DCI partnering with Varsity Performing Arts to launch "SoundSport Scholastic" events

[N.E. Brigand]

44 minutes ago, MikeD said:

This seems to be the statement in question. It can be read in all sorts of ways, with the commas and semi-colon.

"Page 32: During the “spirit” portion of the competition, cheerleading teams are awarded points for using props, such as pom poms, sold by Varsity Brands; the more props a team uses, the more points that team receives."

You could read it like this:

"Page 32: During the “spirit” portion of the competition, cheerleading teams are awarded points for using props, such as pom poms, sold by Varsity Brands; the more props a team uses, the more points that team receives."

I tend to look at it that way. the statement in red is the primary statement, with the green showing pom poms as an example of a prop, and yes, Varsity makes them. Does not mean the unit gets points for using Varsity props over other props; it does mean the spirit competition does awards points for props in general.

I guess some here read it this way:

"Page 32: During the “spirit” portion of the competition, cheerleading teams are awarded points for using props, such as pom poms, sold by Varsity Brands; the more props a team uses, the more points that team receives."

In that reading, the red text shows that props made by Varsity will enhance the score of the unit. The green is just one example of a prop. Personally, I find that interpretation to be silly, but that is just MHO.

OK, the first thing I should do is note that I forgot your post when replying to garfield. Apparently you agree with him, and thus he's not alone. Which is fine by me; I agree the judge is not clear. You do a better job of parsing his words than garfield did, in my opinion.

But here you're replying to my request for Webb's words.

Yet what you cite is not Webb's words.

You're quoting the judge's description of what Webb said in trial.

I'm not saying the judge is lying. What I'm saying is that nobody yet seems to be able to find what Webb actually said about this.That's not the actual transcript of Webb's words. And that gap in our knowledge is frustrating attempts to get to the answer.

Because the subsequent press reports on the trial took the opposite position from you and garfield.

- - - - - - - - - -

Wait a minute, I think I realize the problem. Does anyone else realize, looking at the text below, why I haven't been able to find Webb's words?

"Indeed, testimony at trial revealed that the NCA’s scoring system was intertwined with the promotion of Varsity Brands. During the 'spirit' portion of the competition, cheerleading teams are awarded points for using props, such as pom poms, sold by Varsity Brands; the more props a team uses, the more points that team receives."

I'm not sure I'll have time before the weekend to investigate my hunch. Happy hunting to anyone who wants to get there first!

Edited September 4, 2020 by N.E. Brigand

[N.E. Brigand]

55 minutes ago, MikeD said:

This seems to be the statement in question. It can be read in all sorts of ways, with the commas and semi-colon.

Also what do you make of this statement from the closing argument (p. 38) by the attorney for Quinnipiac University?

"You may recall about how the team used some pompoms in the one 45-second portion of one performance during the year in which they were actually required by Jeff Webb's company to use those pompoms, which by the way he also sold to the participants."

Is he saying that there was just one year in which teams were required to use pompoms?

Or is he saying that there was a year in which teams were required to use Varsity's pompoms?

[Jeff Ream]

23 hours ago, MikeD said:

The actual court transcript of the statement by Webb, with its commas and semi-colon, does not make it clear that he is saying groups get more points for using Varsity props (i.e. pom poms). It could be read that yes, groups using props in that particular competition get more points for using props, and yes, Varsity manufacturers props, but it doesn't state that only Varsity makes props or that Varsity props get more weight than any other props. 

 

just saying this: and yes, Varsity manufacturers props,..........yeah thats all you need right there.

[Jeff Ream]

19 hours ago, garfield said:

You mean the company that continued for 106 years before it was broken up, and then for another 37 years since?  I don't know; the dividend is pretty good and they have a LOT of copper and the real-estate that it hangs from in front of most houses.  

Pretty well for Alexander G. Bell.  Not so much for those of us who were expecting lower prices, better service, and more competition after the split up.

[Careful, just fair warning: the Bell Telephone "split up" was the first full-blown case analysis I did for real in 1984.  I used that work to address exactly your question in 1994 at U of Penn.  My final answer?  It worked out pretty darn well (depending on how one measures "success") for the original players and for the industry, which eventually spawned the companies that we use today.  Is the claim now that Ma Bell's breakup has resulted in everyone today being fabulously in love with their phone provider, lower prices, better service?  And, if you'd care to discuss what happened to each of the "baby bells" as a result of the this fabulous idea to break up the Bell System...  So, please don't try to convince anyone that every breakup of a claimed monopoly is good for society, or that breaking up Varsity, or preventing it from its (so far proven legal) business practices is going to automatically be better for the cheer industry.]

 

i worked in telecom for many years....i'm very aware of how it all turned out, including how wireless evolved, the buyouts and mergers and more. prices on anything have gone up since the early 80's.....but now you have more than one option

[Jeff Ream]

19 hours ago, garfield said:

But DCI isn't scholastic.  So the whole linear argument that Varsity will do with non-scholastic programs what they already do with scholastic programs is a presumption, not fact or even based in fact.

as i said before...DCI is the lure for scholastic. Look at uniform ads, equipment ads......

[Jeff Ream]

19 hours ago, garfield said:

And doesn't that, therefor and by definition, state that Varsity is NOT a monopoly if such a decision even CAN be made?

Does "scandal-ridden" describe Varsity or its competitor?  Is the NCAA lauded for this move?  

And I presume it's one that the anti-Varsity crowd applauds, but it sounds like the NCAA is getting into bed with an even worse org than Varsity.

and the NCAA did that to subtly fight Varsity. hasn't really slowed Varsity down because they'll claim the title NCAA chose is different.

[Jeff Ream]

17 hours ago, cixelsyd said:

This seems like a fair summary of what we know so far.  And (excuse the pun) props to N.E. Brigand for digging through the court docs.

That said... if the allegation is that Varsity made rules that gave more points for use of Varsity products, then the evidence of that should be in their rule book.

you mean like the many stories of judges in many circuits being told what to give groups? that's not in any rulebooks

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, N.E. Brigand said:

OK, the first thing I should do is note that I forgot your post when replying to garfield. Apparently you agree with him, and thus he's not alone. Which is fine by me; I agree the judge is not clear. You do a better job of parsing his words than garfield did, in my opinion.

But here you're replying to my request for Webb's words.

Yet what you cite is not Webb's words.

You're quoting the judge's description of what Webb said in trial.

I'm not saying the judge is lying. What I'm saying is that nobody yet seems to be able to find what Webb actually said about this.That's not the actual transcript of Webb's words. And that gap in our knowledge is frustrating attempts to get to the answer.

Because the subsequent press reports on the trial took the opposite position from you and garfield.

- - - - - - - - - -

Wait a minute, I think I realize the problem. Does anyone else realize, looking at the text below, why I haven't been able to find Webb's words?

"Indeed, testimony at trial revealed that the NCA’s scoring system was intertwined with the promotion of Varsity Brands. During the 'spirit' portion of the competition, cheerleading teams are awarded points for using props, such as pom poms, sold by Varsity Brands; the more props a team uses, the more points that team receives."

I'm not sure I'll have time before the weekend to investigate my hunch. Happy hunting to anyone who wants to get there first!

very telling

[N.E. Brigand]

17 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

very telling

Well, I hate to say this, but new evidence suggests that garfield and MikeD may be right after all. Not sure yet. Need to read some more. But I'm definitely seeing a future where I write Matt Stoller and ask him to explain himself.

For those who want to solve this mystery on their own, here's a hit: Mary Ann Powers.

Edited September 4, 2020 by N.E. Brigand

[garfield]

8 hours ago, N.E. Brigand said:

Naturally.

Does anyone know if that judge is still available for comment? Maybe we can get him to explain what he meant.

ooooohhhhh, I wonder if....