Conference Realignment

[Northeast Stinger]

Has anyone “realigned” their thinking?

 

[Vespidae]

Thus the joint efforts of Emory and GT that started before GT became AAU had a lot to do with why GT finally became an AAU member IMO. Yet it does seem that the Big 10 schools receive on average more research dollars per institution than non Big 10 AAU institutions from what I have gotten from people connected with Big 10 schools, maybe they're wrong in what they say, that I don't know. In conversations with some people around ATL about just this subject most feel AAU is very political and the giant in the political part of it strongly appears to be the combined Big 10 schools. Maybe that has something to do with your "athletic conference or another" comment, don't know. Sounds like you may work in academia or have in the past? IMO Presidents of higher education institutions are really politicians.
I found the comments of the University of Utah regarding the folding of the Pac 12 and their not being invited to the Big 10 very compelling to what I'm trying to say. First, Utah is and was at the time already an AAU school., please note that. Their comment that the big loss was the added research revenue that they would not get by not being invited to the Big 10 and dropping out of the Pac 12 which had more AAU schools than any other conference besides the Big10, even though Utah would continue to be an AAU school. Their comments at the time indicated revenue from sports was a drop in the bucket to the added revenue from AAU research that would have been received. That was a confirmation of what others had told me.
For me I still continue to believe different from what I think you are trying to say based on what has been said, I've read, and conversations I've had, but certainly you're entitled to your opinion however you want to go with it, I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise. I've been wrong before and am open to being wrong on this. Just the evidence I have so far says to me what I have been saying throughout this thread.

This what I have been able to find out and it’s consistent with my own experience.

First, there is no connection between an athletic conference and a research grant award. Individuals apply based on a researcher’s area of interest and collaboration exists for one of two reasons. One, professional connections at the same or other universities, often because of editorial issues when the concluding paper is published (a big deal) or … a controlling university may subdivide work to other same-state schools, e.g., Tech receives a grant and awards a portion to UNG (keeping the dollars in the state).

Athletic conferences MAY have administrative cooperation to help lower costs. So grant offices across the conference standardize templates and processes to make it less burdensome when applying, but they don’t apply as a conference, or even as a school, rather the tools are distributed to individual researchers and organizations.

Conferences do get together annually for a “same Dept” meeting (e.g., all IT heads, all b school heads, etc), but there is no joint research being pursued.

As one stated, “In the Broad Agency Announcements” there is not one mention of one’s athletic conference affiliation.

It’s a talking point for university presidents but at the execution level, not so much.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

This what I have been able to find out and it’s consistent with my own experience.

First, there is no connection between an athletic conference and a research grant award. Individuals apply based on a researcher’s area of interest and collaboration exists for one of two reasons. One, professional connections at the same or other universities, often because of editorial issues when the concluding paper is published (a big deal) or … a controlling university may subdivide work to other same-state schools, e.g., Tech receives a grant and awards a portion to UNG (keeping the dollars in the state).

Athletic conferences MAY have administrative cooperation to help lower costs. So grant offices across the conference standardize templates and processes to make it less burdensome when applying, but they don’t apply as a conference, or even as a school, rather the tools are distributed to individual researchers and organizations.

Conferences do get together annually for a “same Dept” meeting (e.g., all IT heads, all b school heads, etc), but there is no joint research being pursued.

As one stated, “In the Broad Agency Announcements” there is not one mention of one’s athletic conference affiliation.

It’s a talking point for university presidents but at the execution level, not so much.

That sounds right, but is that the whole story? I’m not arguing, just thinking out loud. In other words, lots of breakthroughs in research start with informal relationships, like the business partnerships that develop on golf courses. In the scenarios you lay out I see massive amounts of potential cross pollination all because you are in an AAU conference. I would think, if I am correct, University Presidents would be well aware of this, since a lot of their job (if not most of it) is about building social capital.

Again, not arguing the basic facts as you’ve stated them, just seeing the potential for a lot more going on than initially meets the eye.

 

[stinger78]

That sounds right, but is that the whole story? I’m not arguing, just thinking out loud. In other words, lots of breakthroughs in research start with informal relationships, like the business partnerships that develop on golf courses. In the scenarios you lay out I see massive amounts of potential cross pollination all because you are in an AAU conference. I would think, if I am correct, University Presidents would be well aware of this, since a lot of their job (if not most of it) is about building social capital.

Again, not arguing the basic facts as you’ve stated them, just seeing the potential for a lot more going on than initially meets the eye.

It’s another set of relationships in the research world. To say it has no meaning seems rather naive. How much meaning probably varies across time.

 

[Vespidae]

That sounds right, but is that the whole story? I’m not arguing, just thinking out loud. In other words, lots of breakthroughs in research start with informal relationships, like the business partnerships that develop on golf courses. In the scenarios you lay out I see massive amounts of potential cross pollination all because you are in an AAU conference. I would think, if I am correct, University Presidents would be well aware of this, since a lot of their job (if not most of it) is about building social capital.

Again, not arguing the basic facts as you’ve stated them, just seeing the potential for a lot more going on than initially meets the eye.

Perhaps they do. I just looked at our department travel schedule and not one is attending anything to do with a sports or athletic conference. All are attending professional organizations to present papers or meet academic colleagues.

Do they just meet people at an event and decide to research something? Again, not really. Say my colleague got his PhD from Northwestern as did another researcher who is now employed at Notre Dame. (This has been very consistent … those from the same “tree” collaborate a lot.) Those two are likely to collaborate for the rest of their careers even if they change schools. Whats especially important are those who run the peer reviews and the publishing.

These take decades of connections to build. They don’t even cooperate INSIDE the department.

It sounds good. But it also sounds overhyped. I don’t see it. Perhaps others do.

 

[Tommy_Taylor_1972]

It was rumored that a previous AD (Bobinsky) turned down a large donation when Johnson was coach. Maybe this is the same one?

That could be as well, but what I mentioned is what the was said by the captain said to Cool Hand Luke in 1967 - The Captain's speech " What we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach." It appears that person to person communications are a thing of the past and that phone calls have gone the way of emails and texts. I guess that is a generational thing. But it is also a barrier to getting money to support our athletes. It makes the potential new high-end donors feel their money is not important. I have heard from others, even a GT basketball All-American could not get a return call from the basketball office, same for a former GT HOF head basketball coach. These are just anecdotal instances I am aware of most recently that are missed opportunities and cause a loss of interest in the programs, even to not buying season tickets and making A/T contributions. I am sure each senior administrator has people who answer the phone and inform their boss of calls (hopefully). If the calls are not at least returned, there is a problem. It was not that way only a couple years ago. If someone takes the time to reach out to the leadership, that means they care. If the leadership does not respond, that means they don't. Even a call back from the staff explaining why the boss cannot talk is helpful. Otherwise, interest is lost and hard to regain.

 

[Vespidae]

That could be as well, but what I mentioned is what the was said by the captain said to Cool Hand Luke in 1967 - The Captain's speech " What we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach." It appears that person to person communications are a thing of the past and that phone calls have gone the way of emails and texts. I guess that is a generational thing. But it is also a barrier to getting money to support our athletes. It makes the potential new high-end donors feel their money is not important. I have heard from others, even a GT basketball All-American could not get a return call from the basketball office, same for a former GT HOF head basketball coach. These are just anecdotal instances I am aware of most recently that are missed opportunities and cause a loss of interest in the programs, even to not buying season tickets and making A/T contributions. I am sure each senior administrator has people who answer the phone and inform their boss of calls (hopefully). If the calls are not at least returned, there is a problem. It was not that way only a couple years ago. If someone takes the time to reach out to the leadership, that means they care. If the leadership does not respond, that means they don't. Even a call back from the staff explaining why the boss cannot talk is helpful. Otherwise, interest is lost and hard to regain.

I know for a fact that big donors and vip’s have a special number to call. Tech has dedicated people to handle such things. By name.

I am aware that the AD’s office is in charge of donors, and they should be. A coach who goes around the AD to speak directly to a donor asking money may be effective, but what should have happened is for the same coach to ask the board prez why development isn’t working. Fix the process or replace the people.

 

[jacketup]

Ma Tech treats her students like crap. And she is consistent. She treats her alumni like crap too, which is costing the school and the AA money, but I suppose it makes the academic faculty happy.

I'd run out of space just talking about my family's personal experiences. As one friend said, if you aren't donating seven figures they don't care. And if you go a few years without donating more, they forget about you. I look at the Clemson IPTAY model--I Pay Twenty A Year--as a model for building a program. That would have to be updated for inflation, but Tech doesn't understand how a lot of small donors has the potential to be more valuable that a few big hitters--but they can have both if they would put the effort into it. But they don't.

 

[forensicbuzz]

My original comment was not about hiring people from Tech, it was about the current/recent student population's value of Tech football, I just referenced someone I interviewed. You brought up the outlier phd student.

"Student Demographics - All" means not just undergrad. That data is directly from USC's website, but does not match the google question, google just thinks it does.

Back to your original list, almost every school listed has either far larger undergrad enrollment than Tech or is dog doodoo at football. Regardless, nobody said it is solely the international population hurting GT, but to act like its not a significant contributing factor is just silly.

You referenced someone you interviewed and I countered with someone I interviewed. He just happened to be a Ph.D. instead of a BS grad. I understand the point about the Google search for USC. I was merely pointing out why I wrote 27.1%. Regardless, what it shows is that the international population has little to do with fan support,; the geekiness of our student population has little to do with fan support. But, you did hit the nail on the head. The size of the undergraduate population has EVERYTHING to do with fan support, especially when we do everything we can to alienate sidewalk fans. Our undergraduate population hovers around 12-14k, and that's our biggest hurdle, not the demographics of our undergraduate population.

This is my opinion and I'm not trying to convince you that I'm right. The numbers prove out.

 

[forensicbuzz]

Has anyone “realigned” their thinking?

I have. I used to think that the demographics of our student population had a large impact on the support our AA got. I truly believe that is not relevant and that size is everything.

 

[Tommy_Taylor_1972]

As I recall, the GTAA was the only Tech organization not required to have a formal development (donating) plan with goals, objectives, and staffing.

Just like Bud said, “My only obligation to GT athletics is to name the Athletic Director.”

Actually, according to their mission statement in their 2019 budget, GTAA is a separate corporation from Georgia Tech,
https://finance.gatech.edu/sites/de...ech_athletic_association_fs_6_30_19-final.pdf (an interesting read if you are an accountant or shareholder). I can envision the president nor athletic director actually can influence fund raising, but their performance can, since alumni and corporations like to give more for successful academic and athletic programs.

"The Georgia Tech Athletic Association (“The Association”) is a non-profit corporation organized in 1934 (along with the Letterman/T club)to administer the intercollegiate athletic programs of the Georgia Institute of Technology (“Georgia Tech”
or “the Institute”).
The primary purpose of the Association is to promote the educational programs of Georgia Tech
through student body participation in “healthful exercises, recreations, athletic games and contests”.
Although the Association is a separate entity from Georgia Tech, its role of providing the intercollegiate
athletic programs at Georgia Tech is functionally indistinguishable from the role that athletic
departments of other major U.S. universities provide for their respective universities.
The Association “develops the young people who will change the world”. Its mission is to “inspire and
empower student-athletes to be champions in academics, competition, and life” while emphasizing four
core values – excellence, innovation, teamwork, and character.

The Alexander-Tharpe Fund, Inc. (the “AT Fund”) contributes funds, as available, to the Association to
support student athletes. This support includes financial assistance in the form of scholarships, program
support, and facilities improvements. Due to their interrelationship, the AT Fund is included in the
Association’s financial statements as a blended-component unit." The A/T fund pays the in-state tuition, room, board, and books for approximately 217 GT scholarships for athletes (~$56,000/yr), while the GT institute pays the GTAA for the difference for out-of-state and international scholarship athletes (~+$30,000 each). With current costs, I figure our men's basketball team or 14 staff and 16 players has an

The primary components of noncurrent assets to the GTAA are capital assets, long-term investments held by the
Georgia Tech Foundation (“the Foundation”, another non-profit corporation), and long term pledges and other investments. The foundation operates the Tech Roll Call gifting. They operate the Blackbaud CRM (customer relationship manager) online database for Tech alumni and donors and have assigned account managers for the high-end donors.

Then, there is the NIL collective The Tech Way who collects money to be held and paid by SANIL, an private non-tax exempt company who is one of two major NIL companies for US colleges.

The Georgia Tech Alumni Association is the official non-profit incorporated alumni association for the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech). Originally known as the Georgia Tech National Alumni Association, it was chartered in June 1908 and incorporated in 1947. As of September 2019, there were approximately 166,000 living alumni of Georgia Tech. Since 2006, Georgia Tech alumni have given between $30 million to $40 million a year, providing about 30 to 40 percent of the institute's development funds. Then Georgia Tech was ranked third in alumni giving among public universities, and 26th overall. The alumni association maintains contract though registrar records of all graduates. If every alumni gave $300 per year, the donations for GT development would rise 20%.

So all the fund raising activities for Georgia Tech, outside what it receives from taxpayers through the state Board of Regents, operate as separate entities in support of mother ship Georgia Tech the institute, and have their separate boards and chief executives. And I suspect they individually compete for donations. I wonder how much the AD and the president actually have influence over the donations and who to give what to where. So maybe this is a non-matter of concern. The wealthy people are likely courted by all. I am not wealthy, but I do know that all correspondence I receive from Georgia Tech have a place to click on at the end to give money.

I learned all I know about all this on the internet and have a couple friends on various boards, but we do not discuss these things. Being a military retiree and on social security, I give a small amount to the Roll Call and The A/T fund. I sincerely do appreciate the GT basketball scholarship in 1968 when tuition was $400 a quarter (from what I heard), got a free room in Towers Dorm where my dad stayed in 1930, and ate my meals at Miss Twiggs Tavern training table on the NE end of Grant field and I somehow got out in 12 quarters. Without that scholarship, I would still be a chicken farmer in Southwest Georgia. Wait a minute, I am now moved up to being a retired pecan farmer in Southwest Georgia, but what a ride getting back to there. Life is good.

 

[Vespidae]

Actually, according to their mission statement in their 2019 budget, GTAA is a separate corporation from Georgia Tech,
https://finance.gatech.edu/sites/de...ech_athletic_association_fs_6_30_19-final.pdf (an interesting read if you are an accountant or shareholder). I can envision the president nor athletic director actually can influence fund raising, but their performance can, since alumni and corporations like to give more for successful academic and athletic programs.

"The Georgia Tech Athletic Association (“The Association”) is a non-profit corporation organized in 1934 (along with the Letterman/T club)to administer the intercollegiate athletic programs of the Georgia Institute of Technology (“Georgia Tech”
or “the Institute”).
The primary purpose of the Association is to promote the educational programs of Georgia Tech
through student body participation in “healthful exercises, recreations, athletic games and contests”.
Although the Association is a separate entity from Georgia Tech, its role of providing the intercollegiate
athletic programs at Georgia Tech is functionally indistinguishable from the role that athletic
departments of other major U.S. universities provide for their respective universities.
The Association “develops the young people who will change the world”. Its mission is to “inspire and
empower student-athletes to be champions in academics, competition, and life” while emphasizing four
core values – excellence, innovation, teamwork, and character.

The Alexander-Tharpe Fund, Inc. (the “AT Fund”) contributes funds, as available, to the Association to
support student athletes. This support includes financial assistance in the form of scholarships, program
support, and facilities improvements. Due to their interrelationship, the AT Fund is included in the
Association’s financial statements as a blended-component unit." The A/T fund pays the in-state tuition, room, board, and books for approximately 217 GT scholarships for athletes (~$56,000/yr), while the GT institute pays the GTAA for the difference for out-of-state and international scholarship athletes (~+$30,000 each). With current costs, I figure our men's basketball team or 14 staff and 16 players has an

The primary components of noncurrent assets to the GTAA are capital assets, long-term investments held by the
Georgia Tech Foundation (“the Foundation”, another non-profit corporation), and long term pledges and other investments. The foundation operates the Tech Roll Call gifting. They operate the Blackbaud CRM (customer relationship manager) online database for Tech alumni and donors and have assigned account managers for the high-end donors.

Then, there is the NIL collective The Tech Way who collects money to be held and paid by SANIL, an private non-tax exempt company who is one of two major NIL companies for US colleges.

The Georgia Tech Alumni Association is the official non-profit incorporated alumni association for the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech). Originally known as the Georgia Tech National Alumni Association, it was chartered in June 1908 and incorporated in 1947. As of September 2019, there were approximately 166,000 living alumni of Georgia Tech. Since 2006, Georgia Tech alumni have given between $30 million to $40 million a year, providing about 30 to 40 percent of the institute's development funds. Then Georgia Tech was ranked third in alumni giving among public universities, and 26th overall. The alumni association maintains contract though registrar records of all graduates. If every alumni gave $300 per year, the donations for GT development would rise 20%.

So all the fund raising activities for Georgia Tech, outside what it receives from taxpayers through the state Board of Regents, operate as separate entities in support of mother ship Georgia Tech the institute, and have their separate boards and chief executives. And I suspect they individually compete for donations. I wonder how much the AD and the president actually have influence over the donations and who to give what to where. So maybe this is a non-matter of concern. The wealthy people are likely courted by all. I am not wealthy, but I do know that all correspondence I receive from Georgia Tech have a place to click on at the end to give money.

I learned all I know about all this on the internet and have a couple friends on various boards, but we do not discuss these things. Being a military retiree and on social security, I give a small amount to the Roll Call and The A/T fund. I sincerely do appreciate the GT basketball scholarship in 1968 when tuition was $400 a quarter (from what I heard), got a free room in Towers Dorm where my dad stayed in 1930, and ate my meals at Miss Twiggs Tavern training table on the NE end of Grant field and I somehow got out in 12 quarters. Without that scholarship, I would still be a chicken farmer in Southwest Georgia. Wait a minute, I am now moved up to being a retired pecan farmer in Southwest Georgia, but what a ride getting back to there. Life is good.

Nevertheless… Bud required all schools at the Institute to have a fundraising ability, he did not require the GTAA to do so even though he was president of that as well.

 

[Tommy_Taylor_1972]

Ma Tech treats her students like crap. And she is consistent. She treats her alumni like crap too, which is costing the school and the AA money, but I suppose it makes the academic faculty happy.

I'd run out of space just talking about my family's personal experiences. As one friend said, if you aren't donating seven figures they don't care. And if you go a few years without donating more, they forget about you. I look at the Clemson IPTAY model--I Pay Twenty A Year--as a model for building a program. That would have to be updated for inflation, but Tech doesn't understand how a lot of small donors has the potential to be more valuable that a few big hitters--but they can have both if they would put the effort into it. But they don't.

When I was a Tech 1968-72, it was IPTAY "I pay ten a year" for Clemson. I agree with you about GT not putting students last. Making them stand outside in the freezing cold until on hour before basketball game time, along with all the handicapped and elderly alumni and visitors. Of course the contract our the operation and event management at the basketball games and GT leadership are all inside warm. They even treat the faculty as bad, making them pay for faculty parking spaces at $800 per year and having no parking places for football and basketball games, since they hire out a parking company who sell all the spaces. And they treat women faculty like they did in the 1960's, underpaid and overworked and under-promoted. Non-tenured men with masters degrees make twice as much as tenured women professors. My personal situation is my niece, who came to Tech in a masters in industrial design program and finished her education being the first PhD in Industrial Design. She worked her way up from assistant professor to a tenured associate professor in the school of Industrial Design and associate chair. As well she was underpaid as well as receiving harassment from male supervisors. She was recruited and offered the chair of the industrial design school in the world's #1 industrial design college in London. She put up with Tech for 20 years and will never return. Georgia Tech misses so many opportunities for doing what is right for the students and faculty. It's all about the shiny object growth from industry, the department of defense in research funds, and recently wealthy donors. Hence we gent Hyundai field and expansion beyond the budget, which invites more industry to pour in money. Before I retired from the military-industry complex, around the early two thousands, I began to see the swing of GT from focus on student and faculty to focus on growth and development, led by those with a management style of building and hoping they will come and not doing proper risk assessment of return on investments. Tech's heritage began to be whitewashed over and every part of Tech became a profit-loss center, which usually does not fit well with a charity tax-exempt entity. Now it is about survival through getting more money to pay the bills, and pay athletics bills through a richer big donor fan/corporate experience. I hope I am wrong in hearing that the now Letterwinners Club (former T-Club) lounge at the north end of Grant Field will be the Hyundai suite after remodeling/destroying the Edge building. Industry, like most big donors, give big bucks so they can have a say in how things are run. The horse is riding the cowboy in an up side down new world world of business oriented management. Most business go out of business a long before Georgia Tech has been a well-respected academic institution. No point in complaining if you are just an military retired social security alumni. I am sure most of our 175,000 alumni can find other things to donate to if they are not appreciated.

 

[Vespidae]

Making them stand outside in the freezing cold until on hour before basketball game time, along with all the handicapped and elderly alumni and visitors. Of course the contract our the operation and event management at the basketball games and GT leadership are all inside warm. They even treat the faculty as bad, making them pay for faculty parking spaces at $800 per year and having no parking places for football and basketball games, since they hire out a parking company who sell all the spaces.

FWIW, other universities do the same. Student seating is first come first serve and I’m familiar with students sleeping, in the snow, for seats.

As to parking, Georgia universities used to provide free parking to faculty. It was the Legislature, not the universitities, that required faculty to pay for parking. They also banned state funds to pay for coffee!

A lot of the complaints I read directed at Tech are should be directed at the State government. Tech is simply complying with the law.

 

[Root4GT]

You referenced someone you interviewed and I countered with someone I interviewed. He just happened to be a Ph.D. instead of a BS grad. I understand the point about the Google search for USC. I was merely pointing out why I wrote 27.1%. Regardless, what it shows is that the international population has little to do with fan support,; the geekiness of our student population has little to do with fan support. But, you did hit the nail on the head. The size of the undergraduate population has EVERYTHING to do with fan support, especially when we do everything we can to alienate sidewalk fans. Our undergraduate population hovers around 12-14k, and that's our biggest hurdle, not the demographics of our undergraduate population.

This is my opinion and I'm not trying to convince you that I'm right. The numbers prove out.

I would say size is the biggest issue but the demographic/interests of our undergrads is a force multiplier to our attendance problems.

 

[TampaBuzz]

This is a misleading comment. The correct comment was that ESPN and others wanted an SEC team in the 4-team playoff, and this was the only way to accomplish it. Either undefeated FSU or undefeated Washington was going to have to be left out. FSU's QB getting hurt gave them an avenue to argue it (although a weak argument). Had uga won, FSU would have been in the 4-team playoff. Had Texas, Washington, or Michigan lost in their championship game, FSU would have been in the 4-team playoff. Had Auburn beat Alabama and Alabama beat uga, uga and FSU would have been in the 4-team playoff.

They coulda left Texas out, but SEC/ESPN was gonna complain about that too.

 

[TechPhi97]

Actually, according to their mission statement in their 2019 budget, GTAA is a separate corporation from Georgia Tech,
https://finance.gatech.edu/sites/de...ech_athletic_association_fs_6_30_19-final.pdf (an interesting read if you are an accountant or shareholder). I can envision the president nor athletic director actually can influence fund raising, but their performance can, since alumni and corporations like to give more for successful academic and athletic programs.

"The Georgia Tech Athletic Association (“The Association”) is a non-profit corporation organized in 1934 (along with the Letterman/T club)to administer the intercollegiate athletic programs of the Georgia Institute of Technology (“Georgia Tech”
or “the Institute”).
The primary purpose of the Association is to promote the educational programs of Georgia Tech
through student body participation in “healthful exercises, recreations, athletic games and contests”.
Although the Association is a separate entity from Georgia Tech, its role of providing the intercollegiate
athletic programs at Georgia Tech is functionally indistinguishable from the role that athletic
departments of other major U.S. universities provide for their respective universities.
The Association “develops the young people who will change the world”. Its mission is to “inspire and
empower student-athletes to be champions in academics, competition, and life” while emphasizing four
core values – excellence, innovation, teamwork, and character.

The Alexander-Tharpe Fund, Inc. (the “AT Fund”) contributes funds, as available, to the Association to
support student athletes. This support includes financial assistance in the form of scholarships, program
support, and facilities improvements. Due to their interrelationship, the AT Fund is included in the
Association’s financial statements as a blended-component unit." The A/T fund pays the in-state tuition, room, board, and books for approximately 217 GT scholarships for athletes (~$56,000/yr), while the GT institute pays the GTAA for the difference for out-of-state and international scholarship athletes (~+$30,000 each). With current costs, I figure our men's basketball team or 14 staff and 16 players has an

The primary components of noncurrent assets to the GTAA are capital assets, long-term investments held by the
Georgia Tech Foundation (“the Foundation”, another non-profit corporation), and long term pledges and other investments. The foundation operates the Tech Roll Call gifting. They operate the Blackbaud CRM (customer relationship manager) online database for Tech alumni and donors and have assigned account managers for the high-end donors.

Then, there is the NIL collective The Tech Way who collects money to be held and paid by SANIL, an private non-tax exempt company who is one of two major NIL companies for US colleges.

The Georgia Tech Alumni Association is the official non-profit incorporated alumni association for the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech). Originally known as the Georgia Tech National Alumni Association, it was chartered in June 1908 and incorporated in 1947. As of September 2019, there were approximately 166,000 living alumni of Georgia Tech. Since 2006, Georgia Tech alumni have given between $30 million to $40 million a year, providing about 30 to 40 percent of the institute's development funds. Then Georgia Tech was ranked third in alumni giving among public universities, and 26th overall. The alumni association maintains contract though registrar records of all graduates. If every alumni gave $300 per year, the donations for GT development would rise 20%.

So all the fund raising activities for Georgia Tech, outside what it receives from taxpayers through the state Board of Regents, operate as separate entities in support of mother ship Georgia Tech the institute, and have their separate boards and chief executives. And I suspect they individually compete for donations. I wonder how much the AD and the president actually have influence over the donations and who to give what to where. So maybe this is a non-matter of concern. The wealthy people are likely courted by all. I am not wealthy, but I do know that all correspondence I receive from Georgia Tech have a place to click on at the end to give money.

I learned all I know about all this on the internet and have a couple friends on various boards, but we do not discuss these things. Being a military retiree and on social security, I give a small amount to the Roll Call and The A/T fund. I sincerely do appreciate the GT basketball scholarship in 1968 when tuition was $400 a quarter (from what I heard), got a free room in Towers Dorm where my dad stayed in 1930, and ate my meals at Miss Twiggs Tavern training table on the NE end of Grant field and I somehow got out in 12 quarters. Without that scholarship, I would still be a chicken farmer in Southwest Georgia. Wait a minute, I am now moved up to being a retired pecan farmer in Southwest Georgia, but what a ride getting back to there. Life is good.

You can see the governance structure of the GTAA here. The relevant portion:

The voting membership of the Board of Trustees of the Association shall consist of the President of the Georgia Institute of Technology; the Treasurer of the Association, who shall be the Executive Vice-President for Administration and Finance of the Georgia Institute of Technology; eleven (11) members of the faculty/administration of the Georgia Institute of Technology, of whom nine (9) of the eleven (11) must be members of the academic faculty (one of whom shall be designated by the President of the Georgia Institute of Technology as the Faculty Athletics Representative); seven (7) alumni; and three (3) students of the Georgia Institute of Technology.

So, it's not like they are off competing against each other, per se. The President and the Executive VP for Administration and Finance at GT are on the board, along with 11 faculty, 7 alumni and 3 students. This is why the support of the President is so important.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I have. I used to think that the demographics of our student population had a large impact on the support our AA got. I truly believe that is not relevant and that size is everything.

So you’re saying if the student body is good sized we have a chance

 

[Techwood Relict]

If someone takes the time to reach out to the leadership, that means they care. If the leadership does not respond, that means they don't.

Be punctual, return your phone calls, and work hard. Rule of success says 2 of 3 at minimum. I'm bad at punctual (beaten into me by marriage and 5 children), so I do the last two better.

I'm extraordinarily frustrated that the lack of personal touch would lead to lost opportunities at high level donations. But then again, maybe it's generational and I'm just old.

You donors get outta my yard!

 

[Northeast Stinger]

FWIW, other universities do the same. Student seating is first come first serve and I’m familiar with students sleeping, in the snow, for seats.

As to parking, Georgia universities used to provide free parking to faculty. It was the Legislature, not the universitities, that required faculty to pay for parking. They also banned state funds to pay for coffee!

A lot of the complaints I read directed at Tech are should be directed at the State government. Tech is simply complying with the law.

My friend who teaches at uga says it’s the same there if not worse.