menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: Vedder cited in MAC student fee discussion
Page: 3 of 7
mail
person
Alan Swank
6/9/2016 4:13 PM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
Do student fees cover the shows at Memorial Auditorium or plays at Kantner Hall?
Here's a link to this year's Performing Arts Series and as you can see a season student ticket is $105.

https://www.ohio.edu/performingarts/tickets.cfm
mail
person
Alan Swank
6/9/2016 4:14 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
Robert I disagree that the students are "buying" their tickets. The students are systematically being "charged" for their tickets thru the student fees, they aren't given a choice whether to "buy" or not. How many students do you think would choose to "opt-out" if given the choice whether to subsidize athletics thru their fees? I'm fearful that would be a big number of students that would be saying no thanks.
Are there public universities that don't charge similar fees?
From osu's website;

Student Activity Fee:
All students at the Columbus campus of The Ohio State University are assessed a Student Activity Fee each term to support programs that benefit all students. The fee supports free on-campus entertainment, cultural and arts events, student organizations and clubs, and discounted tickets to sports, arts and cultural events in the Columbus community and throughout Ohio. Approved by the Board of Trustees to support free and discounted programs and opportunities on and around campus for all students. The fee is$37.50 per term. Learn more at http://ohiounion.osu.edu/get_involved/student_activity_fe... .
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
6/9/2016 5:09 PM
The Optimist wrote:expand_more
At the end of the day, we all love Ohio athletics. But Ohio athletics, as currently constituted, isn't anywhere near being financially self-supporting without significant, compulsory subsidies from the student population. So pretty much everyone here is free-riding, to some extent, on the fees that the institution's current students are subjected to.

Reasonable minds can differ on the acceptability of that, but to suggest that anyone who questions the sustainability or appropriateness of OU's current athletic funding model doesn't "get it" is pretty close-minded.

You make a VERY large assumption that everyone here isn't contributing to those subsidies that you mention.

I started posting on this board as a high school student prior to ever enrolling at Ohio. I've posted on this board as: a prospective student, student paying fees, student attending games, alumni paying student loans, alumni donating to OBC, alumni buying season tickets, alumni contributing to OBC capital projects and MULTIPLE combinations of the proceeding.

I would argue that your stance is "close-minded." Your argument is examining this issue as "Ohio athletics." If you think this is about "Ohio athletics" and not "Ohio University" I respect your opinion as little as The Situation respects the opinion of Monroe Slavin. "Ohio Athletics" is the window to "Ohio University."

To imply that Situation doesn't respect my opinion is hurtful.


With love, of course.
mail
person
Recovering Journalist
6/9/2016 6:58 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
Robert I disagree that the students are "buying" their tickets. The students are systematically being "charged" for their tickets thru the student fees, they aren't given a choice whether to "buy" or not. How many students do you think would choose to "opt-out" if given the choice whether to subsidize athletics thru their fees? I'm fearful that would be a big number of students that would be saying no thanks.
Are there public universities that don't charge similar fees?
Should Ohio be sending students away if they don't want to subsidize sports?

There are plenty of high-achieving students who make the campus a better place who care very little (if at all) about athletics.

"Pick another school with a lower or non-existent fee" is not a solution to this problem.
mail
person
Robert Fox
6/9/2016 9:04 PM
Recovering Journalist wrote:expand_more
Robert I disagree that the students are "buying" their tickets. The students are systematically being "charged" for their tickets thru the student fees, they aren't given a choice whether to "buy" or not. How many students do you think would choose to "opt-out" if given the choice whether to subsidize athletics thru their fees? I'm fearful that would be a big number of students that would be saying no thanks.
Are there public universities that don't charge similar fees?
Should Ohio be sending students away if they don't want to subsidize sports?

There are plenty of high-achieving students who make the campus a better place who care very little (if at all) about athletics.

"Pick another school with a lower or non-existent fee" is not a solution to this problem.
Are students turning away because of the sports fee? Or is this an imagined problem.
mail
person
Recovering Journalist
6/9/2016 9:26 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
Robert I disagree that the students are "buying" their tickets. The students are systematically being "charged" for their tickets thru the student fees, they aren't given a choice whether to "buy" or not. How many students do you think would choose to "opt-out" if given the choice whether to subsidize athletics thru their fees? I'm fearful that would be a big number of students that would be saying no thanks.
Are there public universities that don't charge similar fees?
Should Ohio be sending students away if they don't want to subsidize sports?

There are plenty of high-achieving students who make the campus a better place who care very little (if at all) about athletics.

"Pick another school with a lower or non-existent fee" is not a solution to this problem.
Are students turning away because of the sports fee? Or is this an imagined problem.
When the average 2014 graduate nationally had almost $29,000 in debt and our program was subsidized at $18.8 million a year for 2014-2015, it is far from an imagined problem. We're at a point where hard questions are being asked about all that money. Student interest is flat or declining at most schools yet the cost to float the programs continues to rise. If you really think there's no problem, you're not paying attention.
mail
person
Alan Swank
6/9/2016 9:52 PM
This is an intriguing discussion in that those regular posters who would probably identify as republican are all for the fees (higher taxes, government mandates) and those who would identify as democrats are questioning the legitimacy and sustainability of those fees. It appears that those labels have been reversed.
mail
RSBobcat
6/9/2016 11:18 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
This is an intriguing discussion in that those regular posters who would probably identify as republican are all for the fees (higher taxes, government mandates) and those who would identify as democrats are questioning the legitimacy and sustainability of those fees. It appears that those labels have been reversed.
Most all tend to favor "subsidies" that support their own particular interest - whatever else you want to call them (taxes, fees, etc.)
mail
TWT
6/9/2016 11:45 PM
BobcatSports wrote:expand_more
It's a deadly combo that we are facing and I think the long-term consequences are dire: Rising student fees that support athletics and declining student attendance at the events they are signaling with their absence that they don't support. Not a good mix.
Student fees aren't rising at Ohio. They are actually going down as revenue sources have ticked up in the last couple of years. Increased enrollment means the amount of subsidy per student is heading downward. Ohio is already resourcing its programs well. I question the idea that costs for athletics will spiral out of control when there isn't much more the school can do on the resource front.
mail
TWT
6/9/2016 11:59 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
This is an intriguing discussion in that those regular posters who would probably identify as republican are all for the fees (higher taxes, government mandates) and those who would identify as democrats are questioning the legitimacy and sustainability of those fees. It appears that those labels have been reversed.
The portion of the student fee for athletics is just a few hundred dollars a year. If your going down the path of questioning fees, why not question the price of room and board which is now astronomical? Then also its forgotten that athletics brings millions of dollars into the community. The economic impact of Ohio Athletics to SE Ohio is 15-20 million a year. Ohio has an economic mission in Southeast Ohio and athletics helps to support that.
mail
OhioCatFan
6/10/2016 12:14 AM
Uncle Wes wrote:expand_more
. . . Then also its forgotten that athletics brings millions of dollars into the community. The economic impact of Ohio Athletics to SE Ohio is 15-20 million a year. Ohio has an economic mission in Southeast Ohio and athletics helps to support that.
I think that this a very good point that's often overlooked in this debate. I also agree that student fees as a percentage of overall costs (tuition, books, lodging, meals, etc.) will be decreasing over the next few years. This is in part due to increased TV revenue and money flowing in from the new College Football Playoff system. This won't result in a drastic decrease in the percent of athletic costs borne by student fees, but it will be a noticeable impact, IMHO.
Last Edited: 6/10/2016 12:15:54 AM by OhioCatFan
mail
TWT
6/10/2016 12:24 AM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
. . . Then also its forgotten that athletics brings millions of dollars into the community. The economic impact of Ohio Athletics to SE Ohio is 15-20 million a year. Ohio has an economic mission in Southeast Ohio and athletics helps to support that.
I think that this a very good point that's often overlooked in this debate. I also agree that student fees as a percentage of overall costs (tuition, books, lodging, meals, etc.) will be decreasing over the next few years. This is in part due to increased TV revenue and money flowing in from the new College Football Playoff system. This won't result in a drastic decrease in the percent of athletic costs borne by student fees, but it will be a noticeable impact, IMHO.
While costs have leveled out.
mail
person
Robert Fox
6/10/2016 8:08 AM
Recovering Journalist wrote:expand_more
When the average 2014 graduate nationally had almost $29,000 in debt and our program was subsidized at $18.8 million a year for 2014-2015, it is far from an imagined problem. We're at a point where hard questions are being asked about all that money. Student interest is flat or declining at most schools yet the cost to float the programs continues to rise. If you really think there's no problem, you're not paying attention.
Student interest at Ohio University is NOT flat or declining. Student interest is up despite these fees. My level of attention is adequate, I assure you.

Alan,
I agree this issue is divided along ideological lines. I disagree this is an unavoidable "tax." It is not. A student doesn't HAVE to pay these fees. If a student is truly offended by them, go to school elsewhere. That same opportunity is NOT available for items that are subsidized by taxes.
mail
person
colobobcat66
6/10/2016 8:59 AM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
When the average 2014 graduate nationally had almost $29,000 in debt and our program was subsidized at $18.8 million a year for 2014-2015, it is far from an imagined problem. We're at a point where hard questions are being asked about all that money. Student interest is flat or declining at most schools yet the cost to float the programs continues to rise. If you really think there's no problem, you're not paying attention.
Student interest at Ohio University is NOT flat or declining. Student interest is up despite these fees. My level of attention is adequate, I assure you.

Alan,
I agree this issue is divided along ideological lines. I disagree this is an unavoidable "tax." It is not. A student doesn't HAVE to pay these fees. If a student is truly offended by them, go to school elsewhere. That same opportunity is NOT available for items that are subsidized by taxes.
I can assure you that some people move to states where taxes are less, although you can't do much about that for federal taxes.
mail
Mike Johnson
6/10/2016 9:24 AM
In early 2015 a mother in Latrobe, Pennsylvania asked if I could arrange a day for her high school daughter who was interested in engineering and, after googling, had learned about Russ College.

With help from two admin assistants at OU, the day included a meeting with the Russ dean, a meeting with two student ambassadors who then led the tour, lunch with the Russ dean and three faculty members, a meeting with a senior admissions staffer and a campus tour. At the end of the day, I accompanied mother and daughter to the Hampton Inn where they had spent the previous night. The mother picked up the phone and called her husband. Here is a sentence I remember her saying verbatim: "Even with the out-of-state tuition, OU is competitive with state schools in Pennsylvania and New Jersey."

The daughter has enrolled at Ohio for September 2016.
mail
person
Robert Fox
6/10/2016 9:41 AM
colobobcat66 wrote:expand_more
When the average 2014 graduate nationally had almost $29,000 in debt and our program was subsidized at $18.8 million a year for 2014-2015, it is far from an imagined problem. We're at a point where hard questions are being asked about all that money. Student interest is flat or declining at most schools yet the cost to float the programs continues to rise. If you really think there's no problem, you're not paying attention.
Student interest at Ohio University is NOT flat or declining. Student interest is up despite these fees. My level of attention is adequate, I assure you.

Alan,
I agree this issue is divided along ideological lines. I disagree this is an unavoidable "tax." It is not. A student doesn't HAVE to pay these fees. If a student is truly offended by them, go to school elsewhere. That same opportunity is NOT available for items that are subsidized by taxes.

I can assure you that some people move to states where taxes are less, although you can't do much about that for federal taxes.
Agree. But I"m not sure I'm following your point.
Last Edited: 6/10/2016 9:42:28 AM by Robert Fox
mail
person
Alan Swank
6/10/2016 9:41 AM
Here's how the general fee is distributed:

https://www.ohio.edu/finance/bpa/upload/General-Fee-FY-20...
mail
The Optimist
6/10/2016 10:30 AM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
When the average 2014 graduate nationally had almost $29,000 in debt and our program was subsidized at $18.8 million a year for 2014-2015, it is far from an imagined problem. We're at a point where hard questions are being asked about all that money. Student interest is flat or declining at most schools yet the cost to float the programs continues to rise. If you really think there's no problem, you're not paying attention.
Student interest at Ohio University is NOT flat or declining. Student interest is up despite these fees.
Year after year, applications are breaking records for students wanting to attend OHIO University.

The fees are known to applicants, up-front. This is not a situation where people apply, get to Ohio and then say "wait, I have to pay that fee?" Nope. If the fee is something that was going to stop people from attending Ohio University, that would happen before they apply/choose to attend OHIO.

That isn't happening, because the fees (while not something anyone WANTS to pay) is accepted by many as part of attending a residential campus with diverse offerings for students.


...


I agree with those who question the VALUE of a college degree. I think there are a lot of people who are attending college that would be better off (from a purely financial standpoint) by foregoing college and choosing a different career path. I'm conflicted with this, because I firmly believe that much of the value in a college degree comes from personal growth outside the classroom and education offerings. This is not easily reflected in determining the financial return on a college degree. I place a great value of the learning and experiences I had outside of my degree-path at Ohio University.
Last Edited: 6/10/2016 10:34:58 AM by The Optimist
mail
person
colobobcat66
6/10/2016 3:07 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
When the average 2014 graduate nationally had almost $29,000 in debt and our program was subsidized at $18.8 million a year for 2014-2015, it is far from an imagined problem. We're at a point where hard questions are being asked about all that money. Student interest is flat or declining at most schools yet the cost to float the programs continues to rise. If you really think there's no problem, you're not paying attention.
Student interest at Ohio University is NOT flat or declining. Student interest is up despite these fees. My level of attention is adequate, I assure you.

Alan,
I agree this issue is divided along ideological lines. I disagree this is an unavoidable "tax." It is not. A student doesn't HAVE to pay these fees. If a student is truly offended by them, go to school elsewhere. That same opportunity is NOT available for items that are subsidized by taxes.

I can assure you that some people move to states where taxes are less, although you can't do much about that for federal taxes.
Agree. But I"m not sure I'm following your point.

Just saying that people can chose to go where their taxes are less, just like students can go where fees are less. Pretty much a choice to be made by an individual where they want to go.
mail
person
Alan Swank
6/10/2016 3:22 PM
The Optimist wrote:expand_more
When the average 2014 graduate nationally had almost $29,000 in debt and our program was subsidized at $18.8 million a year for 2014-2015, it is far from an imagined problem. We're at a point where hard questions are being asked about all that money. Student interest is flat or declining at most schools yet the cost to float the programs continues to rise. If you really think there's no problem, you're not paying attention.
Student interest at Ohio University is NOT flat or declining. Student interest is up despite these fees.
Year after year, applications are breaking records for students wanting to attend OHIO University.

The fees are known to applicants, up-front. This is not a situation where people apply, get to Ohio and then say "wait, I have to pay that fee?" Nope. If the fee is something that was going to stop people from attending Ohio University, that would happen before they apply/choose to attend OHIO.

That isn't happening, because the fees (while not something anyone WANTS to pay) is accepted by many as part of attending a residential campus with diverse offerings for students.


...


I agree with those who question the VALUE of a college degree. I think there are a lot of people who are attending college that would be better off (from a purely financial standpoint) by foregoing college and choosing a different career path. I'm conflicted with this, because I firmly believe that much of the value in a college degree comes from personal growth outside the classroom and education offerings. This is not easily reflected in determining the financial return on a college degree. I place a great value of the learning and experiences I had outside of my degree-path at Ohio University.
The tough part is that there are so many jobs out there that don't really require a college degree but the job description/hr departments state that you must have one. It's kind of like a high school diploma was required 50 or 60 years ago.
Last Edited: 6/10/2016 3:24:31 PM by Alan Swank
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
6/10/2016 6:49 PM
colobobcat66 wrote:expand_more
When the average 2014 graduate nationally had almost $29,000 in debt and our program was subsidized at $18.8 million a year for 2014-2015, it is far from an imagined problem. We're at a point where hard questions are being asked about all that money. Student interest is flat or declining at most schools yet the cost to float the programs continues to rise. If you really think there's no problem, you're not paying attention.
Student interest at Ohio University is NOT flat or declining. Student interest is up despite these fees. My level of attention is adequate, I assure you.

Alan,
I agree this issue is divided along ideological lines. I disagree this is an unavoidable "tax." It is not. A student doesn't HAVE to pay these fees. If a student is truly offended by them, go to school elsewhere. That same opportunity is NOT available for items that are subsidized by taxes.

I can assure you that some people move to states where taxes are less, although you can't do much about that for federal taxes.
Agree. But I"m not sure I'm following your point.

Just saying that people can chose to go where their taxes are less, just like students can go where fees are less. Pretty much a choice to be made by an individual where they want to go.

I think that choice argument is over-rated and needs to be examined for reality.

A variety of financial and/or personal circumstances may make going to school away from nearby choices impractical/impossible.

It's like the idea of choice re investments/retirement vehicles and health insurance. If more than 3% of adult Americans really understand the options re investing/retirement and health insurance to a depth required to make wise choices, I'd be very, very surprised.




I agree with me.
mail
person
Robert Fox
6/11/2016 8:38 AM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
I think that choice argument is over-rated and needs to be examined for reality.

A variety of financial and/or personal circumstances may make going to school away from nearby choices impractical/impossible.
Right. Ohio University students had no choice but to attend Ohio University. It was their ONLY option.
mail
TWT
6/11/2016 9:01 AM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
Here's how the general fee is distributed:

https://www.ohio.edu/finance/bpa/upload/General-Fee-FY-20...
The chart shows that 34% of the general fee goes to athletics. That was in FY13. The best most comparable data on general fee numbers that I could find are for the FY14 school year, $624 per semester. The students are then making a subsidy to athletics of $425 dollars a year. A subsidy that includes an all sport pass to Ohio Athletic events. I'm not seeing a great robbery of the students here. Beyond that the idea that its spiraling out of control would assume the university has a need to inject tens of millions more into the athletic budget. There has been 10 million dollar increase since Ping's time on the subsidy to properly fund a FBS athletic program but that evolution peaked a few years ago. Revenues in the last couple of years between ticket sales, marketing and MAC distribution have grown so a need for a subsidy is actually decreasing.

https://www.ohiohighered.org/sites/ohiohighered.org/files...
Last Edited: 6/11/2016 9:07:40 AM by TWT
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
6/11/2016 1:17 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
I think that choice argument is over-rated and needs to be examined for reality.

A variety of financial and/or personal circumstances may make going to school away from nearby choices impractical/impossible.
Right. Ohio University students had no choice but to attend Ohio University. It was their ONLY option.


Robert--That is a truly unimpressive comment/argument (especially re choice overall). I suppose that in the least possible way it responds to what I said.

Big surprise.
mail
person
Recovering Journalist
6/11/2016 1:56 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
I think that choice argument is over-rated and needs to be examined for reality.

A variety of financial and/or personal circumstances may make going to school away from nearby choices impractical/impossible.
Right. Ohio University students had no choice but to attend Ohio University. It was their ONLY option.
There have been some good arguments made in favor of subsidies in this thread. This is not one of them. As a quick example, if an Ohioan wants to study journalism at an ACEJMC certified state university, they have three options. They can pay a subsidy at Ohio, pay a subsidy at Bowling Green, or pay a subsidy at Kent State. I think you know full well that students and their parents, many of whom are choosing state schools for cost reasons, cannot avoid the subsidy without significant compromise whether they like it or not.
Showing Messages: 51 - 75 of 160
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)