jdub27

Ignoring point 3 already. If UND is going to be a "hockey" school, then the hockey program is going to have to support other sports. I don't see NDSU taking significant issue with their football team helping support their other sports. The issue is that hockey is pretty maxed out at UND, so increased revenue for the department needs to come from FB, MBB, WBB and VB. Because of the revenue share with the REA, they haven't taken it on the chin to the level the rest of the athletic department has, which has only exacerbated the problem elsewhere. Kind of makes it hard to improve certain programs while they are shouldering the cuts for others while already at a disadvantage. Yes, hockey needs to remain successful because it is a revenue driver, but that doesn't mean they are untouchable and without question.

UND is so unlucky to have a president that the search committee for the school with the largest undergrad enrollment in the nation approached him to apply. What a bum for looking at tripling his salary and advancing his career. UND should definitely stick with either academia who are looking for their last job before retiring (which has recently worked out much better for them) or someone who is content on being at UND until they retire.

A few points: We keep hearing about hockey is so profitable yet no one can explain why 52% of football ticket revenue is needed to support operations of the REA/BESC and apparently MK is the bad guy for wanting to renegotiate an almost two decade old deal that is set up to be renegotiated every year. If hockey is paying 52% of their ticket revenue to the REA, then they aren't profitable through ticket sales. The REA was set up to support all of UND athletics, ignoring that and the fact that the hockey program is where it is only because of an extraordinary outside gift is just changing the narrative from reality.

I think your number is a bit high assuming the NCAA reports are correct. Last year the rough amount of football ticket revenue that went to the REA was ~$250K and that was easily a high water mark over the last number of years. Regardless, the athletic department made a deal that made sense almost two decades ago. However that deal is also renewed annually and UND doesn't feel like it's currently making sense for them, giving the right to negotiate it.

I have always assumed this was the plan, but in order for that to work, the relationship needs to continue to be beneficial from both sides. As things sit right now, that is not happening (whether or not it is real or perceived doesn't even matter). The UND athletic department has faced significant budget cuts while apparently being unable to being able to renegotiate with their biggest partner to help ease the pain, while that partner (whose sole reason for existence is to operate in the most beneficial way to support UND athletics) has continued to see the same amount of revenue come in.

2020 Per the tax returns, he doesn't receive any compensation from any of the three main entities.

No significant donor is making their decisions based on what is said by anonymous message board rubes. Claiming that is what they are basing their decision off of is more insulting to their intelligence than anything posted here. But just for fun, since you can GUARANTEE it, name some names to back it up.

I can probably find the actual terms later but here's a decade old article showing NDSU and the Fargodome having a disagreement in rent (sound familiar?) but NDSU absolutely pays rent for their use of the Fargodome. http://www.inforum.com/content/rent-revenue-sharing-issue-ndsu-lease-fargodome And as already stated, one of the biggest parts of Phase 2 is the locker room and coaches offices. Though i don't disagree with your solution to the issue.

Are you on the IAC? Yes, those things can happen but only under the circumstances. 1)They increase ticket revenue (which football did last season but 52% went to the REA). 2)UND renegotiates with their partners which is what Kennedy is trying to do. 3)A combination of the previous two. NDSU pays rent to the Fargodome just like UND pays rent to the Alerus (though more, since UND use the Alerus less). I'm not sure how one can rip on the idea of new locker rooms for the football team while not even acknowledging the money spent on the hockey locker rooms which are 70+ years newer and "needed" a $3 million plus renovation to remain competitive. But your comments, I assume you haven't seen the new hockey locker rooms. It's about as close to gold plated jock straps as you'll get.

I would imagine there are programs on campus who feel very similar from time to time.

I'd be willing to guess many of the "anti-hockey" people actually hold season tickets to and support the hockey program. However pointing out the disparities in how programs are viewed and supported is done to try to show that just because things are running smoothly with the hockey team (mainly because of some very gracious support from an outside donor) does not mean that programs or the overall relationship with the REA is operating in the best interest of UND or its athletic department (which again, is the mission of the RE Arena and basis for its non-profit status).

I don't know the breakdown, however yes, a large majority came from private donations, including the Engelstads. However there were at least some REA resources used for some portions of it in whatever capacity. The point was that the argument that things like locker room doesn't matter help or matter for recruiting for one team but is so important another needs to spend a significant amount of money on it doesn't hold water. Also, I think you're underestimating how much the UND alumni football player endowment is and how much they raise annually to contribute to the athletic department. If you were to take Mr. Engelstad out of the equation (an obvious game changer), I think the football team alumni would be leaps and bounds ahead of where the hockey team is. I'll let some former players speak to that since they have a much better idea. The hockey program is where it is because of the largest gift to an athletic department at NCAA history (at the time), which was mainly for the hockey team but was set up to benefit the entire athletic department and has apparently started to stray further and further from that. I mean, what does that make them in your eyes? They are at the top because of what someone else did, they didn't earn the REA through their own work (ticket revenues).

Parts of them are borderline condemnable. Great view for recruits. At least they finally got new lockers to put in them, slap a little lipstick on that pig. Tough to make the argument that stuff like that doesn't matter when the hockey team literally made that exact argument on why they needed to spend the (semi-private) money to renovate their locker room to make sure they keep up with rival programs.

RE Arena, Inc. expensed $1.1 million to UND for utilities, maintenance staff, phone service and other expenses. So whatever that includes I guess?

Correct, however UND paid them $247,000 last year for that along with an additional $1.1 million in other expenses, on top of the ticket revenue split.

Can you give me one way the current usage agreement with the REA is beneficial to the football program? They pay rent at the Alerus Center and give 52% of their ticket revenue to the REA. Plus I think they get dinged for some of the expenses to run the HPC. The REA has a lot of money in reserves, I'm having a hard time buying that they continue to need football ticket revenue or that they ever should have to begin with. I concede the basketball program is benefiting but it's fair to point out the exposure potential is greater than anything on campus and it's not really close.

Indeed.

Guessing there is one more guard leaving, likely looking at the JuCo route for next season. If accurate, I stand corrected on my previous assumption.

Here is 2017's information: Note that this is an oversimplification The REA got $2.4 million in revenue, another $769,000 in advertising revenue, $247,000 for box office revenue and charged UND another $1.1 million to UND for other expenses, so basically earned $4.5 million in revenue related to UND (not including concessions/merchandise shop/etc). UND got $2.2 million in ticket revenue, $432,000 in advertising revenue and $750,000 in "extra revenue". Net effect, UND saw $3.4 million in revenues before paying the REA $1.3 million for a net of around $2 million. I'm having a hard time with the $1.1 million charged to UND for "utilities, maintenance staff, phone service and other expenses" without knowing all the details behind it. Seems like that should be covered in the "rent" payment. That is separate from the REA getting a cut of football ticket revenue. Even if these numbers are close, I can see why UND is asking for the contract to be looked at. This also paints a bit of a different picture than what KEM made it look like when she said UND should sign the usage agreement and sit back and collect their check. UND is doing plenty of heavy lifting.

Why is any football ticket revenue going to the REA? I can see MBB/WBB/VB due to the BESC, but feel free to explain the football part. The revenue split It is also part of the ongoing negotiations, so the fight isn't all about the logo, it's about the bigger picture that the REA is supposed to operate in the best manner to support UND athletics (note that the term used and it isn't men's ice hockey) and the President is saying they aren't. Tough to argue with him given the information that is currently available. How many years did UND hockey "stand for themselves" before getting a $110 million gift?

While I won't argue that money hasn't been misspent along the way, there is no chance that anyone saw the multiple rounds of budget cuts to the degree that were required. His "implication to sue" was simply to remind the RE BoD that the RE Arena Inc is to operate in a way that is most beneficial to the University of North Dakota as the sole financial beneficiary. They are literally required by the their bylaws to do so and pointing out that he feels they might not be doing that seems like a fair comment to make. The Engelstad Foundation is free to do as they please (and MK literally went out of his way in every e-mail to thank them and show gratitude for what they have done), however the REA does not have that latitude to have free reign to do as they please.

Again, which nickname did you vote for?

Also, which nickname was it you voted for since your top choice wasn't an option but your second choice was....?

Assuming the events are profitable and those funds aren't held back in reserve or to cover expenses they would be included in the funds that go back to UND, however all of these numbers appear to be subjective to various degrees. But increased revenue that can be attributed to more availability for events because of less facility use by UND seems to argue that the usage contract between the two should be renegotiated. The REA can use revenue from those events to cover more of their costs and UND can keep more of their ticket revenue upfront instead of waiting/hoping to get it on the back-end. UND owns all of the land from 6th Ave N to Gateway Dr (north to south) and Columbia Rd to the back of the lots on Boyd Dr (east to west). This includes the land underneath all of the townhomes and commercial buildings to the north and commercial space to the east.

UND owns the land. And the whole thing was set up to operate in the best interest of UND and it's athletics program. That's literally their mission statement. Calling the REA a private enterprise is also misleading as it is set up as a non-profit (enjoying significant tax breaks) with UND as it's sole financial beneficiary. And UND doesn't just "use" the facilities, they pay 52% of all ticket revenue to the REA as "rent" and also pay the REA for some other services. As for what is given back to UND, they only gets whatever is determined to be "leftover" at the end of the year from all sources of cash flow and that number is a very highly subjective number, which I'm assuming is decided by the REA Arena BoD. The ability for the REA to book more of these outside events due to increased arena availability is part of the reason UND has asked for a change in the UND ticket revenue split, they are using the arena less and the REA should in turn have to lean less on UND's ticket revenue to operate as they can bring in more outside revenue. That seems pretty logical.