In addition, Srb said the FIM was appointing a person affiliated with Clear Channel as race director to run the races in place of the AMA Pro Racing staff that has effectively carried out those responsibilities since the series began in 1974.
We weren't sure what to make of that, since AMA Pro Racing doesn't have a contract with the FIM regarding the AMA Supercross Series. The AMA, our parent organization, is a member organisation of the FIM, but their relationship does not involve AMA Supercross, or any other series operated by AMA Pro Racing.
Our contract is with Clear Channel, and it is very specific on these issues. So we notified Srb and the FIM that we would be adhering to our contract by sanctioning the events and officiating at them.
It wasn't until Clear Channel began advertising the series this fall that we realized the extent to which the FIM was seeking to take over our series.
The first round of advertising correctly identified it as the AMA Supercross Series, but in subsequent ads it was identified as the “FIM World Supercross GP,” then “World Supercross,” and finally as the “THQ World Supercross GP.”
In the meantime, Clear Channel told us that it intended to install its employee as the race director, and to enforce FIM rules at AMA Supercross Series races. We notified Clear Channel that this was a violation of our contract, and their attorneys told us they disagreed.
Our contract with Clear Channel calls for arbitration of any disagreements, but it was apparent that the arbitration procedure could not be completed before the AMA Supercross Series got under way January 4. Therefore, we have gone to court to compel Clear Channel to abide by the contract it signed.
Q: You have mentioned that the AMA is the parent organization of AMA Pro Racing, and that it's AMA Pro Racing that actually enters into contracts regarding the AMA Supercross Series. What exactly is the relationship between these organisations?
