quote:

---

well ok...I guess you realize you accrue no future benefits doing this...none

---

Unless BMA has a child that he will pass his account to, and that child is younger than you and will continue to sell you tickets until you die. If that's the case, you have no use for future benefits.

quote:

---

quote:

---

well ok...I guess you realize you accrue no future benefits doing this...none

---

Unless BMA has a child that he will pass his account to, and that child is younger than you and will continue to sell you tickets until you die. If that's the case, you have no use for future benefits.

---

can't just "pass" account...can transfer right to tickets (rules to be announced in Oct, I think) but points accrued stay in original account AND current seats have a 10 or 15 year countdown expiration (then have to re-ante) ....am I wrong on this??

you are not wrong

many people decided getting better seats for the next 10 or 15 years
was better than the points that would have accrued

Points don't transfer, but once the tickets are transferred (only to immediate family), points accumulate in the new account prospectively.

quote:

---

These are the same type of people who get on here and act like they are the reason currents students have a sports pass.

---

they were also promised in good faith that these items were for LIFE. A&M reneged on that. Not cool. Don't make a deal you aren't willing to honor.

think about it this way.

you pay off your home. it's yours. then 25 years later they say, nope not anymore you have to start paying again and you'll lose some of what you've accumulated over the years. like, we'll remove your garage and driveway, you'll now have to park on the street. we'll also remove a bedroom or two. you can make due with one. you'd be pissed too.

I would be interested to know what percent of ED's are involved in the lawsuits. I have the impression it's actually a very small percentage. Several ED's that I know were content with the offers and thought it was fair from their perspective.

In any business dealing -- and no matter how one looks at this, it is a business -- you can't please everyone. From what I've read, it seems the TMF made a very fair offer to include 100% reimbursement of the original endowment. That's after the ED had multiple years of enjoyment at home games and away games.

Situations change ... fact of life.

Farmer , I believe there is less than 15 , and the biggest objection for a bunch was the taking of the promised parking ( not the reseating and most if not all are not siblings ) without informing the endowed donor .

quote:

---

quote:

---

These are the same type of people who get on here and act like they are the reason currents students have a sports pass.

---

they were also promised in good faith that these items were for LIFE. A&M reneged on that. Not cool. Don't make a deal you aren't willing to honor.

think about it this way.

you pay off your home. it's yours. then 25 years later they say, nope not anymore you have to start paying again and you'll lose some of what you've accumulated over the years. like, we'll remove your garage and driveway, you'll now have to park on the street. we'll also remove a bedroom or two. you can make due with one. you'd be pissed too.

---

Look, I'm just a caveman, but I'm pretty sure homestead laws don't apply to seats in a stadium.

I would think the parking argument is harder for the TMF. Some of the contracts shared online said "best available" parking. Some of those lots are still around and the parking definition is more clear than seating in an undesignated endowed area. Also there has been no upgrade in parking lots nor is there a significant price difference, if any at all, in parking lot prices (as compared to seating differences). However there is a big value/location difference and there's more scarcity of good parking than there is of good seats. The TMF may have to split the difference there, because they can't use the "we need to raise money and it doesn't exist anymore" arguments.

I wonder if that is impacting the rumors about the new parking deck being reviewed again?

The contracts also stated the parking would be adjacent to the stadium . Example lots a,b, c. All endowed are now being assigned lot H . Explain how that is adjacent to the field ?

quote:

---

The contracts also stated the parking would be adjacent to the stadium . Example lots a,b, c. All endowed are now being assigned lot H . Explain how that is adjacent to the field ?

---

Lot H as in 'fish lot'... The one diagonal to the northwest of Kyle Field?

For all who gt upset about the endowed donors getting upset about their contracts not being honored . How are you going to feel and what are you going to do when the 12th man trustees change the seating from say 15 years to 6 years because they need money and want you to pay another capital gift .Will not happen ? Are you sure ? Precedence has been already set !

Don't think that will happen. The TMF wrote a better contract. Limited life contract that is much shorter than the stadium life, unless they build a brand new stadium. They specifically noted reseating possible after the primary term, so we're forewarned. If something happens sooner and the seats are still there, this time there would be 60,000 seats that would be litigated.

Hope you are right !!!

They'll create a new way to piss us off!

Cjs, yes , the one west of welborn road

From what I see, the reseating is good for seven years for some seats and ten years for others. I have not seen any longer terms than those- has anyone else?

For the ZC 15 years

quote:

---

Look, I'm just a caveman, but I'm pretty sure homestead laws don't apply to seats in a stadium.

---

it was an analogy Einstein..

88, and a good one !

nah, a house is not a good analogy, doesn't account for appreciation of the asset nor the utility (you used it for years)

maybe something more like...you invested early in XYZ Inc, now they have another round of funding and guess what, you are now diluted and don't own the same % of the company, doesn't matter you were an early investor

The house analogy is bogus; the stock one is right on the mark though

It's like you paid for a guaranteed room in your buddies house, which he promised you could live there for life. 25 years later, he tears down the old shack and builds a mansion. He offers you a very nice bedroom to live in for free, but you're upset because it's not the same spot in the house. And you don't have access to the new masterbath spa and liquor cabinet.

Who was the baboon that wrote lifetime guarantees? Stupid the 12th man wrote it and just as dumb that some really thought nothing could possibly change the remaining 50 yrs of their life

quote:

---

Who was the baboon that wrote lifetime guarantees? Stupid the 12th man wrote it and just as dumb that some really thought nothing could possibly change the remaining 50 yrs of their life

---

It was the Cold War, the age of Fee Love was giving way to free AIDS, everyone still smoked, so no one really expected the old *******s to still be alive even if the Human race somehow survived the rise of our mutant ape overlords.

It was a calculated risk.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Who was the baboon that wrote lifetime guarantees? Stupid the 12th man wrote it and just as dumb that some really thought nothing could possibly change the remaining 50 yrs of their life

---

It was the Cold War, the age of Fee Love was giving way to free AIDS, everyone still smoked, so no one really expected the old *******s to still be alive even if the Human race somehow survived the rise of our mutant ape overlords.

It was a calculated risk.

---

Fee love ------> aids.

I see what you did there.

Interesting.

My ED written agreement said nothing about having the same seats for my lifetime in Kyle Field, it said I would always have seats in the 'Endowed Seating Area'.

An Endowed Seating Area was well-defined in 1992, has yet to be defined in New Kyle.

My written agreement refers to 'parking privileges in the Endowed parking area'.

For decades the Endowed Parking Area was lot A, that was changed to lot H a few years ago, not sure where it'll be, if it exists at all, in the future.

When I agreed to my lump-sum endowment, I'd yet to have seen any written document, I had spoken extensively over the phone with Frank Shannon, I believed and trusted in what he said to me.

Frank's sales pitch / promise to me was simple, "You and your wife will always have the best seats, and the best parking in Kyle Field for the rest of your life and, our promise to you is, we will not ask you for any more money."

This promise was made to many other Endowed Donors, many times confirmed by Frank, Harry Green and other 12th Man / Aggie Club employees.

The question is, how binding is an oral agreement?

Frank Shannon should be sued for making such a ridiculous promise. Total incompetence and zero vision, no matter how desperate the program is.....how absolutely crazy for all involved ....really, nothing would change over 40, 50 yrs? I'm at a loss. thry gave a ton of credit to EDs....but these same people would have actually killed the program's ability to build a new stadium. Pretty wild that common sense hasn't entered the conversation. All sides are guilty of greed and incompetence

I know dozens of Endoweds, I live in Bryan, all are not nearly as greedy as you'd like to think.

Frank didn't make that promise in a vacuum, Harry Green, who preceded Frank as Director of the Aggie Club, made exactly the same promise, for many years, to lots of Endoweds.

My goodness.

"these same people would have actually killed the program's ability to build a new stadium"

Huh?

Are you talking about the Endoweds? Or Frank Shannon?

There are less than 400 Endowed donors, we hold less than 1800 seats, how can we make that big of a difference, in a 102,000 capacity stadium, especially when more than 95% of us have chosen to play by the 12th Man's re-seating rules?

Isn't that an easy question to answer? If the contract cannot be performed within one year, oral agreements are not binding. The law on this is not ambiguous.

From the outside looking in on this deal, I can see both sides.

On the one hand, the 12th man Found and the athletic program need to maximize revenue and this might hurt if these seat holders get premium seating.

On the other hand, these donors were made promises for their generous donations. They are due something whether that is seats comparable to what they had or other seats and a cash payout of some determined amount.

But the name calling and general asshattery that has been going on makes everyone look like a bunch of whining children.

Give them their 40 td line 2nd deck seats on the student side.....we will find out really quick if they are trying to get the premium club or really do just want their premium site lines.

Bob, Those 1,800 seats are bringing in $27M in the one time fee and another $7m/yr in annual donations...so over the next 10 yrs we would have been down $100m or so if those 1,800 premium tics were just given to EDs. The EDs still got incredible consideration and PP points and credits.....again, stupid the 12th man gave any kind of lifetime promise bc that's a promise they flat out couldn't make.....but seems like all sides are just being stupid about this.....how would we pay for this stadium if the best club seats weren't sold at market? 25 yrs ago EDs didn't purchase club seats either. Just a sad situation.....and we know not all EDs are playing this card. We are talking about the 5% litigious EDs who aren't being reasonable

03, need to give you some info . The endowed were not given any additional PP s. For those of us who stood in the line and marched to the beat of the 12th man foundation and the rules put forth for us to follow during the reseating , we were short changed on PPs .Even though a large % have continued to give ,we are on the low end in the seat picking for our chosen section . So much for prime seats .,

I think it is very unfortunate that the university is now in an adversarial situation with some of the best and loyalest supporters out there.