Received my MG Membership Guide

[southsideguy]

Going through it on Page 2 I see the CUSA schools  showing their Total Alumni and athletic donors and the annual fund contributions. I was shocked and saddened by the chart.  UNT has the largest Alumni and fewest donors to the athletic department and we are dead last in Annual Fund Contributions.  What is our problem and dont say winning is the answer, UTEP and UTSA are both killing us.  I don't understand our alumni base and the city of denton.

[untjim1995]

Until very, very recently, Athletics has been treated with disdain by the BOR and administration. He faculty hated its existence, mostly, so it easily spread to The student body/alumni. And the previous AD was lazy as hell, but kept his job for 15 years because he stayed in his meager budget every year and never complained about the lack of funding. Everything was all about cost...known costs, not opportunity costs.

Thankfully, it appears that this line of thinking is finally changing at the top, so it will filter down accordingly. 

[UNTLifer]

North Texas never has successfully asked for donations, academic, athletic, etc..., ever and that is the problem.  Every other school is constantly in contact with their alumni by mail, email, phone call, etc... asking for donations, but not North Texas.  My family still receives an annual solicitation from the college my Dad received his B.S. from way back in the late 40's/early 50's.  North Texas?  Nothing and we fund a family scholarship.

[DeepGreen]

Everyone is spot on.  I have several UNT classmates that I'm still in touch with and none of them are connected with UNT.  Not bragging, but some of these guys are well heeled.  Retired and had very successful careers.

My opinion, and it's been discussed on here many times, but UNT missed the boat shen they dropped down to D1AA(now FCS) for that 10 year period.  And all that was required was expand Fouts to 30K.

We lost so many fans.  We get back in to FBS but never increased the funding to support it.  Until now.

[NorthTexan95]

22 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

North Texas never has successfully asked for donations, academic, athletic, etc..., ever and that is the problem.  Every other school is constantly in contact with their alumni by mail, email, phone call, etc... asking for donations, but not North Texas.  My family still receives an annual solicitation from the college my Dad received his B.S. from way back in the late 40's/early 50's.  North Texas?  Nothing and we fund a family scholarship.

This.  Until recently there was no central database for contacting alumni.  I believe at for awhile athletics did not have permission to ask alumni for donations. 

[Wag Tag]

Just raised close to $9m from alumni for the IPF! How does that compare?

[outoftown]

I thought WB and NS just managed to get a new record in donations this year? What is the chance 2018 is gonna be a new record yet again?

You need to ask for donations, and you need to do it when you got some real attention for winning. Doing one without the other is not gonna net you much, and it feels like UNT has never before managed to get both of those things right at the same moment.
 

Edited March 23, 2018 by outoftown

[oldguystudent]

I think I saw this guide at Apogee once, but don't recall ever getting one in the mail.  Are they sending them out? 

[southsideguy]

yes i got mine today with the bill for my MSF and season tickets.

On 3/20/2018 at 2:30 PM, GrayEagle said:

Twenty win season sounds great but don't tell them that we had eighteen losses.  Still, a 20 win season after five years of Benford is quite an accomplishment.

 

[meangreenJW]

I think it's three things. 

1) The biggest factor is lack of success. The numbers in the new book are "annual fund donations" and don't include capital gifts (facilities, etc.). The majority of annual funds gifts (MGSF formerly MGC) will be required commitment for seats and parking. Lack of success = lack of tickets sold = low demand for premium seats and parking and thus the required donations.

2) Low prices - While there was a lot of chirping on some of the donation changes, it's a double whammy when you sell less tickets and are at the bottom in donations required for those tickets. 

3) Lack of a strategy - I've received, seen, heard, etc. more about the MGC/MGSF this year than all years combined. Tweets, facebook posts, emails, on field presentations, etc. I don't recall seeing many (any) before this year. Constantly preaching that MGSF supports student-athletes combined with success will build the base. 

There are numerous other factors (the mentioned lack of pride, institutional culture, etc) but in my opinion these factors are the primary contributors.

What I appreciate is the new regime doesn't hide from the numbers. I felt like RV hid how low they were. This group seems to put it out there at every opportunity. It's a not so subtle step the heck up message.

[Zeke]

16 hours ago, Prettylittleeagle said:

What is our problem? My opinion? Most people who go to UNT don't own that they went to UNT. Our alumni as a whole are disengaged from the university. If you look at our overall university donations I would assume they are in the same place. For many many many years, no one has really given an S about UNT. I have family that went to UNT that don't ever speak of UNT unless I bring it up. I have friends who transferred into UNT from P5 schools that they attended for 1 year and still don't consider them selves a UNT mean green. It's the culture of the university, I don't know that it's specifically a problem within the AD. We are turning around the AD side of things. 

This is very true.  How many of you:

• Have friends and family that are certain you are the biggest Mean Green fan EVER
• Find it as almost a novelty that you follow the team
  • "You have season tickets?!"  
  • "You go to Every game??!"
• Ask you about the team with almost a smirk on their face

[untjim1995]

12 hours ago, meangreenJW said:

I think it's three things. 

1) The biggest factor is lack of success. The numbers in the new book are "annual fund donations" and don't include capital gifts (facilities, etc.). The majority of annual funds gifts (MGSF formerly MGC) will be required commitment for seats and parking. Lack of success = lack of tickets sold = low demand for premium seats and parking and thus the required donations.

2) Low prices - While there was a lot of chirping on some of the donation changes, it's a double whammy when you sell less tickets and are at the bottom in donations required for those tickets. 

3) Lack of a strategy - I've received, seen, heard, etc. more about the MGC/MGSF this year than all years combined. Tweets, facebook posts, emails, on field presentations, etc. I don't recall seeing many (any) before this year. Constantly preaching that MGSF supports student-athletes combined with success will build the base. 

There are numerous other factors (the mentioned lack of pride, institutional culture, etc) but in my opinion these factors are the primary contributors.

What I appreciate is the new regime doesn't hide from the numbers. I felt like RV hid how low they were. This group seems to put it out there at every opportunity. It's a not so subtle step the heck up message.

There is absolutely no doubt RV hid the numbers. When Cerebrus posted the article that showed we had increased membership by something like 764 in the MGC 2014, he figured out that we had gotten less than 1% of alumni in that 12 year time frame to join. That s almost impossible to do, unless you just aren't trying--which we now know he wasn't. RV knew that the BOR and administration didn't care, they just didn't want the thing costing money more than what they allocated. As costs still kept going up, he got 17 people to fund his extra stuff by selling them on "access". It took some time, but eventually, the right hire (i.e. Smatresk) finally corrected the multitude of wrong hires and wrong decisions that had been made under RV's watch.

Wren Baker is breath of fresh air. He knows he has the full backing of Neal Smatresk. And Seth Littrell and Grant McCasland are the fruits of making legitimately good hires. And, no, RV had nothing to do with Littrell's hire.

I really think the future here is about as bright as it can be for our athletic programs. Yes, we are still below where I believe we need to be, conference-wise, and there may not be anything we can do about it, to be frank. SMU keeps us from AAC membership. Who knows what ends up happening with TCU in the future, but the MWC could easily be their home in the years ahead when the Big XII GOR expires. If that happens, and we don't get into the AAC or MWC or whatever league comes from the remainder of the Big XII, I am not sure what that means. But, for now, for the next 5 years, in my opinion, things look really promising here. An we haven't said that about both main revenue sports, simultaneously, in forever. And it might just be what keeps us in the highest level of FBS play in the years ahead when the future culling occurs. 

[SilverEagle]

I'm going to go over this again.......for the umpteenth time. Please pay attention.

We are in this situation because HISTORICALLY we have been the "best-little-teachers-college-we-can-be-so-there's-no-reason-to-solicit-outside-funds......for anything-school".  It's been that way since North Texas was founded and continued on until the Presidency of one James Carl Matthews (1951-1968). So that has been 78 years. 

 All of those presidents may have been very religious men, but when it comes to the outside fundraising issue.....they've all been a bunch of heathens. I've heard more than one story from credible sources where Dr. Matthews refused to accept money, or refused to consider accepting money, from alumni to start scholarship funds etc. Dr. Matthews attitude was "we get enough money from the state to run this school and we don't need to raise any additional funds". I'm told that he refused to allow a Mean Green Club-like organization to be created. He (allegedly)  stated that the University gives the athletic department an adequate budget to operate under and there is no need for additional funding. 

Finally that changed (in theory) when Dr. Matthews retired and whoever was in charge of replacing him decided that we needed a President who was more in the present. Initially that guy was John Kemerick who only lasted until 1970 when his anti-Vietnam war views got him in trouble with the Governor and he was forced to resign.  

John Carter served as interim until the next president was hired.

C.C. "Jitter" Nolan was hired next. And it wasn't because he was an outstanding academic. He was known to be a very good fund raiser and that is what he set about doing. He had only a bachelors degree, so all of the "academics/ Dr. Matthews minions" at North Texas were very unhappy with the hire. During his tenure he was the one who figured out how to hire Hayden Fry. Fry subsequently started the Mean Green Club.....around 1973. 

I don't know this for sure, but I suspect that Nolan was responsible for the University creating it's endowment fund. 

Anyway, to shorten this rant, not long after Fry left for Iowa the academics ganged up on Nolan and ran him out of town.

Since then, any attempts to have a consistent fund raising program for athletics has gone in fits and starts. IMHO, thanks to the "old nesters" still embedded in administrative posts, fund raising for athletics has never been either a priority, or consistent.  

It's only been in very recent history that that "cultural" change that we've needed to happen for decades is finally  happening. 

SO, to summarize, it's been in our DNA to not fund raise and getting that out of our system has been/will be a long process. But this Mean Green guide represents (IMHO) a significant change in engagement with fans. 

 

Edited March 23, 2018 by SilverEagle

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

I think this AD is making a big mistake trying to milk his known donors instead of actively trying to get new donors (game attendees). 

If the club level family with four seats is already paying $4000+ a year to go to 5 games (+1 Liberty type school 'game') -- I really think they are barking up the wrong tree. I know of a couple families that dropped out this year since the cost outweighs any benefits. Any time they have extra tickets, they can't even give them away. 

 

 

[Wag Tag]

1 hour ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

I think this AD is making a big mistake trying to milk his known donors instead of actively trying to get new donors (game attendees). 

If the club level family with four seats is already paying $4000+ a year to go to 5 games (+1 Liberty type school 'game') -- I really think they are barking up the wrong tree. I know of a couple families that dropped out this year since the cost outweighs any benefits. Any time they have extra tickets, they can't even give them away. 

 

 

Amazing... they are getting new donors everyday! The  increase in DONATIONS is the proof! Record breaking!

Edited March 23, 2018 by Wag Tag

[BTG_Fan1]

21 hours ago, meangreenJW said:

I think it's three things. 

1) The biggest factor is lack of success. The numbers in the new book are "annual fund donations" and don't include capital gifts (facilities, etc.). The majority of annual funds gifts (MGSF formerly MGC) will be required commitment for seats and parking. Lack of success = lack of tickets sold = low demand for premium seats and parking and thus the required donations.

2) Low prices - While there was a lot of chirping on some of the donation changes, it's a double whammy when you sell less tickets and are at the bottom in donations required for those tickets. 

3) Lack of a strategy - I've received, seen, heard, etc. more about the MGC/MGSF this year than all years combined. Tweets, facebook posts, emails, on field presentations, etc. I don't recall seeing many (any) before this year. Constantly preaching that MGSF supports student-athletes combined with success will build the base. 

There are numerous other factors (the mentioned lack of pride, institutional culture, etc) but in my opinion these factors are the primary contributors.

What I appreciate is the new regime doesn't hide from the numbers. I felt like RV hid how low they were. This group seems to put it out there at every opportunity. It's a not so subtle step the heck up message.

I feel like the numbers comes out is meant to show the fan base how much help is needed. It puts pressure on the fan base in a good way. For people that do care, it should show that even a small 1 time donation every year for $20 bucks helps. 

2 hours ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

I think this AD is making a big mistake trying to milk his known donors instead of actively trying to get new donors (game attendees). 

If the club level family with four seats is already paying $4000+ a year to go to 5 games (+1 Liberty type school 'game') -- I really think they are barking up the wrong tree. I know of a couple families that dropped out this year since the cost outweighs any benefits. Any time they have extra tickets, they can't even give them away. 

It’s not going after people who donate.. it’s presenting people who do donate with information for them.

If I get a letter and it shows that .03% of Alumni donate, when I do meet up with friends and we talk about UNT or a friend comes with me to a game, that is when someone who does donate says hey you should look into donating.. Word of month from me to you is far more effective than a random Facebook post or tweet. 

Also, presenting those numbers to donors should not annoy them. It’s meant for the season ticket holders who aren’t members to see the benefits and see how much of a difference it can make.

[Christopher Walker]

Tangential... but Mean Green Nation's own @aztecskin and fam are featured on the Alumni Association's annual report that was just sent out:

https://twitter.com/fussbudgets/status/977309825083301889

Edited March 24, 2018 by Christopher Walker

[UNT Mean Green]

On 3/22/2018 at 7:32 PM, Wag Tag said:

Just raised close to $9m from alumni for the IPF! How does that compare?

Annual fund donations and capital gift pledges are very different.

[Wag Tag]

Wrong the source is the same! Alumni 

[aztecskin]

15 hours ago, Christopher Walker said:

Tangential... but Mean Green Nation's own @aztecskin and fam are featured on the Alumni Association's annual report that was just sent out:

https://twitter.com/fussbudgets/status/977309825083301889

its funny and a little strange. 

[Christopher Walker]

2 hours ago, aztecskin said:

its funny and a little strange. 

#photogenicfam

[TIgreen01]

Bunch of whining in here.  I have had more contact from the school and AD this year than in any year from the past 20... And probably more than just the last 5 years combined. 

Quit the pessimism

[edcollopy]

I got the brochure and thought it was very well done and really spelled out how easy it is to make your payments over a period of time.  Made it super easy.  I increased my donation 50% because of the ease.

[Cerebus]

This is a historical issue. 

The schools who do fundraising well have a good database of contacts, that they have built over decades.

When they were building those databases, our administration was so afraid of outside influence that at one point a president banned donations.   So what ends up happening is that there is no central database.  Over time, some schools/centers/etc started to build their own data.  Now, everyone is incredibly protective of their own.

What Smatresk is going to have to do is keep pushing to build a central development database, and force everyone to share all the data they have.  Once the data is fully shared, then it incentivises everyone to keep populating and updating the database.  

It doesn't matter how many development officers you hire if they only know a tiny fraction of your actual alumni base.  

[diehardUNTfan]

On 3/23/2018 at 9:59 AM, Zeke said:

This is very true.  How many of you:

• Have friends and family that are certain you are the biggest Mean Green fan EVER
• Find it as almost a novelty that you follow the team
  • "You have season tickets?!"  
  • "You go to Every game??!"
• Ask you about the team with almost a smirk on their face

so true