(03-06-2018 07:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-06-2018 03:20 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-06-2018 02:53 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-06-2018 11:08 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(03-06-2018 10:25 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I guess what I find interesting is that this is even an issue. Miami can simply pay the $650K liquidated damages and walk away with a very cheap one-and-done buy game. From a business prospective, thats a screaming bargain on the FBS "one and done" market. So, whats this court fight really about? Is Miami trying to use the force majeure clause to walk away with no cost what so ever?

YES. That's exactly what Miami appears to want to do. They want to use a hurricane, that didn't impact their travel to the game (the hurricane hit on a MONDAY and teams routinely travel on away games on Thursday or earlier, well in advance of any declared emergency), in order to stiff Arkansas State for the return game AND any payment for failure to perform.

Obviously, that hasn't been Miami's intent, as they offered to play ARK-ST in either 2024 or 2025 as per the terms of the contract.

They say they filed this suit after ARK-ST threatened to sue if Miami didn't give them either $650k or a date in 2020/2021.

So you have first hand knowledge that Miami wasn't contemplating getting the contract moved to 2024 so they could buy it out in 2023? I mean you say obviously that is not their intent.

The other guy said Miami's intent has been to avoid playing the game and paying the buyout. The fact that Miami offered to do one of those things, play the game, shows that's not true.

FWIW, if FM clause is found to apply, such that Miami was justified in canceling, and the game is moved to 2024, then IMO the buyout should be upped to reflect the time value of money.

That would mean boosting it to about $725k.

They don't want to come to Jonesboro, I don't want them in Jonesboro. On that one thing we can agree.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk