So somebody has finally found a name by googling "men of westood" + "business registration"? But we can't say if the company and the NIL are the same yet as it hasn't been confirmed or listed on the website.
Plus who ever owns the site definitely reads these comments as right after I posted above about the Privacy Policy missing, they put…
So somebody has finally found a name by googling "men of westood" + "business registration"? But we can't say if the company and the NIL are the same yet as it hasn't been confirmed or listed on the website.
Plus who ever owns the site definitely reads these comments as right after I posted above about the Privacy Policy missing, they put it up!! Plus it doesn't list a company or name within the policy so still no transparency. And they put a date of March 1 when it wasn't even on the site. What a liar!
You can check out the differences in versions timestamped here for evidence that the Privacy Policy did not exist until today: https://archive.vn/www.menofwestwood.com
I stand corrected. The Privacy Policy does, in fact, list "Men of Westwood Inc and websites" at the very top therefore, by googling "Men of Westwood Inc" you do get a person's name and address. Now whether this is the person actually running the NIL collective and website is still in question. What I worry about is that this person (or a completely different person who has nothing to do with the NIL collective) is now putting himself in an unenviable position to answer questions posed by others such as "bruinballer" has when he could avoid all of this by being transparent as Dimitri has so astutely argued in his post that only 4 active of the 136 NIL collectives in the On3 database do not list a founder with MOW being one of them. So why fight the absolute norm and gain the trust of all Bruins around the world who may want to donate to the MOW? Why the secrecy? It just creates more questions about "who and what are you doing with my money" when it doesn't need to by being transparent.
Additionally, after discussing this with a few of my friends who are friendly BRO members, they gave me info of BRO posts on this matter that say things like "Plenty of blame...but no solution. ...if ...Dimitri understand NIL is what it takes to compete with top players...then propose an alternative" which seems to be the general tone of most BRO members. Excuse me? I think Dimitri is the voice of reason here and without his piece, the general public (and other school boards) which are already making fun of MOW and its non-transparent operation, the BRO narrative will continue and further create a negative image of UCLA athletics and its NIL efforts which are then being told to potential recruits. Because of Dimitri's post and some comments I made (understandably a bit harsh but not sorry for) they did correct their website by adding a Privacy Policy which I commend and is a start of some corrections they need to make.
So let's keep pushing and try to get MOW to be transparent and then we might just be all on board and creating something that will actually be effective in getting the best athletes for basketball and football. There is a good portion of the literally hundreds of thousands of UCLA alumni such as myself that are more than willing to help out if the NIL collective is being transparent and I know exactly how my money is going to help. For example, I contributed to the UCLA Centennial Campaign which collected nearly $5.5 Billion dollars from 220,000 donors who gave 574,000 gifts. Did you know that 81% of those were under $1,000 and 95% under $10,000? Those numbers right there is one part of the transparency needed to get people on board and until the MOW realizes this, they shouldn't be reaching out outside of BRO (which I also heard is a suggestion made by the top BRO operator himself) then complaining that Dimitri's post has "no solutions."
To BRO members reading this: You are free to copy and paste my posts to the BRO board although I know it will take some guts to do so. But wouldn't it be worth it to have some other viewpoints expressed by the outside world and then convince MOW so that it can have several thousand more people donate to the MOW since so many of us are asking for the transparency and that's all we want? Why hide this information when 95%+ of the NIL collectives listed on On3 are being transparent?
So somebody has finally found a name by googling "men of westood" + "business registration"? But we can't say if the company and the NIL are the same yet as it hasn't been confirmed or listed on the website.
Plus who ever owns the site definitely reads these comments as right after I posted above about the Privacy Policy missing, they put it up!! Plus it doesn't list a company or name within the policy so still no transparency. And they put a date of March 1 when it wasn't even on the site. What a liar!
You can check out the differences in versions timestamped here for evidence that the Privacy Policy did not exist until today: https://archive.vn/www.menofwestwood.com
I stand corrected. The Privacy Policy does, in fact, list "Men of Westwood Inc and websites" at the very top therefore, by googling "Men of Westwood Inc" you do get a person's name and address. Now whether this is the person actually running the NIL collective and website is still in question. What I worry about is that this person (or a completely different person who has nothing to do with the NIL collective) is now putting himself in an unenviable position to answer questions posed by others such as "bruinballer" has when he could avoid all of this by being transparent as Dimitri has so astutely argued in his post that only 4 active of the 136 NIL collectives in the On3 database do not list a founder with MOW being one of them. So why fight the absolute norm and gain the trust of all Bruins around the world who may want to donate to the MOW? Why the secrecy? It just creates more questions about "who and what are you doing with my money" when it doesn't need to by being transparent.
Additionally, after discussing this with a few of my friends who are friendly BRO members, they gave me info of BRO posts on this matter that say things like "Plenty of blame...but no solution. ...if ...Dimitri understand NIL is what it takes to compete with top players...then propose an alternative" which seems to be the general tone of most BRO members. Excuse me? I think Dimitri is the voice of reason here and without his piece, the general public (and other school boards) which are already making fun of MOW and its non-transparent operation, the BRO narrative will continue and further create a negative image of UCLA athletics and its NIL efforts which are then being told to potential recruits. Because of Dimitri's post and some comments I made (understandably a bit harsh but not sorry for) they did correct their website by adding a Privacy Policy which I commend and is a start of some corrections they need to make.
So let's keep pushing and try to get MOW to be transparent and then we might just be all on board and creating something that will actually be effective in getting the best athletes for basketball and football. There is a good portion of the literally hundreds of thousands of UCLA alumni such as myself that are more than willing to help out if the NIL collective is being transparent and I know exactly how my money is going to help. For example, I contributed to the UCLA Centennial Campaign which collected nearly $5.5 Billion dollars from 220,000 donors who gave 574,000 gifts. Did you know that 81% of those were under $1,000 and 95% under $10,000? Those numbers right there is one part of the transparency needed to get people on board and until the MOW realizes this, they shouldn't be reaching out outside of BRO (which I also heard is a suggestion made by the top BRO operator himself) then complaining that Dimitri's post has "no solutions."
To BRO members reading this: You are free to copy and paste my posts to the BRO board although I know it will take some guts to do so. But wouldn't it be worth it to have some other viewpoints expressed by the outside world and then convince MOW so that it can have several thousand more people donate to the MOW since so many of us are asking for the transparency and that's all we want? Why hide this information when 95%+ of the NIL collectives listed on On3 are being transparent?
Actually, went to the website and in two minutes had my info. I do this for a living (legal profession), so didn't need to google it :-)