I was just about to post this myself, where were they when we needed funding for football????????
Don't know, but truth is you can say that about a lot of issues with funding for football. Apparently, this deal alone will bring in well over $130,000 in cash for the athletic program on a yearly basis, on top of a ton of in-kind drinks for things like the training room and BASA. (In all something like $200 K every year for athletics).
Sad thing is even when football was in trouble and everyone knew the implications (after the 1999 Task Force Report), the program was still only able to get a little over $120,000 over something like four years in fund raising. That was a killer.
Truth is a lot of us want to see football's return, and a deal like this does show there are big corporate donors out there that could help. Anything that makes the program -- even as it is now -- more fiscally stable sets a better environment for a possible return of football. I hope even the naysayers on here can see this.
I do think people on here bash the current athletic administration quite a bit, so sometimes you have to tip your hat when something positive happens. Especially when it appears the athletic program is the one that spearheaded this deal, and it will ultimately garner $5 million (with a majority of that going to the rest of the university with $3 million, and $2 million going to athletics).
What difference does it make when you know they'll only misappropriate the funds?
Well, it took just under two hours for it to happen -- a negative comment on an otherwise completely positive story. Actually surprised it took that long.
Seriously, that's great news for the school. Thanks for sharing Ms. Paty.
Come on, Buc. That's a funny statement but completely inaccurate. Who are you? Dave
Buc2002 Wrote:Well, it took just under two hours for it to happen -- a negative comment on an otherwise completely positive story. Actually surprised it took that long.
Well you see in Pitts mind when a school uses money that a donor has given with for a specfic reason, oh say funding a golf center that is misappropriating the funds. Which is strange because i am pretty sure that if the school had taken and used the money for some other reason then what the donor had stated that really would have been misappropriating the funds but thats real world not Pitts worlds.
A retired VP of Coca Cola is an ETSU alum. They (he) has/have been pretty significant supporters of ETSU for quite some time.
Buc2002, I was just taking a playfully wild stab since you seemed to know more than the press release. I could be wrong but I counted $113,500 in cash from the statement. Still a nice figure though. I also figured only a representative of the athletic department would say they "spearheaded" this agreement. I would think most people would find it difficult to believe the A.D. "spearheaded" a campus-wide beverage distribution agreement with Coca-Cola especially when the rep from Coke doesn't mention one word about athletics in his quote.
Even if you are right on the $135,000 in cash, to get to $200,000 a year means a lot of coke,powerade and vitamin water. Do you know where the other "services" will be directed? Maybe they will be helping with facilities as well.
Mullins' quote mentioned BASA events and athletic training room for areas that would receive support like sodas and Powerade as part of the deal. Truth is that number in dollars could be a large figure when you think about the amount of drinks they use for an entire year.
Scoreboards are a part of the deal according to the release and they don't mention it specifically -- I don't think -- but there was a fee for the pouring "rights" for Coke at all of ETSU's new athletic facilities so that's some funds there as well (according to the radio report on JCW I heard today). The $200,000 is just simple math based on the $2 million number over 10 years.
If you'll remember, Pepsi was the beverage provider for athletics just over the last three years, and the overall campus had no deal whatsoever. This has to have stemmed from what they saw athletics do with Pepsi in the past few years, and the deal just grew to include the whole campus. Athletics obviously was the focus considering the press conference was in Memorial Center (also know this from the radio report), and all the photos on the link show athletic logos, Bucky and Mullins with the Coke reps.
Not sure how free cokes for the athletes and BASA will pay for all the projects '02/Mullins want to get done though. Can you compress all those empty cups and bottles and build a press box at the soccer stadium? This story seems to be a little, hmm, embellished? Typical...
Okay, misapropriate the funds was a cheap shot.
But the question I ask here is "How will this help the basketball team win?"
What I see is roughly $58,000 a year- out of millions- spent for advertising the ball clubs.
So what does that mean? We'll have more of those dreadful "Welcome Home" radio spots that actually said ETSU had a "world-renown athletic program?"
Now Rod, I realize that if a booster says "I want this donation to go to the golf program" it is going to the golf program.
But don't you see? When you can build a $2 million golf facility while the football program is falling into oblivion because they have raised only six percent of that amount, something is wrong.
etsualumni00 Wrote: Not sure how free cokes for the athletes and BASA will pay for all the projects '02/Mullins want to get done though. Can you compress all those empty cups and bottles and build a press box at the soccer stadium? This story seems to be a little, hmm, embellished? Typical...
So you didn't read the whole article I take it because it quiet clearly laid out all the benefits from the deal and it was much more then just free cokes. That was the first point but perhaps you missed things like.
$250,000 per year for exclusive vending commission
$43,500 per year for athletic marketing exposure
$50,000 per year for athletic sponsorship funding (with 3% increase each year)
$20,000 per year for scoreboard sponsorships
$25,000 per year for scholarships
$15,000 per year value in university marketing exposure
Welcome Back Student functions and recycling programs
So yeah free cokes only would suck but the rest of the deal looks pretty sweet.
$250,000 per year for exclusive vending commission - So what?
$43,500 per year for athletic marketing exposure - The women's basketball team just got $45,000 from the NCAA for marketing. So therefore one could probably stand to reason the women's basketball team will be the most marketed team at ETSU next year.
$50,000 per year for athletic sponsorship funding (with 3% increase each year)- So instead of hearing "COY SLAMS IT HOME!" we might get to hear "COY SLAMS IT HOME! THAT DUNK BROUGHT TO YOU BY COKE!" on the radio broadcasts.
$20,000 per year for scoreboard sponsorships- So what?
$25,000 per year for scholarships- At this point of what I've read Coke is spending $70,000 for ads and ETSU is getting back $25,000 for scholarships.
$15,000 per year value in university marketing exposure- What does "per year value" mean? Who determines "per year value?"
Welcome Back Student functions and recycling programs- A few more signs to litter the campus and theoretically a way for Coke to save money on future packaging.
I'm going to say this- at any other school in the country the athletic director would have been fired for this. The media would be running editorials speaking of how appalling it was an athletic director decided to hold a press conference so they could essentially advertise Coke.
What other college would do that? How is this newsworthy?
But when you consider Mullins will do spots for used car dealers this really isn't a surprise.
Rod, you might be the only one on here who took the "free cokes" thing literally. I obviously know it's more than just free cokes, but I don't think any of us know exactly how much more. Explain this statement:
"We appreciate Coke’s strong statement of their long-term commitment of nearly $2 million in cash and product to help us develop championship teams at ETSU.”
Most intelligent people know that Coke can say their product is worth about any amount when it comes to tax purposes for a donation. I'm certain it will be on the high end of fair market value, probably valued a little more than you and I would pay at the most expensive convenience store. So I don't think this deal is as exciting as we are made to believe. It certainly wouldn't have "saved" football, and it won't build any of the new facilities Mullins has planned. In fact, I bet there is a very small percentage of "real money" involved. Most of it will be the "value" of putting the ETSU logo on the side of their trucks, the "value" of a free scoreboard from Coke, and the "value" of free products they'll be getting.
Don't get me wrong, this appears to be a good thing for ETSU. They actually did something right this time. Some on here might think they've won the athletic sponsorship lottery, but it's about the same as you or I winning $25,000 - it's nice, but at the end of the day, we're not going to retire from our jobs.
Is ETSU getting a free scoreboard?
And aren't the scoreboards at Memorial Center, that keep track of all the points and have video boards and all of that, pretty good the way they are now?
Why do we want new scoreboards in an arena the school is trying to replace, anyway?
Is the ETSU logo going on the side of Coke trucks?
Even if they are, what does that mean?
"We couldn't get anybody around here to put ETSU bumper stickers on their cars, but by golly, all we had to do is let Coke have the monopoly on our concessions and they agreed to give us as much prominence on their trucks as the "How's My Driving?" sticker!
"FINAL FOUR- HERE WE COME!!!!!"
I'm convinced ETSU fans will be drinking all the old bottles of Surge that Coca-Cola had lying around in storage at games next year while Max Headroom becomes the team's secondary mascot.
Rod, you obviously didn't read the whole article or you misunderstood etsualumni00's question. He was was questioning the benefits to the athletes and BASA and your response was to throw out all of the benefits in the article. The $250,000 for vending commission does not go to the Pirate Club, it appears to me that the $25,000 in scholarships will not go to athletes given Dr. Bach's comments and Mullins' lack of specific comment about scholarships. You would think that if the sole purpose of the Pirate Club is to raise money for athletic scholarships they would have specifically mentioned that benefit, the $15,000 a year in university marketing doesn't go to the Pirate club or athletics, and the welcome back students doesn't go to athletics. Of course, if all of these benefits went to athletics they would have quoted a higher figure than nearly $2 million over the life of the contract.
Again, this is good news for ETSU and the athletic department but I thought we should try to keep the discourse here as honest and factual as possible. Kind of like the title of this thread. As Rod has already stated, almost every school has some kind of beverage distribution agreement with either Pepsi or Coke. Should we interpret this as Coke endorses what Mullins is doing to the athletic program or that Coke wants to partner with ETSU to sell product?
By the way, I don't see one picture with Mullins and Coke reps in the press release
If you were a Coke rep, would you want your picture taken with one of the least popular men in town?
Let me ask you- WHY is this good news for ETSU? Is this even a better deal than what they got from Pepsi for the last three years?
It's a non-issue. It really is.
And I deserve much love from the board for my Max Headroom comment. I don't even know where it came from!
PittsburghBucs Wrote:Is ETSU getting a free scoreboard?
And aren't the scoreboards at Memorial Center, that keep track of all the points and have video boards and all of that, pretty good the way they are now?
Why do we want new scoreboards in an arena the school is trying to replace, anyway?
and financial support for scoreboards in new athletic facilities.
Doesn't look like ETSU is planning to replace the scoreboards in the Dome.
As for corperate sponsorships last time I was in the Roundhouse (its been a few years) it looked like it should have been called the Dr Pepper Palace.
As for schools granted pouring rights to Pepsi or Coke it all started back in 1992 with.. wait for it. Penn St
Quote:Penn State University signed a $14 million, 10-year contract with Pepsi-Cola in 1992, giving the beverage company exclusive vending and advertising rights on each of 21 campuses collectively totaling 70,000 students. Never had an agreement been so all-encompassing, combining athletics sponsorship, vending machines and fountain sales. The executive vice president and provost of Penn State justified the deal by pointing out the state legislature had cut the university’s $250 million budget by 3.5 percent.
Others quickly followed. In the next two years, the University of Cincinatti, the University of Oregon and Rutgers signed contracts.
By the time University of Maryland sought $25 million to “name” its new field house and instead settled for an $8 million up-front, $260,000-per-year-in-potential-commissions, 15-year deal with Coca-Cola in December 1997, about 100 campuses and state higher education systems nationwide had inked deals with one of the two soft drink companies.
The University of Minnesota, with 37,000 students, has the record: a $28 million (non-guaranteed) 10-year contract with Coca-Cola.