CSU/USU suing MW over exit fees

[oneepstein]

They agreed to those fees to gain the benefit of playing in a stable league. They all assumed that it would be in a case of moving UP as opposed to laterally. Now they want to renege on the fees even though they gained the benefit of having them in place.

It’s like there are 12 houses in a neighborhood and people’s houses keep getting broken into, and everyone agrees to hire a full time security service to protect their homes. Now the service has a 5 year contract so everyone has to sign the contract and commit to paying the fees for the duration. Everyone does so and lives in peace for a couple of years, but then one day half the owners decide to move and since they aren’t going to be living there anymore they don’t want to pay.

There’s also the fact that they acted in concert with one another to actively destroy the MW. Now maybe Utah State wasn’t part of the conspiracy, but the rest have no leg to stand on.

And if you’re trying to play the “we didn’t say we were leaving” game… well let’s just say that the discovery on that one would be a gem and might make you look worse.

 

[Masked_rebel]

I do not remember the specifics of the lawsuit with the PAC last year.

But again a bit of a different story. All of those schools left the remaining PAC 2 extremely high and dry and all left for notably greener pastures. The teams could much more easily afford the fees, and still was able to reduce them to 65%, and they were somewhat reasonable fees. It was < 1/3 of their highest total media value, we are asking for 3x the highest total media value.

I don't know how this plays out, but it seems like the NCAA credits are a bargaining chip as well, the MW schools may have a legal claim to it, but I imagine it will be forfeit as a part of the negotiations.

The MW totally jacked up their exit fees once SDSU tried to leave ~ 18 months ago. I have always looked at is as a bit of a bargaining chip. They knew that the fees would get negotiated down and they make the fees completely unreasonable with hope that the take home would be higher than if they were a more reasonable/standard number.

Looking at the exit fees of other schools the total amount that the MW is seeking is absolutely ridiculous especially considering what the poaching fees add to the equation.

IF this gets to arbitration, I can see that the poaching fees totally being used against the MW with trying to double dip. The PAC 2 being "desperate" helps their cause somewhat. They did sign the agreement, but at the very least I can see the poaching fees being dragged out in court, even if to simply delay things. I can see the MW settling that too.

Which also means that it is very possible that UNLV gets much less than what was first thrown out there. It was not set in stone, but a range remember. Being "Up to 24.5 mill".

At least the MW did not account for the total value of all the fees with their distribution. The total distribution was worth 110 mil. So there is some room there.

I think I did the math with the 55 in poaching fees 55 in exit fees ( negotiated down obviously) would be the minimum to make things right

But if the poaching fees gets thrown out or settled for say half, and the exit fees get negotation down to industry standard, UNLV isn't getting that extra 24.5 mil.

Which is why I was saying that we shouldn't spend that money on Mullen because it may not come to be. So I hope that we were able to fundraise outside of that money to finance that contract.

You dont sign Mullen with the future potential money. That will play into the investment and long term being able to extend and keep, but I imagine it took the donors coming up to get the money for paying him.

 

[Rosegreen1]

Well I mean they did sign the contract no?

They did and they played the games for the scheduling agreementand the members agreed to exit fees. I don’t see how they can get out of that.

The crux of their argument is that there has not been an official public announcement of a conference change and the conference is not allowing them any voting rights. Everything hinges on that. The argument is the same. The Court in the Pac12 suit said that since 10 schools left, WSU and ORSt were sole members and the 10 defecting schools had no voting rights or ownership of the assets.

Colorado State president and AD announced their intention to join the PAC12 in this statement:

CSU takes historic step to join the Pac-12

CSU is joining the Pac-12 in 2026 as part of a move to rebuild the storied athletic conference.

source.colostate.edu

Same with Utah State:

Pac-12 Conference and Utah State University Unite to Advance the New Era of the 100-Year-Old Legacy

The Pac-12 Conference and Utah State University are proud to announce their new partnership, marking an exciting chapter in expansion history for the conference.

www.usu.edu

This is all delay to pay tactics. I don’t think the schools can afford the exit fees right now.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

They did and they played the games for the scheduling agreementand the members agreed to exit fees. I don’t see how they can get out of that.

Colorado State president and AD announced their intention to join the PAC12 in this statement:

CSU takes historic step to join the Pac-12

CSU is joining the Pac-12 in 2026 as part of a move to rebuild the storied athletic conference.

source.colostate.edu

Same with Utah State:

Pac-12 Conference and Utah State University Unite to Advance the New Era of the 100-Year-Old Legacy

The Pac-12 Conference and Utah State University are proud to announce their new partnership, marking an exciting chapter in expansion history for the conference.

www.usu.edu

This is all delay to pay tactics. I don’t think the schools can afford the exit fees right now.

I could be wrong on this info and if it is I'll retract.

From what I understand USU had a booster step up to pay exit fees to join PAC. I believe owner of the Maverick gas stations.

I don't know about CSU and if the exit fees are suddenly a problem for them.

 

[dcut03]

Again exit fees are always negotiated and I don't know why they won't be in this case. The MW isn't that special. The only thing special is how egregious the fees are compared to the actual value of the media rights.

Part of that negotiations is how they pay it back. The AAC teams that left for the big 12 are playing them back over 3-4 years.

There is a more than reasonable path to pay the fees, whatever they end up being back.

 

[Rosegreen1]

I could be wrong on this info and if it is I'll retract.

From what I understand USU had a booster step up to pay exit fees to join PAC. I believe owner of the Maverick gas stations.

I don't know about CSU and if the exit fees are suddenly a problem for them.

USU has significant debt, how much is unknown but the legal battles with Blake Anderson and paying multiple coaches and buyouts isn’t helping their financial bottom line.

Colorado State has to service their debt from the stadium construction, it’s almost 8 million a year and goes up to 12 million until 2055. You add in all these other fees from the pac move. It’s probably tough on their plans on any future builds and projects.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

USU has significant debt, how much is unknown but the legal battles with Blake Anderson and paying multiple coaches and buyouts isn’t helping their financial bottom line.

Colorado State has to service their debt from the stadium construction, it’s almost 8 million a year and goes up to 12 million until 2055. You add in all these other fees from the pac move. It’s probably tough on their plans on any future builds and projects.

Good points.

 

[Masked_rebel]

USU has significant debt, how much is unknown but the legal battles with Blake Anderson and paying multiple coaches and buyouts isn’t helping their financial bottom line.

Colorado State has to service their debt from the stadium construction, it’s almost 8 million a year and goes up to 12 million until 2055. You add in all these other fees from the pac move. It’s probably tough on their plans on any future builds and projects.

More than anything, this tells you the new Pac 12 is in trouble and they aren't getting anywhere near the TV deal they believe they were.

 

[oneepstein]

More than anything, this tells you the new Pac 12 is in trouble and they aren't getting anywhere near the TV deal they believe they were.

Not to mention, how are they negotiating TV deals when’s all their members aren’t really members?

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

Not to mention, how are they negotiating TV deals when’s all their members aren’t really members?

Like I said first questions I would ask as a lawyer, are you members of the MWC or not, if so can we have that in writing...😁

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

More than anything, this tells you the new Pac 12 is in trouble and they aren't getting anywhere near the TV deal they believe they were.

Their commisioner said new media partnership would be transformational not transactional. Whatever that means.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Am I wrong in saying this is a very similiar argument that the departing PAC schools attempted and lost?

I'm not seeing it, buddy. If I recall:

• The big victory was that the traitors could no longer vote. Thus they couldn't, say, dissolve the conference. I guess maybe this is in common with the MW Traitor suit?
• I can't remember what the "exit fee" of $6.5Mx10 was for. If I recall, since the media contract expired the day they left, it made the actual exit fee -0-, and the $6.5M was some other thing.
• Pretty sure the traitors participated equally in FY 2024 Pac revenue distributions, including BB units (previously earned). Anything earned in FY 2024 would start paying in FY 2025.
• The Pac-2's major cash windfall comes from the last 2 years of the Rose Bowl contract, and 100% of Pac BB 6-year unit payouts
• Other stuff.........

Anyway, lots went on with the Pac vs Traitor case. Just not seeing a lot of parallels. Your traitors apparently just don't want to pay the fee that was in the Bylaws before they decided to bail. Correct on that? And as an aside, what is the difference between an exit fee, and say, a buyout if a coach leaves for another team?

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Their commisioner said new media partnership would be transformational not transactional. Whatever that means.

It means Teresa was flinging out some big words hoping they would make her not look like an idiot.

 

[Rosegreen1]

Not to mention, how are they negotiating TV deals when’s all their members aren’t really members?

Makes you wonder if Utah State and Colorado State are having second thoughts and if their lawsuit fails that they’ll just rejoin the MWC. Dealing the Pac2 a death blow and forced to add low tier schools like Tarleton State.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

I'm not seeing it, buddy. If I recall:

• The big victory was that the traitors could no longer vote. Thus they couldn't, say, dissolve the conference. I guess maybe this is in common with the MW Traitor suit?
• I can't remember what the "exit fee" of $6.5Mx10 was for. If I recall, since the media contract expired the day they left, it made the actual exit fee -0-, and the $6.5M was some other thing.
• Pretty sure the traitors participated equally in FY 2024 Pac revenue distributions, including BB units (previously earned). Anything earned in FY 2024 would start paying in FY 2025.
• The Pac-2's major cash windfall comes from the last 2 years of the Rose Bowl contract, and 100% of Pac BB 6-year unit payouts
• Other stuff.........

Anyway, lots went on with the Pac vs Traitor case. Just not seeing a lot of parallels. Your traitors apparently just don't want to pay the fee that was in the Bylaws before they decided to bail. Correct on that? And as an aside, what is the difference between an exit fee, and say, a buyout if a coach leaves for another team?

Who knows.

Thats my answer to all of it. Makes my head hurt.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

It means Teresa was flinging out some big words hoping they would make her not look like an idiot.

'Creative scheduling'

Get ready for some Thursday Night PACtion !

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

thats what makes this whole thing really insane. They raked in a bunch of cash in basically the same situation and now expect that judges will again agree with them. Id rather play hardball if Im the MWC and stretch this thing out. Their schools cant bleed cash either and its becoming clearer they arent getting anywhere with the TV deals or the attraction of other schools.

Interesting things about this and it could change as soon as tomorrow...

Boise, Fresno and SDSU didn't join in on this or file similiar lawsuits separately?

Doesn't mean they won't only they haven't (yet) Why? Wouldn't they have the same argument?