CitrusUCF
Heisman
Posts: 7,693
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 314
I Root For: UCF/Tulsa
Location:
|
RE: Bad news for GCU non profit status
(01-25-2020 05:18 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote: (01-25-2020 02:45 PM)YesCubanB Wrote: Honestly if it’s a school that helps the conference, and they do, I don’t give a rats ass whether they’re for profit, nonprofit, pro-prophet or Lorena Bobbit.
I agree. It’s ridiculous that GCU and others, get slammed for being “for profit”, when every other college is technically “for profit” as well. No college is in it to lose money and barely scrape by.
Non-profit doesn't mean losing money and scraping by. Non-profits should make money, but that money should be re-invested in the organization and its programs. It doesn't go to shareholders.
|
|
01-28-2020 07:59 PM |
|
edinburger
1st String
Posts: 1,190
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 66
I Root For: UTRGV
Location:
|
RE: Bad news for GCU non profit status
(01-28-2020 07:59 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote: (01-25-2020 05:18 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote: (01-25-2020 02:45 PM)YesCubanB Wrote: Honestly if it’s a school that helps the conference, and they do, I don’t give a rats ass whether they’re for profit, nonprofit, pro-prophet or Lorena Bobbit.
I agree. It’s ridiculous that GCU and others, get slammed for being “for profit”, when every other college is technically “for profit” as well. No college is in it to lose money and barely scrape by.
Non-profit doesn't mean losing money and scraping by. Non-profits should make money, but that money should be re-invested in the organization and its programs. It doesn't go to shareholders.
Not sure there's a huge difference whether the surplus goes to stockholders (for-profit), or "performance bonuses" for executives that are based on enrollment numbers or revenue (too common at non-profits and even state schools) or just unnecessary plushness like lavish presidential offices, dinner meetings at fancy restaurants, and planning retreats held at resorts (also too common even at state schools).
Any enterprise where people are getting paid is going to have some financial motives mixed in with everything else.
But even if GCU's for-profit status causes GCU some problems, it's not an infectious disease transmitted through DI basketball games. If (purely theoretical here) GCU made it to the Final Four, I really can't see Virginia refusing to play them on the grounds that it would make their hands dirty.
Bottom line - it's a minor issue. What is important to maintain the ideal of a "student-athlete" is that a college is based mainly on full-time students receiving a quality educational experience.
|
|
01-29-2020 10:39 AM |
|
CitrusUCF
Heisman
Posts: 7,693
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 314
I Root For: UCF/Tulsa
Location:
|
RE: Bad news for GCU non profit status
(01-29-2020 10:39 AM)edinburger Wrote: (01-28-2020 07:59 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote: (01-25-2020 05:18 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote: (01-25-2020 02:45 PM)YesCubanB Wrote: Honestly if it’s a school that helps the conference, and they do, I don’t give a rats ass whether they’re for profit, nonprofit, pro-prophet or Lorena Bobbit.
I agree. It’s ridiculous that GCU and others, get slammed for being “for profit”, when every other college is technically “for profit” as well. No college is in it to lose money and barely scrape by.
Non-profit doesn't mean losing money and scraping by. Non-profits should make money, but that money should be re-invested in the organization and its programs. It doesn't go to shareholders.
Not sure there's a huge difference whether the surplus goes to stockholders (for-profit), or "performance bonuses" for executives that are based on enrollment numbers or revenue (too common at non-profits and even state schools) or just unnecessary plushness like lavish presidential offices, dinner meetings at fancy restaurants, and planning retreats held at resorts (also too common even at state schools).
Any enterprise where people are getting paid is going to have some financial motives mixed in with everything else.
But even if GCU's for-profit status causes GCU some problems, it's not an infectious disease transmitted through DI basketball games. If (purely theoretical here) GCU made it to the Final Four, I really can't see Virginia refusing to play them on the grounds that it would make their hands dirty.
Bottom line - it's a minor issue. What is important to maintain the ideal of a "student-athlete" is that a college is based mainly on full-time students receiving a quality educational experience.
I think the for-profit status raises two questions in the minds of the traditional institutions:
1. What is the student-athlete educational experience? Is GCU likely to see sport as a for-profit revenue arm where their goal is to admit anyone and keep them eligible by any means available? Essentially, are they going to act like IMG Academy does in the high school space? If so, then even with the various foibles at some institutions (e.g., UNC) and the debate we can have about standards and student-athletes' overall experiences, it suggests that GCU is acting with different motivations. At most universities, athletics hopefully pays for itself; otherwise, it's seen as a marketing expense. Rarely is it seen as a way to make profit for the university. Even at Notre Dame, where athletics does send money back to the academic side, that motivation is very different from GCU trying to profit to pay shareholders.
2. Does the corporate parent's financial capabilities allow GCU to win any arms race regardless of their level of success, fan support, conference revenues, etc.? This is similar to the question that non-profit Liberty faces from their 90,000 online students that seem to be paying for all of their athletic investments, and this touches back to Q1, the goal of GCU's athletics.
(This post was last modified: 01-29-2020 11:24 AM by CitrusUCF.)
|
|
01-29-2020 11:21 AM |
|