lawkota Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 do you want to see the contract....its all fact....the public doesnt always get the WHOLE story.....as in every case..... I would like to see the contract, where can I get a copy? Quote
Hansel Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 I would like to see the contract, where can I get a copy? I highly doubt REA would allow any of its dealing to become public "I regret to inform you that if the 'Herald' would reveal any business dealings to you and/or to the public, they and you would have a lawsuit on your hands" -Ralph Engelstad Quote
Cratter Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 another deal most people dont know about is the amount of money UND athletics pays the REA...money up front as well as rental to use the REA each month for hockey...as well as REA getting half the ticket sales..so i would venture to say after all is said and done...UND is getting a raw end of the deal in the exchange....again...my opinion....life was so much easier in the old barn......gotta feeling life will be much much different with volleyball and hoops moving to the Ralph.... So your implying that UND pays money to use the facility that was built for them, that would mean that someone is making a profit. Where is this profit going then, because it obviously isn't going to Mr. Engelstad himself. The only one making the profit is the entity of "Ralph Engelstad Arena." Of course given they have to pay their bills, salaries, electric, etc. Then where does the rest go, back to the UND athletics department. Quote
legend334 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 what would the law suit be? for seeing the contract between UND and REA??? on what grounds? that a copy was misplaced and found by someone??? that would be a frivilous law suit......again like i stated earlier, do you think REA could or could not "cook" the books for lack of a better term.....come on people....dont be so nieve....the 700,000 that REA gave to UND athletics isnt a dent in what UND had to pay to REA during the course of the year....do the math.... Quote
UND92,96 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 Maybe I'm naive, but I believe that all profits that REA realizes go towards the direct benefit of the athletic department one way or another. The key word there is "profits." Certainly, the running of the arena creates significant costs, as well, and those presumably are paid for in large part through ticket sales, concessions, etc. But at least two things lead me to believe that UND has, indeed, benefited financially by the REA to a large extent. First, the addition of womens hockey. This is a sport which has significant costs, yet which produces practically no revenue. Despite the apparent hardship this should mean to the athletic department, no mens non-revenue-producing sports have been cut, nor are there any cuts on the horizon as far as I know. I think this speaks volumes. Secondly is the construction of the basketball/volleyball facility. If UND athletics does, indeed, operate at a loss of roughly $400,000, then of course it would seem to be virtually impossible to construct this facility with no state money at all. Yet, that seems to be the case. Again, this is apparently possible due only to the profits turned by REA. Quote
Bisonfan1234 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 It's the same with the Fargodome and NDSU, except the government owns our building. All big buildings are owned by some company that rents them out to whoever, it's simply how it works. Quote
Bisonfan1234 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 One question: is this new side-arena for bball (just women's?) and vball actually under construction, slated to start construction in the future, or still a proposal? Quote
legend334 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 so UND 92 96 if all was so hunky good with UND and REA...why would the new facility make UND athletics choose between a new floor to play on in the hockey arena or a weight room in the b-ball and volleyball arena...and for your information....most of the women's hockey expenses has been picked up by the FSC....and state money.....and cuts could be on the horizon....but as far as you know.....as far as paying rent....why should UND....if the building is paid for which it is, and concessions on a home hockey game make 200-300,000 why wouldnt they make enough money to let it go...the perception out in the pubilic isnt the reality is all i am saying.....above and all else..the new building for MBB and WBB and volleyball is being built so REA can host bigger events...such as junior olympics......while UND athletics including hockey, MBB, WBB will not be allowed to enter the building for a month and a half since it will be on total lock down.... Quote
legend334 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 bison....the roof is already over the new arean....scheduled to open in sept...2004...... Quote
Bisonfan1234 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 If the REA cost $100 million...how long will it take for you to pay that debt back? Maybe then they'll let it go. And now you've got another arena to pay for, how much is that one running? $50 million? Quote
Cratter Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 do you want to see the contract....its all fact....the public doesnt always get the WHOLE story.....as in every case..... The public doesn't know the whole story, but you do. Could you enlighten us all to how you achieved this great knowledge? Quote
legend334 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 that isnt UND athletics debt....he built it with his own money...the new building is 8 million..... Quote
UND92,96 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 so UND 92Â 96Â if all was so hunky good with UND and REA...why would the new facility make UND athletics choose between a new floor to play on in the hockey arena or a weight room in the b-ball and volleyball arena...and for your information....most of the women's hockey expenses has been picked up by the FSC....and state money.....and cuts could be on the horizon....but as far as you know.....as far as paying rent....why should UND....if the building is paid for which it is, and concessions on a home hockey game make 200-300,000 why wouldnt they make enough money to let it go...the perception out in the pubilic isnt the reality is all i am saying.....above and all else..the new building for MBB and WBB and volleyball is being built so REA can host bigger events...such as junior olympics......while UND athletics including hockey, MBB, WBB will not be allowed to enter the building for a month and a half since it will be on total lock down.... I'm not trying to argue with you. I'll be the first to admit that I have no inside information regarding the finances of either REA or the UND athletic department. Whether or not you do, again I don't know. As for womens hockey costs being picked by the FSC, we're both essentially saying the same thing. Most people give money to the FSC to get hockey tickets. The fact that REA seats 11,500 allows far more hockey tickets to be sold than at the old Ralph. However one wants to phrase it, the fact that REA exists is the only reason womens hockey can exist at UND without some serious cuts to other sports. Maybe those cuts will eventually happen anyway, but they probably would have happened already but for the existence of REA. Quote
UND92,96 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 If the REA cost $100 million...how long will it take for you to pay that debt back? Maybe then they'll let it go. And now you've got another arena to pay for, how much is that one running? $50 million? There is no debt to pay back from the construction of REA. Ralph's $100 million-plus built it. As for the new facility, my understanding is that the profits from REA will pay for it over time. The state had to O.K. its construction, and I think it's safe to say that they would never have given permission unless it was clear that the money would be there, and that nothing would have to come from the state. Quote
legend334 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 i disagree with that opinion....women's hockey was going to happen at UND before REA went up....when Terry Wanless was here the plans were already in motion to fund the sport without the new seats in the new REA....so to say REA is funding how? where? are they giving UND athletics more than 700,000??? did UND athletics pay REA 500,000 by May 1st.....yes they did, does REA get 50% of the seat sales, yes they do, who pays to recruit FSC members??? does REA pay the expense to get these people in the seats, no UND does, so where is the great benefit to UND athletics? and the monthly ice rental of 6500 dollars a month...add it all up, oh yeah and another 150,000 paid to REA by the end of June.....and REA wont pony up any money until REA sees UND athletics books.....or they wont give the money UND athletics already gave REA......seems like a good deal doesnt it?? maybe you will need to read this more than once....where did i see this information....in the contract.... Quote
UND92,96 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 i disagree with that opinion....women's hockey was going to happen at UND before REA went up....when Terry Wanless was here the plans were already in motion to fund the sport without the new seats in the new REA....so to say REA is funding how? where? are they giving UND athletics more than 700,000??? did UND athletics pay REA 500,000 by May 1st.....yes they did, does REA get 50% of the seat sales, yes they do, who pays to recruit FSC members??? does REA pay the expense to get these people in the seats, no UND does, so where is the great benefit to UND athletics? and the monthly ice rental of 6500 dollars a month...add it all up, oh yeah and another 150,000 paid to REA by the end of June.....and REA wont pony up any money until REA sees UND athletics books.....or they wont give the money UND athletics already gave REA......seems like a good deal doesnt it?? maybe you will need to read this more than once....where did i see this information....in the contract.... Yes, womens hockey was going to happen anyway due to Title IX and the threats of a lawsuit. But I firmly believe that the added hockey revenue due to REA makes it a lot less painful than it would otherwise have been. Bottom line: where do you think all this REA money ends up? If the contract is as one-sided as you are apparently saying, why did UND sign off on it? Something here doesn't add up. Quote
legend334 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 it does sound lopsided doesnt it, it is the fact....it is the contract....it is almost as bad as the deal with the Alerus we signed....hmmm....common theme here??? perhaps it has a lot to do with who is on the REA board? Quote
UND Fan Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 Legend 334 - You are very adament in your comments regarding REA, its financing and how it relates to UND's Athletic Department. I know for a fact that much of what you are saying is incorrect. As was asked by others, where did you get your information? It was a poor source. Quote
legend334 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 here is the deal with the Alerus for all those who forgot, friday--walk thru day--2500.00 for basicly 2:00 pm til 6:00 or 7:00, gameday 8500.00.....UND receives no concession money, the first 5,000 people in the door--all UND money, last year UND had 4200 season ticket sales for football, once again UND athletics did all the leg work to get those people in the door, the next 5,000 to 10,000 people split 50-50, after that 70 alerus, 30 percent UND til the place is filled, great deal for UND huh??? Quote
Bisonfan1234 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 Well at least the government owns the Alerus...oh wait...the government sucks. Quote
UND Fan Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 Legend334 - We were asking about your source for your REA info. I don't think anyone will argue with you about the Alerus deal. Quote
Cratter Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 The Alerus is city owned, so I believe the contract is public information, so not a big deal, one does not have to sign that contract, but UND must sought it to be fair. The Alerus has a hard time making a profit, which doesn't seem to be true for the Ralph. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 bisonfan1234: The Betty. So the REA Board is out to financially undermine UND Athletics? Gee, who's on the REA Board of Directors? - Earl Strinden, VP Emeritus, UND Alumni Association - Dr. Tom Clifford, President Emeritus, UND Those two guys seem like two really likely ones to be out to get UND. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.