Online Now 324

The Tunnel

Welcome to The Tunnel

On this Board 272
Record: 1931 (5/25/2013)

Online now 354
Record: 3166 (6/2/2013)

Boards ▾

The Tunnel

Welcome to The Tunnel

Off-Topic/Ticket Exchange

Talk about everything else with fellow Hokies and other fans

Reply

OT: From today's Washington Post - UVA President Ousted

  • It'll be interesting to see who they pick up...Note that financial hardships are cited in their decision. Specifically her ability to raise funds and increase giving.

    Here's my question...WTF. Actually that's more of a statement, but also a question. The school is sitting on an endowment that would make a porn star blush. 5.4 Billion. With a B. With even the most conservative of investment strategies, that kind of bank roll is good for about 540 million dollars a year in gains.

    I'm not saying this as a sports fan, but as a Virginian...When tuition is going up and up, whilst the endowment is substantially increasing year after year after year - at what point will it be reasonable to expect that college tuition will be FREE? Imagine that - an endowment so measurable that by the charity of admission one has 'made it' with a grant - a reward - for years of good and dutiful behavior. Should not the goal of every University be to raise so much money as to be entirely self sufficient based upon the compounding interest of their investments alone? Why not?

    We might give UVA hell, but as an institution, they're rich. Filthy. Effing. Dirty. Rich. And good for them, by the way. I'm proud and happy, as a Virginian, that they've got the jing.

    Going back to the original point however...why fire the President over her inability to reach their 3 billion dollar goal? I'd fire the institutional investors that have apparently let them down on the fiduciary responsibility to grow and nurture their next egg.

    Last point on this - let it be a call to arms for all Hokies to make a point of giving to the VT endowment fund. If knowledge is power, then money must equal knowledge.

    University of Virginia president to step down - The Washington Post

    Teresa Sullivan will step down on Aug. 15 as president of the University of Virginia, after just two years as the first female president of the vaunted in Charlottesville.

    www.washingtonpost.com

    Enter Night

  • Enter Night said...

    It'll be interesting to see who they pick up...Note that financial hardships are cited in their decision. Specifically her ability to raise funds and increase giving.

    Here's my question...WTF. Actually that's more of a statement, but also a question. The school is sitting on an endowment that would make a porn star blush. 5.4 Billion. With a B. With even the most conservative of investment strategies, that kind of bank roll is good for about 540 million dollars a year in gains.

    I'm not saying this as a sports fan, but as a Virginian...When tuition is going up and up, whilst the endowment is substantially increasing year after year after year - at what point will it be reasonable to expect that college tuition will be FREE? Imagine that - an endowment so measurable that by the charity of admission one has 'made it' with a grant - a reward - for years of good and dutiful behavior. Should not the goal of every University be to raise so much money as to be entirely self sufficient based upon the compounding interest of their investments alone? Why not?

    We might give UVA hell, but as an institution, they're rich. Filthy. Effing. Dirty. Rich. And good for them, by the way. I'm proud and happy, as a Virginian, that they've got the jing.

    Going back to the original point however...why fire the President over her inability to reach their 3 billion dollar goal? I'd fire the institutional investors that have apparently let them down on the fiduciary responsibility to grow and nurture their next egg.

    Last point on this - let it be a call to arms for all Hokies to make a point of giving to the VT endowment fund. If knowledge is power, then money must equal knowledge.

    The problem is not fundraising- she cant dance!peace

    tvhokie

  • Enter Night said...

    5.4 Billion. With a B. With even the most conservative of investment strategies, that kind of bank roll is good for about 540 million dollars a year in gains.

    Hey, could you forward me the name of the person handling your investments? 10% using the most conservative strategy is pretty dang good.

    hokiefan86

  • Enter Night said...

    It'll be interesting to see who they pick up...Note that financial hardships are cited in their decision. Specifically her ability to raise funds and increase giving.

    Here's my question...WTF. Actually that's more of a statement, but also a question. The school is sitting on an endowment that would make a porn star blush. 5.4 Billion. With a B. With even the most conservative of investment strategies, that kind of bank roll is good for about 540 million dollars a year in gains.

    I'm not saying this as a sports fan, but as a Virginian...When tuition is going up and up, whilst the endowment is substantially increasing year after year after year - at what point will it be reasonable to expect that college tuition will be FREE? Imagine that - an endowment so measurable that by the charity of admission one has 'made it' with a grant - a reward - for years of good and dutiful behavior. Should not the goal of every University be to raise so much money as to be entirely self sufficient based upon the compounding interest of their investments alone? Why not?

    We might give UVA hell, but as an institution, they're rich. Filthy. Effing. Dirty. Rich. And good for them, by the way. I'm proud and happy, as a Virginian, that they've got the jing.

    Going back to the original point however...why fire the President over her inability to reach their 3 billion dollar goal? I'd fire the institutional investors that have apparently let them down on the fiduciary responsibility to grow and nurture their next egg.

    Last point on this - let it be a call to arms for all Hokies to make a point of giving to the VT endowment fund. If knowledge is power, then money must equal knowledge.

    I agree with your endowment, self sufficient and free tuition suggestions. Not suggesting that someone mandate it, but if I was on the Board of Trustees that would be my long-term goal.

    Having been exposed to the Board/CEO dynamic, I'd say two years is about the time when the respective parties decide whether or not this relationship is working. I believe its more than a fund raising issue. That's just an easy and obvious excuse. The economy is down. Many folks lack confidence and "feel" poor. Seems like a difficult environment in which to raise money and something that would be considered as part of her evaluation. I think is fair to say that the initial set of press releases never tells the entire or real story when it comes to such high profile resignations. Who knows, maybe she can't dance! Her lack of history with the university probably has something to do with it. Maybe she wanted to expose the current members of the Seven Society.

    Beyond her departure, the comments about faculty pay are a little worrisome to me as I can be a critic of rising tuition costs and the current whining about student loan debt and the subsidized rates.

    VTChE

  • When you're investing that much money, you don't pick and choose individual funds, you create them for your purposes. And yes, 10% is conservative. My guess is that they should (likely) have a goal between 15 and 20 growth each year.

    Enter Night

  • Enter Night said...

    And yes, 10% is conservative. My guess is that they should (likely) have a goal between 15 and 20 growth each year.

    Questionable at best

    This post was edited by fatalbert757 on 6/11/2012 at 9:05 AM

    fatalbert757

  • Enter Night said...

    When you're investing that much money, you don't pick and choose individual funds, you create them for your purposes. And yes, 10% is conservative. My guess is that they should (likely) have a goal between 15 and 20 growth each year.

    No, with a pool of money that large...7-8% annual return is closer to reality. I trade international debt (bonds and bank instruments) to pension funds, hedge funds and insurance companies, etc.

    SonofaHokie

  • We're getting off the point here...and thanks for the downvote to the trigger happy grouch this morning.

    I've worked with the alumni affairs offices at both Stanford and Cal. They do have a challenging "goal" for growth each and every year.

    I'll give you and example of something that is non-traditional. At Stanford, one department of their office of executive education is funded jointly by their engineering school, but also by their instructional endowment fund. As they market and sell their executive education programs, their endowment funds collects 50% of their net profits. In 2009, they made 22 million back on and investment of (apx) 10 mil. Over 50% return.

    That's where I'm getting my angle from.

    But back to the point at hand - UVA is sitting on a mountain of cash that, of invested wisely, should mature to the point where theyd be able to fund their entire budget from the compounding interest alone without touching the principle...

    That's all...

    Enter Night

  • No down vote from me, I do not even have a down vote avaliable?? I would be interested to know how they made a 50% ROI.

    I agree at the very least UVA should not be raising their tuitions. I saw a list of the most wealthy schools recently and to no ones surprise Harvard was at the top.

    SonofaHokie

  • I started this thread to make a pretty simple point but I've now been downvoted at least four times. Not sure who I've offended, but i would definitely appreciate a few upvotes...

    I offer the following as something that I'm pretty sure we can all agree upon.

    thumbsup

    This post was edited by Enter Night on 6/11/2012 at 10:28 AM

    attachment

    Enter Night

  • Enter Night said...

    I starded this thread to make a pretty simple point but I've now been downvoted at least four times. Not sure who ive offended, but i would definitely aporeciate a few upvotes...

    You got it, bub. All your information looks sound.

    josgood

  • I would appreciate a few downvotes

    fatalbert757

  • Enter Night said...

    I started this thread to make a pretty simple point but I've now been downvoted at least four times. Not sure who I've offended, but i would definitely appreciate a few upvotes...

    I offer the following as something that I'm pretty sure we can all agree upon.

    thumbsup

    I gotcha covered.

    I'm not certain we'll ever know the true answer but the fundraising thing is simply not the correct reason, That's a cop out excuse. There were some who were uneasy with her leadership of the hospital and med schools because she had no prior experience in doing so. But hey, they knew that when they hired her. She was not the most popular choice when first hired but she has very quickly received great reviews from almost everyone at the school. This news really came out of left field. I've been able to meet her on several different occasions and she could not be a more personable, interesting, thoughtful President. It's a night and day difference from Casteen. At one of the baseball games last year, she asked my 4 year old to come sit with her to teach her the players names because someone in our section told her he knew them all. Since then, they struck up a little friendship as she would go out of her way to come speak to him on the multiple occasions she saw him at a game or while playing out on the Lawn. Does that make her a great President? Of course not. But it does show that she's more about the people of the University than the corporation. And I guess the BOV prefers the latter.

    I think they made a huge mistake and I personally think it goes to show the eff ups Richmond is capable of. When you have a legislature that provides 6% of a budget while trying to control 100% of the school's spending, something has to change.

    End of rant.

    JoeHoo

  • JoeHoo said...

    I gotcha covered.

    I'm not certain we'll ever know the true answer but the fundraising thing is simply not the correct reason, That's a cop out excuse. There were some who were uneasy with her leadership of the hospital and med schools because she had no prior experience in doing so. But hey, they knew that when they hired her. She was not the most popular choice when first hired but she has very quickly received great reviews from almost everyone at the school. This news really came out of left field. I've been able to meet her on several different occasions and she could not be a more personable, interesting, thoughtful President. It's a night and day difference from Casteen. At one of the baseball games last year, she asked my 4 year old to come sit with her to teach her the players names because someone in our section told her he knew them all. Since then, they struck up a little friendship as she would go out of her way to come speak to him on the multiple occasions she saw him at a game or while playing out on the Lawn. Does that make her a great President? Of course not. But it does show that she's more about the people of the University than the corporation. And I guess the BOV prefers the latter.

    I think they made a huge mistake and I personally think it goes to show the eff ups Richmond is capable of. When you have a legislature that provides 6% of a budget while trying to control 100% of the school's spending, something has to change.

    End of rant.

    Any time politicians are involved, the bullsh*t meter automatically comes into play. Somebody somewhere didn't want her, or, that same person (or group) wanted somebody else.

    mm87vt

  • I upvoted you! I love when UVa makes bad decisions. This should hurt their athletics too, as she was a big supporter of that.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Did you hear Hoo got arrested? Thomas Jefferson would be proud!

    11VT12 ●

  • MDHokie11 said...

    I upvoted you! I love when UVa makes bad decisions. This should hurt their athletics too, as she was a big supporter of that.

    Doubtful. The athletic department made it through John Casteen. That's about the equivalent of sliding through a cow field in white pants and not getting any stains.

    Sure she gave the teams a lot more face time. But she didn't really get involved (which was actually an improvement over Casteen) with the overall direction of the department.

    JoeHoo

  • So there was a mistake made. The question is was it when they hired her as president or when they decided she was not the person for the job.
    Anytime you go through the proces of hiring someone to fill a position like this it is very bad p r to have to make a change after only two years.

    Leanderthal1547

Virginia Tech
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports