Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is coppermine suing Pipeline?

Have not read the pleadings, but basically, a Coppermine coach either gave or sold email addresses for Coppermine families to Pipeline. Pipeline then sent emails to 2008 families (maybe others, I don’t know) expressing interest in their attending Pipeline tryouts. Some of these kids then attended tryouts and switched to Pipeline.

I don’t believe any of the Coppermine players actually switched to Pipeline. Two left from that Coppermine 08 team left and went to SAC though.

If no one actually left, the damages argument is even weaker.

No, the actionable activity is in getting the list illicitly, not players leaving.

In a civil suit, you have to prove damages of some type, in addition to “actionable activity.” This is just a power play by Coppermine which likes to throw its weight around, deep pockets from having so many facilities and so many different types of club teams.

The damages are the value of the list(s?), and damages can be more than value if there was fraud involved. Again without seeing the complaint we don’t know what the theory of damages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is coppermine suing Pipeline?

Have not read the pleadings, but basically, a Coppermine coach either gave or sold email addresses for Coppermine families to Pipeline. Pipeline then sent emails to 2008 families (maybe others, I don’t know) expressing interest in their attending Pipeline tryouts. Some of these kids then attended tryouts and switched to Pipeline.

I don’t believe any of the Coppermine players actually switched to Pipeline. Two left from that Coppermine 08 team left and went to SAC though.

If no one actually left, the damages argument is even weaker.

No, the actionable activity is in getting the list illicitly, not players leaving.

The value of the lists are close to zero. A coach could just approach players in a parking lot and issue the same invitation.


In a civil suit, you have to prove damages of some type, in addition to “actionable activity.” This is just a power play by Coppermine which likes to throw its weight around, deep pockets from having so many facilities and so many different types of club teams.

The damages are the value of the list(s?), and damages can be more than value if there was fraud involved. Again without seeing the complaint we don’t know what the theory of damages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is coppermine suing Pipeline?

Have not read the pleadings, but basically, a Coppermine coach either gave or sold email addresses for Coppermine families to Pipeline. Pipeline then sent emails to 2008 families (maybe others, I don’t know) expressing interest in their attending Pipeline tryouts. Some of these kids then attended tryouts and switched to Pipeline.

I don’t believe any of the Coppermine players actually switched to Pipeline. Two left from that Coppermine 08 team left and went to SAC though.

If no one actually left, the damages argument is even weaker.

No, the actionable activity is in getting the list illicitly, not players leaving.

In a civil suit, you have to prove damages of some type, in addition to “actionable activity.” This is just a power play by Coppermine which likes to throw its weight around, deep pockets from having so many facilities and so many different types of club teams.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then why wasn’t the case dismissed?

Who knows? I’m sure Coppermine hired good lawyers. Not uncommon for allegations that sound good in a complaint to be proven to be baseless at summary judgment or trial. For purposes of motion to dismiss, Court is required to assume everything alleged in Complaint is true.

Anonymous wrote:Then why wasn’t the case dismissed?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is coppermine suing Pipeline?

Have not read the pleadings, but basically, a Coppermine coach either gave or sold email addresses for Coppermine families to Pipeline. Pipeline then sent emails to 2008 families (maybe others, I don’t know) expressing interest in their attending Pipeline tryouts. Some of these kids then attended tryouts and switched to Pipeline.

I don’t believe any of the Coppermine players actually switched to Pipeline. Two left from that Coppermine 08 team left and went to SAC though.

If no one actually left, the damages argument is even weaker.

No, the actionable activity is in getting the list illicitly, not players leaving.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child has played for both Coppermine and Pipeline. Coppermine is a poorly managed fiasco of a club, where an abusive attitude towards the kids starts at the very top (this doesn't apply to the Premier side, but since Coppermine has taken over, kids have left Premier). The guy who sold/shared the emails was the supposed lifelong best friend of the top guy, so apparently even he hates him. Pipeline shouldn't have done what they did, mostly because they didn't need to. Coppermine has no older teams playing at the level of Pipeline or SAC or Union or Celtics, so the kids are going to leave anyway as they get older. As for damages, not sure how a few elementary kids switching teams amounts to any monetary damage, let alone an amount in excess of $ 1 million.

Pipeline isn't perfect. However, they pay their coaches better than anyone else in Baltimore, have many coaches who also coach at the local privates. My child is not on the highest team, but I am still very happy with the quality of coaching received. Early on, Pipeline did have trouble keeping the quality of their coaching consistent as they expanded, and they put a lot of effort into addressing that over the past few years. They have been doing free additional technical sessions over the past year, and it is always open to players from every team (they actually have a certain amount of slots reserved for each team).

Not sure about the criticism about the younger years, at least on boy's side. Yes, 2008 has been a problem. But 2009 preacademy is considered one of the best years, if not the best, in the club internally. I've seen them practice and they are not a big team, height wise. 2010 North just qualified for top tier Jeff cup, I believe. Earlier years, probably too early to tell. But the academy program for kids under 12 has grown exponentially over the past few years, and that's where they are getting most of their players on the very young side.

OK, for the top 2009 boys team, this is not correct at all - their size is well above average for that age group across the board, and they imported top players on that team from other clubs (and at least one really good smaller player left for another team). They are a top-flight team - not debating that at all.

I’ve heard from two sources that there is at least one 2008 playing on the 2009 pipeline team...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child has played for both Coppermine and Pipeline. Coppermine is a poorly managed fiasco of a club, where an abusive attitude towards the kids starts at the very top (this doesn't apply to the Premier side, but since Coppermine has taken over, kids have left Premier). The guy who sold/shared the emails was the supposed lifelong best friend of the top guy, so apparently even he hates him. Pipeline shouldn't have done what they did, mostly because they didn't need to. Coppermine has no older teams playing at the level of Pipeline or SAC or Union or Celtics, so the kids are going to leave anyway as they get older. As for damages, not sure how a few elementary kids switching teams amounts to any monetary damage, let alone an amount in excess of $ 1 million.

Pipeline isn't perfect. However, they pay their coaches better than anyone else in Baltimore, have many coaches who also coach at the local privates. My child is not on the highest team, but I am still very happy with the quality of coaching received. Early on, Pipeline did have trouble keeping the quality of their coaching consistent as they expanded, and they put a lot of effort into addressing that over the past few years. They have been doing free additional technical sessions over the past year, and it is always open to players from every team (they actually have a certain amount of slots reserved for each team).

Not sure about the criticism about the younger years, at least on boy's side. Yes, 2008 has been a problem. But 2009 preacademy is considered one of the best years, if not the best, in the club internally. I've seen them practice and they are not a big team, height wise. 2010 North just qualified for top tier Jeff cup, I believe. Earlier years, probably too early to tell. But the academy program for kids under 12 has grown exponentially over the past few years, and that's where they are getting most of their players on the very young side.

OK, for the top 2009 boys team, this is not correct at all - their size is well above average for that age group across the board, and they imported top players on that team from other clubs (and at least one really good smaller player left for another team). They are a top-flight team - not debating that at all.

Anonymous wrote:My child has played for both Coppermine and Pipeline. Coppermine is a poorly managed fiasco of a club, where an abusive attitude towards the kids starts at the very top (this doesn't apply to the Premier side, but since Coppermine has taken over, kids have left Premier). The guy who sold/shared the emails was the supposed lifelong best friend of the top guy, so apparently even he hates him. Pipeline shouldn't have done what they did, mostly because they didn't need to. Coppermine has no older teams playing at the level of Pipeline or SAC or Union or Celtics, so the kids are going to leave anyway as they get older. As for damages, not sure how a few elementary kids switching teams amounts to any monetary damage, let alone an amount in excess of $ 1 million.

Pipeline isn't perfect. However, they pay their coaches better than anyone else in Baltimore, have many coaches who also coach at the local privates. My child is not on the highest team, but I am still very happy with the quality of coaching received. Early on, Pipeline did have trouble keeping the quality of their coaching consistent as they expanded, and they put a lot of effort into addressing that over the past few years. They have been doing free additional technical sessions over the past year, and it is always open to players from every team (they actually have a certain amount of slots reserved for each team).

Not sure about the criticism about the younger years, at least on boy's side. Yes, 2008 has been a problem. But 2009 preacademy is considered one of the best years, if not the best, in the club internally. I've seen them practice and they are not a big team, height wise. 2010 North just qualified for top tier Jeff cup, I believe. Earlier years, probably too early to tell. But the academy program for kids under 12 has grown exponentially over the past few years, and that's where they are getting most of their players on the very young side.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is coppermine suing Pipeline?

Have not read the pleadings, but basically, a Coppermine coach either gave or sold email addresses for Coppermine families to Pipeline. Pipeline then sent emails to 2008 families (maybe others, I don’t know) expressing interest in their attending Pipeline tryouts. Some of these kids then attended tryouts and switched to Pipeline.

I don’t believe any of the Coppermine players actually switched to Pipeline. Two left from that Coppermine 08 team left and went to SAC though.

If no one actually left, the damages argument is even weaker.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is coppermine suing Pipeline?

Have not read the pleadings, but basically, a Coppermine coach either gave or sold email addresses for Coppermine families to Pipeline. Pipeline then sent emails to 2008 families (maybe others, I don’t know) expressing interest in their attending Pipeline tryouts. Some of these kids then attended tryouts and switched to Pipeline.

I don’t believe any of the Coppermine players actually switched to Pipeline. Two left from that Coppermine 08 team left and went to SAC though.

If no one actually left, the damages argument is even weaker.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is coppermine suing Pipeline?

Have not read the pleadings, but basically, a Coppermine coach either gave or sold email addresses for Coppermine families to Pipeline. Pipeline then sent emails to 2008 families (maybe others, I don’t know) expressing interest in their attending Pipeline tryouts. Some of these kids then attended tryouts and switched to Pipeline.

I don’t believe any of the Coppermine players actually switched to Pipeline. Two left from that Coppermine 08 team left and went to SAC though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is coppermine suing Pipeline?

Have not read the pleadings, but basically, a Coppermine coach either gave or sold email addresses for Coppermine families to Pipeline. Pipeline then sent emails to 2008 families (maybe others, I don’t know) expressing interest in their attending Pipeline tryouts. Some of these kids then attended tryouts and switched to Pipeline.