Re: Re: Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

Maybe or maybe not. They are incorporated, pay taxes, have paid employees, generate millions of dollars and some operate out of 10 million dollar+ HQ buildings. Maybe they are both a social organization and a business.

Either way, why should a social organization be able to prevent another social organization from starting?

Re: Re: Re: Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

Because they've all signed the Unanimous Agreements of NPC and agreed that things will work this way with their member groups.

Now if NPC would try to prevent say Delta Sigma Theta from starting on campus, they wouldn't get very far, since they are in 2 different conferences.

Re: Re: Re: Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

Because all 26 social organizations belong to a "coalition" in NPC that has agreed to a sort of "non-compete" agreement.

>>>Either way, why should a social organization be able to prevent another social organization from starting?<<<

I don't think that one social organization CAN prevent another from starting. Several posters have pointed out, however, that NPC groups have agreed to operate in a certain way. A non-NPC group can go to a campus anytime they want to (assuming the campus administrators agree) and they don't have to have the approval of the Panhellenic Council. With NPC groups, typically the request for new groups to make presentations comes from the campus Panhellenic, not the other way around anyway. But wherever the idea comes from, NPC groups know that they need the approval of the campus Panhellenic and have no problem with it.

Re: Re: Re: Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

They're not a for-profit business. Antitrust doesn't apply. There are no owners or shareholders, no one gets a percentage of the profits. All the money is put back into the organization- philanthropies, programming, etc.

Antitrust is a very tricky, complicated thing. For those of you who are sports fans, that's one of the legal theories that some of the Big East schools that are suing the ACC are using.

Most laws aren't blanket laws- they don't cover all groups and individuals. Most are applied more narrowly. Things like freedom of speech- people try to apply it all the time in ways in which it can't legally be applied.

And once again, this whole question of expansion is only pertinent to NPC groups. It was something each group accepted when joining the NPC.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

Since everyone seems to be concentrating on the NPC itself. Why then, there seems to be even a better arguement there in terms of antitrust, because HQs are incorporated and do act just like businesses providing lots of services. From what I understand, just because you are a not-for-profit corporation does not mean you are exempted from the antitrust laws. Anti trust has been applied to not-for-profit hospitals.

So taking the initially example and applying to the NPC itself (i.e., trade association): all 26 organizations (oligopoly) belong to a coalition call the NPC (national trade association) that has agreed to "non-compete" agreements (Unanimous Agreements), which when applied to and through local Panhels by local chapters and NPC recommendations for setting up and running a Panhel (vertical arrangements), essentially enable the strongest of the 26 organizations (oligopoy) to use these trade association agreements to continued dominance in the market (market power) and prevent new competitors (a new NPC sorority) into the market (campus).

Please GCs, who are attorneys, can you explain for us who do not understand these things?

I'm not quite sure who you think should be suing whom for what???

And what would they hope to accomplish? What would the desired outcome be?

I'm confused as to the details of your hypo

I think I get what he's trying to say, but I think it's wrong. Luis, are you trying to say that the NPC prevents groups within it's own ranks from becoming stronger, while keeping the "higher" tier groups at the top?

If so, the NPC rules are set up to do exactly the opposite - it's set up so that when a campus decides to open up for expansion, all NPC groups who are not on that campus are allowed to submit a proposal. The school then selects the groups they feel would be a good fit for the campus and invites them to do a presentation on the group's core values, history, and goals on the campus, etc. The campus itself then chooses the group that THEY liked the best, based on the proposal, presentation, and the fit for the campus.

So in the end, the NPC makes it more fair by giving all groups the opportunity and governance structure to make the initial contact with a campus that wants to expand. But in the end, it's the members of the campus itself that select which group they want to colonize.

Does that make sense?

Luis,

Your theory would only work if there were one or two sororities that were the biggest, strongest, wealthiest sorority AT EVERY SINGLE CAMPUS THEY ARE ON. No sorority is like that.

Since the local panhellenics - not the national groups - vote for who they want to come and expand, the argument doesn't hold water. When I was in school a group colonized, and the two choices given were one of the smallest sororities in NPC and one that was considerably larger. They chose the smaller group because they felt it was a better fit for the campus, or maybe because they liked their colors better, or maybe the reps from the bigger group all had sticks up their butts. Who knows? The point is it was the collegians who chose the group, not NPC saying "this group is bigger and you must pick them."

Now, this is the way it's supposed to work. Believe me, I'm not saying that things in NPC don't need some sort of improvement to get all the sororities on an equal footing, but this is getting off on a tangent. If I get ambitious I'll find threads that DO talk about that for you. We were discussing whether NPC has the right to allow another sorority, be it big, small or whatever, to enter a campus.

pissing contests
 

you guys are arguing over meaningless points....there are a goodly number of avenues which might entice the formation of another group, be it of whatever-panhel or administrative or student generated-move.
Simple..take each case on it's own merit. The schism of the varied groups on campus which has divided IFC's into groups
who either cannot compete with each other, who are hellbent on
"heritage" issues...has clouded the fraternal waters.
'way back when....we were concerned with matters of comity,
with elimination of the "clause." Now we have moved into the opposite direction.
What has happened to civility? GLOs now appear to be some who have few standards, who charter multiple campuses, who
spread membership in urban areas...kinda willy-nilly. How do
we even manage to talk to one another, so diverse have we become? Back to basics, huh?

Re: pissing contests
 

Whaaaaa????!???!! :confused:

I don't understand what "urban areas" have to do with anything we are discussing. Are you saying campuses in cities like NYC, Philly and Chicago shouldn't have GLOs???

urban chapters
 

I am not saying outfits cannot use greek letters and spread charters all over inner-cities. But please do not call them collegiate...women's groups like Beta Sigma Phi and Epsilon
Sigma Alpha have invaded college campuses, too. And the once boy-scout fraternity, Alpha Phi Omega, was tried join the
ranks of the traditional IFCs in some locations. The U of Mich
has long been home to many professional fraternities who do
operate, in some cases, as social ones.
If we are hell-bent on destroying collegiate identities, why don't
we just confer the PhD at birth and get on with living?
But, please, please, please don't piss on my leg and tell me it is raining. Anybody can take any name they want to.
But they are a helleva far cry from SAE, Beta, TKE, or Theta,
Pi Phi or DZ--all of whom are open to all today.
You all damned well know what I mean.

Re: urban chapters
 

What are you talking about???? Do you have your threads mixed up?
Where in this thread did we delve outside the realm of NPC or IFC????

Why can't urban campuses have GLOs? My school, the University of Pittsburgh, is a very urban campus as we have 11 thriving NPC GLO's, around 16 IFC, several NPHC (sorry, don't know exact number), and 1 multicultural.

To quote two posts back from you, "What has happened to civility?" ?
An excellent question, and one that's appropriate for you to ask, especially in light of your own posts.

You haven't exactly been polite or civil in your posts ("You all damned well know what I'm talking about"), and have been quite condescending. Even though I think most of us really aren't sure what your point is in relation to this thread.

I, for one, really don't understand the tone of your posts. What the heck did we do to you to make you talk this way to us???
:confused:

The only "pissing contest" I see is you and Tom rivaling for most confusing posts to understand.

And Tom, no offense meant here- we're used to it, and you don't take an air of condensention with us usually!

Yes it makes sense and I understand the intent of NPC rules, but does it really work? All groups have an opportunity to make a presentation but the larger groups with more money are most likely to have a professional make the sales pitch and eventually get invited to campus. Some of the smaller groups probably skip the presentation because they can't afford the initial start up costs. If you are at a school like IU and you need a 3 million dollar house just to compete I don't see how NPC rules benefit the smaller groups.

kddani i agree - i usually don't post that much, but this thread is really annoying me.

if i'm reading the message that you're sending correctly, you're saying that non-"traditional" GLOs are less worthy of recognition, or less worthy of being called "collegian". i'm sorry, but it is that kind of backwards thinking that has been inhibiting people's thoughts and expressions for years - it's terrible!

who are you to say that APO is "less collegiate" than SAE or TKE or Pike, or whoever? or that professional fraternities have no right to even consider themselves in the same realm as social GLOs. the values and standards that those organizations hold dearly members can be JUST as important and just as life-changing as any social organization.

being in a social GLO is not for everyone. just like going to a huge campus is not for everyone. not everyone enjoys debutante balls, or keg parties. WHO CARES? i think it's great that anyone, anywhere, with any kind of background can find a group of people that they feel they mesh with.

i see you've had 40+ years of volunteering and experience and blah blah blah. but i honestly don't think you have any idea what you're talking about. the point of being in a greek organization (or ANY organization) is not to judge other organizations based on differences. it's to find a group of people with similar values as you. if there's a breakdown in communication between "urban" and "collegiate" and "heritage"-oriented organizations, i think it's less a problem of the organizations themselves, and more the problem of closed-minded thinkers. no names mentioned.