Were Nevada's and Fresno's Actions Unethical?

[creekster]

So where is it that I can find that Fresno and Nevada ratted out their deal? Or is this just assumptions?

It looks that way to me, but it could be wrong. As I have said several times, I really lack enough info to conclude unethical behavior, but it sure looks that way.

[falafel]

BYU clearly approached the WAC (with Utah State its dupe or shill) knowing that the MWC had voted to accept Nevada and Fresno, and worked actively to thwart the MWC's objective.

Seriously, BYU doesn't deserve to be in a North Korean conference.

If BYU were a lawyer it would be disbarred.

Lol. This is where we all get tied up, since there are so many contradictory things that are "clear" to half of us.

[falafel]

Sure, but it seems like "liquidated damages" is something different than an exit penalty, which to me seems more like an exit clause. Of course, I'm not an attorney and have no idea what I'm talking about.

I don't think they are different. But the exit penalty is not the issue. It, as Creekster states, is the signing of an agreement with no intent to abide by it that's the problem.

[creekster]

but turn that around. Could I say that BYU used it's knowledge (that the MWC would invite 2 WAC teams) unethically when it pushed for the exit penalty?

you oculd but you would be wrong. There was no invite. There was no indication of any invites. The invites only happened after BYU's possible move to inde sytatus was kicked around and BYU left the conference call. BYU acted knowing only that BSU had left and seeking to ensure that the WAC it would be buying would be the same as the one in the window.

[Hot Lunch]

that's a poor assumption. remember that Nevada allegedly didn't sign off on the 5 mil penalty

why is this a poor assumption? So maybe Nevada did know it was coming and therefore didn't sign. I would hope that Fresno would be smart enough not to sign an agreement that they would be penalized $5 million knowing they would walk away 5 days later. Is Nevada really acting unethical if they didn't sign the agreement then?

Sorry, I am not trying to be a dick here or a Ute troll I promise.

[Jacob]

why is this a poor assumption? So maybe Nevada did know it was coming and therefore didn't sign. I would hope that Fresno would be smart enough not to sign an agreement that they would be penalized $5 million knowing they would walk away 5 days later. Is Nevada really acting unethical if they didn't sign the agreement then?

Sorry, I am not trying to be a dick here or a Ute troll I promise.

Nevada did agree to it, whether they signed or not. There was a conference call, they voted yes, there were 7 other University presidents and the commissioner there as witnesses.

[Hot Lunch]

Who else would have done it? USU? No way. I think its pretty safe to assume that the ones who benefited from destroying BYU's plans are the ones who leaked it.

If I recall, Jay Drew was quoting a source at Utah St. in the Tribune article breaking the news. I am pretty sure that was the case.

[Flystripper]

why is this a poor assumption? So maybe Nevada did know it was coming and therefore didn't sign. I would hope that Fresno would be smart enough not to sign an agreement that they would be penalized $5 million knowing they would walk away 5 days later. Is Nevada really acting unethical if they didn't sign the agreement then?

Sorry, I am not trying to be a dick here or a Ute troll I promise.

you don't have to sign to be bound by the agreement. Supposedly all WAC members verbally agreed and most signed after the fact. A verbal agreement is as binding as any signature...it is just harder to prove but with the other conferences as witnesses there is no problem of proof in this case.

[ERCougar]

why is this a poor assumption? So maybe Nevada did know it was coming and therefore didn't sign. I would hope that Fresno would be smart enough not to sign an agreement that they would be penalized $5 million knowing they would walk away 5 days later. Is Nevada really acting unethical if they didn't sign the agreement then?

Sorry, I am not trying to be a dick here or a Ute troll I promise.

Remember how long Utah took to accept the offer from the PAC 10? Without an exit penalty?

My guess is that immediately after the Sat conference call, Fresno/Nevada called Thompson, formulated plans, and the Fresno Board of Regents (or whoever makes the decision) met together to accept the impending invite, all before the Tuesday conference call or Wednesday decision.

[creekster]

why is this a poor assumption? So maybe Nevada did know it was coming and therefore didn't sign. I would hope that Fresno would be smart enough not to sign an agreement that they would be penalized $5 million knowing they would walk away 5 days later. Is Nevada really acting unethical if they didn't sign the agreement then?

Sorry, I am not trying to be a dick here or a Ute troll I promise.

so you go to buy a car from someone, you shake hands on a deal, prom,ising to sign the paperwork. you then drive the car into the guys garage and say "ooops, no deal becasue I didnt sign the paper! You lose!" guess how the law treats that?

[beefytee]

May I analogize for a moment?

Your company, Ethical, Inc., is the main supplier of widgets for Microsoft. Your competitor, Unethical, Inc., wants to be the supplier for Microsoft, but they know they can't be as long as Microsoft has confidence in Ethical, Inc.

Ethical Inc enters a nondisclosure agreement with Unethical, Inc in which Ethical proposes a joint venture with Unethical regarding Unethical's major client, Apple. In order to keep unethical in the deal Ethical insists, and Unethical agrees, that Unethical commits to the new joint venture, that it won't go after the Microsoft account and agrees to pay liquidated damages of $5m if they jump ship.

Having agreed to the above, unethical approaches Microsoft late one night and quickly enters into a contract with Microsoft, backs out on the Apple deal, and declares that it has no intention of paying the $5m.

Nevada and Fresno are Unethical Inc. And if you don't think that is unethical, then you are an idiot! It's in the company name!

Yes, after typing all that I realize what a waste of time this all was.

Sounds like BYU needs to be investigated for anti-trust issues.

[Hot Lunch]

Nevada did agree to it, whether they signed or not. There was a conference call, they voted yes, there were 7 other University presidents and the commissioner there as witnesses.

So did Nevada have an invite last week? I would think they would have accepted it right away if they did. That would be a no brainer and something everyone but ER would agree with.

[ERCougar]

so you go to buy a car from someone, you shake hands on a deal, prom,ising to sign the paperwork. you then drive the car into the guys garage and say "ooops, no deal becasue I didnt sign the paper! You lose!" guess how the law treats that?

That's a little different. It'd be more like buying a car from someone with an agreement to be able to return it at any time while losing your down payment.

[Jacob]

So did Nevada have an invite last week? I would think they would have accepted it right away if they did. That would be a no brainer and something everyone but ER would agree with.

No! They got invited only because MWC was scared of losing BYU.

[falafel]

If I recall, Jay Drew was quoting a source at Utah St. in the Tribune article breaking the news. I am pretty sure that was the case.

That's only because USU was involved in lobbying the WAC. That doesn't mean USU broke the news to the MWC. That's what we're talking about, after all. Which WAC team called Hair to rat out their own conference? No way it was USU. This is was what they wanted more than anything.