question is where?
P.S. Mopar, it probably ended up like that guy's first dollar. Fancy a crisp?

[hoosiersergeant]

If you go back to the original www.geicoracing.com website. It was Mike, Max, Paul Tracy, and some other driver (sorry don't know who it was) was part of the GEICO RACING "TEAM"....and Lauren.

Now the site is all MAX and the other GEICO Sponsored teams, moto, boats, et al.

There has to be more to the story than what's on the surface. No conspiracies, just something else that caused the bitterness and litigation.

[RA64]

I don't believe contingencies amount to a majority of the modern day nascar purse. I don't even believe they would qualify as particularly significant. Can you provide some examples that would make your case?

nascar's point system and payouts reflect an emphasis on entries/starting fields. There was a time when a "cup" race had less than 15 entries and many top teams cherry picked only the highest paying races.

Going from $50K for last and $75K for 10th to $25K for last and $150K for 10th MIGHT have the effect you desire. But it might also have a far different effect, such as smaller fields and not just for one race but several.

perhaps not a majority. http://www.nascar.com/races/cup/2009..._official.html

just looking at the payouts: AJ Allmendinger won $72750 for finishing 17th, Carl Edwards finished 18th and won $118056. I assume the difference is in contingencies.

as an example of the flat payouts, mike wallace earned $64952 for finishing last, so Allmendinger won less then 8K more for running 187 more laps (467.5miles)

I said a more progressive payout would encourage racing among the whole field, obviously it could lead to smaller fields as well. NASCAR claims there's no requirement to have 43 cars anyway.

personally though, the start and park does not bother me so much. For people it bothers though, changing the payouts seems like a better solution then banning cars that don't have pit crews.

[Lucky161]

perhaps not a majority. http://www.nascar.com/races/cup/2009..._official.html

just looking at the payouts: AJ Allmendinger won $72750 for finishing 17th, Carl Edwards finished 18th and won $118056. I assume the difference is in contingencies.

as an example of the flat payouts, mike wallace earned $64952 for finishing last, so Allmendinger won less then 8K more for running 187 more laps (467.5miles)

I said a more progressive payout would encourage racing among the whole field, obviously it could lead to smaller fields as well. NASCAR claims there's no requirement to have 43 cars anyway.

personally though, the start and park does not bother me so much. For people it bothers though, changing the payouts seems like a better solution then banning cars that don't have pit crews.

The difference you're seeing between Allmendinger and Edwards is not contingencies. It is something more like the "winner's circle" although that may not be the name of that program now.

Contingencies are based on a competitor displaying a company's logo and if you'll look closely at all Cup cars those logos are almost the same for every car. There is an assumption that if a car displays a logo then that team/car/driver is using their product. That is not always the case. I have a friend that won a class championship in drag racing one year and was listed in that company's advertising as using there product. I asked him about it and he said, no, they didn't use that brand of cam, but nobody else was paying contingency money so they put their decal on the car. This was years ago but it was a very small amount of money. The "winner's circle" program was initiated to make sure the top teams came to all races instead of cherry picking. It would be closer to "appearance" money than contingency money.

For your example of contingency money to be significant companies paying continencies would have to be paying thousands of dollars per team per race. At even just $1000 per team per race that would cost a company $1.5M a season. When M. Waltrip was sponsored by Pennzoil they opted to pay nascar a fee to leave most of those logos off of their car. I don't remember which ones but a couple they were required to leave on the car, but they were able to leave most of them off by paying. I also have forgotten the amount they paid but apparently they didn't consider it to be significant.

[RA64]

The difference you're seeing between Allmendinger and Edwards is not contingencies. It is something more like the "winner's circle" although that may not be the name of that program now.

Contingencies are based on a competitor displaying a company's logo and if you'll look closely at all Cup cars those logos are almost the same for every car. There is an assumption that if a car displays a logo then that team/car/driver is using their product. That is not always the case. I have a friend that won a class championship in drag racing one year and was listed in that company's advertising as using there product. I asked him about it and he said, no, they didn't use that brand of cam, but nobody else was paying contingency money so they put their decal on the car. This was years ago but it was a very small amount of money. The "winner's circle" program was initiated to make sure the top teams came to all races instead of cherry picking. It would be closer to "appearance" money than contingency money.

For your example of contingency money to be significant companies paying continencies would have to be paying thousands of dollars per team per race. At even just $1000 per team per race that would cost a company $1.5M a season. When M. Waltrip was sponsored by Pennzoil they opted to pay nascar a fee to leave most of those logos off of their car. I don't remember which ones but a couple they were required to leave on the car, but they were able to leave most of them off by paying. I also have forgotten the amount they paid but apparently they didn't consider it to be significant.

I realize there are contingencies like that in racing, particularly at the amateur level. But I was thinking some of the extra money comes from the drivers getting paid for various obligations the driver has, for example making some appearance for a NASCAR sponsor or something. Getting paid that certain amount is contingent on the driver fulfilling that obligation. In this way, the winners circle program is a contingency program too, the teams have to meet certain requirements to get that money.

This is just based on what I read on the topic. I thought these things were sometimes lumped together and considered contingencies.

Anyway, sorry for using the term incorrectly or in a confusing way, that wasn't the point of the post anyway.

[Coyote]

I had some thoughts I wanted to post, but my brain went blank trying to comprehend that a sponsor was willing to pay six million dollars to have Mike Wallace run a season of Nationwide.

Can't remember anything now. Still numb.

But I do know I have no problem with start and parks. Part of racing is deciding how muhc you're going to spend and what level to compete. Start and parks are saying that they are just competing to make the race. If they were doing based on a top 35 lock in than NASCAR should step in a say no, but not otherwise.

[Jack Harrington]

I had some thoughts I wanted to post, but my brain went blank trying to comprehend that a sponsor was willing to pay six million dollars to have Mike Wallace run a season of Nationwide.

Can't remember anything now. Still numb.

But I do know I have no problem with start and parks. Part of racing is deciding how muhc you're going to spend and what level to compete. Start and parks are saying that they are just competing to make the race. If they were doing based on a top 35 lock in than NASCAR should step in a say no, but not otherwise.

6 million dollars worth of confidence in Mike Wallace....Not in this lifetime. Max Papis in a taxi.....same deal!

[Lucky161]

I realize there are contingencies like that in racing, particularly at the amateur level. But I was thinking some of the extra money comes from the drivers getting paid for various obligations the driver has, for example making some appearance for a NASCAR sponsor or something. Getting paid that certain amount is contingent on the driver fulfilling that obligation. In this way, the winners circle program is a contingency program too, the teams have to meet certain requirements to get that money.

This is just based on what I read on the topic. I thought these things were sometimes lumped together and considered contingencies.

Anyway, sorry for using the term incorrectly or in a confusing way, that wasn't the point of the post anyway.

I wasn't implying that you were intentionally misleading. Drivers getting paid for appearances etc. would not show up as winnings. I'll agree that the "winner's circle" program is a type of contingency in that they have to show up to collect, but before they can do that, they have to perform on the track to even qualify for it. Taking away that money would go against what you are proposing of paying more for better performance.

It's a balancing act and probably no version would be perfect in every case. They can pay a "winner takes all" or they can pay all participants the same or something in between.

[MoparsRule]

The "Winners Circle" program & the top 25 from the previous season add a healthy sum to the payout.

[Jack Harrington]

The "Winners Circle" program & the top 25 from the previous season add a healthy sum to the payout.

If anyone is interested in the 'BIG PICTURE', read DRIVIN' WITH THE DEVIL. What Mopar is talkin' is what Big Bill was talkin' at that motel in Daytona Beach, all those years ago. Of course he was hoodwinkin' some folks at the same time, but that was what he did best.
P.S. Lauren is still a little wanker.......How much did the Arabs offer for the little poop?