Big news on practice facility donation

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

The money is good, I like the idea of a donor giving money without the requirement of a name on the side of the building. However at the same time I like to know who the state funded universities are in bed with so to speak. Maybe he/she just doesn't want to be named until everything is set in stone, but if this is entirely private (we never find out). I don't know how I feel about it.

Does anyone know if a large donation has been made by a completely anonymous source in the past?

I don't have a problem with JoeBoo asking these sorts of questions, and frankly I'm not totally comfortable with anonymous donations on principle.

I am thankful for the donation, however.

COMPLETELY HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION:

For instance, what if the anonymous donor was Monsanto? They are a HUGE company that is disliked by a lot of people (maybe not in this neck of the woods, but worldwide they are less popular than T Denny by far), and our president sits on their board. 6 months from now, Monsanto gets some sort of exclusive research deal with SDSU worth far more than 5 million. Would that have the appearance of impropriety?

[Nidaros]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

I don't have a problem with JoeBoo asking these sorts of questions, and frankly I'm not totally comfortable with anonymous donations on principle.

I am thankful for the donation, however.

COMPLETELY HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION:

For instance, what if the anonymous donor was Monsanto? They are a HUGE company that is disliked by a lot of people (maybe not in this neck of the woods, but worldwide they are less popular than T Denny by far), and our president sits on their board. 6 months from now, Monsanto gets some sort of exclusive research deal with SDSU worth far more than 5 million. Would that have the appearance of impropriety?

I am not so certain that this example is hypothetical but nearly real. Granted Montsano owns DeKalb seed corn as do every other herbicide companies own other corn seed companies. The free research could benefitsSD farmers and up yields 10 to 20 percent and with commodities such as corn, prices are not going down anytime soon, this would certainly benefit our local economy. I really dont know or have any clue what President Chicone's role is on the Montanso board. The appreance under these circumstances are not good on the surface, but I suspect the president choice to sign off on a big chunck of research would require some sort of venting process. I dont think Montsano has bought our guy. I see his presence on the Montanso board as an advantage to corn growers who some times complain about his presence on the board. Montanso like everyone else has to pay for their access to SDSU research.

[NoVaJack]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

I don't have a problem with JoeBoo asking these sorts of questions, and frankly I'm not totally comfortable with anonymous donations on principle.

I am thankful for the donation, however.

COMPLETELY HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION:

For instance, what if the anonymous donor was Monsanto? They are a HUGE company that is disliked by a lot of people (maybe not in this neck of the woods, but worldwide they are less popular than T Denny by far), and our president sits on their board. 6 months from now, Monsanto gets some sort of exclusive research deal with SDSU worth far more than 5 million. Would that have the appearance of impropriety?

Interesting point worthy of rep points.

[JackJD]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

I think most people have no problem with anonymous gifts. If you don’t like anonymous gifts, then make a gift yourself, put your name on it, and round up a bunch of buddies and get them to give too. You can bet that as soon as the indoor facility breaks ground, we’re going to tackle the new football stadium so keep your checkbook out. And if making a donation is not in the cards, that’s okay too – just be a great fan and support those who are making the gifts, anonymous or known.

(Is this the weirdest thread drift?) On the topic of Monsanto: I disagree with your assertion, SF_Rabbit_Fan, that Monsanto, worldwide, has some terrible reputation. I’m confident I can make a case, supported by lots of facts, showing Monsanto’s contributions to increasing crop production (feed the world, all those good things) significantly outweighs anything negative perceived about the company (I’m going to guess you’re referring to Monsanto’s aggressive protection of its patents and related matters). Monsanto is highly respect in many circles as an innovator and leader. And the comment about research: true research has to be conducted objectively or it’s worthless. So, no, Monsanto giving a grant to SDSU for research does not bother me because SDSU researchers have been and will continue to be objective.

"Monsanto Field at Coughlin Alumni Stadium". I like that.

[JackJD]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

There's more optimism plus some concept drawings of the indoor facility in the thread "Performance Center Deadline" found in the "Other Athletics/Alumni/Fundraising News" category on this message board. Jump: http://sdsufans.com/board/showthread...627#post208627

[Nidaros]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

I think most people have no problem with anonymous gifts. If you don’t like anonymous gifts, then make a gift yourself, put your name on it, and round up a bunch of buddies and get them to give too. You can bet that as soon as the indoor facility breaks ground, we’re going to tackle the new football stadium so keep your checkbook out. And if making a donation is not in the cards, that’s okay too – just be a great fan and support those who are making the gifts, anonymous or known.

(Is this the weirdest thread drift?) On the topic of Monsanto: I disagree with your assertion, SF_Rabbit_Fan, that Monsanto, worldwide, has some terrible reputation. I’m confident I can make a case, supported by lots of facts, showing Monsanto’s contributions to increasing crop production (feed the world, all those good things) significantly outweighs anything negative perceived about the company (I’m going to guess you’re referring to Monsanto’s aggressive protection of its patents and related matters). Monsanto is highly respect in many circles as an innovator and leader. And the comment about research: true research has to be conducted objectively or it’s worthless. So, no, Monsanto giving a grant to SDSU for research does not bother me because SDSU researchers have been and will continue to be objective.

"Monsanto Field at Coughlin Alumni Stadium". I like that.

+++ THIS. Better stated since you have a better awareness of Montsanto. I never did get those farmers who vocally opposed President Chicoine presence on the Montsano board. People often act and vote against their own interests. Naming rights acquired by Montsanto, might not be too far fetched.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

I think most people have no problem with anonymous gifts. If you don’t like anonymous gifts, then make a gift yourself, put your name on it, and round up a bunch of buddies and get them to give too. You can bet that as soon as the indoor facility breaks ground, we’re going to tackle the new football stadium so keep your checkbook out. And if making a donation is not in the cards, that’s okay too – just be a great fan and support those who are making the gifts, anonymous or known.

(Is this the weirdest thread drift?) On the topic of Monsanto: I disagree with your assertion, SF_Rabbit_Fan, that Monsanto, worldwide, has some terrible reputation. I’m confident I can make a case, supported by lots of facts, showing Monsanto’s contributions to increasing crop production (feed the world, all those good things) significantly outweighs anything negative perceived about the company (I’m going to guess you’re referring to Monsanto’s aggressive protection of its patents and related matters). Monsanto is highly respect in many circles as an innovator and leader. And the comment about research: true research has to be conducted objectively or it’s worthless. So, no, Monsanto giving a grant to SDSU for research does not bother me because SDSU researchers have been and will continue to be objective.

"Monsanto Field at Coughlin Alumni Stadium". I like that.

Worldwide, many people would place Monsanto right up there with oil companies or big banks. Everybody likes being able to fill their gastank or get a home loan, but lots of people don't like Exxon Mobile or Goldman Sachs. Lots of people would be uncomfortable with anonymous donations from those companies, too. Biased research is far from worthless in the hands of a mega-corporation interested in swaying public opinion. All I'm saying is that I share JoeBoo's concerns about anonymous donations, concerns that posters dismissed as stupid.

[Jacked_Up]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

... (W)hat if the anonymous donor was Monsanto? They are a HUGE company that is disliked by a lot of people (maybe not in this neck of the woods, but worldwide they are less popular than T Denny by far), and our president sits on their board. ...

I'd say that T. Denny Sanford is pretty darn popular, at least around here and in other places that he's donated money. Don't confuse jealousy of his wealth and success with unpopularity. Sanford is not well known worldwide in the same sense as Monsanta, which like any large company has critics. Overall, however, Monsanto is a highly reputable and successful company.

[joeboo22]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

All what I was getting at is I like the donations that are made public rather then not. If 2 years from now SDSU agrees to a big contract with X company (may be Monsanto, may be a dairy product company, may be a vendor agreement, etc.) Which ultimately cost the University and the students more in the long run, I don't want that company to have gotten the in because of an anonymous $5 million donation. My guess is though certain people in the know, know who this donor is and would make sure it wouldn't happen.

As far as Monsanto, Monsanto does a ton of shady stuff, just as DuPont, Dow Chemical and Syngenta do. Agribusiness is a multi billion dollar a year business and all of them have big deals with ag-schools. I wouldn't put it past 1 of them to try to gain an upper hand any which way possible.

[JackJD]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

SFRabbitFan and joeboo: I support your right and your willingness to state your opinions. Personally, I question why people take broad assertions that likely are not provable (but seem to sound pretty reasonable) and use those assertions as a foundation for making decisions or at least conclusions on which decisions may be made. But, if that's what some like to do, have at it.

[For some reason I am reminded of the Saturday Night Live skit on undecided voters which aired recently. Look it up, it's hilarious satire showing people who sound real serious and sincere but are totally lost. Again it's satire but like all good satire, the writers hit a nerve.]

[MH351]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

I hadn't realized Monsanto had joined ranks with Exxon and banks as enemies of the people. Are there any companies that are profitable that are ok? All the same, I'm very glad for this anonymous donation, and look forward to having it help us win in the future.

[zooropa]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

Which ultimately cost the University and the students more in the long run

Huh?

This isn't Faust. The donor was not Mephistopholes.

The university is not going to obligate itself to more expenses in the long term than it just received in donations.

[RowdyRabbit]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

Huh?

This isn't Faust. The donor was not Mephistopholes.

The university is not going to obligate itself to more expenses in the long term than it just received in donations.

ROFL. The Mephistopholes part really, and I mean REALLY struck a funny bone. Must spread reps.

Although, technically, it *could* have been...it was anonymous. Cripes sakes, now our athletic teams will have to enter the stadiums and arena's through the gates of Hell because of the strings attached to his donation.

Seriously. I found it a tad ridiculous listening to everyone curse and swear at T. Denny Sanford for throwing his name around with his money...now someone donates anonymously and everyone is cursing the anonymity. People floor me, I swear.

[filbert]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

Well played, Sir. Well played.

Huh?

This isn't Faust. The donor was not Mephistopholes.

The university is not going to obligate itself to more expenses in the long term than it just received in donations.

[LakeJack]

Re: Big news on practice facility donation

ROFL. The Mephistopholes part really, and I mean REALLY struck a funny bone. Must spread reps.

Although, technically, it *could* have been...it was anonymous. Cripes sakes, now our athletic teams will have to enter the stadiums and arena's through the gates of Hell because of the strings attached to his donation.

Seriously. I found it a tad ridiculous listening to everyone curse and swear at T. Denny Sanford for throwing his name around with his money...now someone donates anonymously and everyone is cursing the anonymity. People floor me, I swear.

This.