(01-26-2020 02:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-26-2020 02:46 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-26-2020 02:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-26-2020 09:45 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-26-2020 09:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Agree about Boise asking for more, that's not a breach, unless the original $1.8m deal had a clause that said neither side will ever ask to change the deal, which is highly unlikely.

But disagree about that vote to end the $1.8m bonus as of 2026. That's a meaningless vote until you actually miss a payment. It's like my family can hold a vote tomorrow to stop making our mortgage payment and the bank may find out about it, but until we actually miss a payment the bank has no cause of action. Until then it's just words.

IANAL, but I expect that if you send a letter to the bank saying you're not making any payments after June 1, the bank might be able to start some kind of legal process.

For those bringing up "ripeness", its worth noting there is also a legal concept called "anticipatory breach" or "anticipatory repudiation".


An anticipatory breach (also referred to as an anticipatory repudiation) is an action that shows a party's intention to fail to perform or fulfill its contractual obligations to another party. An anticipatory breach negates the counterparty's responsibility to perform its requirements under the contract. By demonstrating a party's intention to breach, the counterparty may also begin legal action.


https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/ant...breach.asp

Given that there are currently realignment opportunities that may not exist 6 years from now (as well as other unknown opportunities that may occur between now and the time at which he MW has signaled it will unilaterally end the Boise special deal)---anticipatory breach may be an appropriate basis for legal action in order for Boise to determine if their long term future is with the MW or AAC (or elsewhere).

So, very roughly, Boise couldnt go to court now and get a declaratory judgement about the bonus in the next contract (ripeness), but could jump to the AAC this fall and stiff MWC on the late-notice exit fee (anticipatory breach).

(just assume AAC would invite that way for purposes of this sub-discussion)

Seems like something they could certainly argue.

Interesting find. Yes, it appears that Boise could, as part of the process of defending itself from the future harm, repudiate its side of the deal - the assignment of its home TV rights - and walk away from the MW free and clear.