Why I said "No" to the Cornell Fund

[mha]

(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.

[eschwieb]

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

Schwieb '96

[CUlater \'89]

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.

[mha]

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.

[CUlater \'89]

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).

[mha]

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.

[kaelistus]

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.

[CowbellGuy]

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.

[marty]

[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:

http://realserver.princeton.edu:8080/ramgen/sports/20011027CORNELLatPRINCETONfootballTV24300K.rm

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.

http://goprincetontigers.ocsn.com/multimedia/prin-multimedia.html

[gwm3]

[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.

[Jim Hyla]

I can only (well not really only, since I will say alot more:-P ) 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.

[CowbellGuy]

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.

[mha]

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.

[gwm3]

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.

[Ken71]

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