Widgets Magazine
Page 5 of 43 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 1074
  1. #101
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,025
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    It's hard to read that and not view it as him dogging out Boren in many ways.

    I still wonder how the regents regarded Boren towards the end of his tenure; perhaps they felt largely the same way and specifically sought someone with a strong business background to correct what they perceived as major issues.

    It just all seems strange to me. Boren served that university for a long time and few can challenge his love and dedication for the school. It all seems a bit ham-fisted to talk about Boren in this way but on the other hand it may be needed in order for Gallogly to make the change he believes is now necessary.
    Context to previous decisions is very important. The self serving rants do nothing to provide context and Boren is not going to get into a mud wrestling contest. Universities are not corporations and should not be run as such. The common right wing thread these days is that in society, the MOST important thing in society is the money. Gallogy has made NO mention of any vision for academic excelllence, free thought, diversity, etc. except in passing. While I cannot argue for fiscal irresponsibility, it seems Boren had noble dreams for a UNIVERSITY and then worked on making them happen. Gallogy is about budgets and control, and positioning himself as a "savior". He will have little power with our state legislature and will fund the UofO more and more with corporate funds. Corporations are about universities for training their work force, and not necessarily for training citizens to think for themselves, to challenge long established social norms (cough, cough, good ole boys in control).

  2. #102

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    ^

    Many people will have the same reaction given his comments.

    Certainly Gallogy knows this so I suspect he is being somewhat strong in order to grease the skids for what he feels is needed structural change.

    In other words, he has to first spell out why the change is needed before he commences a sweeping plan. And such big changes imply a fundamental disagreement with previous decisions.

  3. Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Rover View Post
    Context to previous decisions is very important. The self serving rants do nothing to provide context and Boren is not going to get into a mud wrestling contest. Universities are not corporations and should not be run as such. The common right wing thread these days is that in society, the MOST important thing in society is the money. Gallogy has made NO mention of any vision for academic excelllence, free thought, diversity, etc. except in passing. While I cannot argue for fiscal irresponsibility, it seems Boren had noble dreams for a UNIVERSITY and then worked on making them happen. Gallogy is about budgets and control, and positioning himself as a "savior". He will have little power with our state legislature and will fund the UofO more and more with corporate funds. Corporations are about universities for training their work force, and not necessarily for training citizens to think for themselves, to challenge long established social norms (cough, cough, good ole boys in control).
    We should probably just flip out two weeks into someone taking a different approach than his predecessor took over the last 20 years. I’m not sure why the fact that he’s conservative and a business person is making everyone trip out. Boren was a politician with no academic background before taking over at OU and did well. For the record Gallogly has made comments about his academic visions for the future of the university in previous statements but the financials are the most pressing issue right now so that appears to be what he’s handling first. I think Boren did a good job but had overstayed his welcome which from what I heard is how the regents felt and wanted to go in a different direction. Boren definitely pissed off a lot of large donors with his tendancy to get too political so I’m sure that had something to do with their decision to bring in someone with a different background given the university’s financial situation.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,025
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Other than a few offhand comments in a general way saying academics will be important (duh), he has articulated no particular vision. He is a CFO more than a university president. He didn't start off evaluating deans and professors. He didn't debunk the new colleges because they were bad for student development or academic achievement, but for rosy estimations of occupancy (like one evaluates an apartment building). He's been there two weeks (actually involved longer), but his focus is clear, and it isn't academics. It's about getting research contracts in (guess who those will benefit), and getting his administrative team in place so he can turn OU into a corporation. Doesn't take long to see what is top of mind to Gallogy.

  5. #105

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by PhiAlpha View Post
    We should probably just flip out two weeks into someone taking a different approach than his predecessor took over the last 20 years. I’m not sure why the fact that he’s conservative and a business person is making everyone trip out. Boren was a politician with no academic background before taking over at OU and did well. For the record Gallogly has made comments about his academic visions for the future of the university in previous statements but the financials are the most pressing issue right now so that appears to be what he’s handling first. I think Boren did a good job but had overstayed his welcome which from what I heard is how the regents felt and wanted to go in a different direction. Boren definitely pissed off a lot of large donors with his tendancy to get too political so I’m sure that had something to do with their decision to bring in someone with a different background given the university’s financial situation.
    I know there was significant friction between some of the very big money at ou and Boren based on how he handled Joe Mixon vs. the SAE scandals. It's ultimately why he "retired".

  6. #106

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by PhiAlpha View Post
    We should probably just flip out two weeks into someone taking a different approach than his predecessor took over the last 20 years. Iím not sure why the fact that heís conservative and a business person is making everyone trip out. Boren was a politician with no academic background before taking over at OU and did well. For the record Gallogly has made comments about his academic visions for the future of the university in previous statements but the financials are the most pressing issue right now so that appears to be what heís handling first. I think Boren did a good job but had overstayed his welcome which from what I heard is how the regents felt and wanted to go in a different direction. Boren definitely pissed off a lot of large donors with his tendancy to get too political so Iím sure that had something to do with their decision to bring in someone with a different background given the universityís financial situation.
    Some are leary of this individual based on the fact that those conservatives he aligns with in the legislature have contributed to the financial woes by slashing higher ed appropriations. Add to this he came from an industry that enjoyed massive tax cuts and tax incentives that were paid through these cuts.

  7. #107

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by king183 View Post
    Also a good sign in my opinion is his refusal to gloss over intentionally opaque financial information that no one understood.
    That's part of why I'm squinting at him from the start. His big excitement about "a billion dollars of debt!" was nothing more than scaring people with a big number while failing to acknowledge that bonded debt for capital projects is completely normal for a public institution and is not the same thing as an institution simply being in debt because they're spending more than they take in. He either doesn't know what he is doing and is demonstrating that up-front, or he does and is presenting the facts deceptively to the public to exaggerate the university's financial status. Neither option is good for OU or the state.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rover View Post
    Other than a few offhand comments in a general way saying academics will be important (duh), he has articulated no particular vision. He is a CFO more than a university president. He didn't start off evaluating deans and professors. He didn't debunk the new colleges because they were bad for student development or academic achievement, but for rosy estimations of occupancy (like one evaluates an apartment building). He's been there two weeks (actually involved longer), but his focus is clear, and it isn't academics. It's about getting research contracts in (guess who those will benefit), and getting his administrative team in place so he can turn OU into a corporation. Doesn't take long to see what is top of mind to Gallogy.
    All of this.

  8. Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Jersey Boss View Post
    Some are leary of this individual based on the fact that those conservatives he aligns with in the legislature have contributed to the financial woes by slashing higher ed appropriations. Add to this he came from an industry that enjoyed massive tax cuts and tax incentives that were paid through these cuts.
    Post definitive proof to back this claim up. Please show that money was cut from education as a result of tax incentives and tax cuts given to the oil and gas industry. Show how any new taxes cuts or incentives are massive compared to any other industry.

  9. #109

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by PhiAlpha View Post
    Post definitive proof to back this claim up. Please show that money was cut from education as a result of tax incentives and tax cuts given to the oil and gas industry. Show how any new taxes cuts or incentives are massive compared to any other industry.
    This touches on that. And the GPT is quite industry specific.
    https://www.reuters.com/investigates...oklahoma-bust/

  10. #110

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    From the above link:
    The wind industry received tax credits and exemptions worth $306 million from 2004 to 2015, the Oklahoma Tax Commission said. State revenue data reviewed by Reuters show the horizontal-drilling tax breaks topped $1 billion between fiscal years 2012 and 2015 alone.

    Then there is this: https://newsok.com/article/5553048/o...gher-education

    ...most states reported five-year increases in state support for higher education for the fiscal years 2012 to 2017 that ranged from 2.1 percent to 51.4 percent.

    Seven states, however, reported five-year declines that ranged from 1.8 percent (Kansas and Arkansas) to 17.8 percent (Oklahoma).

    I guess those education loses were the result of state employee pay raises, tax breaks for renewables, funding for social services, increased spending on mental health and other spending schemes.
    Now show me comparable breaks for other industries such as the one that pays oil and gas credits when they are not even producing a product.

    From March 2016 http://oklahomawatch.org/2016/03/30/...big-tax-break/
    The Oklahoma Tax Commission estimates the state will pay out $158 million in rebates next year to operators of “economically at-risk” wells that are no longer profitable at current oil and gas prices.

    Two years ago, before prices plunged, those rebates totaled just $11 million.


    Now the ball is in your court friend. Show me and the rest of us how "everyone is flipping out because he is a conservative and business man".

  11. #111

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Joe Castiglione was recently asked about beer sales and said he did not see it happening outside of the premium areas. He, of course, could be lying/unwilling to divulge future plans, but based on that response, it probably won't be as quickly as some hope.
    https://pistolsfiringblog.com/oklaho...games-in-2018/
    OSU takes the lead in state.

  12. #112

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Beer in the stadium was never going to happen under Boren. In fact, he banned it after one game right after the club area opened in the east upper deck. Then, in an odd attempt to persuade members they never existed, had the beer taps camouflaged. Sometime down the road beer was added back but it demonstrates how oddly uncomfortable Boren was with the whole matter.

    I don't expect to see beer sales everywhere in the stadium this season, but at least now the idea can be fully considered where before there was no point for Joe C to even think through the pros and cons.

    And I have to say as a beer lover and season ticket holder, it's not a big deal to me to do without it.

  13. #113
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,025
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Jersey Boss View Post
    OSU has always been known to be a beer guzzling school. This is no surprise.

  14. #114

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Jersey Boss View Post
    Takes the lead? There are far fewer schools selling alcohol than not selling alcohol. And it is not like it will make a difference in the garbage product they have on the field (except maybe people will stay the whole game). But financially, it is negligible, at best. UT didn't make that much money in beer sales, so you are greatly overstating the effect of this.

  15. #115

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    Beer in the stadium was never going to happen under Boren. In fact, he banned it after one game right after the club area opened in the east upper deck. Then, in an odd attempt to persuade members they never existed, had the beer taps camouflaged. Sometime down the road beer was added back but it demonstrates how oddly uncomfortable Boren was with the whole matter.

    I don't expect to see beer sales everywhere in the stadium this season, but at least now the idea can be fully considered where before there was no point for Joe C to even think through the pros and cons.

    And I have to say as a beer lover and season ticket holder, it's not a big deal to me to do without it.
    this is spot on beer sales have slowing been creeping back into OU sports for years now (east club pregame basketball in courtside club then half time basketball in courtside club sante lounge, south club level ect)

    i would expect baseball and softball to get beer sales either this season or next (as a test case) then basketball/football to be the year after those

  16. #116

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    Beer in the stadium was never going to happen under Boren. In fact, he banned it after one game right after the club area opened in the east upper deck. Then, in an odd attempt to persuade members they never existed, had the beer taps camouflaged. Sometime down the road beer was added back but it demonstrates how oddly uncomfortable Boren was with the whole matter.

    I don't expect to see beer sales everywhere in the stadium this season, but at least now the idea can be fully considered where before there was no point for Joe C to even think through the pros and cons.

    And I have to say as a beer lover and season ticket holder, it's not a big deal to me to do without it.
    Beer was available for 1 game about 10-12 years ago.
    They brought it back to the Santee Lounge several years ago. Until last year one could not bring beer outside of the santee lounge in to their seats. Last year i believed the rule changed. Also i think there is a limit of 1 per person into the seating area.

    I can remember when the Santee lounge had 2 sides. The north side was smoking and the south side was smoke free.

  17. #117

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    And of course, beer and alcohol flow freely in the OU football suites.

  18. #118

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    And of course, beer and alcohol flow freely in the OU football suites.
    And OU makes a pretty penny leasing those out. If beer was sold to plebs, the suites might lose some of their luster.

  19. #119

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by jonny d View Post
    UT didn't make that much money in beer sales, so you are greatly overstating the effect of this.
    Really? I guess it is all ones perspective of what is "overstating the effect of this".
    https://www.chron.com/business/bizfe...s-10810944.php
    This was the second year that beer, wine and liquor sales were permissible at the home stadium of the Texas Longhorns. The school took in $3.1 million in revenue on alcoholic beverages sales, the newspaper reported. That compares with $1.8 million the previous season

  20. #120

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    And I have to say as a beer lover and season ticket holder, it's not a big deal to me to do without it.
    No doubt Pete this issue by itself is not "a big deal" . However this is also a part of the fan experience that OU does not seem to be improving on for the great unwashed. Multiple start times of 11 am, the erosion of the tailgating areas for the average fan while enabling the "tailgate boys " to profit off this reality are certainly not fan friendly or enhancing the experience. While I have heard the reasons for the 11 am start as "out of our control, TV determines this" the school has been able to tell the networks that OU-TEXAS will not be played with a 6pm start time.

  21. #121

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Jersey Boss View Post
    No doubt Pete this issue by itself is not "a big deal" . However this is also a part of the fan experience that OU does not seem to be improving on for the great unwashed. Multiple start times of 11 am, the erosion of the tailgating areas for the average fan while enabling the "tailgate boys " to profit off this reality are certainly not fan friendly.
    Yes, and Joe C -- being the smart man that he is -- understands it is harder and harder to get people to leave their home theaters and kegerators.

    Especially when staying home is free and actually buying a ticket is getting pretty darn expensive.

  22. #122

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    Yes, and Joe C -- being the smart man that he is -- understands it is harder and harder to get people to leave their home theaters and kegerators.

    Especially when staying home is free and actually buying a ticket is getting pretty darn expensive.
    You are correct about that.
    From 2015:
    http://www.oudaily.com/sports/oklaho...4930d8855.html

  23. #123

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    And of course, beer and alcohol flow freely in the OU football suites.
    im sure you are aware but for others that might not ... suites are leased space really no different then a condo

  24. #124

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt

    technically TU took the lead in the state, they have been serving beer for a few years now. But yes OSU is in front of OU on this issue.

    I could be wrong but i think once all of the southside club level seats are in 3 year contracts, then we will see beer for the rest of the stadium. Thats a huge selling point for those seats.

  25. #125

    Default Re: OU losing $36 million per year, facing nearly $1 billion in debt


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-04-2014, 02:19 PM
  2. Replies: 39
    Last Post: 10-16-2012, 11:26 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-04-2012, 04:22 PM
  4. Blinds.com CEO Builds $75 Million Company Debt Free
    By metro in forum Current Events & Open Topic
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-30-2010, 08:54 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO