CockyTalk

Welcome to Cockytalk!

Thank you for visiting our forum. As a guest, you have limited access to view some discussion and articles. By joining our free community, you will be able to view all discussions and articles, post your own topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos, participate in Pick'Em contests and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today!!

If you have any problems registering or logging in, please contact our Admins. Thanks!

Go Back   CockyTalk > Gamecocks Sports > The Cock Pit

Today's Top 10
Posters (by posts)Threads (by views)Newest Posts Gamecock Headlines 
b381l
thekob
garnet_black215
Master Bedroom
COCKYTALKIN
Gamecocks1137
CockyRyan
USCBASEBALL1
B-G
Captain9Dragons
Clemson Recruiting.. (4286)
Clowney Spares RB Bi (1744)
Ranking the Opposing (1684)
Not a Rival.. (1249)
Hello Gamecocks! (689)
John Rocker at rock (630)
Marching band (611)
Section 16 (281)
Muschamp + fan = win (280)
Does anyone know how (217)
Shaw Interview: SB Nation
My predictions for 2014
2015 - Dallas Warmack - A
2015 - Mon Denson
Please Post Over/Under Wi
SEC Coaches on the Hot Se
Clemson Recruiting...how
So what do you do with 18
Question about tailgating
Section 16


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-03-2014, 09:46 PM   #61
kick_ball
high midi-chlorian count
 
kick_ball's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Dagobah System
Posts: 1,820
CockyCash: 521
kick_ball is USC mascot materialkick_ball is USC mascot materialkick_ball is USC mascot materialkick_ball is USC mascot materialkick_ball is USC mascot materialkick_ball is USC mascot materialkick_ball is USC mascot materialkick_ball is USC mascot materialkick_ball is USC mascot materialkick_ball is USC mascot materialkick_ball is USC mascot material
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

usc should've honored the contract ... people/businesses/schools can make mistakes ... its best if they acknowledge them ..its ok for fans to admit their team/school did something wrong... doesn't make you less of a fan.... honor the contract and move on... just don't offer that same deal anymore and eventually its a non issue
__________________
May the Force be with you...Always!
kick_ball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 06:50 AM   #62
yazoo
1st Team All-SEC
 
yazoo's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Tryon, NC
Posts: 3,945
CockyCash: 1813
yazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot material
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by gamecockhub View Post
Yazoo:
It is confusing as some of the articles state that all of the Lifetime SS and FS donors are going to have to be repaid for their YES fees and others don't say anything about the other 200+ in both of the Lifetime categories at all. I know we should not rely on the journalists writing these articles always knowing what they are talking about but it is certainly both confusing and interesting.
I didn't read the State article. I read only the opinion. I like raw data and don't trust the media filter.

I think the question you ask here is one that Ray Tanner will need to think about. He is under no legal obligation to refund all the YES fees collected since Hyman decided to intentionally breach the contracts. However, it is probably the right thing to do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReadR00ster View Post
He was not suing for breach of contract and damages, he was suing to enforce the contract , because it is a sweet deal for him. He got a court order to make USC sell him the seats without any fees.
Suing to enforce a contract is the same thing as suing for breach of contract.

In this case, the Supreme Court opinion said Lee sued for a declaratory judgment. Those are two different things. With the latter, you are not entitled to enforce the contract, recover damages, etc., only for a declaration of its meaning. The opinion did not mention any injunctive relief.
__________________
"if you donít have one quarterback then you have none"
--Dabo Sweeney (c. 2014)



Shaq Attack
yazoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 09:30 AM   #63
georgelee57
Walk On
 
georgelee57's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Columbia
Posts: 16
CockyCash: 500
georgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his comb
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by yazoo View Post
I didn't read the State article. I read only the opinion. I like raw data and don't trust the media filter.

I think the question you ask here is one that Ray Tanner will need to think about. He is under no legal obligation to refund all the YES fees collected since Hyman decided to intentionally breach the contracts. However, it is probably the right thing to do.



Suing to enforce a contract is the same thing as suing for breach of contract.

In this case, the Supreme Court opinion said Lee sued for a declaratory judgment. Those are two different things. With the latter, you are not entitled to enforce the contract, recover damages, etc., only for a declaration of its meaning. The opinion did not mention any injunctive relief.
No monetary damages or attorney's fees were ever requested. This was done in order to insure that any one making a contract with the athletics dept. will receive what they are promised.

I do not want money. I want these folks to understand that we expect contracts to be honored.
georgelee57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 09:37 AM   #64
gamecockhub
4-Star
 
gamecockhub's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Lexington,SC
Posts: 336
CockyCash: 10441
gamecockhub has developed his gaff and talonsgamecockhub has developed his gaff and talonsgamecockhub has developed his gaff and talonsgamecockhub has developed his gaff and talonsgamecockhub has developed his gaff and talonsgamecockhub has developed his gaff and talonsgamecockhub has developed his gaff and talonsgamecockhub has developed his gaff and talonsgamecockhub has developed his gaff and talonsgamecockhub has developed his gaff and talonsgamecockhub has developed his gaff and talons
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by georgelee57 View Post
No monetary damages or attorney's fees were ever requested. This was done in order to insure that any one making a contract with the athletics dept. will receive what they are promised.

I do not want money. I want these folks to understand that we expect contracts to be honored.
Good for you , sir! That is exactly what they should have done in the first place, honor the contract! Glad they found in your favor. It was the right thing to do!
__________________
Any day above ground is a good one!
gamecockhub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 10:02 AM   #65
yazoo
1st Team All-SEC
 
yazoo's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Tryon, NC
Posts: 3,945
CockyCash: 1813
yazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot material
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by georgelee57 View Post
No monetary damages or attorney's fees were ever requested. This was done in order to insure that any one making a contract with the athletics dept. will receive what they are promised.

I do not want money. I want these folks to understand that we expect contracts to be honored.
I could glean from reading the Supreme Court's opinion that you tried every way possible to resolve this out of court. As some people on here know, I am not a big Hyman fan. I think he is an unethical person who was mostly motivated by selfish ambition. I am glad you exposed him in this because he is politically skilled at a high level and has bamboozled a lot of folks into liking him by trashing others . . . such as noble people like yourself. Your suit has shown some how Mr. Hyman operates, and is not the way most of us believe it is the way of ethical people or organizations.

I am guessing the only legal obligation now the falls out from this is you no longer have to pay the YES fees. I don't know yet if your effort will secure that benefit for the rest of the people in your situation.
__________________
"if you donít have one quarterback then you have none"
--Dabo Sweeney (c. 2014)



Shaq Attack

Last edited by yazoo; 04-05-2014 at 07:23 AM.
yazoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 10:07 AM   #66
The Yancey
Grumpy Old Fart
 
The Yancey's Avatar
 
Male

2009 Awards: Awards for best Posters - Given for: Best Signature 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sunshinny Florida
Posts: 19,728
CockyCash: 4751350
The Yancey is USC mascot materialThe Yancey is USC mascot materialThe Yancey is USC mascot materialThe Yancey is USC mascot materialThe Yancey is USC mascot materialThe Yancey is USC mascot materialThe Yancey is USC mascot materialThe Yancey is USC mascot materialThe Yancey is USC mascot materialThe Yancey is USC mascot materialThe Yancey is USC mascot material
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

I fully agree with Yazoo and Mr. Lee.
__________________


#ModForMod
The Yancey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 10:57 AM   #67
Nureye
Smash and Grab
 
Nureye's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Columbia
Posts: 1,550
CockyCash: 415
Nureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot material
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by georgelee57 View Post
We use or give our tickets. Here are the facts.

As posted by George M. Lee, II on Gamecock Central.


I want to clear up any misconception regarding my decision to bring legal action against the Gamecock Club. Here are the facts:...

Here is my take on this statement.

1. I think the GCC made the wrong decision in not honoring their "contract" with you.

2. Purchasing more tickets than you could need. 16-32 to be exact. At a reduced price, because you don't pay the PSL, is NOT some act of benevolence. Calling this "loyalty" that deserves to be rewarded is a sham.

One of the reasons the PSL was put in place was so that new donors would have the opportunity to purchase tickets in better areas of the stadium. The Lifetime donors are retarding this process.

3. The tone of this post wreaks of arrogance and entitlement. The name-calling, unsolicited opinions, and the simple fact that you felt it necessary to defend your actions on a message board indicate, to me, a level of insecurity and false-pride that, much like the "Lifetime contract" itself, is wholly unsavory and not kosher.
__________________
I understand basic math.
Nureye is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 11:27 AM   #68
yazoo
1st Team All-SEC
 
yazoo's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Tryon, NC
Posts: 3,945
CockyCash: 1813
yazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot material
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nureye View Post
Here is my take on this statement.

1. I think the GCC made the wrong decision in not honoring their "contract" with you.

2. Purchasing more tickets than you could need. 16-32 to be exact. At a reduced price, because you don't pay the PSL, is NOT some act of benevolence. Calling this "loyalty" that deserves to be rewarded is a sham.

One of the reasons the PSL was put in place was so that new donors would have the opportunity to purchase tickets in better areas of the stadium. The Lifetime donors are retarding this process.

3. The tone of this post wreaks of arrogance and entitlement. The name-calling, unsolicited opinions, and the simple fact that you felt it necessary to defend your actions on a message board indicate, to me, a level of insecurity and false-pride that, much like the "Lifetime contract" itself, is wholly unsavory and not kosher.
He probably felt the need to post due to unfair bashing from the Hyman apologists crew. That is not something new. The bashing of Mr. Lee has been going on since he felt he needed to bring the lawsuit on principle. I do not understand the power of that man (Hyman) to influence people but it is pretty astounding. Even now, two years after he left, he still has people who will defend him by attacking anyone who might besmirch the great man's reputation.
__________________
"if you donít have one quarterback then you have none"
--Dabo Sweeney (c. 2014)



Shaq Attack
yazoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 11:50 AM   #69
Nureye
Smash and Grab
 
Nureye's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Columbia
Posts: 1,550
CockyCash: 415
Nureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot materialNureye is USC mascot material
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by yazoo View Post
He probably felt the need to post due to unfair bashing from the Hyman apologists crew. That is not something new. The bashing of Mr. Lee has been going on since he felt he needed to bring the lawsuit on principle. I do not understand the power of that man (Hyman) to influence people but it is pretty astounding. Even now, two years after he left, he still has people who will defend him by attacking anyone who might besmirch the great man's reputation.
Yazoo, I know you don't like Hyman. Everyone knows you don't like Hyman. Your posts over the years are very clear on that point.

And while not all of Hyman's methods were well received, especially in this particular case, it is 100% fact that Hyman left the USC athletic department in a much better state than he found it.

So, as much as you like to bash on him; it comes off as sour grapes when you ignore the MAJOR accomplishments of his tenure...including the PSL scheme.

We were lucky to get Hyman when we did, and we are lucky to have Ray right now. It's almost like divine intervention.
__________________
I understand basic math.
Nureye is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 12:09 PM   #70
zambam
Blue Chip
 
zambam's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: charlotte
Posts: 801
CockyCash: 24050000
zambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudly
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReadR00ster View Post
A lot of people gave to USC and didn't get hooked up like this guy did. This went too far. Someone took a bribe.
You are completely wrong and/or misinformed.
zambam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 12:21 PM   #71
zambam
Blue Chip
 
zambam's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: charlotte
Posts: 801
CockyCash: 24050000
zambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudlyzambam is crowing loudly
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nureye View Post
Here is my take on this statement.

1. I think the GCC made the wrong decision in not honoring their "contract" with you.

2. Purchasing more tickets than you could need. 16-32 to be exact. At a reduced price, because you don't pay the PSL, is NOT some act of benevolence. Calling this "loyalty" that deserves to be rewarded is a sham.

One of the reasons the PSL was put in place was so that new donors would have the opportunity to purchase tickets in better areas of the stadium. The Lifetime donors are retarding this process.

3. The tone of this post wreaks of arrogance and entitlement. The name-calling, unsolicited opinions, and the simple fact that you felt it necessary to defend your actions on a message board indicate, to me, a level of insecurity and false-pride that, much like the "Lifetime contract" itself, is wholly unsavory and not kosher.
I disagree about the tone and I must have missed the name calling.

It is funny to me that so many people think this was some kind of backroom, sweetheart deal. It was done to make money for the University. It is a common practice in fund-raising.

To the math genius who determined the "profit" these people made on their tickets, please PM me whenever you need tickets to a football game. I will make you a special deal.
zambam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 03:13 PM   #72
yazoo
1st Team All-SEC
 
yazoo's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Tryon, NC
Posts: 3,945
CockyCash: 1813
yazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot material
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nureye View Post
Yazoo, I know you don't like Hyman. Everyone knows you don't like Hyman. Your posts over the years are very clear on that point.

And while not all of Hyman's methods were well received, especially in this particular case, it is 100% fact that Hyman left the USC athletic department in a much better state than he found it.

So, as much as you like to bash on him; it comes off as sour grapes when you ignore the MAJOR accomplishments of his tenure...including the PSL scheme.

We were lucky to get Hyman when we did, and we are lucky to have Ray right now. It's almost like divine intervention.
I will agree a significant amount of money was raised when he was the AD. I consider that his primary accomplishment. It doesn't mean I think he was ethical in how he did his thing.
__________________
"if you donít have one quarterback then you have none"
--Dabo Sweeney (c. 2014)



Shaq Attack
yazoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2014, 03:25 PM   #73
rioninusc
Two Deep
 
rioninusc's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,156
CockyCash: 555
rioninusc rules the CockPitrioninusc rules the CockPitrioninusc rules the CockPitrioninusc rules the CockPitrioninusc rules the CockPitrioninusc rules the CockPitrioninusc rules the CockPitrioninusc rules the CockPitrioninusc rules the CockPitrioninusc rules the CockPitrioninusc rules the CockPit
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Let's see how many people here would get all upset if they had a job that guaranteed a 3% raise each year regardless of how the company is doing, and then not get it one year. They would sue.

Say you have a life insurance policy that claims the payments of 6 dollars a month will never go up as long as you live, and you sign the contract, and then later on it goes up to 16 bucks. Yeah you guessed it you would fight it. If you don't you're not that bright.

It's the same deal, stop trying to make this something it isn't. Hyman and USC screwed these folks and the right party won case closed.
rioninusc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2014, 04:07 PM   #74
georgelee57
Walk On
 
georgelee57's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Columbia
Posts: 16
CockyCash: 500
georgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his combgeorgelee57 is developing his comb
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by rioninusc View Post
Let's see how many people here would get all upset if they had a job that guaranteed a 3% raise each year regardless of how the company is doing, and then not get it one year. They would sue.

Say you have a life insurance policy that claims the payments of 6 dollars a month will never go up as long as you live, and you sign the contract, and then later on it goes up to 16 bucks. Yeah you guessed it you would fight it. If you don't you're not that bright.

It's the same deal, stop trying to make this something it isn't. Hyman and USC screwed these folks and the right party won case closed.
Re: SC Supreme Court Issues Ruling re: Seat License Fees Edit | Reply
I go to work everyday and have for over 30 years. Everything I have I have made. While I cannot comment on the reason that the other Lifetime Member's purchased these policies, I know why I did and it was because I was called, met with regarding the program and was convinced that it would be of great benefit to the university going forward. The fact that Mr. Hyman decided to cash the policies in for pennies on the dollar was his and his alone.

When a great many of the Lifetime Donors purchased these policies they were in the early to late thirties and really were not giving a great deal of thought to when they might die. What I was thinking about was the ability to do something for my University as my family has done for over five decades. I never approached anyone and requested any type of special deal. None of the lifetime members did, we were approached by USC.

I do not know you personally, do not know how long you have been a member of the GC Club or if are even a graduate of USC. What I do know is that you seem to have hard feelings for some unjustified reason which is your right. Very easy to support a winner folks. Would it be the same if we remained a middle of the road team?

The brightest legal minds in our great state considered all of the evidence and testimony from the lower court and determined that the lower court erred. If the decision had gone the other way I would have accepted it and moved on with my life. Seems some folks want to belabor the point and in fact some do not get the point.

We had an AD in Mr. Hyman who made a business decision to disregard over 200 valid agreements that had been in place for 20 years and had been honored up until his arrival. No preliminary contact was made with any of the Lifetime members and not one person from the GC Club or AD's office ever offered any reasonable explanation as to why we were not given the respect that all humans deserve. I was told by Jeff Crane in his office that we were not dying fast enough (what a guy). Class act and still with the AD'S OFFICE. We were treated as though we were used commodities to be discarded and all of this by number's cruncher's' with MBA's (not from USC, Jeff Crane UNC) WHO were brought here BY Hyman for a specific purpose, raise money at all costs and forget the long term fans. These folks were and are not Gamecoocks they are resume builders who want to prove their great ability as fundraisers so they can move on and repeat the process. There is no loyalty here, just look at what is occurring at A&M, sound familiar. We now have true gamecocks as coaches and as our AD. Ray and Steve and all of our coaches have proven their loyalty and have and will continue to do things the right way. Let's do what we have always done, love our university and team, treat other with respect and always act in a manner that reflects positively on you and your USC.

Remember this, second thought will be given going forward before we as fans are simply looked at as $$$$ and not as the loyal Gamecock fans that we are. Let Ray do his job, support your team and help those in need. No one has the right to flagrantly disregard the rights of others in the manner that Mr. Hyman did and he was not and never will be a true gamecock.

We have what we need in place at the AD level now and he has proven both his loyalty and also that he is USC as we know and love it.

One final note. You can continue to make negative posts till the cows come home. The facts speak for themselves. Would you have defended your own rights as well as those of over two hundred others at your own expense, follow through for six years and ask for only one thing in return? When you can honestly answer that question as a "YES" then feel free to comment all you want about the intentions and background of third parties you know little if nothing about. Put four children through USC at the same time, maintain your obligations to your alma mater and then feel free to comment. Until that time I do not feel that you a have a whole lot to comment on. Go help other's, do something that has a positive affect on other's and remain a Gamecock.

No hard feelings on my part,


With Warmest Regards,

George M. Lee,III
georgelee57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2014, 05:09 PM   #75
ReadR00ster
2nd Team All-American
 
ReadR00ster's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 8,686
CockyCash: 510
ReadR00ster is USC mascot materialReadR00ster is USC mascot materialReadR00ster is USC mascot materialReadR00ster is USC mascot materialReadR00ster is USC mascot materialReadR00ster is USC mascot materialReadR00ster is USC mascot materialReadR00ster is USC mascot materialReadR00ster is USC mascot materialReadR00ster is USC mascot materialReadR00ster is USC mascot material
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by zambam View Post
You are completely wrong and/or misinformed.
I've been living in the south long enough to know how the good-ole-boy system works down here.
ReadR00ster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2014, 07:31 PM   #76
GREENVILLE COCKPIT
Injured Reserved
 
GREENVILLE COCKPIT's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GREENVILLE
Posts: 407
CockyCash: 32257
GREENVILLE COCKPIT rules the CockPitGREENVILLE COCKPIT rules the CockPitGREENVILLE COCKPIT rules the CockPitGREENVILLE COCKPIT rules the CockPitGREENVILLE COCKPIT rules the CockPitGREENVILLE COCKPIT rules the CockPitGREENVILLE COCKPIT rules the CockPitGREENVILLE COCKPIT rules the CockPitGREENVILLE COCKPIT rules the CockPitGREENVILLE COCKPIT rules the CockPitGREENVILLE COCKPIT rules the CockPit
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReadR00ster View Post
BS, those people were HOOKED UP by their inside friends. This one family that gives thousands upon thousands, no doubt has made hundreds of thousands maybe even millions selling these seats over the years.

25 people x 8 seats = 200 seats. Probably some of the best seats in the stadium. Say they average a profit of like $300 dollars a seat that is $60,000 a game. x 7 games a year = 420,000 a year. So after ten years this one family has made 4.2 million on these seats. It's corruption.
WOW, have to say I'm glad you're not my accountant ! & no there was no ''HOOK UPS'' from inside friends. When this was first brought up a letter was sent out to all Gamecock Club Members. At the time it was a sweet deal for the Athletic Department and the fan. I was a half scholarship donor at the time and entitled to 6 tickets ( 4 + 2 ) & thought this would be a great way to establish better seats. Seems like we had about a year to sign up for it and during this time I became separated and was in the beginnings of a lengthy divorce, so I opted out. To say someone has made millions is absurd. Heck I can remember in the mid to late 90's I couldn't even give tickets away !!!
__________________
GREENVILLE COCKPIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2014, 10:30 PM   #77
roosterdude21
Game MVP
 
roosterdude21's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Meh
Posts: 1,537
CockyCash: 317
roosterdude21 is USC mascot materialroosterdude21 is USC mascot materialroosterdude21 is USC mascot materialroosterdude21 is USC mascot materialroosterdude21 is USC mascot materialroosterdude21 is USC mascot materialroosterdude21 is USC mascot materialroosterdude21 is USC mascot materialroosterdude21 is USC mascot materialroosterdude21 is USC mascot materialroosterdude21 is USC mascot material
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

roosterdude21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2014, 11:50 PM   #78
BlueHerons
4-Star
 
BlueHerons's Avatar
 
Female

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 323
CockyCash: 500
BlueHerons is making other chickens nervousBlueHerons is making other chickens nervousBlueHerons is making other chickens nervousBlueHerons is making other chickens nervousBlueHerons is making other chickens nervousBlueHerons is making other chickens nervousBlueHerons is making other chickens nervous
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by GREENVILLE COCKPIT View Post
WOW, have to say I'm glad you're not my accountant ! & no there was no ''HOOK UPS'' from inside friends. When this was first brought up a letter was sent out to all Gamecock Club Members. At the time it was a sweet deal for the Athletic Department and the fan. I was a half scholarship donor at the time and entitled to 6 tickets ( 4 + 2 ) & thought this would be a great way to establish better seats. Seems like we had about a year to sign up for it and during this time I became separated and was in the beginnings of a lengthy divorce, so I opted out. To say someone has made millions is absurd. Heck I can remember in the mid to late 90's I couldn't even give tickets away !!!
I think what some people aren't realizing is when this deal came out, the Gamecocks and football are nothing like what they are today. At best, we were a mediocre mid level football team with no conference affiliation. You could get football tickets from anyone, for any game for free.

We were hardly ever televised and all the games were night games because of the heat until late October THEN we played day games.

For anyone to think anyone bought this deal for profit was absurd.

Also, everyone with good seats has been sitting next to the same families for decades. No one ever sold those seats.

I think Mr. Lee absolutely bought all those tickets for altruistic reasons.
BlueHerons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2014, 12:22 PM   #79
CCC
Her Modness
 
CCC's Avatar
 
Female

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Moncks Corner, SC
Posts: 6,934
CockyCash: 101500
CCC is USC mascot materialCCC is USC mascot materialCCC is USC mascot materialCCC is USC mascot materialCCC is USC mascot materialCCC is USC mascot materialCCC is USC mascot materialCCC is USC mascot materialCCC is USC mascot materialCCC is USC mascot materialCCC is USC mascot material
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nureye View Post
3. The tone of this post wreaks of arrogance and entitlement. The name-calling, unsolicited opinions, and the simple fact that you felt it necessary to defend your actions on a message board indicate, to me, a level of insecurity and false-pride that, much like the "Lifetime contract" itself, is wholly unsavory and not kosher.
Really?? Arrogant and entitled? Are we reading the same thing???

The fact that you're attacking someone as arrogant, entitled, insecure, etc. that you don't know is unsavory and not kosher. Can't believe one member of the Gamecock family would treat another member of the Gamecock family that way.
CCC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2014, 12:53 PM   #80
lakemurraycock
Blue Chip
 
lakemurraycock's Avatar
 


Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lake Murray
Posts: 827
CockyCash: 357
lakemurraycock is crowing loudlylakemurraycock is crowing loudlylakemurraycock is crowing loudlylakemurraycock is crowing loudlylakemurraycock is crowing loudlylakemurraycock is crowing loudlylakemurraycock is crowing loudlylakemurraycock is crowing loudlylakemurraycock is crowing loudlylakemurraycock is crowing loudlylakemurraycock is crowing loudly
Default Re: SC Supreme Court Rules against Gamecock Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by georgelee57 View Post
No monetary damages or attorney's fees were ever requested. This was done in order to insure that any one making a contract with the athletics dept. will receive what they are promised.

I do not want money. I want these folks to understand that we expect contracts to be honored.
Seems very reasonable. I totally agree with your actions. Thank you for supporting our university through the good times and bad. If they could break contracts at will who would want to enter into another with the university in the future?
lakemurraycock is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Provided by SLB Development