I don't disagree, although even as PN said the Athletic Depts in College are like advertisements for the school. The football programs, whether right or wrong, are the porches of the universities. That's how most of the landscape has been and is moving. It's not just $$$, it's perception among those who are a part of FBS, heck even in Div II and III nowadays.
Fundraising and athletic endowment
- Thread starter CrazyPaco
- Start date
Pitt does not seem to want or appreciate the small donors, like under a thousand. I am on a Directors level and don't feel appreciated, except once a year when they have the Athletic Director Party. For all the Pitt folks that come down to Cupka's for coaches show, don't you think they should at least say how are you today, thanks for coming down. All they do is go to their "friends", don't they feel comfortable with the others? The only good man I met is Bob Heller who always says hello and is really visible, and he's new. Amy and EJ are cool, always say hi and smile. Why don't they solicit people at these events, hey are you a Panther Club member, would you like to be?
IPTAY is 100% still around. Their site claims 16,000 donors, so 67%) of the total donor population.
I saw an IPTAY booth soliciting new members when I was walking around the Clemson campus before the Pitt game on 11/12.
I'd imagine they're looking for folks to give more than the $10 the name implies. Not sure if someone can still join for just $10 a year now or not.
Yeah, it may just be name only but it's accounting for 67% of the total number of people donating nonetheless. Maybe it's a great marketing ploy to keep it at $10. $10 is the floor..but you feel better giving $25 because it's above and beyond.
That's not the "problem"; athletics should an enhancement to the college experience not the experience. If 40k attending a football game is the outcome of having proper priorities- so be it.
I've never once received a single snail mail or email communication or solicitation from my home departments of my undergraduate majors: neuroscience or biology. Nothing from the Honors College. Something is really wrong with all of that. The Neuroscience department is highly respected by its graduates. I guarantee they'd receive contributions if they solicited their alumni. Fundraising for SAS is beyond pathetic.
I completely agree about the Panther Club. The incentives to join really aren't there. The solicitation is poor. The web presence is nonexistent. The only reason I've been a member for 20 years is my own self motivation to help Pitt athletics.
Pitt's fiscal year 2016 ran from July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016. Steve Pederson was fired on Dec 17, 2014, in the middle of FY15. You can see what impact that the change in athletic directors to general athletic department contributions had by looking at the blue bars in the graph below. The graph reflects what I had previously posted was the impact of Pederson's departure on financial contributions to the athletic department according to those that work in it.
Last edited:
It's the annual athletic scholarship fund. When you join the Panther Club, that is what your "membership fee" or "donation" gets placed into. Pretty much any money that isn't designated to a specific purpose (like a facilities project or endowment fund) is placed in the annual general athletic scholarship fund. That fund helps pay the cost of the tuition, room, board, books, fees, and now also the cost of attendance gap for what is equivalent to the 257 maximum number of scholarships that Pitt is allowed to dole out by the NCAA for its 19 varsity sports.
That 257 total equivalent scholarship number is now fully funded thanks to the new ACC money, but the gap between the annual fund raised+athletic endowment distribution and the actual cost shown in the graph comes out of other places in the athletic budget, including money from the university's overall general operations budget that essentially subsidizes the operations of the athletic department. That is both athletic department specific-money and university money that could otherwise be used for things like recruiting, facilities, staff, coach retention and recruitment, etc; as well as, when talking about the subsidization, money that could be used for all manners of academic, scholarship, faculty, facility, research, and community outreach projects. These days, the subsidy is something like $7-8 million per year.
Last edited:
That's unbelievable. I get mailers, updates, magazines, requests, invitations to events, etc. from my degree program, the Honors College, the alumni association, the Business school alumni association, and the AD year round from Alabama to email, phone, and home address. I just assumed all schools were similar in those academic areas, at least. Obviously get (limited) communication from Pitt from the AD for that support, but I just figured they were focused on other areas. Wow.
As sad as this is, I'm still hearing people complaining about the football team, with their focal point not on the fact that Pitt is winning, but how badly the defense is playing. Winning is not enough for some of the yinzers....
They used to give you a window sticker. Heck, back in the Golden Panther days and early Panther Club days they gave you a lapel pin for even the minimum membership level. What they have given has been wildly inconsistent and I have no idea what you are supposed to get these days other than a membership card. That in itself is a problem.
It is also a problem that there is no real incentive to give to the school itself. I can tell you that the neatest thing I've seen is Texas A&M Century Club plaque for giving $100 to the school. The first year you get the plaque and then each year after you get bar with the year on it to attach below it. It's a nice incentive to keep giving. Pitt gives you nothing for consecutive or even yearly donations.
I do get mailings from the Alumni Association and Athletic Department (as I should as I have been a member of these groups for 20 years), and I think I do get a mailing from the general university annual fund. That is it. Nothing from or about the individual schools or departments. Some schools do have their own magazines though, like the Med School. Their magazine is quite good (and free), so if you are interested in the science that is going on at Pitt, I recommend you check it out. The general alumni magazine, Pitt Magazine, is also very good (and I say that in comparison with being familiar with many other school's alumni magazines).
Last edited:
As sad as this is, I'm still hearing people complaining about the football team, with their focal point not on the fact that Pitt is winning, but how badly the defense is playing. Winning is not enough for some of the yinzers....
Those that don't contribute or invest in a tangible way - but only complain - will ALWAYS come up with lame excuses/reasons for why they don't contribute or invest.
Useless worrying about them or listening to them.
I recently went to make an Alumni Association account, only to find out that one had been automatically created for me and the 'access code' had already been e-mailed to me; turns out they sent it to the high school e-mail I used on my application. They really need to create @alumni.pitt.edu e-mail addresses; I'd use it in a heartbeat, and it could solve a lot of their problems.
They do have alumni.pitt.edu email addresses. Or, at least they used to.
Edit: it appears to no longer be offered. That sucks. I know that students can now keep their .edu addresses for life though (or so I've heard).
Last edited:
You can't conclude any of those assumptions definitively without access to the actual internal data, but they aren't unreasonable guesses.
SMF - this may all be true, but trust me, they do not sell out their games.
I was going to get a Pitt license plate from the alumni association until I read it's a paper process. I guess I don't want it bad enough, but honestly when I see anything paper-based anymore I usually pass.
Since it is the "Day of Giving," here is how Pitt is doing.
Part of this information comes from Virginia Tech.
ACC Donor Comparison (2014)
# of living alumni (grad & undergrad)
1. FSU 315,425
2. Pitt 306,821
3. UNC 296,046
4. Syracuse 251,067
5. VT 238,169
6. UVA 213,000
7. NCSU 205,400
8. BC 168,651
9. Miami 168,000
10. Duke 157,017
11. Louisville 138,340
12. Clemson 132,198
13. Georgia Tech 130,000
14. ND 127,553
15. Wake 67,065
Total # of Athletic Donors
1. Clemson 23,879
2. NCSU 20,077
3. FSU 27,074
4. UNC 11,750
5. VT 10,158
6. UVA 9,842
7. Duke 9,552
8. Louisville 9,079
9. ND 8,822
10. Miami 8,076
11. Pitt 8,031
12. Georgia Tech 7,075
13. BC 6,575
14. Syracuse 5,157
15. Wake 5,013
Max possible % of alumni athletic donors
1. Clemson 18.1%
2. NCSU 9.8%
3. FSU 8.6%
4. Wake 7.4%
5. ND 6.9%
6. Louisville 6.6%
7. Duke 6.1%
8. GT 5.4%
9. Miami 4.8%
10. UVA 4.6%
12. VT 4.3%
12. UNC 4.0%
13. BC 3.9%
14. Pitt 2.6%
15. Syracuse 2.1%
Annual Scholarship Fund $ raised
Total ACC Athletic Endowments (2016)
From Pitt: most recent changes in scholarship costs and fundraising:
Give to Pitt Athletics: https://ev12.evenue.net/www/ev_pitt...itt&locale=en_US&linkID=pitt&donationCd=PAF17
CP,
Is there a Pennsylvania county breakdown of where all our alumni are?
Keeping the .edu address started a year or two after I graduated; I was not pleased.
In Pitt's Fact Book, second from last page (it combines undergrad, graduate, and professional alumni).
http://pre.ir.pitt.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Fact-Book-2017.pdf
That's crazy. Literally after I posted this I received an email from the Honors College and a holiday mailer from the business school at Alabama wishing a Happy Holidays and links to "see what is new and how you can help".
There have been a lot of things Pitt has been really bad at for a long time. Self-promotion is near the top.
Very few college teams sell out their games. College stadiums are generally too big for the teams playing in them. My point is thst from a "total fan" standpoint, I'd rank NCSU between 3rd and 5th in the ACC.
Fair enough, but honestly their games are not well attended for the most part. They support basketball a bit more. Just my experience over the last 5 years.
My alumni.pitt.edu email address still works apparently. I rarely use it, and I have no idea if you can get a new one from Pitt. It isn't obvious on their website.
Since some people here literally called the athletic department and the department was not able to tell them how they could make a donation to wrestling, I'd say that Barnes did very little in terms of improving the fundraising infrastructure.
Edit: Not sure what happened, but the post I just replied to was from this morning, and it was deleted.
The real problem with respect to the AD issue vis-a-vis fundraising for athletics is that the Pitt AD with the longest tenure at Pitt over the past two decades simply sucked at fundraising. He had next to zero personality and was simply just awful in personal interactions with real people. While things did improve a bit during his tenure, compared to where Pitt started, it did not keep up with the competition [Big East and now ACC schools]. Other than Steve, no AD has been at Pitt long enough to have much impact. I believe Lyke has the ability, personality, willingness and vision to drastically improve athletic fundraising at Pitt. But it takes a lot of time to identify, cultivate, and start bringing in donors. Hopefully she sticks around long enough for us to see. Hail to Pitt!
I asked some fans at a tailgate about IPTAY. It started as I Pay Ten a Year back in the 30's, but became I Pay Twenty, Thirty, an so on. It is currently like $3,000 a year. But they still have tiered levels for younger alums etc.
That's moderately alarming, as I definitely didn't make that post this morning.
We go down to death valley and knock off the national champions...
Only to come home the next week where our Panthers were greeted by an attendance more suitable for Central Catholic vs Woodland Hills.
All of these very smart fundraising ideas just don't mean much when the target market has better things to do on Saturday.
Only to come home the next week where our Panthers were greeted by an attendance more suitable for Central Catholic vs Woodland Hills.
All of these very smart fundraising ideas just don't mean much when the target market has better things to do on Saturday.
I don't think there is much of a correlation between attendance and athletic endowments. For instance, Boston College has about $100 million in athletic endowment--nearly five times Pitt. Duke has $150 million--nearly 7.5 times Pitt. UNC has $212 million in athletic endowment--nearly 10 times Pitt. Pitt outdraws all three in football. Back to the drawing board. Hail to Pitt!
I will agree with you......i am venting about our sorry attendance.
i would however....be interested in knowing (if possible) what % of these endowments are attributable to BC hockey....or Duke / UNC basketball and to a lesser degree, lacrosse.
Point being........Nationally ranked minor sports do bring in $$$$ even if not at the gate.
Pitt's minor sports suck up and down the line.......thus adding to the woefully low numbers that Paco has presented.
It is highly unlikely that data would ever be released by any University. Actually finding athletic endowment information versus general endowment information is pretty tough. Bottom line, despite being a pretty rich University, Pitt athletics is very poor compared to its conference colleagues, and even poorer when compared to other P5 heavy weights--which puts Pitt at a significant competitive disadvantage. Hail to Pitt!
PS For instance, the Nits are likely to bring in more ticket revenue for the Pitt v. PSU game than Pitt will garner for the entire home season. Add on nearly 2.5 times the athletic endowment, and superior annual fund raising, it is not hard to understand the competitive problem Pitt faces.
It's highly unlikely that PITT turns the PITT athletic money train around given 40 years of poor performance. As PITT sports revenues stay steady or decline our competition is ramping up on an annual basis.
We have Auburn relatives who have average gov't job s but contribute significant sums ( disproportionate to income) to Auburn and live for Auburn football. Does ths sound like a PITT fan?
So I know I'll get crushed for this but this is my theory of where PITT is heading.
Gallagher is tired of getting his head beat in regarding PITT sports so I believe PITT is looking maybe 6 years out to determine if moving to a lower level makes sense. The switch to the ACC is keeping the water level in the boat low but the boat still has holes in it.
The Barnes basketball on purpose /not by accident hire of Stalling was maybe the first move. Why hire an expensive high profile basketball coach if down the road a conference change would force that person to leave.
The Gallagher hire of Lyke could be a second move .Hiring a second tier AD who has had experience in a P5 and MAC environment is the perfect person to make this evaluation. Plus the new AD has experience at the second tier level and would be a perfect fit.
It seems unlikely that PITT will be able to keep up with the "Jones", attract and keep top level coaches, and support the minor sports!
We have Auburn relatives who have average gov't job s but contribute significant sums ( disproportionate to income) to Auburn and live for Auburn football. Does ths sound like a PITT fan?
So I know I'll get crushed for this but this is my theory of where PITT is heading.
Gallagher is tired of getting his head beat in regarding PITT sports so I believe PITT is looking maybe 6 years out to determine if moving to a lower level makes sense. The switch to the ACC is keeping the water level in the boat low but the boat still has holes in it.
The Barnes basketball on purpose /not by accident hire of Stalling was maybe the first move. Why hire an expensive high profile basketball coach if down the road a conference change would force that person to leave.
The Gallagher hire of Lyke could be a second move .Hiring a second tier AD who has had experience in a P5 and MAC environment is the perfect person to make this evaluation. Plus the new AD has experience at the second tier level and would be a perfect fit.
It seems unlikely that PITT will be able to keep up with the "Jones", attract and keep top level coaches, and support the minor sports!
Wow! Mind blowing conspiracy theory. I know the Chancellor, and nothing can be further from the truth. He even personally contributed $100,000 to athletics last year. The new Chancellor is a former athlete, and appreciates the value that collegiate athletics brings to a university. Whether the Barnes, Stallings or Lyke hires turn out to be good, bad, or indifferent--it had ZERO to do with giving up Division 1 sports at Pitt. Ever consider the possibility that the people hired are: 1) actually good at what they do; and/or 2) that with the athletic budget Pitt has, those hires were the best they could attract for the money? Pitt in the course of its recent athletic history has NEVER hired a high profile, super successful coach for any of its teams. Hail to Pitt!
Similar threads
