The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

If we just get fair and equal representation I will be happy. Our own board would be nice. A split won't happen due to the above mentioned by blazr. Best we could hope for is our own board of ELECTED members.

Equal representation is the best outcome. A complete split would be disastrous because it would become open warfare between UA and UAB. At least now when it comes to some issues they aren't actively sabotaging Birmingham.

Scanning today's paper, for her sake i hope wita harbert's money is not tied into harbinger capital. I recall some connection between harbinger capital/harbert but not sure. I'm sure birmingham southern college will be hoping for a nice donation from her someday but she would seem to have enough to also fund UAB stadium, nothing probably gets big money more interested than naming the stadium for them.

(02-17-2012 07:12 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 06:47 PM)GreenMississippi Wrote:  If our political opponents want to run on the "Funnel UAB Hospital money to Tuscaloosa" platform, PLEASE run those ads in Jefferson, Shelby, and Madison county.

That's another pet peeve of mine. I've poured over the financial reports for UA and UAB and can't find the transfer of money from UAB to UA.

They surely use UAB's size and stature to sell the system to the state and donors, but no dollars generated at UAB are going down the road from what I can tell.

+1
You are correct - the transfer of large sums of money to the west is more of an urban legend than any basis in fact.

There enough bad things done by the BOT - we do not need to invent things

(02-18-2012 12:52 PM)uabbean Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 07:12 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 06:47 PM)GreenMississippi Wrote:  If our political opponents want to run on the "Funnel UAB Hospital money to Tuscaloosa" platform, PLEASE run those ads in Jefferson, Shelby, and Madison county.

That's another pet peeve of mine. I've poured over the financial reports for UA and UAB and can't find the transfer of money from UAB to UA.

They surely use UAB's size and stature to sell the system to the state and donors, but no dollars generated at UAB are going down the road from what I can tell.

+1
You are correct - the transfer of large sums of money to the west is more of an urban legend than any basis in fact.

There enough bad things done by the BOT - we do not need to invent things

So, if I've followed your posts over time:

"Everyone calm down. UAB's money is not flowing to Tuscaloosa."

yet, at the same time,

"Everyone panic!!! The medical side of UAB's campus wants nothing more than to eliminate athletics!!"

The point is not that UAB money is being laundered to wind up in Tuscaloosa, it's that UAB money is system money right now. When the UA System wants to float debt for a project on Tuscaloosa's campus, the amount of revenue considered by banks and investors includes UAB money. Yet, even though our money helps the Tuscaloosa campus be able to borrow more money and borrow it cheaper, the Birmingham campus - where the majority of that revenue is generated - is not allowed to leverage it the same way. And, back to the topic, if the government undertook the project to split the campuses, that UAB money is either going to count from that point forward as "Tuscaloosa money" or "Birmingham money" from a bottom-line perspective. I have a pretty good idea which conclusion would win out...

http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2012/02/many...eport.html

(02-18-2012 12:52 PM)uabbean Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 07:12 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 06:47 PM)GreenMississippi Wrote:  If our political opponents want to run on the "Funnel UAB Hospital money to Tuscaloosa" platform, PLEASE run those ads in Jefferson, Shelby, and Madison county.

That's another pet peeve of mine. I've poured over the financial reports for UA and UAB and can't find the transfer of money from UAB to UA.

They surely use UAB's size and stature to sell the system to the state and donors, but no dollars generated at UAB are going down the road from what I can tell.

+1
You are correct - the transfer of large sums of money to the west is more of an urban legend than any basis in fact.

There enough bad things done by the BOT - we do not need to invent things

I'm not saying money is being transferred... It's the marshaling of projects in terms of the project's being approved by the board per campus. Look at what expenses for projects were reportedly approved at the last 2 board meetings for UA's campus vs UAB's. According to sources at these meetings, there was a very large discrepancy.
Now, it seems to me that when one pores over the net assets per campus, UAT's 1.5 billion and UAB's 2.2 billion, there *appears* to be a skewing of projects, tilting to the favor of UAT.

(02-18-2012 02:38 PM)blazr Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 12:52 PM)uabbean Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 07:12 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 06:47 PM)GreenMississippi Wrote:  If our political opponents want to run on the "Funnel UAB Hospital money to Tuscaloosa" platform, PLEASE run those ads in Jefferson, Shelby, and Madison county.

That's another pet peeve of mine. I've poured over the financial reports for UA and UAB and can't find the transfer of money from UAB to UA.

They surely use UAB's size and stature to sell the system to the state and donors, but no dollars generated at UAB are going down the road from what I can tell.

+1
You are correct - the transfer of large sums of money to the west is more of an urban legend than any basis in fact.

There enough bad things done by the BOT - we do not need to invent things

So, if I've followed your posts over time:

"Everyone calm down. UAB's money is not flowing to Tuscaloosa."

yet, at the same time,

"Everyone panic!!! The medical side of UAB's campus wants nothing more than to eliminate athletics!!"

The point is not that UAB money is being laundered to wind up in Tuscaloosa, it's that UAB money is system money right now. When the UA System wants to float debt for a project on Tuscaloosa's campus, the amount of revenue considered by banks and investors includes UAB money. Yet, even though our money helps the Tuscaloosa campus be able to borrow more money and borrow it cheaper, the Birmingham campus - where the majority of that revenue is generated - is not allowed to leverage it the same way. And, back to the topic, if the government undertook the project to split the campuses, that UAB money is either going to count from that point forward as "Tuscaloosa money" or "Birmingham money" from a bottom-line perspective. I have a pretty good idea which conclusion would win out...

+1... Well stated.

very well stated blazr