Jump to content
  • Welcome to GoMeanGreen.com!

    Thank you for visiting us!  Registering is easy and free, and provides you with the ability to participate in the discussions along with many cool features and content.

Sign in to follow this  
DemolitionDan

How important are student athletic fees?

Recommended Posts

We have the lowest donor support by a full 3%. That's pitiful. The 1% that are donating to facilities can't make up our entire donor base. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a sobering bunch of statistics.  We need to raise more money and lots of it, I am embarrassed.  We do not financially support our University/teams.  I give but I guess not enough.  We need a serious fundraising program.  We will not make it to the next level without it.....

GO MEAN GREEN
GIVE MONEY

 

  • Upvote 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely, that number has to have increased since 2017. I thought we broke all kinds of donor funding records last year. If not, this is truly pathetic. We're behind a bunch of schools that have people donate just to suck

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to keep in mind, and I’m not 100% sure about this, but I think the donor money represents direct donations, while other category captures indirect donations (i.e. MGSF / MG club). Bottom line still remains donations section is weak. 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be interested to see what our median donation size is. Are we doing a bad job of courting small or big dollar donors? To be this far behind in the donor game is pathetic. Maybe its a categorization thing with a lot of our big money donations being accounted for differently? At this point we're left looking for excuses.

I'm willing to bet these numbers are better after last year. But one year isn't going to completely change the picture. Not great.

knightcommission-report.png.6153863c507301c6de30ea2c2f0ee702.png

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmm..this doesn't look good if you consider what most seem to want UNT to be. That is to have a university athletic department that is The Leader of CUSA and second to none! I feel confident the AD and all associated with the athletic department and University are addressing this issue.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, meangreenlax said:

I'd be interested to see what our median donation size is. Are we doing a bad job of courting small or big dollar donors? .

 

Both 

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to recall something the AD put out saying MGSF increased by over 30% last year with a 5 year goal of 100% increase. We'd pass 2-3 schools but still not enough. But if we keep winning at the current clip, it will grow exponentially. FY 2017 would have been 16-17 season. That was the season following the 5 years where we had 1 winning season in football, men's and women's basketball combined. No doubt that would have been our worst year.

 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This page is great and nicely searchable. Especially in donor contributions the money likely gets shifted around weirdly in fits of financial "making the numbers fit". I am almost sure this is not an apples to apples comparisson from year to year nor between how institutions report. Either that or people radically change their spending behavior from one year to the next, in which case that would explain why NT had almost 4 million on year and only 1 million a few years later. You guys can decide yourselves whether or not this really correlates with on field success.Pictured are not total revenues like it says, but actually only donor contributions.

knightcommission-report.png.c2b08f70401c7c9fa5bde2aa87abf9f8.png

Edited by outoftown
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the VERY simple Cliff notes of getting more donors-

Years 1-3 You win and it rallies the people who are there thick and thin and they bump up their donations or maybe it's easier to get more money out of the few big donors. But overall it's a percentage change, not a cultural change. We've been bad or up and down so long that it probably feels like a lucky, passing phase to casual fans. 

Years 3-5 Winning becomes more of an expectation and the excitement grows however this is about when you lose your coach due to success. Also the CONCEPT of giving money to the athletic department just starts to enter people's brains who are new to the scene because of the success. People want to be part of the success so while the culture isn't there, it's percolating. Also, if you are a smart AD you make a good replacement coaching hire but also use the opportunity to tell wealthy people associated with the program "If you want this to continue, now's the time to step up." Hopefully five years of success has dulled the skepticism. 

Years 5-7 The success starts to pay off and the begging, kicking, knocking down doors, and begging some more for donations decreases from 95% of the time to about 80% of the time. Seriously, I doubt there's a G5 AD out there who doesn't hustle constantly for donations. But by now the concept of being a donor to the program has gone from "Nah, not for me" to "Yeah, I'm a member of the MGSF" and selling bigger projects to more successful donors is less of a tough sell. I went to a Boise State game last year and it's not like their tailgate scene or game presentation is any better than ours but EVERYTHING IS BOISE STATE. It's the place to be. People are bought in. We sat next to two older guys in the upper deck that couldn't fathom not going to a home game. It's just what they do. 

 

So yeah, it's going to take a while longer and some more good decisions along the way. I'm not even sure if a single event can speed up the process but I'd sure like to kick the hell out of A$M next year and test the theory. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found more info on the NCAA financial reporting at this site using a google search. Pretty interesting. 

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/ncaa/finance/2019NCAAFIN_AUP-FRS-FAQs.pdf

Basically, donations are only counted if they are spent that fiscal year so I assume the money received for the indoor, etc. won't be recorded until it is actually spent. I'm also assuming it isn't "received" by the athletic department until it is budgeted and spent. Until then it probably belongs to the UNT Foundation or some University holding fund. 

Q: Net fund raising revenues are not spent for current year athletic expenses and are retained for future years. When do you record the revenue?

A: Funds received by the athletic department should be recorded in the year they are received and used by the athletic department. Do not report contributions to be used in other reporting years.

Q: Contributions - Are premium seating contributions to be reported as sport specific or general contributions? Is there any reason for premium seating revenue to be separated for institutional comparison purposes?

A: The face value of the ticket should be reported to Ticket Sales category (Category 1), while any premium amounts over the face value should be reported to Contributions (Category 8 (to the specific sport in both categories if possible).

Q: Please clarify the issues surrounding pledges, contributions, and routing of such through a foundation.

A: Pledges (a promise to contribute money or assets) are not to be reported into the system. Only when contributions are actually received in the form of cash or assets should they be reported in the year they were received and spent. If a contribution (in whole or in part) is made to a foundation specifically for athletics, then the portion allocated to athletics should be reported as contribution revenue in the year it was received and used. Do not report: Contributions to be used in other reporting years. If, however, a general contribution has been made to a foundation without knowing how much will be allocated to athletics, then no reporting as contribution revenue should be made until that determination is made. Basically, there should be transparency between any foundation revenue and expense that is athletically related. If it is athletically related, it should also be reported and included with revenues and expenses reported on behalf of the athletics department

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, meangreenJW said:

Found more info on the NCAA financial reporting at this site using a google search. Pretty interesting. 

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/ncaa/finance/2019NCAAFIN_AUP-FRS-FAQs.pdf

Basically, donations are only counted if they are spent that fiscal year so I assume the money received for the indoor, etc. won't be recorded until it is actually spent. I'm also assuming it isn't "received" by the athletic department until it is budgeted and spent. Until then it probably belongs to the UNT Foundation or some University holding fund. 

Q: Net fund raising revenues are not spent for current year athletic expenses and are retained for future years. When do you record the revenue?

A: Funds received by the athletic department should be recorded in the year they are received and used by the athletic department. Do not report contributions to be used in other reporting years.

Q: Contributions - Are premium seating contributions to be reported as sport specific or general contributions? Is there any reason for premium seating revenue to be separated for institutional comparison purposes?

A: The face value of the ticket should be reported to Ticket Sales category (Category 1), while any premium amounts over the face value should be reported to Contributions (Category 8 (to the specific sport in both categories if possible).

Q: Please clarify the issues surrounding pledges, contributions, and routing of such through a foundation.

A: Pledges (a promise to contribute money or assets) are not to be reported into the system. Only when contributions are actually received in the form of cash or assets should they be reported in the year they were received and spent. If a contribution (in whole or in part) is made to a foundation specifically for athletics, then the portion allocated to athletics should be reported as contribution revenue in the year it was received and used. Do not report: Contributions to be used in other reporting years. If, however, a general contribution has been made to a foundation without knowing how much will be allocated to athletics, then no reporting as contribution revenue should be made until that determination is made. Basically, there should be transparency between any foundation revenue and expense that is athletically related. If it is athletically related, it should also be reported and included with revenues and expenses reported on behalf of the athletics department

As far as I can tell there are few standards in athletic reporting, but it is non-profit accounting.   Allocations back and forth between the athletic department and general fund make manipulation of the results very easy. 

The shorthand version of above:  Donations are recorded in the period when the cash is received and expenditures when payments are made. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/19/2019 at 1:28 AM, meanrob said:

I said it during RVs time and I’ll say it again. You need ten years of success to cultivate a donating culture. You don’t have to go 10-2 every year but you can’t win three games in two years and have multiple coaching fires. 

WB has done a great job but it’s not changing after a few seasons. 

Completely agree. If people think we are on an up-and-up right now (not even 5 years in), just imagine what things could be like after 10. That’s 2 generations of 4-year students watching 7-10 win teams. Year in year out.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, greenminer said:

Completely agree. If people think we are on an up-and-up right now (not even 5 years in), just imagine what things could be like after 10. That’s 2 generations of 4-year students watching 7-10 win teams. Year in year out.

If we can keep Wren for 10 yrs... we will have a solid program that has a strong donor base, a winning culture, and a spot on the college athletics map. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/18/2019 at 3:53 PM, wardly said:

Sad that we are D.A.L. in donor contributions.

There’s no way, with our top few donors donating millions year after year. These numbers have to be maneuvered around for this Knight Commission report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Student fees although less than other CUSA schools feed ALL programs at North Texas. Coaches and players win games. The administration wins conference title and bowl games.

  • Upvote 1
  • Eye Roll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.