Convincing professors to help with the founding of new university Background

I'm doing some work for a new online-only university that is being founded, based in the US and offering degrees up to doctorate in courses like history, philosophy and literature. It's heavily research-based and doesn't allow credit transfer.

One of the great things about this university is that it will offer scholarships to people in developing countries allowing them to complete a degree at a US university for as little as $100. The university is not designed to make money, but only to keep itself going. (This does not mean it is non-profit; in fact most non-profits are designed to make as much money as possible, they just don't have shareholders.)

We need academics/professors to volunteer to advise and help us get started, especially during the current period where the application for a new university is being considered. We expect them to help by:


associating with the university for the sake of the application, even if only in name;
marking theses, when students reach that stage (though no teaching will be required).


The questions

I've tried emailing professors asking for their help, but it seems no one is interested. I get the impression that online universities don't have much respect from these people and that no one wants to risk their reputation by being involved with something new and different.

What is the best approach to convince established professors to contribute to this project? Would they expect to be paid in return? (A stipend is possible, as well as a title, but no salary.)
There are a number of issues here:


The new university probably isn't accredited (yet?) and is for-profit (at least that's how I interpret "this does not mean it is non-profit").  In principle a for-profit, unaccredited university could be innovative and wonderful, but it will face a lot of prejudice because most such universities are not.
Joining a new venture like this involves putting a lot of trust in the people who are running it.  If they turn out to be crazy or dishonest, then everyone involved will look bad.  It's difficult to reach this level of trust, and almost impossible starting with e-mail from a stranger.
Advising research students takes time and effort.  It's not just a matter of proposing a topic and waiting for the thesis to come in; instead, there's a lot of advising and mentoring.  This is a major commitment, and I wouldn't want to have my name associated with something like this unless I was doing everything necessary to help the students succeed.  Some of your comments (such as "virtually no need of professors until it comes to marking theses" or "we need academics associated with the university for the sake of the application, even if its only in name") sound like I would be setting students up for failure or misleading them as to my level of involvement.
Time is a major limiting factor.  If I had all the time in the world, then I would cheerfully volunteer to help with all sorts of things.  As it is, though, there are a lot of students at my own institution who seek supervision, and working with them in person is more satisfying and productive than supervising someone over the internet.  If I maintain my current level of engagement with students in person, and add internet activities, then what am I going to cut?  It's not enough to make a case that participating in this new university is valuable.  Instead, you have to make the case that it is more valuable than whatever I might be doing instead, such as research or family time.
What you describe comes across as saying professors aren't really necessary except for validating research output and ought to be willing to do that for relatively little money.  This philosophy won't be popular with many professors, who would like to believe they engage in plenty of crucial activities.  If this isn't the impression you would like to convey, then you need to modify your sales pitch.