Why I said "No" to the Cornell Fund

(A letter to the Cornell Fund folks in Alumni Affairs & Development, as well as Athletics Development. CCd to assorted people.)


This evening I received a call from a nice young lady, a junior at Cornell, thanking me for my past generosity with donations to the University, and asking me to consider a donation to the Cornell Fund again this year.

I thought about it for a moment, and then said no.

Right now, I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of giving money to Cornell University. I'm very clear on the idea that I won't be giving any more money to Cornell Athletics anytime soon, and I need to think very carefully about the possibility of supporting the University in other, directed ways. I think I've given something to Cornell every year since I graduated in 1989. I gather that's noteworthy. But right now, the sour taste in my mouth is too sharp.

Cornell Athletics has disgusted several dozen active alumni, in class years ranging from the '60s to 2002, sufficiently that they all signed a letter that has garnered absolutely no response. (The letter went to higher-ups in Athletics, as well as President Rawlings and AA&D VP Inge Reichenbach.) Dozens more have been vocal on the subject, and hundreds of alumni, parents of student athletes, and friends of athletic programs are directly affected.

The problem, in a nutshell, is a series of missteps and hurt feelings surrounding a decision by Athletics to contract with an outside entity to let fans listen to games on the Internet, when for five years this had been free, and could easily have been free again. Athletics representatives have said they are so offended by a single individual fan's words and actions that they are unwilling to deal with this person ever again, and they've pulled the plug on the free, volunteer-run "hockeycam" online video that many players' parents praised last season. That individual has said he'd apologize for his side of the issue; Anita Brenner at Athletics has told me, straight out, that they won't.

My friend Ken Deschere '71 has commented that the real shame of this situation is that, despite a strong Cornell Hockey program and season, Athletics has created such a distraction that many of the program's staunchest supporters are disgustedly focused on that.

We're not talking about a couple dozen whiny 22-year-olds who are sore at being asked to pay $6.95 a month. We're talking about people who each spend hundreds or thousands of dollars a winter following the Big Red around the northeast when they can, and like to listen online when they can't. They're some of our most active alumni, some of the people I know we most desperately need to stay in touch with, and keep on our side. They also donate, sometimes to excess. I've done a rough estimate, and I think I've shuffled $1,500 or so from my pockets to Cornell Athletics over the last decade or so, NOT counting ticket prices. These alumni are people who would pay if they were asked in a reasonable manner to pay for a reasonable service that offered reasonable value, and I told Athletics as much when they asked for my input well before they finalized their plans this summer.

Personally, I HAVE been paying $6.95 a month since September, because I travel a lot, and I feel cheated. Why? Because Athletics contracted with a service provider that doesn't actually provide a working service. They don't have the advertised cross-platform service; their Macintosh software is in beta (pre-release) test... and the beta version I downloaded and installed in September EXPIRED in October. Imagine being on the road with your laptop, tuning in to listen to a game, and being told you can't because your software has expired. By the time you can download a newer version via your slow modem connection, of course, the game is over.

Other paying customers have also been screaming because the service was simply unavailable for the pregame show and one period of last month's Brown game, and again for much of the Sunday afternoon game against Boston University this past weekend. (I was at these games, so wasn't trying to listen to them online.) Condescendingly telling people they should pay for something they've been enjoying for free, and then failing to deliver it, is mind-numbingly crass.

Frankly, the number of people I've heard say they've stopped giving money to Cornell in general, or Athletics in particular, scares me, and I hope it scares you, too. For the time being, I'm focusing my giving on joining the Tompkins Trust Company with a pledge to the Ithaca Breast Cancer Alliance of $10 for each power-play goal scored by the men's ice hockey team this season. (12 so far. Ouch!) That feels like a way I can support the program without giving money to Athletics. For now, it'll work for me. I can't speak for anyone else.

The hurt feelings aren't going to go away without someone from the University saying or doing something. A tremendous amount of damage has been done by some shockingly petty people in Athletics, who've chosen to dig their heels in rather than try to work towards a resolution. I've offered my help on several occasions, in several ways, to several people, and as far as I know, I get along pretty well with everyone in Athletics. The continued silence, to me and to other alumni who I would conservatively say have given hundreds of thousands of dollars over the last several decades, is deafening.

Well said, Mark. Please let us know if you do actually get a response.

Schwieb '96

Mark Anbinder wrote, in part, "Right now, I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of giving money to Cornell University. "

So, you're punishing the rest of the University for the actions and inactions of Athletics? Do you have "hurt feelings" due to the actions and inactions of other areas of the University? And if you do, are you saying that the years of good feelings from the University (while in school and as an alumnus) mean nothing now that a few people have chosen to ignore the cries of "unfair" from some hockey fans and Athletics won't apologize for remaining offended by Age's admittedly offensive actions and words?

While I have no problem with you refusing to donate money to Athletics or to make an unrestricted donation to The Cornell Fund, holding back money from the rest of the University seems overdone. As you know, you could have made a targeted donation to some other aspect of University that you appreciate and sent the very same letter to the very same people. I took similar actions back when Charlie Moore decided to become the Athletics CEO and started playing politics with the budget and certain coaching decisions.

As for the letter itself, what exactly are you after, besides an "I'm sorry for ignoring your letter"? They're not going to allow HockeyCam or free webcasts this year (or while the contract with the outside service is in effect). They already got the letter that John put together, so they're certainly aware that there are a number of people who are unhappy with the current situation. You don't say what it is going to take for you to start giving money again, which is, after all, their main concern. As you put it, "[t]he hurt feelings aren't going to go away without someone from the University saying or doing something." What might that be, short of putting everything back the way it was?

Sure, the quality of the "pay" service needs improvement and you're right to complain to Athletics (and also to the service provider, I hope) and in fact, you should demand a partial refund. But I just don't see Athletics reading your letter and thinking anything other than, "just another person upset in the short term with having to pay for listening to games; they'll get used to it, just like the Major League Baseball fans and the alums of the many other schools who now have to pay to listen to webcasts."

You yourself were consulted prior to the decision to go with the "pay" option; they heard what you said and chose to go a different way. But don't now "take your ball home" and spoil the rest of the University's "fun" just because you disagree with Athletics business decision.

Thanks for reading at least part of my letter. You missed the bit about considering "supporting the University in other, directed ways."

I'm not sure what I'm after. Someone saying "We understand that we screwed up, and we're sorry," would be a good start. They've admitted to me that they screwed up. They need to say it in public. They need to stop ignoring their biggest fans and staunchest supporters.

There's no reason we can't have a HockeyCam this season, though. OCSN and RealNetworks have both said they'd allow a privately done, locally supported video feed such as last season's HockeyCam. Any ongoing decision to neither provide such a service, nor allow anyone else to, is purely an Athletics decision. A short-sighted one, to say the least.

I did see that you wrote that you need to "think very carefully about the possibility of supporting the University in other, directed ways". I took that, together with the rest of your letter, to mean that for now you are not giving any donations to the University, directed or otherwise, but may do so in the future in a more directed manner. In fact, you could have done so right now, but you simply chose not to, because you're pissed off.

What exactly do you think they screwed up? Going to a pay option is their business perogative and the verdict on whether that was a good decision will not be heard for some time. Are you saying they screwed up by getting pissed at Age for his actions/words? I doubt that they're going to agree. Maybe they're holding a grudge too long, but that's hardly screwing up -- if they continue to hold the grudge next season, or reject the idea of HockeyCam coming back while being maintained by someone other than Age, well, that might be carrying things too far.

I was unaware that OCSN has agreed to something like HockeyCam this season. In any case, wouldn't it be the case that the video and audio feeds would not be linked and therefore there would be a time difference between the two? If that were the result, would that satisfy you? And if so, I think it is incumbent on you, John and the others who signed the letter to make that specific fact known the Athletics as soon as possible, and offer someone other than Age as the contact/responsible person (as you know, sometimes personality differences and emotions do affect negotiation results, fair or not).

Yes, for now, I chose not to, because I'm that disillusioned with the way Athletics is treating alumni. If one person making such a decision and telling the right people about it can focus enough attention that a resolution can eventually be reached, then it was worth it.

Remember, I'm one of the paying customers who decided it was worth coming up with $6.95 a month for Cornell SportsPass, and remember... it doesn't work.

Business decisions are fine and dandy. Organizations making such decisions need to accept responsibility for the results. Athletics made an unsupportable decision, and then painted itself into an indefensible corner by refusing to talk to the alumni, parents, and friends who expressed concerns.

From my vantage point:

What they screwed up: Going to an external pay site before going to the Hockey Boosters / Fans / Students to see if they could be put in charge of broadcasting the games.

What I would like to see:

1- An apology to Age. He wasn't civil, whatever. But he's also given a lot to Cornell Athletics and hasn't really asked for anything back. They should recognize that.

2- The hockey Cam back. Even if its in a pay system. I am not willing to pay $7 for radio feed, but I would for full audio/video. Cornell PROMISED an improved service. I can still find the web link when they said that. Well... So far, I see a much inferior service to what existed last year. They lied.

Felix Rodriguez wrote:

What they screwed up: Going to an external pay site before going to the Hockey Boosters / Fans / Students to see if they could be put in charge of broadcasting the games.

Going with CornellPass was a bad decision. Telling people they explored all their options is a blatant lie and makes others look bad.

[Q]I am not willing to pay $7 for radio feed, but I would for full audio/video. Cornell PROMISED an improved service.[/Q]

I and many others no doubt have thought about this. If the school offered the video there would be reason to pay the $7. One thing I noticed at the place where the Tigers hang out is that they had video for football this season and last. So there is hope that we will see the Big Red from remote locations at sometime in the future. I just wish it were NOW!

Here is the shortcut for Cornell at Princeton Football 2001 a free but low quality video archive:

[realserver.princeton.edu]

Here is the page with all the links for 2002 and 2001. The 2002 season is from College Sports Pass. The issue is that video is available for all you Tiger fans reading this post.

[goprincetontigers.ocsn.com]

[Q]Going to an external pay site before going to the Hockey Boosters / Fans / Students to see if they could be put in charge of broadcasting the games. [/Q]


I'm certainly no fan of CornellPass, but is this idea really feasible? CornellPass is for all of the major Cornell sports. I doubt that the Hockey Boosters would really feel like shelling out money to broadcast Basketball games.

I can only (well not really only, since I will say alot more ) say thank you Mark. For unlike CUlater '89, whom ever that is (isn't it interesting that he/she is the only one on this page to not put their name up front), I like Mark believe that it is only with protest, involving money, that the powers to be will listen and consider a change.

You ask, what could they do? It's very simple, all they have to do is to say that they are going to consider all options available for now and for next year. They could state they are willing to sit down, with a select few, and talk over all the possibilities. I don't really care if they say they are sorry for the Cornell Pass, but they are a service organization and they need to respond to their constituents; and heaven forbid if they don't feel that alumni are part of their constituents.

Like Mark, I have told the AD that I will not be giving to Athletics. Unlike him I will still give to the University. However that is a minor distinction in my mind. We each have to respond in our own way. Frankly, if they keep being quiet about this, I will also stop giving to the University as a whole, but restrict it to very select items.

Finally, I need to make an anology to Nixon and Watergate.

The problem here is not so much that they did what they did, but it is rather their lack of response to the outcry. It's not the crime (that's bad enough), but the coverup that bothers me, and ultimately took Nixon down.

Is anybody out ther old enough to remember the Tylenol scare. Well that company knew how to handle a crisis, and it is used as a teaching model. When something happens that affects your business and your constituents, the best thing to do is to address it openly and quickly. If Nixon had done that, he would not have had to resign. If the Athletic Dept. would do it we would all be discussing how we can help, rather than how we need to protest.

Graham Meli '02 wrote:

I'm certainly no fan of CornellPass, but is this idea really feasible? CornellPass is for all of the major Cornell sports. I doubt that the Hockey Boosters would really feel like shelling out money to broadcast Basketball games.

It's things like this that really irritate me. Rather than ask questions, people make assumptions without knowing the facts. Too many people think audio streaming is some kind of hyper-complex voodoo that's prohibitively expensive. I was doing bleeding edge audio and video streaming for 200 people a game with my year-old, low-end laptop, and my 2 year-old, low-end desktop at work, with a software package paid for by a small group of generous supporters. Mike Schafer's annual parking ticket bill could probably fund audio streaming for all the Cornell sports. I'm getting tired of saying it. Clearly no one is listening.

Actually, Graham, Athletics has already been told that I, and others, would help them get netcasting up and running for all four of the sports that are broadcast on the radio. It's no harder to accomplish for four than it is for one.

Y'see, I'm the one who first set up audio streaming for a Big Red sports broadcast, back in 1997, when WVBR broadcast the football season. I reinvented WVBR's streaming audio this year in a way that's much higher quality, supports a much broader range of platforms and even any software the user chooses, and -- get this -- requires less bandwidth.

When Anita Brenner told me the night of the Harvard game that Laura Stange and Ricky Stewart were "working on" getting video streaming up some other way than the fan-run HockeyCam, I had to shake my head. It had been two weeks since our last conversation and since I'd offered to help. I told Anita, "If you'd called me as late as this afternoon, we could have video streaming for this game, tonight." She just looked at me for a minute, then said "I'm sorry."

Me too.

Instead of trying to deal with this, they're hiding. That's just sad.

Well, I asked the question if the idea was feasible, and you answered it. I appologize if the concept was "irritating," but until now I had not seen any real discussion of providing free webcasting for the other sports.

Jim's got it right - the lack of response to the outcry adds insult to injury.

They've taken away the booster-supported FREE services (audio and video), and replaced them with a commercial system that has problems throughout (from lack of support on all platforms, to missing pre-game shows and sections of the games, to screwed-up billing). They've lied about their efforts to consider all alternatives, and have yet to provide any response to the letters and e-mails of protest.

The prediction of a bunker mentality within the Athletics Department seems to have been borne out. How can ANY University Department that hopes to continue development efforts simply ingore concerns expressed by alumni?

Ken '71

I think the pay per listen concept is fine for people who did not go to the particular university, but it is obscene gouging when applied to people who attended the university. For instance, if the University of Alabama or Oklahoma or Ohio State charged to listen to its broadcasts, it might make sense, because my perception is that there are thousands of fans who support those teams who DID NOT EVEN GO TO THE SCHOOL--they are just from the particular state, and maybe they moved out of state later or somehow can't pick up the broadcasts on the radio. Someone who did not go to the school does not have a right to listen for free. Yet even Ohio State airs its games on the net for free!! (I don't know about U. of O. or U. of A.) But with respect to Cornell, the ONLY people who listen on the net are alumni-- and particularly the ones who [were] most loyal. Maybe I am naive, but as a Cornell '88, do I get ANYTHING other than a diploma, for having spent a huge amount of $$ on tuition and other expenses for four years at Cornell? The "whiny 22 year olds" of whom Mark speaks just shelled out (or owe) over $100,000 to Cornell. Is that meaningless? Don't we get to be part of the "Cornell community??" A "community" doesn't nickel and dime its members. Maybe they should install pay-toilets at the Cornell Club in Manhattan-- might generate a few extra quarters.

It's a very good letter, Mark.

> Maybe they should install pay-toilets at the Cornell Club in Manhattan-- might generate a few extra quarters.

Exactly. Maybe I should have to pay a 2 cent royalty to Cornell everytime I list it on my resume.

The corporation "Cornell" that owns the university assets, protects and builds the endowment, makes sure everybody gets paid, etc is a necessary part of university operations. But it isn't all that "Cornell" stands for. A university is a community not just of interests but also of people, and strategies that make sense from a dollar perspective often grind people underfoot. The people making decisions now "know the price of everything and the value of nothing."

If you want to donate to specific departments.. the pepband is currently broke..

Note for Jim Hyla: In my years of posting on this message board and Kyle's board, I have always posted as CUlater '89, so if you're implying that my anonymity is related to this issue and therefor cause for suspicion, forget about it.

Also, I certainly agree that protesting by holding back money can be an appropriate action -- I believe I mentioned that I took that route also in the past. But I think it is inappropriate to withhold money needed for the rest of the University for what is ultimately an Athletics issue (sure, Day Hall likely has the authority to overrule on this point, but that necessitates a lengthy process that will be largely political). Athletics is set up as a separate entity for many reasons, and largely it is expected govern itself. Even assuming that Day Hall had approval over the concept of going to a pay service, there has to be a line drawn as to how much independent digging the rest of the Administration needs to do on every issue presented for its approval. At some point, a CEO or parent company has to trust the people it hired to run the subsidiary.

However the process was undertaken by Athletics, there were no doubt numerous justifications presented to Andy Noel and whomever at Day Hall needed to sign off on this. You may disagree with the result (as do I), but it's too late to change the process. I think it is unrealistic to expect, relatively few games into the season, that Athletics or the Adminstration will throw up their hands and say "this idea didn't work; let's scrap it". Instead, they should be working to fix the problems and make the system better for the subscribers. The earliest that one should expect them to do a full assessment of the whole pay service idea is after a full year, and even that time period is realistically too short for a fair evaluation.

Some people here have stated or implied that Athletics told everyone that it had or would consider all options and then failed to do so. Jim indicates he would like Athletics to promise to consider all options for this year and going forward. "Considering all options" doesn't necessarily mean reaching the result you want, or sitting down with all people who might be able to provide the product. I have no idea what criteria Athletics used in making this decision, but if I had to guess, I would guess that demonstrating a degree of professionalism is one of them. I'm not sure of the relative timing of Age's run-ins and the decisionmaking process, but those incidents may have had an impact on Athletics' desire to steer clear of one-man shows, and thus rule them out as a whole. The idea of hiring a real company to run this service, one that is in the business of webcasting and contracts with other schools, probably seemed to be a classy move. Obviously, the quality of the service is not where it should be, and the subscribers and Athletics should be pushing to have that remedied ASAP, but don't use that as an indictment of the process. Back when they were making the decision, someone at Athletics probably said, "It's really important that all of the webcasts are heard properly. If there's a problem, who is going going to have the desire, and capability, to fix the problem -- the proverbial guy in a garage or a company whose business and future revenue stream is dependent on providing good service?" Now it is up to us, and Athletics, to call on that expertise.

I do agree with Jim that the silence from Athletics is a mistake, one I hope they remedy soon. But all you should expect from them is to say "we're sorry there are problems with the service. We are working with OCSN to prevent them from occurring in the future. Thank you for your feedback."

Apologies if I seemed snippy, Graham. Just trying to get the info out.

Corporate bureaucracy-speak at its finest, CUlater. Never admit to a bad decision.

CUlater '89 wrote:

But all you should expect from them is to say "we're sorry there are problems with the service. We are working with OCSN to prevent them from occurring in the future. Thank you for your feedback."

That would be a fantastic start. What's most appalling about this, as Ken suggests, is that we haven't even heard that much.

Sadly, despite our common interest in the Big Red, we're sniping amongst ourselves, focusing our energies on this Athletics idiocy instead of on cheering.

"Never" is an awfully long time, Al. If someone was having a rough first semester freshman year, does that mean they made a bad choice as to which college to attend? Does that mean they should get their transfer applications started?

Well, we are between games right now...

I guess I don't find this discussion any sillier than the thread about whether Lenny should be leaving the team for four games (which debate, for the record, I find quite silly). Anyway, you're right, it is Thursday, time to focus on the big road games this weekend.

CUlater '89 said:
[Q]If someone was having a rough first semester freshman year, does that mean they made a bad choice as to which college to attend? Does that mean they should get their transfer applications started?[/Q]

No, it doesn't, but I would hope that he/she would talk to some of the people who were upset with the performance, namely the profs, and seek advice or help.

You see we are on the same page if we think about it. Maybe the AD should listen alittle, but he doesn't have to even admit he was wrong. Rather say, "You guys are having a problem with my decision and how it has worked out. How about we get together and see if we can come up with a solution."

Novel idea, isn't it?

Excellent use of "Reflection" and "Invite" dialogue strategies, Jim. You could teach the dialogue class my company just paid me to sit in...

Seriously, though, it was a great class, and made me stop and realize that pretty much every thread on every message board I've ever read could be used as examples of "how not to achieve meaningful dialogue" (and therefore real results). If more people (including myself) actually talked (and posted) like your hypothetical AD, who knows what we could accomplish? Maybe, just maybe, we'd be watching hockeycam sometime this season....

CUlater '89 wrote:

However the process was undertaken by Athletics, there were no doubt numerous justifications presented to Andy Noel and whomever at Day Hall needed to sign off on this.

And they have to live with the consequences of that decision, for example that when they call to ask for money from the people they needlessly inconvenienced, we're likely to tell them no.

The idea of hiring a real company to run this service, one that is in the business of webcasting and contracts with other schools, probably seemed to be a classy move. Obviously, the quality of the service is not where it should be, and the subscribers and Athletics should be pushing to have that remedied ASAP, but don't use that as an indictment of the process. Back when they were making the decision, someone at Athletics probably said, "It's really important that all of the webcasts are heard properly. If there's a problem, who is going going to have the desire, and capability, to fix the problem -- the proverbial guy in a garage or a company whose business and future revenue stream is dependent on providing good service?" Now it is up to us, and Athletics, to call on that expertise.

But isn't this whole argument given the lie by the end result, which is that even if RealPass were working as planned, they have replaced a free webcast with synced video for home games with a pay service with no video? Then they even implied that one of the improvements we might see thanks to their fantastic professional outlet is an occasional video broadcast. So the pie in the sky is to get back with the pay service a fraction of what we had--and could have had--for free?

Not to mention that because their contract is with RealNetworks, it will have to be a RealVideo feed, even if Quicktime would have given considerably better picture quality? Of course that last part is technical, and we can't expect them to know that themselves, but that just brings up another disadvantage to their wonderful business decision: their outside professional authority has a vested interest in ignoring the relative merits of formats other than RealVideo.

Hey TBone,

How is the pep band normally funded? I am sad to hear that you don't have any money. Does that mean the band will travel less this season?

A fan who anxiously awaits the new CD!

Usually through the SAFC and in part from (usually band) alumni donations. This year, for whatever reason, they slashed our budget in half. That coupled with the CDs being delayed (damn you, Weed High records) has left us quite put out until those things are pressed and moving off the shelves. And the CD production and NCAA trip sucked up a lot of reserves.

I think we'll be travelling about the same (as far as the scheduling goes). And we'll just have to stay with other bands instead of hotels. No matter.

Hey more power to you. I will be first in line for the CD. My son joined the Yale pep band for a fun activity and hasn't regretted a moment. Keep smiling and keep having fun fun fun fun fun!!

Hey, if we wanted to contribute directly to the pep band, to whom and where would we send funds to?

The main issue behind the pep band being "broke" is that for the playoff run last spring, there was no SAFC emergency funding available. This was quite unusual; usually they're available to help out with the new expenses that pop up. They simply ran out of money. Fear not, this will not stop the band from going to each and every playoff game in the future, just as it did not last year. There are ways.

However, any donations to the pep band would be greatly appreciated by the band and its alumni. A donation to the band can help to increase the number of games traveled to (because SAFC funds are usually directed toward one thing, like hotels or copying expenses) and is a way to support Cornell and the hockey program while knowing exactly what your money is being used for. The pep band doesn't get money from Athletics, either, so your gift would not allow the department to merely divert funds away to other areas of its choosing. It would actually make a difference.

The band is entirely student-run, including everything from choosing which pieces to play at a game (and often arranging them) to choosing which road games to attend to making and balancing the budget. Imagine if a student coached the hockey team, allocated funding, and made travel plans: that's what the conductor and head manager do. It's not quite as involved, I know, but the analogy fits. [FYI, I'm writing all this because I'm the Band Alumni Association treasurer, which means I have the whoppingly hard job of looking at the undergraduate treasurer's budget and saying, "Yup. Looks good."]

More to the point: You can donate by checking "other" on your Cornell Fund donation card and writing in "Big Red Pep Band." Alternatively, if you are so motivated by this thought that you have to do it NOW, your dollars can reach the band by sending a check to:

Big Red Pep Band
Teagle Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853

Make the check payable to Cornell University, and write "Big Red Pep Band Gift" in the memo. Thanks in advance to all those who choose to support the band financially (in addition to what they get at the games).

I'm all in favor of donating to the Pep Band if the money doesn't get funneled through the Athletics budget. Looking at the address you gave, Lowell, suggests that it does, though. Can you shed some light?

I'm pretty sure that it is just earmarked for the Pep Band and put into the account, that it is not "funneled" through athletics. In other words, they don't get any of the money. I think (but do not know) that the Teagle Hall address may just be a mailbox. This should not discourage you from supporting the band if you desire to.

Correct me if I am wrong Lowell.

Grant TUBA

I can shed some light, Mark, although I won't go into the complete nuts and bolts here. The pep band (as well as the marching band) receives considerable administrative support from the athletics department, which includes financial accounting and handling receipt of gifts. That I suppose could be called "funneling," but I don't think that's your question. The band receives no cash budget from the department, and gifts go directly to a band account which does not zero at the end of the fiscal year. So the earlier observation (in another thread?) of gifts freeing up a sport's budget dollars to be moved elsewhere does not apply.

E-mail me (or better yet, buy me a beer) if you want a more complete description or if you'd like to give to the Take Away Lowell's Apostrophe Key Fund, which is likewise tax deductible.

So being a senior (albeit one who may be around for a it longer), I got my first solicitation from the Cornell Fund / Senior Class Campaign today. I'm wondering how to go about this. It's been said on here that someone who stops donating will get more attention than someone who just refuses to all along... should I maybe contribute my $20.03 along with a note saying that future donations will be withheld until Athletics learns how to treat alumni. That's kinda what I'm leaning towards. Any suggestions?

-Fred

E-mail me (or better yet, buy me a beer) if you want a more complete description or if you'd like to give to the Take Away Lowell's Apostrophe Key Fund, which is likewise tax deductible.

I'd really like to read the 501(c)(3) documents on that one.

Beeeej

I think a note enclosed with a donation would have negligible impact.

Here are some tips that I got from a fundraising professional, along with contact info for who to write to.

[elf.hockey.cornell.edu]

Madris, you remain an idiot. But you finally got one right. Now go listen to some AM radio.

Spock

[Q]We'll have the biggest impact if a lot of people actually stop donating (whether to Athletics or the University as a whole) or say they're going to. People who've never given saying they're not going to start is far less effective. People who've given and say they'll stop makes development folks take notice.[/Q]
[Q]* Letters have more impact than a phone call. It's hard to ignore a piece of paper.[/Q]
This is what I was talking about. How should a new grad go about this? I've never donated before bc I've never been asked. Is it best to not do it at all, or to do it this time and say I'll resume when they set up a fair internet broadcasting system... I would be sure to send the letter to others too, as recommended... probably separate from the donation as well as along with it.

Just trying to do my part .

The apostrophes are now fixed, thank you very much.

That, and what Grant and Pat said.

[smartass]If the presumption here (not an unreasonable one) is that money talks, I'm not sure that any letter that comes with a donation of $20.03 will rock the foundation of the fundraising department any more than a letter stating that you don't plan on donating will.[/smartass]

If you enjoyed your time at the school, and want to acknowledge your class, I would send in the initial donation with a letter explaining why you won't be donating any more. Don't think of it in terms of "impact"- you are no Ho, you are not even an Anbinder (yet) - do it because you think it is right, and both the letter and a parting gift to the school are both right.