Massaro on youtube with Chip Walters
- Thread starter SpaceRaider
- Start date
if you have a 3rd of the money, why not start the projects you can.
I don’t understand why they won’t start the IPF and fable offices to get them out of the Murph.
I'll believe $100 million worth of construction when I see it. I call BS. He tried to make it sound like we are less than a year away from announcing the actual beginning of the project. We'll be in a recession in ~12ish months and that will just be used as an excuse/crutch for continued mediocrity and ineptitude.
Yea I would start the projects we can. My church is adding onto our current building and not financing any of it. Once we have enough money for phase 1 we complete that and then start phase 2 when the money is raised for that. I would think they could do the same.
As far as recession goes it could happen soon or could not. If there is one I do not think it will be a big one at all. I think we are hearing about a pending recession because some in the media want it to occur before the election to vote Trump out of office. Talking about it could bring consumer and producer confidence down and then who knows. I am not saying it will not happen in the next 12 months or so, but it is so hard to predict exactly when. There will be a recession in the future though and then a recovery just like there always is.
As far as recession goes it could happen soon or could not. If there is one I do not think it will be a big one at all. I think we are hearing about a pending recession because some in the media want it to occur before the election to vote Trump out of office. Talking about it could bring consumer and producer confidence down and then who knows. I am not saying it will not happen in the next 12 months or so, but it is so hard to predict exactly when. There will be a recession in the future though and then a recovery just like there always is.
Getting just a little political there with your opinions, crposton? I do agree completely with the first and last sentences in your second paragraph.
As for starting the first phase with what has been "donated": We don't know is how much of the supposed $35 +/- million raised has stipulations attached and just what those stipulations are. As an example someone could have pledged a significant donation but with the requirement that the entire project be funded before they would submit their pledged funds.
Couple of things. Two positive. One less so.
1. Cut them some slack. They are giving us information we have been asking for even if every question is not answered. As for the negative, it would be nice if they would engage like this before everyone has become disenfranchised. This is where MT leadership has failed to understand its customer before its too late.
2. I think it's a positive they are still in a silent phase though it's obviously not so silent now given this info. I personally don't think it makes any difference to quietly raise funds, but I guess some genius fundraiser has advised on how you show how much you've already raised before you announce it publicly to make more people want to donate. Maybe it makes a difference. I don't know. Seems like smoke and mirrors to me, and you will only get as much as your fundraisers are good at fundraising regardless of the method. Anyway, I would guess that's why they haven't started moving dirt.
The things that would be really good to know if they are going to keep doing these...
1. How much of the $35 million raised is student fee or university generated? In other words, how much has actually been donated?
2. Have they already begun the paper process with the state? Hell, it will probably take years just to get the state to approve everything and that's if we have the money in hand. Would like to know are they staying ahead of that aspect of it.
3. If they are staying ahead of it how much longer will the silent phase last and will they move to begin construction as soon as they announce a public campaign? Just to get a better sense of timing. Another way to put that...if we raise most by x date we will begin by z. Or if they don't have it all or not close to it all we will use the initial funds and begin construction by x date with an initial phased approach. So, how soon will they begin the first phase of the project if they are still well short of the goal?
1. Cut them some slack. They are giving us information we have been asking for even if every question is not answered. As for the negative, it would be nice if they would engage like this before everyone has become disenfranchised. This is where MT leadership has failed to understand its customer before its too late.
2. I think it's a positive they are still in a silent phase though it's obviously not so silent now given this info. I personally don't think it makes any difference to quietly raise funds, but I guess some genius fundraiser has advised on how you show how much you've already raised before you announce it publicly to make more people want to donate. Maybe it makes a difference. I don't know. Seems like smoke and mirrors to me, and you will only get as much as your fundraisers are good at fundraising regardless of the method. Anyway, I would guess that's why they haven't started moving dirt.
The things that would be really good to know if they are going to keep doing these...
1. How much of the $35 million raised is student fee or university generated? In other words, how much has actually been donated?
2. Have they already begun the paper process with the state? Hell, it will probably take years just to get the state to approve everything and that's if we have the money in hand. Would like to know are they staying ahead of that aspect of it.
3. If they are staying ahead of it how much longer will the silent phase last and will they move to begin construction as soon as they announce a public campaign? Just to get a better sense of timing. Another way to put that...if we raise most by x date we will begin by z. Or if they don't have it all or not close to it all we will use the initial funds and begin construction by x date with an initial phased approach. So, how soon will they begin the first phase of the project if they are still well short of the goal?
Ok, I’ll bite.
I say the the $35 million CM claims to already have in hand represents the $50 student fee increase portion dedicated to facility upgrade. It’s misleading. He makes it sound like they have been diligently working behind the scenes reaching out to donors gauging interest for individuals giving levels and raising money in his “quiet phase”. Anyone in here been contacted by Massaro, Blackburn or the BRAA? Not me. But then again, I don’t think he wants to hear what I have to say about the state of the program.
If someone has a different explanation, feel free to weigh in.
That's why I would like to know how much is actually donated funds vs. university generated in the post above.
I hope you're wrong. That would be a painful truth though it wouldn't surprise me.
Unless the new Board of Trustees can get loans approved through the School Bonding Authority and assuming there is an independent MTSU Foundation that can pay for it, then TBOR Facilities must still approve the plan and the revenue streams to build it. They must have a certain percentage of funds in hand. This can be verified with a quick call to Dick Tracy, Executive Dir. of Facilities Development at the TBOR for a breakdown of any proposal that has been submitted for approval.
I don't claim to know any specifics regarding the $35 million. I'm skeptical that it would be made up entirely of a $50 per student fee increase. That would represent 35 years of student fees. 20,000 students X $50 X 35 years = $35 million. If I were just hazarding a guess, the $35 million is probably made up of some amount from student fees, some amount from other university related sources, some amount that has actually been donated, and some amount that has been pledged to be donated once other funding is secured. That is pure speculation on my part.
I should have been clearer. There is a $50 increase to the 2019-2020 full time student fee of $935 for taking 12 hours or greater of which $240 is specifically earmarked for Athletics. I have no idea how SM and CM do their accounting.
Not political just telling the truth. Did not say if I agreed or not. Recession was brought up so I responded.
That is true, but I would hope they would want the projects started. Especially if that is enough to complete the IPF. I do not care if the money is generated or donated as long as it gets done.
The IPF cost thing is crazy. That could be a corrugated metal building that can be built easily for under 500k and it would be a nice one at that.
"We're waiting to do it all at once". There you go. Capital dumbass move right there. We got 35 mill ready to spend and we're waiting. They are putting more effort into golf than football right now.
Bingo. I’ve said the same thing. Tan prefab metal and brick it up about 6 ft all the way around the bottom and out windows all the way around the top and call it a day. Would still blend perfectly with rest of campus.
I drove by UAB on the way to Florida...I love their covered field...inexpensive, easy to brand, makes the field usable year round. It cost them $4.7M
From 2016...It's possible, and it's happening at UAB, which is breaking ground this month on what may be major college football's first "indoor" practice facility that's not actually enclosed. Ingram knows no other schools that have done this. UAB is putting a pavilion roof over a 100-yard field without climate-controlled walls.
From 2016...It's possible, and it's happening at UAB, which is breaking ground this month on what may be major college football's first "indoor" practice facility that's not actually enclosed. Ingram knows no other schools that have done this. UAB is putting a pavilion roof over a 100-yard field without climate-controlled walls.
Similar threads
