Kennedy vs. Engelstad Foundation: GF herald feature

[Blackheart]

1 hour ago, gfhockey said:

Maybe we need another consultant to come in and tell us things

I think these guys are available...

[Benny Baker]

1 hour ago, The Sicatoka said:

Anyone stop to think that just getting how the arrangements between UND and REA work out into the public eye wasn't someone's end game? Or maybe exposing how Ms. McGarry operates? One can easily posit that UND got the existing deal but got those items out in public review. 

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting." -- Sun Tzu 

Many seem to emphasize that it was McGarry, not UND or Kennedy, that went to the herald first and made this public.

[The Sicatoka]

19 minutes ago, Benny Baker said:

Many seem to emphasize that it was McGarry, not UND or Kennedy, that went to the herald first and made this public.

And that seems to have exposed how she operates. Someone dares to question and she runs to the media? 

[geaux_sioux]

3 hours ago, gfhockey said:

I heard kennedy got s spanking from kem

 

[UND-FB-FAN]

3 hours ago, gfhockey said:

$$$ talks

That is obviously true in most cases, apparently including this one, but is it right? Is it right for the betterment of UND athletics? $$$ often equals power but not insight. 

Perhaps too philosophical for some (or most) on here. 

[nd1sufan]

14 hours ago, darell1976 said:

I jumped into the boat that had the point of all ticket sales for football should NOT be in the hands of the REA but into the hands of the university and the Alerus. I know you don’t agree with that but that’s my view and his view and the view of others and you can make fun of those who don’t agree with you, just says a lot of your character.

I would just ask supporters of this ticket revenue practice to find other D1 schools that have 52% of their ticket revenue taken off the top by the venue they PLAY THE EVENTS in, much less events they have nothing to do with putting on the event. It is a fair question. 

[darell1976]

18 minutes ago, nd1sufan said:

I would just ask supporters of this ticket revenue practice to find other D1 schools that have 52% of their ticket revenue taken off the top by the venue they PLAY THE EVENTS in, much less events they have nothing to do with putting on the event. It is a fair question. 

It’s like Bison basketball getting ticket revenue taken by the Fargodome.

[Oxbow6]

Anyone with a connection to MK want to ask him how he personally thought the latter half of the Vegas meeting/negotiations with McGarry went.

[Walsh Hall]

24 minutes ago, nd1sufan said:

I would just ask supporters of this ticket revenue practice to find other D1 schools that have 52% of their ticket revenue taken off the top by the venue they PLAY THE EVENTS in, much less events they have nothing to do with putting on the event. It is a fair question. 

You do realize there are expenses relating the ticketing/accounting... that entail the 52/48 breakdown?   You do realize that if the REA wasn't handling the duties that there would be expenses to hire all the staff and other related expenses to get this done?  There is a difference between gross income and net income.  

To think the hockey program is the beneficiary of this "issue" is laughable.  To think the football program is harmed by this issue is laughable.  

The football team needs to get better.  Getting better has zero to do with the this ticketing issue and the hockey team/REA.

[southpaw]

28 minutes ago, Walsh Hall said:

You do realize there are expenses relating the ticketing/accounting... that entail the 52/48 breakdown?   You do realize that if the REA wasn't handling the duties that there would be expenses to hire all the staff and other related expenses to get this done?  There is a difference between gross income and net income.  

To think the hockey program is the beneficiary of this "issue" is laughable.  To think the football program is harmed by this issue is laughable.  

The football team needs to get better.  Getting better has zero to do with the this ticketing issue and the hockey team/REA.

If the 52% helps cover the ticketing/accounting issues, then why is UND also paying a large amount of money specifically for that purpose?

[petey23]

Chicken or Egg question(s)

Whose idea was it to move UND Football ticket sales revenues under the control of The Ralph?

No matter which entity suggested it, it  must have made sense and must continue to make sense as both sides have signed off on the agreement in the past and going forward.

Maybe one of the Junior Athletic Directors in this thread could answer.

[UND1983]

10 minutes ago, petey23 said:

Chicken or Egg question(s)

Whose idea was it to move UND Football ticket sales revenues under the control of The Ralph?

No matter which entity suggested it, it  must have made sense and must continue to make sense as both sides have signed off on the agreement in the past and going forward.

Maybe one of the Junior Athletic Directors in this thread could answer.

It must have made some kind of sense in 2001 when we were D2 and had half the budget we do now. 

 

[Walsh Hall]

It about Synergy.  Makes zero sense to have (2) separate ticketing employees/systems...  The hockey team has the same deal as the football team.  52% to REA, 48% to the University.

[jdub27]

27 minutes ago, Walsh Hall said:

It about Synergy.  Makes zero sense to have (2) separate ticketing employees/systems...  The hockey team has the same deal as the football team.  52% to REA, 48% to the University.

You're dead on with your first two sentences and then off the rails after that. The ticket revenue is a completely separate line item than the box office services provided by the REA. UND paid an additional $247K to the REA outside of the 52% of ticket revenue for those other services provided. And neither of those include an additional $1.1 million paid for "utilities, maintenance staff, phone service and other expenses". 

I'm not sure what's so hard to comprehend some of this: The ticket revenue UND pays to the REA is the equivalent of "rent" for use of the REA/BESC. UND also makes separate payments for other services and expenses. Regardless of whether its all a shell game of some sort (with minimal oversight on one side the equation), the football team has nothing to do with the REA yet, 52% of their ticket revenues are directed towards "rent" for a building they don't use (again, a separate fee is paid for ticket services).

When the original agreement was made, ticket revenues were significantly lower than they are today. On top of that, the athletic department has had to deal with significant budget cuts, yet the REA has managed to keep the same amount of revenue flowing in to them from UND, meaning that athletic department has had to cut extra from other areas to make up for not being able to do across the board cuts.

[Siouxperfan7]

14 hours ago, The Sicatoka said:

Anyone stop to think that just getting how the arrangements between UND and REA work out into the public eye wasn't someone's end game? Or maybe exposing how Ms. McGarry operates? One can easily posit that UND got the existing deal but got those items out in public review. 

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting." -- Sun Tzu 

This was my thinking as well.  Agree to basically the same deal through 2020.  Settle the storm that was created and make sure your largest donor is relatively satisfied.   No one knows what was actually said in these meetings.  The revenue sharing was likely brought up and that UND would like to renegotiate that in 2020.  If the revenue sharing was discussed and there is a potential to change that in the very near future (2020) that will bake it more beneficial for UND, than it is a win for Kennedy and more importantly, UND athletics in general.

[petey23]

37 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

It must have made some kind of sense in 2001 when we were D2 and had half the budget we do now. 

 

True. But is has been agreed to every year.

[UND-FB-FAN]

17 minutes ago, petey23 said:

True. But is has been agreed to every year.

Yes, and that is an issue. Maintaining the current agreement while the landscape has completely shifted (i.e., DII to DI status) is senseless. Maybe not for solely the hockey program, I suppose, but for the entire University's best interests. While UND has maintained the status quo with their emphasized hockey stance, the school 70 miles south has exploded onto the scene with tremendous success. 

[Cratter]

1 hour ago, petey23 said:

True. But is has been agreed to every year.

Except, The 52% didn't start in 2001.

It was right around when the Ralph built UND a brand new basketball arena and the Ralph needed a way to pay for it...

[petey23]

3 minutes ago, Cratter said:

Except, The 52% didn't start in 2001.

So somewhere along the line, it made sense for the Athletic Department to either propose this arrangement or agree to this arrangement.

[BarnWinterSportsEngelstad]

On 6/22/2018 at 4:51 PM, WiSioux said:

As it should. I cannot believe there are actually people on here that believe a family should donate a $104 million gift to the university and get nothing in return. Especially for non-school events in a building that the family still owns. If you want all the money made in the building then you take the entire ownership responsibility for the building. Including insurances, taxes, maintenance, etc

 

On 6/22/2018 at 4:57 PM, jdub27 said:

The family does not own the building, a non-profit does. That nonprofit is setup specifically to benefit UND athletics. 

ND state legislature is the one to shoot arrows at. They didn't want the state to own The Palace on the Prairie for fear of funding it's survival? Dub has a pretty good handle on how this is set up.

Div II football was doing OK under this setup. Div I requires more $ for each sport.

All $ stay within UND and The Ralph, as per Strinden.

UND general fund bails out the AD. NCAA requires 14 sports. Most sports lose money.

If AD gets all FB ticket revenue right away instead of 48% nothing changes at the end of the school year because the $500,000 from The Ralph would NOT be given to AD at the end of the school year. The FB program is still short and therefor would not have any more to spend. The AD gets bailed out by the U, not a good scenario, especially in these budget challenging times.

FB and any other sport need donations to get to the next level. The Alerus puts a handicap on FB program paying it's own because of the seating capacity, granted it's not an issue yet, but it will be.

What this arrangement does do until September 30, 2030, is let The Ralph spend hockey made $ on MH without the consent of UND. Remember why KEM was lately in GF and Coach Berry thanked her. The AD isn't paying the $100,000 raise.

[UNDBIZ]

18 minutes ago, BarnWinterSportsEngelstad said:

The AD isn't paying the $100,000 raise.

Source?

[WiSioux]

I am trying to remember back to when sports were being cut... Is hockey the only sport that makes money at UND? Does either basketball or volleyball make more money than they spend?

[UNDBIZ]

8 minutes ago, WiSioux said:

I am trying to remember back to when sports were being cut... Is hockey the only sport that makes money at UND? Does either basketball or volleyball make more money than they spend?

All were shown to have a loss. After accounting for champions club donations and allocating administrative expenses, men's hockey is likely to show a profit. 

[BarnWinterSportsEngelstad]

1 hour ago, UNDBIZ said:

Source?

The raise meeting?

Attended by KEM, Berry, AD, Pres.

Next, announced that Berry gets raise and he thanks KEM in the press release.

[Oxbow6]

28 minutes ago, BarnWinterSportsEngelstad said:

The raise meeting?

Attended by KEM, Berry, AD, Pres.

Next, announced that Berry gets raise and he thanks KEM in the press release.

At least MK was able to finish at the table that meeting/negotiations with KEM.