IowaBison

I don't see how that's bashing, I'm wondering. It seems like proportionality could cost UND $100,000s each year?

yep $150k in the black, that jives with the books: Operating loss: $5.9 million Income loss: $5.4 million Decrease in net assets: $5.4 million

That former was my definition of what it is, the latter is my definition of what it was meant to be.

different strokes for different folks. I don't know why UND would take the harder route, which proportionality will likely be.

And I think within your post, The Sicatoka (thanks for posting it), lies the rub. I believe the original intent was for the REA to be a money tree for the University, ie funnel profits to the UND. That doesn't appear to be happening.

They could care quite a bit if their relationship was symbiotic and that SISCO had a few years earlier tied itself to IBM's ship and was expecting to make considerably more than they did. (ie periodically wondering if they could rework the contract because their budget just wasn't adding up).

Nothing as long as your sure the REA is going to be getting a million dollar 'gift' every year.

The Ralph's Books. Your bizarre interpretation of UNDs/REAs financials is quite funny. It would be like me saying IBM lost $100 million last year and you replying, "Yeah, but they wrote a check for $130 million to purchase hardware. See they bought it all from SISCO."

ha-ha-ha. that's funny.

I agree and felt the same way until I saw his words in print.

I say that the approaches are completely different. Chapman came in and one of his goals was moving to athletics to DI. There was a process and momentum to do it. Kupchella has been hesitant to do it and it shows (that's not a shot at Kupchella-he has a bad taste in his mouth from his prior position, recognized a number of benefits to UND remaining DII, and saw that the finances weren't readily there). UND's process hasn't been horrible, but the internal report was worthless and Kupchella's announcement showed no enthusiasm. Also, a number of publicly stated requirements for the move, most notably a conference invite, have not been satisfied. This really has to make one question what is going on.

I'm not sure about an admission of guilt. I think it's a sign that Potts is a good guy. My guess is that he volunteered his service. The SBOHE needs a lot of help right now.

I disagree. These types of agreements happen all too often. It's easier to negotiate a relatively lop-sided settlement in order to avoid litigation. I remember when I lived in Washington six years ago, the CEO of DC General Hospital, lost his job for gross negligence (he should have been thrown in jail). Instead he received of over a million dollars.

Baloney. UND could have had two or three undergraduates write a better report than what was put out by UND's committee. Some of the errors and omissions in the report are down right laughable. I agree that UND has great strength in its tradition and alumni, which, as I noted before, makes UNDs process even more embarassing, imo. My sincere hope is that folks at UND start taking this a little more seriously and I'm assuming they will. 'Cause continuing this piece-meal, half-assed approach could damage the school.

I agree completely.

Really? When are you going to do anything professionally with regards to the transition? Poo-poo DI and NDSU for four years. Decide to study the issue and put out a joke of a report-which does not support the move. Announce that you will be making the move in two years, maybe. I don't see how an institution like UND could have done this any more half-assed.

Potts already had the power you described, what he wanted was the power to control Chapman. This power is the Board's alone. Whenever any executive leaves a position like Potts did the primary condition is the promise not to sue each other in the future. Sure lawyers would jump on the case, they'll jump on most any case.

For what? Because they didn't give in to his unreasonable demands of being able to hire and fire? Because individuals spoke about how they were displeased with his performance? ?

talk about smearing. The Forum's comment, which you interpret as a smear, is not Pott's specific. What would any expect out of an individual in his position? Threatened to resign, was taken up on the offer, given full pay for the remainder of his contract, but given the liberty to pursue any opportunities he might find. What kind of work would you expect him deliver?

They certainly do as they negotiate with one another for fees; you can't squeeze money out of a turnip. Call it what you want, the official books say the were about 1/2 million dollars off.

The FargoDome made money last year. NDSU has free access to a number of event days each year. The Alerus lost money, the Ralph lost money. The two and UND are trying to squeeze money out of one another when there is none there. ?

If Canadien schools' only issue is hockey it's not a big deal. If they want to play basketball or football, it certainly is. I don't see why any special rules need to be considered. If they want to play hockey, let 'em meet hockey requirements (they can skip the general ones). If they want to play basketball, then they need to do what everyone else does. 14/16 sports, compliance, compliance, compliance, money, money, money, and (of course) wait, wait, wait. Considering the apparent differences between the CIS and NCAA, I don't know why they'd go further than hockey.

Boise is much larger than Grand Forks and is one of the fastest growing metropolitan areas in the United States. Grands Forks, to put it gently, is not.

Which last year didn't cover it's own maintenance costs. This blessing may in fact be a millstone around UND's neck, just like the alerus.