(06-26-2019 11:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  It tells me that UConn wanted out of the AAC because they realized that if a conference like the Big 12 back-filled with Cincinnati or Houston or both that the AAC would be no place to be.

Wait for it...

(06-26-2019 11:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:20 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Nothing says "we trust you" like a $30M exit fee.

But in all honesty I think UConn wants that too, may even have suggested it. As a stick to beat back the football lobby in the athletic department.

I can see that angle too! I think they'll either play at the FCS level again, or drop it all together, but in time.

Consider the timing of this information leaked. Only right after the Board approved the move to the Big East and it was fait acompli.

UConn has the most divided Athletic Department which has been at war with itself for a decade. And yes I agree with you, the end game is dropping football altogether. But as Andy Katz pointed out, they have to play it out and try for a few years, so that they can go back to the donors and not have them slam the door in their face.

I do think they will give a sincere effort to keep football afloat. But it wont be easy.

it is funny all the ones in here talking about what this exit fee means are the same ones that try and ignore or down play the fact that the Big 12 has an exit fee equal to two prior years conference distributions that is in effect for 99 years from 2012

it is not a part of the GOR and the lack of the GOR does not end that exit fee or the contract that contains it

(06-26-2019 11:53 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  it is funny all the ones in here talking about what this exit fee means are the same ones that try and ignore or down play the fact that the Big 12 has an exit fee equal to two prior years conference distributions that is in effect for 99 years from 2012

it is not a part of the GOR and the lack of the GOR does not end that exit fee or the contract that contains it

At the G5 level $30M is huge, because it would take a decade or more to make it back.

At the P5 level even $60M is just two years.

UConn is G5.

(06-26-2019 03:02 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Read the SECOND tweet

$30M exit fee years 1-5, $15M years 6-9, $10M in year 10 and afterwards.

UConn really, really wanted out of the AAC.

And clearly did not think they would be part of any realignment wave in the mid-2020's. Like I said before---this was not about money. They are losing money on this deal---especially for the first 5 years. Thats probably why my expectation on this were so far off. Money didnt drive the bus the here.

I honestly thought the AAC would hang on to UConn as long as the new deal was 4 million per team or better. I clearly waaaaay underestimated the desire of the UConn administration to reunite with their old rivals. It looks to me like the AAC probably had to hit a double digit 10-15 million per team home run to hold on to UConn. They werent staying unless the money was crazy good--and when it came back well under "crazy good"-----that was it.

(06-26-2019 11:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:53 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  it is funny all the ones in here talking about what this exit fee means are the same ones that try and ignore or down play the fact that the Big 12 has an exit fee equal to two prior years conference distributions that is in effect for 99 years from 2012

it is not a part of the GOR and the lack of the GOR does not end that exit fee or the contract that contains it

At the G5 level $30M is huge, because it would take a decade or more to make it back.

At the P5 level even $60M is just two years.

UConn is G5.

two years prior distributions will be about $84 million for the Big 12 at the end of their current contract

it will take a long time to make that up especially with a buy in that the Big 10 will charge for sure (they have to or listen to Nebraska cry) and right now the ACC and PAC 12 pay less then the Big 12 and that does not look to be changing anytime soon especially for Texas (there the LHN goes beyond the current Big 12 contract) so that makes giving up $84 million to move to the ACC or PAC 12 a really stupid move

and the ACC is locked into a long TV contract and there is nothing to suggest anyone would pay 12 members of the PAC 12 a great deal more (especially enough to make up for the LHN) because they added two schools vs paying enough to 8 other schools to keep two schools in the Big 12

much less pay enough to make up for giving up $84 million in exit fees

(06-27-2019 12:09 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:53 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  it is funny all the ones in here talking about what this exit fee means are the same ones that try and ignore or down play the fact that the Big 12 has an exit fee equal to two prior years conference distributions that is in effect for 99 years from 2012

it is not a part of the GOR and the lack of the GOR does not end that exit fee or the contract that contains it

At the G5 level $30M is huge, because it would take a decade or more to make it back.

At the P5 level even $60M is just two years.

UConn is G5.

two years prior distributions will be about $84 million for the Big 12 at the end of their current contract

it will take a long time to make that up especially with a buy in that the Big 10 will charge for sure (they have to or listen to Nebraska cry) and right now the ACC and PAC 12 pay less then the Big 12 and that does not look to be changing anytime soon especially for Texas (there the LHN goes beyond the current Big 12 contract) so that makes giving up $84 million to move to the ACC or PAC 12 a really stupid move

and the ACC is locked into a long TV contract and there is nothing to suggest anyone would pay 12 members of the PAC 12 a great deal more (especially enough to make up for the LHN) because they added two schools vs paying enough to 8 other schools to keep two schools in the Big 12

much less pay enough to make up for giving up $84 million in exit fees

Except you don't owe an exit fee if you give 2 years notice and serve it. Most give 2 years notice and let the conference keep the last year of the distribution. That's not a hindrance.

(06-27-2019 12:13 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:09 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:53 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  it is funny all the ones in here talking about what this exit fee means are the same ones that try and ignore or down play the fact that the Big 12 has an exit fee equal to two prior years conference distributions that is in effect for 99 years from 2012

it is not a part of the GOR and the lack of the GOR does not end that exit fee or the contract that contains it

At the G5 level $30M is huge, because it would take a decade or more to make it back.

At the P5 level even $60M is just two years.

UConn is G5.

two years prior distributions will be about $84 million for the Big 12 at the end of their current contract

it will take a long time to make that up especially with a buy in that the Big 10 will charge for sure (they have to or listen to Nebraska cry) and right now the ACC and PAC 12 pay less then the Big 12 and that does not look to be changing anytime soon especially for Texas (there the LHN goes beyond the current Big 12 contract) so that makes giving up $84 million to move to the ACC or PAC 12 a really stupid move

and the ACC is locked into a long TV contract and there is nothing to suggest anyone would pay 12 members of the PAC 12 a great deal more (especially enough to make up for the LHN) because they added two schools vs paying enough to 8 other schools to keep two schools in the Big 12

much less pay enough to make up for giving up $84 million in exit fees

Except you don't owe an exit fee if you give 2 years notice and serve it. Most give 2 years notice and let the conference keep the last year of the distribution. That's not a hindrance.

this is completely untrue there is no provision for two years notice to avoid exit fees in the Big 12 contract for conference membership

there is however a provision that any Big 12 member has less than a day to notify the conference AND DECLINE any offer if that member is approached or approaches others about switching conferences

failure to do so can void the right to vote on conference business and other penalties

so you are 100% incorrect there is no two year notice provision in the Big 12 contract

(06-27-2019 12:29 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:13 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:09 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:53 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  it is funny all the ones in here talking about what this exit fee means are the same ones that try and ignore or down play the fact that the Big 12 has an exit fee equal to two prior years conference distributions that is in effect for 99 years from 2012

it is not a part of the GOR and the lack of the GOR does not end that exit fee or the contract that contains it

At the G5 level $30M is huge, because it would take a decade or more to make it back.

At the P5 level even $60M is just two years.

UConn is G5.

two years prior distributions will be about $84 million for the Big 12 at the end of their current contract

it will take a long time to make that up especially with a buy in that the Big 10 will charge for sure (they have to or listen to Nebraska cry) and right now the ACC and PAC 12 pay less then the Big 12 and that does not look to be changing anytime soon especially for Texas (there the LHN goes beyond the current Big 12 contract) so that makes giving up $84 million to move to the ACC or PAC 12 a really stupid move

and the ACC is locked into a long TV contract and there is nothing to suggest anyone would pay 12 members of the PAC 12 a great deal more (especially enough to make up for the LHN) because they added two schools vs paying enough to 8 other schools to keep two schools in the Big 12

much less pay enough to make up for giving up $84 million in exit fees

Except you don't owe an exit fee if you give 2 years notice and serve it. Most give 2 years notice and let the conference keep the last year of the distribution. That's not a hindrance.

this is completely untrue there is no provision for two years notice to avoid exit fees in the Big 12 contract for conference membership

there is however a provision that any Big 12 member has less than a day to notify the conference AND DECLINE any offer if that member is approached or approaches others about switching conferences

failure to do so can void the right to vote on conference business and other penalties

so you are 100% incorrect there is no two year notice provision in the Big 12 contract

The contract is covered by the GOR and its penalties. The Big 12 bylaws have an exit procedure that require a 2 year notice of intent to leave. The penalty amount has changed since Missouri and A&M left but it is assessed for each year of the notice not served and its wholly separate from the GOR and its penalties.

SECTION 3 of the Big 12 Bylaws requires a notice of not less than 2 years for a withdrawing member and forfeiture of 2 years distributions as an exit penalty with a 50% reduction of that penalty if they play as a full member for 1 year, and leave a full distribution behind for the subsequent year. That's covered by sections 3.1, 3.2, and some other details in section 3.3 of the Big 12's bylaws and is wholly other than GOR penalties, which when the GOR expires would be zero.

So if the GOR expires in 2025 a notice may be given in 2023 by a departing member who will play the 2024 season and 2025 season leaving behind their 2025 distribution as their penalty and would be eligible for play in their new conference in 2026. The cost would be around 38 million if the GOR has been satisfied.

(06-27-2019 12:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:29 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:13 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:09 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  At the G5 level $30M is huge, because it would take a decade or more to make it back.

At the P5 level even $60M is just two years.

UConn is G5.

two years prior distributions will be about $84 million for the Big 12 at the end of their current contract

it will take a long time to make that up especially with a buy in that the Big 10 will charge for sure (they have to or listen to Nebraska cry) and right now the ACC and PAC 12 pay less then the Big 12 and that does not look to be changing anytime soon especially for Texas (there the LHN goes beyond the current Big 12 contract) so that makes giving up $84 million to move to the ACC or PAC 12 a really stupid move

and the ACC is locked into a long TV contract and there is nothing to suggest anyone would pay 12 members of the PAC 12 a great deal more (especially enough to make up for the LHN) because they added two schools vs paying enough to 8 other schools to keep two schools in the Big 12

much less pay enough to make up for giving up $84 million in exit fees

Except you don't owe an exit fee if you give 2 years notice and serve it. Most give 2 years notice and let the conference keep the last year of the distribution. That's not a hindrance.

this is completely untrue there is no provision for two years notice to avoid exit fees in the Big 12 contract for conference membership

there is however a provision that any Big 12 member has less than a day to notify the conference AND DECLINE any offer if that member is approached or approaches others about switching conferences

failure to do so can void the right to vote on conference business and other penalties

so you are 100% incorrect there is no two year notice provision in the Big 12 contract

The contract is covered by the GOR and its penalties. The Big 12 bylaws have an exit procedure that require a 2 year notice of intent to leave. The penalty amount has changed since Missouri and A&M left but it is assessed for each year of the notice not served and its wholly separate from the GOR and its penalties.

once again you are incorrect

the GOR is a separate contract that has no mechanism for exiting the conference and that is by design

the separate 99 year contract for conference membership has no provision for two years notification to avoid exit fees

http://www.big12sports.com/fls/10410/pdf...Bylaws.pdf

above is that contract please show up where it says that the buyout is not in effect if two years notice is given (it doesn't)

feel free to take several years to look that over before posting a replay stating that you were incorrect (or any other post)

(06-27-2019 12:56 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:29 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:13 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:09 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  two years prior distributions will be about $84 million for the Big 12 at the end of their current contract

it will take a long time to make that up especially with a buy in that the Big 10 will charge for sure (they have to or listen to Nebraska cry) and right now the ACC and PAC 12 pay less then the Big 12 and that does not look to be changing anytime soon especially for Texas (there the LHN goes beyond the current Big 12 contract) so that makes giving up $84 million to move to the ACC or PAC 12 a really stupid move

and the ACC is locked into a long TV contract and there is nothing to suggest anyone would pay 12 members of the PAC 12 a great deal more (especially enough to make up for the LHN) because they added two schools vs paying enough to 8 other schools to keep two schools in the Big 12

much less pay enough to make up for giving up $84 million in exit fees

Except you don't owe an exit fee if you give 2 years notice and serve it. Most give 2 years notice and let the conference keep the last year of the distribution. That's not a hindrance.

this is completely untrue there is no provision for two years notice to avoid exit fees in the Big 12 contract for conference membership

there is however a provision that any Big 12 member has less than a day to notify the conference AND DECLINE any offer if that member is approached or approaches others about switching conferences

failure to do so can void the right to vote on conference business and other penalties

so you are 100% incorrect there is no two year notice provision in the Big 12 contract

The contract is covered by the GOR and its penalties. The Big 12 bylaws have an exit procedure that require a 2 year notice of intent to leave. The penalty amount has changed since Missouri and A&M left but it is assessed for each year of the notice not served and its wholly separate from the GOR and its penalties.

once again you are incorrect

the GOR is a separate contract that has no mechanism for exiting the conference and that is by design

the separate 99 year contract for conference membership has no provision for two years notification to avoid exit fees

http://www.big12sports.com/fls/10410/pdf...Bylaws.pdf

above is that contract please show up where it says that the buyout is not in effect if two years notice is given (it doesn't)

feel free to take several years to look that over before posting a replay stating that you were incorrect (or any other post)

No Todge, You need to read your own bylaws. I've listed the sections above. The GOR expires in 2025 and then has no effect. Your bylaws require a 2 year notice (Section 3.1), the penalty is disclosed in Section 3.2, and other stipulations in 3.3.

To the board I suggest you google the Big 12 bylaws zip down to around page 10 or 11 (SECTION 3) and read it for yourselves. The GOR is separate Todge but it has an expiration date. Now if they vote to extend it then it continues to cover the conference but the vote has to be unanimous and obviously if someone is leaving it won't be.

(06-27-2019 01:05 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:56 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:29 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:13 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Except you don't owe an exit fee if you give 2 years notice and serve it. Most give 2 years notice and let the conference keep the last year of the distribution. That's not a hindrance.

this is completely untrue there is no provision for two years notice to avoid exit fees in the Big 12 contract for conference membership

there is however a provision that any Big 12 member has less than a day to notify the conference AND DECLINE any offer if that member is approached or approaches others about switching conferences

failure to do so can void the right to vote on conference business and other penalties

so you are 100% incorrect there is no two year notice provision in the Big 12 contract

The contract is covered by the GOR and its penalties. The Big 12 bylaws have an exit procedure that require a 2 year notice of intent to leave. The penalty amount has changed since Missouri and A&M left but it is assessed for each year of the notice not served and its wholly separate from the GOR and its penalties.

once again you are incorrect

the GOR is a separate contract that has no mechanism for exiting the conference and that is by design

the separate 99 year contract for conference membership has no provision for two years notification to avoid exit fees

http://www.big12sports.com/fls/10410/pdf...Bylaws.pdf

above is that contract please show up where it says that the buyout is not in effect if two years notice is given (it doesn't)

feel free to take several years to look that over before posting a replay stating that you were incorrect (or any other post)

No Todge, You need to read your own bylaws. I've listed the sections above. The GOR expires in 2025 and then has no effect. Your bylaws require a 2 year notice (Section 3.1), the penalty is disclosed in Section 3.2, and other stipulations in 3.3.

To the board I suggest you google the Big 12 bylaws zip down to around page 10 or 11 (SECTION 3) and read it for yourselves. The GOR is separate Todge but it has an expiration date. Now if they vote to extend it then it continues to cover the conference but the vote has to be unanimous and obviously if someone is leaving it won't be.

the expiration of the GOR does not make any difference in the contract I posted

and again you are just plain wrong and you know it

everyone here is the part where JR tries to obfuscate the fact that he does not know what he is talking about

please highlight the part that states that two years notification means there is no exit fee?

3.1 Withdrawal. Notwithstanding the commitment of each Member set forth in Section 1.2.3 above, a Member may only withdraw from the Conference, cease to be a member in the Conference, or otherwise fail to fully participate in the activities of the Conference in contravention of its commitment to remain a Member in the Conference for such ninety-nine (99) year period (“Withdraws” or “Withdrawal”) by fully complying with the provisions of these Bylaws and by paying the Buyout Amount (as defined below). Each Member acknowledges and agrees that the Withdrawal of a Member and the payment of the Buyout Amount and implementation of the provisions of these Bylaws does not abrogate the obligations of such Withdrawing Member (as defined below) pursuant to that certain Amended and Restated Grant of Rights Agreement dated effective as of July 1, 2012, or any replacement or extension thereof or other agreement pursuant to which such Member grants the right to telecast some or all of its sporting events to the Conference (a “Grant of Rights Agreement”). The Grant of Rights Agreement which will remain in full force and effect as to such Withdrawing Member and the Withdrawing Member shall continue to be fully bound under the Grant of Rights Agreement after Withdrawal for the remainder of the term of any Grant of Rights Agreement as if it remained a Member of the Conference, but the Withdrawing Member shall not be entitled to payment of any amounts or any other benefits arising under the Grant of Rights Agreement after Withdrawal.3.2Withdrawing Member. A Member (a “Withdrawing Member”) may Withdraw, or shall be deemed to have Withdrawn, as a Member of the Conference: (i) if it gives notice of the intent to Withdraw to the Conference; or (ii) if a Supermajority of Disinterested Directors by affirmative vote determines that such Member: (A) makes statements or takes actions that are determined by a Supermajority of Disinterested Directors to evidence the intent of such Member to withdraw from the Conference either currently or in the future; (B) breaches or evidences its intent to breach or not honor and fully comply with its obligations to the Conference under these Bylaws or the Grant of Rights Agreement for the entirety of the respective terms thereof; © if a third party offers to, or attempts to induce a Member to, leave the Conference and/or breach or not to fully perform its future obligations under the Grant of Rights Agreement and the Member does not both (1) inform the Conference of such action as promptly as possible (but in any event not later than twelve (12) hours after such action) and (2) immediately and unconditionally reject that offer in a form and manner reasonably acceptable to the Commissioner; or (D) if a Member otherwise takes or fails to take actions that are determined by a Supermajority of Disinterested Directors to be contrary to the best interests of the Conference taken as a whole.3.3 Notice Date and Interim Period. The “Notice Date” of the Withdrawal shall be the date of the occurrence of the event that causes the Withdrawal under Section 3.2 above. The “Effective Date” of the Withdrawal shall be the June 30 that next follows the end of the period that is 18 full calendar months following the Notice Date, unless
15an earlier date is established by a Supermajority of Disinterested Directors in its sole discretion. The period from the Notice Date to the Effective Date is referred to herein as the “Interim Period.”3.4Buyout Amount. Any Withdrawing Member shall pay to the Conference a commitment buyout fee (the “Buyout Amount”) in an amount equal to the sum of the amount of distributions that otherwise would be paid to the Member during the final two years of its membership in the Conference. The Withdrawing Member shall be deemed to have agreed to forfeit all distributions of any type that otherwise would have been made to the Withdrawing Member during the Interim Period (the “Distribution Withholding”) and the Conference shall not pay the Distribution Withholding to the Withdrawing Member. A Withdrawing Member agrees to pay to the Conference the amount by which the Buyout Amount exceeds the Distribution Withholding, with such payment to be made not later than the Effective Date. In addition, • if (A) by legal action or otherwise, a Withdrawing Member, or any other person or entity, attempts to challenge or oppose or interfere with, or challenges or opposes or interferes with, (i) the payment of the Buyout Amount by the Withdrawing Member or the withholding of the Distribution Withholding by the Conference, (ii) the enforcement by the Conference of its rights under the Grant of Rights Agreement or the performance by the Withdrawing Member of its obligations under the Grant of Rights Agreement, or (iii) the right of the Conference’s telecast partners to televise games of the Withdrawing Member under the terms of the Grant of Rights Agreement during its then-remaining term; or (B) for any other reason the Conference’s telecast partners are unable to produce and telecast games of the Withdrawing Member during the then-remaining term of the Grant of Rights Agreement or the Conference is unable to realize the revenues relating to those games from its telecast partners, • then the Members agree that such actions, in breach of the Withdrawing Member’s agreements in these Bylaws, cause additional damage to the Conference and therefore that the Buyout Amount shall be increased by, and shall also include, and the Withdrawing Member shall be obligated to pay to the Conference immediately upon the occurrence of any of the foregoing events, the amount of all actual loss, damage, costs, or expenses whatsoever (including but not limited to lost revenues, damage to reputation and public image, and damage to relationships with related parties) incurred by the Conference or any of its remaining Members directly or indirectly related to that challenge or opposition, whether economic or otherwise.Each of the Members agrees that Withdrawal of a Member contrary to its commitment to the Conference and the other Members pursuant to Section 3.1 above would cause damage and financial hardship to the Conference and the other Members without regard to the continued enforcement of the Grant of Rights Agreement, that the financial consequences to the Conference and its remaining Members cannot be measured or estimated with certainty at this time, and that the payment of the Buyout Amount is a reasonable method of compensating the Conference and the other Members for such damage and financial hardship and shall not be construed as a penalty.3.5 Effect of Withdrawal. The term of office of any Director representing a Withdrawing Member shall automatically expire and such Director shall no longer be a Director of the Conference effective as of the Notice Date and such Withdrawing Member shall not be entitled to have a Director representative on the Board of Directors during the Interim Period or thereafter. During the Interim Period and thereafter: (i) the number of Directors shall automatically be reduced by the number of Withdrawing Members and the calculation of the Disinterested Directors Entitled to Vote, the Majority of Disinterested Directors, and the Supermajority of Disinterested Directors shall exclude for all purposes the position on the Board of Directors previously represented by the Withdrawing Member(s); and (ii) neither the Director representing any Withdrawing Member nor such Member’s representatives on any Advisory Committee (as defined in the Rules) shall be entitled to attend any meeting of, vote on any matter before, notice
16of any meeting of, or copies of materials distributed to, the Board of Directors or any Advisory Committee.


nowhere in the above does it mention anything about two years notification or any way to avoid the buyout

highlight the part that says that two years notification voids the buyout and or provide some proof of your claim.....otherwise everyone will know that you are just wrong

3.3 Notice Date and Interim Period.

The “Notice Date” of the Withdrawal shall be the date of the occurrence of the event that causes the Withdrawal under Section 3.2 above.

The “Effective Date” of the Withdrawal shall be the June 30 that next follows the end of the period that is 18 full calendar months following the Notice Date, unless an earlier date is established by a Supermajority of Disinterested Directors in its sole discretion. The period from the Notice Date to the Effective Date is referred to herein as the “Interim Period.

*************************************

So 18 months prior to June 30th, 2025 would be the date to give notice. Working backwards that is December 31st, 2023

The buyout in 3.4, if 3.3 is met would be two years of Distributions withheld. The GOR would not apply, since they would be leaving upon it's expiration.

There is not penalty specified for a "late" notice. The Damage clause is extremely vague, and such vagueness, as opposed to specific price set by the Big East and American, have not done well in court. Generally schools just forfeit the distributions until they formally exit. The way I read it, this almost encourages Oklahoma to announce their withdraw after the 2023-24 distributions are paid. It is extremely difficult to "get money back" in such cases, and the courts are not in the business of collections.

How long would it take OU or Texas to make it up? Depends. It looks like comparable B1G and SEC schools are making $20-25M more in distributions that the B12. So $80M would take 4 years to start flowing black. They can pretty much take out a loan from the parent institution and pay it back over a decade and be cash flow positive that way. Also the history of conferences includes advances on distributions (Maryland got that to help with their financial issues when joining the B1G) -- but I don;t see that as necessary for OU or Texas.

As for the remaining members that will be a nice pile of cash coming in, possibly as much as $160M or $20 per school. Obviously distributions will decline without the heavyweights. But I think the B12 will remain a power conference, albeit a weak one.

(06-27-2019 03:39 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  3.3 Notice Date and Interim Period.

The “Notice Date” of the Withdrawal shall be the date of the occurrence of the event that causes the Withdrawal under Section 3.2 above.

The “Effective Date” of the Withdrawal shall be the June 30 that next follows the end of the period that is 18 full calendar months following the Notice Date, unless an earlier date is established by a Supermajority of Disinterested Directors in its sole discretion. The period from the Notice Date to the Effective Date is referred to herein as the “Interim Period.

*************************************

So 18 months prior to June 30th, 2025 would be the date to give notice. Working backwards that is December 31st, 2023

The buyout in 3.4, if 3.3 is met would be two years of Distributions withheld. The GOR would not apply, since they would be leaving upon it's expiration.

There is not penalty specified for a "late" notice. The Damage clause is extremely vague, and such vagueness, as opposed to specific price set by the Big East and American, have not done well in court. Generally schools just forfeit the distributions until they formally exit. The way I read it, this almost encourages Oklahoma to announce their withdraw after the 2023-24 distributions are paid. It is extremely difficult to "get money back" in such cases, and the courts are not in the business of collections.

How long would it take OU or Texas to make it up? Depends. It looks like comparable B1G and SEC schools are making $20-25M more in distributions that the B12. So $80M would take 4 years to start flowing black. They can pretty much take out a loan from the parent institution and pay it back over a decade and be cash flow positive that way. Also the history of conferences includes advances on distributions (Maryland got that to help with their financial issues when joining the B1G) -- but I don;t see that as necessary for OU or Texas.

As for the remaining members that will be a nice pile of cash coming in, possibly as much as $160M or $20 per school. Obviously distributions will decline without the heavyweights. But I think the B12 will remain a power conference, albeit a weak one.

there are several problems with what you are claiming

if a third party offers to, or attempts to induce a Member to, leave the Conference and/or breach or not to fully perform its future obligations under the Grant of Rights Agreement and the Member does not both (1) inform the Conference of such action as promptly as possible (but in any event not later than twelve (12) hours after such action) and (2) immediately and unconditionally reject that offer in a form and manner reasonably acceptable to the Commissioner

so a program sitting back and waiting to tell the conference they are leaving until their next to last distribution has been made would be in violation of the above part of the contract

and I have no clue where you get the idea that "courts are not debt collectors"

from small claims court all the way to Pennzoil vs Getty courts have awarded damages for breaking contracts.....that is a claim that pretty much ignores what a massive amount of court cases are about

there is also this issue as well

3.4Buyout Amount. Any Withdrawing Member shall pay to the Conference a commitment buyout fee (the “Buyout Amount”) in an amount equal to the sum of the amount of distributions that otherwise would be paid to the Member during the final two years of its membership in the Conference. The Withdrawing Member shall be deemed to have agreed to forfeit all distributions of any type that otherwise would have been made to the Withdrawing Member during the Interim Period (the “Distribution Withholding”) and the Conference shall not pay the Distribution Withholding to the Withdrawing Member. A Withdrawing Member agrees to pay to the Conference the amount by which the Buyout Amount exceeds the Distribution Withholding, with such payment to be made not later than the Effective Date.

so members have specifically agreed to the fact that they owe an amount that is equal to a prior two years distributions even if that is more than any distributions that have been withheld by the conference

so waiting to make an announcement until after the distribution has been made only one year prior to when they want to leave is specifically in violation of the contract (unless they can actually make a deal within 12 hours before the distribution is made from FIRST CONTACT) is acting in a manner that specifically attempts to violate the contract and to do so to attempt to avoid agreed to damages

I see it highly unlikely that a court would look favorably on a member that when ask why they did not give the 12 hour notification and why they waited until just after a distribution to make the notification basically has to state that they did so in order to get the money in the bank then make the conference sue them to try and get it back

all the more so with this in the contract

In addition, • if (A) by legal action or otherwise, a Withdrawing Member, or any other person or entity, attempts to challenge or oppose or interfere with, or challenges or opposes or interferes with, (i) the payment of the Buyout Amount by the Withdrawing Member or the withholding of the Distribution Withholding by the Conference, (ii) the enforcement by the Conference of its rights under the Grant of Rights Agreement or the performance by the Withdrawing Member of its obligations under the Grant of Rights Agreement, or (iii) the right of the Conference’s telecast partners to televise games of the Withdrawing Member under the terms of the Grant of Rights Agreement during its then-remaining term; or (B) for any other reason the Conference’s telecast partners are unable to produce and telecast games of the Withdrawing Member during the then-remaining term of the Grant of Rights Agreement or the Conference is unable to realize the revenues relating to those games from its telecast partners, • then the Members agree that such actions, in breach of the Withdrawing Member’s agreements in these Bylaws, cause additional damage to the Conference and therefore that the Buyout Amount shall be increased by, and shall also include, and the Withdrawing Member shall be obligated to pay to the Conference immediately upon the occurrence of any of the foregoing events, the amount of all actual loss, damage, costs, or expenses whatsoever (including but not limited to lost revenues, damage to reputation and public image, and damage to relationships with related parties) incurred by the Conference or any of its remaining Members directly or indirectly related to that challenge or opposition, whether economic or otherwise.Each of the Members agrees that Withdrawal of a Member contrary to its commitment to the Conference and the other Members pursuant to Section 3.1 above would cause damage and financial hardship to the Conference and the other Members without regard to the continued enforcement of the Grant of Rights Agreement, that the financial consequences to the Conference and its remaining Members cannot be measured or estimated with certainty at this time, and that the payment of the Buyout Amount is a reasonable method of compensating the Conference and the other Members for such damage and financial hardship and shall not be construed as a penalty.

so members have agreed that any action legal or otherwise to try and avoid paying the exit fee can itself cause additional damages that are not able to be calculated at the time of the contract, but that the withdrawing member agrees they will be liable for

so even if one says that a member should have a right to challenge the contract there is still the fact that a member trying to do what you say which is to wait to notify they are leaving until the next to last distribution is made they have taken an action that is attempting to oppose or interfere with withholding distributions and or paying the amount equal to two prior years distributions

so there are two parts of the contract they would be willingly violating to try and get away with interfering with the conference withholding two years distributions

the notification part and the part that says they are liable for more damages if they take any action to interfere with or oppose that withholding or the needed additional payments to equal two prior years distributions

not to mention that 8 of the current Big 12 members have enforced a similar contract two separate times and the other two have paid under a similar contract.....so they have little claim to say they have always been against this type of contract because they have collected under them two times or they have acknowledged and paid under them once in the past

and back to what I first said all the people that are now talking about how stupid UConn is and how much they will have to pay and how much this will cost them and how much they are agreeing to pay the BE if they try and leave are the same ones that try and pretend the Big 12 does not have a valid and well written contract in place for 99 years from 2012 (that clearly has no two year notification to avoid exit fees as has been thoroughly proven by posting the contract)

(06-26-2019 11:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 03:02 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Read the SECOND tweet

$30M exit fee years 1-5, $15M years 6-9, $10M in year 10 and afterwards.

UConn really, really wanted out of the AAC.

What does that tell you John? It tells me that the Big East knows there is another round of realignment coming from conferences that can draft up. They are locking UConn in because they realize that some P5 conference(s) may need to back fill.

UConn wanted out of the AAC for more basketball revenue and a better TV market. But they might also have realized that if a conference like the Big 12 back-filled with Cincinnati or Houston or both that the AAC would be no place to be. Hence this move.

This ^
UConn should end the football program and just focus on BBall.

(06-26-2019 11:52 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  UConn has the most divided Athletic Department which has been at war with itself for a decade. And yes I agree with you, the end game is dropping football altogether. But as Andy Katz pointed out, they have to play it out and try for a few years, so that they can go back to the donors and not have them slam the door in their face.

Let's not forget that UConn made this 100-year decision with an outgoing President and an interim chair of the Board of Trustees.

Perfect timing for the basketball faction to strong arm this decision...

(06-26-2019 11:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:53 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  it is funny all the ones in here talking about what this exit fee means are the same ones that try and ignore or down play the fact that the Big 12 has an exit fee equal to two prior years conference distributions that is in effect for 99 years from 2012

it is not a part of the GOR and the lack of the GOR does not end that exit fee or the contract that contains it

At the G5 level $30M is huge, because it would take a decade or more to make it back.

At the P5 level even $60M is just two years.

UConn is G5.

But if they accept an invite, they become P5.

(06-27-2019 07:23 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:53 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  it is funny all the ones in here talking about what this exit fee means are the same ones that try and ignore or down play the fact that the Big 12 has an exit fee equal to two prior years conference distributions that is in effect for 99 years from 2012

it is not a part of the GOR and the lack of the GOR does not end that exit fee or the contract that contains it

At the G5 level $30M is huge, because it would take a decade or more to make it back.

At the P5 level even $60M is just two years.

UConn is G5.

But if they accept an invite, they become P5.

in the P5 $60 million is not close to two years either

you are having to overcome a deficit so you need to make more money than you would have in your former conference

in the case of Texas right now they are making the same money as the Big 10

in the case of OU they are making about the same as the SEC SEC SEC or perhaps a little less

and of course both are making more than the ACC or PAC 12 even without any LHN or SoonerSports money so they would never make up the deficit at current rates in either of those conferences and even for OU with the Big 10 and the buy in it will probably take them a decade and a half to make up any deficit and lesser money from a buy in.....just like Nebraska 18 years later is only just starting to break even on their move to the Big 10 from the Big 12 and that is exclusive of any third tier money and it is well known that Nebraska was further ahead than Texas on stating their own network (which does not mean it would have paid close to the same, but it would have been additional revenue)

there is little chance between a buy in and exit fees that Texas especially and even OU would not be looking at being revenue negative for a decade or more if they moved conferences barring some dramatic differences in contracts in the future

(06-27-2019 03:39 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  3.3 Notice Date and Interim Period.

The “Notice Date” of the Withdrawal shall be the date of the occurrence of the event that causes the Withdrawal under Section 3.2 above.

The “Effective Date” of the Withdrawal shall be the June 30 that next follows the end of the period that is 18 full calendar months following the Notice Date, unless an earlier date is established by a Supermajority of Disinterested Directors in its sole discretion. The period from the Notice Date to the Effective Date is referred to herein as the “Interim Period.

*************************************

So 18 months prior to June 30th, 2025 would be the date to give notice. Working backwards that is December 31st, 2023

The buyout in 3.4, if 3.3 is met would be two years of Distributions withheld. The GOR would not apply, since they would be leaving upon it's expiration.

There is not penalty specified for a "late" notice. The Damage clause is extremely vague, and such vagueness, as opposed to specific price set by the Big East and American, have not done well in court. Generally schools just forfeit the distributions until they formally exit. The way I read it, this almost encourages Oklahoma to announce their withdraw after the 2023-24 distributions are paid. It is extremely difficult to "get money back" in such cases, and the courts are not in the business of collections.

How long would it take OU or Texas to make it up? Depends. It looks like comparable B1G and SEC schools are making $20-25M more in distributions that the B12. So $80M would take 4 years to start flowing black. They can pretty much take out a loan from the parent institution and pay it back over a decade and be cash flow positive that way. Also the history of conferences includes advances on distributions (Maryland got that to help with their financial issues when joining the B1G) -- but I don;t see that as necessary for OU or Texas.

As for the remaining members that will be a nice pile of cash coming in, possibly as much as $160M or $20 per school. Obviously distributions will decline without the heavyweights. But I think the B12 will remain a power conference, albeit a weak one.

Just curious as the date on these bylaws. The one I read from was the most recent I could find 2016. It clearly stated in 3.2 that a notice of not less than 2 years was required and that 2 years worth of distributions would be subject to forfeit with notice at a rate of 50%, which is roughly 38 million plus escalators between next year and 2023. I believe it was 18 months notice when Missouri and A&M withdrew. But where Texas and Oklahoma are concerned whether it is 38 or 80 million it would not be a deterrent.

(06-26-2019 03:18 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  The exit fee will probably be reduced through negotiation.

Most conferences have some sort of entrance fee. Most have a reduced payout for a couple of years. It's probably worth it to pay the $3.5m up front.

I don't believe the BE has a ton of NCAA credits. Why would a new member be included in the distribution of credits earned while they were in another conference?

No, the credits remain with the old conference. The Big East has earned a little more than double the AAC in NCAA credits in 6 years. And UConn of course is responsible for a little less than half of the American's credits.