• eclectic_electron@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Because they like having money? Running a university is legitimately very expensive and there’s always more to do. I think it’s more common with people who went to business school or became pro athletes, etc. They end up with very profitable careers and a fond recollection of their time in college. It’s worth it to the university to ask almost everyone just in case, because sometimes they find that one whale alum.

        • eclectic_electron@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          11 months ago

          Athletics is actually petty profitable, since athletes can’t be paid, so the school gets all the money for sponsorships, tickets, merch, etc.

          It can actually be a problem for the schools, since athletics isn’t allowed to be profitable. They have to spend all the money athletics brings in on athletics, which is why the athletics department ends up with all the fancy new buildings.

          • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            since athletes can’t be paid,

            Remind me again, what is it called when the people generating the wealth are not compensated?

            It can actually be a problem for the schools, since athletics isn’t allowed to be profitable. They have to spend all the money athletics brings in on athletics, which is why the athletics department ends up with all the fancy new buildings.

            Ah yes, that sounds like a great benefit for students getting an education. Also for the academic staff. Must be great to work at a university as a lecturer and know the football coach earns multiples of your salary.

          • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            What’s the point of having an athletic program if you’re not using it to subsidize programs that actually matter?

            • eclectic_electron@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              It kinda does do that, just indirectly. Even if the university can’t profit directly off of athletics, a successful sports season increases application rates and donations. Basically it boosts the brand recognition and brand identity of the school.

              It’s still painful to me that the class size at my engineering school basically doubled the year after the university won some basketball championship. I don’t want to believe that people, and especially engineers, are that influence-able but the numbers don’t lie

      • Th3D3k0y@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        I looked up the University of Cincinnati’s finances once because I never realized they were public. I think UC owns non-liquid non-realestate assets somewhere in the 30billion range. They still ask for donations, despite the fact they could give free education to every student for multiple years.

        • psud@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          It’s nuts how wealthy some of those universities are. Several could easily provide free education and still turn a profit

          I wonder if they use tuition fees mostly for rationing aceess

        • MonkRome@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Most donations are restricted to the purpose of the donation. You’d need to know how much of the endowment is for scholarships. Sometimes schools will have an immense amount of money, but can’t actually lower tuition because the money is tied up in other things. If I give money for an endowment that supports future replacement of electron microscopes, that does fuck all for your tuition.

          • vortic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Yeah, people like to have their names on physical things so they pay for more buildings rather than paying for scholarships.

          • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            If I give money for an endowment that supports future replacement of electron microscopes, that does fuck all for your tuition.

            Presuming of course that they absolutely weren’t going to replace those microscopes without that endowment. If they were, then that endowment frees up some money elsewhere in the budget. Unless literally every penny they hold has strings attached, then the fungibility of money means they could use general fund money they aren’t spending on X because of an endowment on Y instead.

            • MonkRome@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Presuming of course that they absolutely weren’t going to replace those microscopes without that endowment.

              In many, if not most, cases there would never be room in a budget for an electron microscope at your average mid sized or small school. Keep in mind we’re talking about a million+ dollar expenditure.

              In many cases improvements like a building or an electron microscope absolutely hinge almost entirely on donations, that’s why they are so attractive to a donor. They can make real lasting improvements to a college or university that wouldn’t otherwise exist.

              Even the endowed scholarships that go to assist with tuition are never as big as people think. If you have a $100,000 endowed scholarship. The school is likely only giving $4,500 of that out each year so they can grow the endowment at the same rate they give out money, thereby ensuring future students get more help.

              I’ll paraphrase a real world example. School X has a $100 million dollar endowment, with $65 million going to endowed scholarships, that’s only ~$3 million a year for tuition relief. That same school is looking at a $45 million a year budget. Certainly they could chose to spend down their endowment and give their students 2 years of free school… And then what? Pass on the 3 million a year budget shortfall to future students?

              I work in higher Ed, I agree the system is broken, but most schools endowments come no where near being able to give free tuition.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      Purelly and entirely because when it comes to money with no strings attached, having X + A money (if A is a positive real number) always beats having only X money, hence why lots of people are pointing out Universities with X in the billions of $ which still ask for donations.

      It’s pure unadulterated greed, trying to monetise a (not anymore deserved for most in the US) public image of Universities as places that help people have a better future.