What is Plan B?
by John Berkowitz on Feb 26, 2010 6:22 AM PST
62 comments
The University of Washington has been talking about and planning a renovation of Husky Stadium for six years. The total cost of the renovation is expected to be around $250 million dollars if the project broke ground in 2010. The plan has always been to raise half the capital required through donors and seat licences. The other half was to come directly from the State of Washington in the form of existing King County tourist taxes.
Down in Olympia the legislators are coping with a recession which is forcing the state to raise taxes and lower services. In that type of environment politicians are very reluctant to invest further in sports facilities despite the fact the painless tax was instituted to do exactly that. What they would rather do is extend this tax and divert it to other purposes such as low income housing, the arts, and amateur sports.
The bill did pass th house to extend the taxes but it included a proviso that no money be used for the renovation of Husky Stadium which just happens to be a state owned facility. That proviso could change in the senate before it passes the Governors desk for signing but at this point the chances of that happening are beginning to fade.
So what exactly does the University do if no public money is available? The UW has always said that they would be able to come up with approximately $150 million of the cost on their own as mentioned above. That would leave $100 million which would either have to be raised or financed.
Scott Woodward has always said there was no Plan B. That is the politically astute stance to take when you are going to the state for money. That being said there always is a Plan B out there. So the question of the day to this audience is how is the University of Washington going to raise or finace another $100-$150 million to finance the renovation of Husky Stadium?
0 recs |
62 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Market the Black Jerseys
For Football and Basketball.
Should we assume...
that people like Steve Ballmer are part of the $150M “privately financed” group? Or have we been courting them to provide something above/beyond that number?
Ballmer has been courted by the UW recently, but I haven’t heard anything about how successful that courtship is going.
Woodward is no idiot – he knows there’s a lot of money in the area, and he’s trying to cultivate relationships that would give the UW something similar to what Oregon has with Phil Knight.
I don’t know if Ballmer has any connections with the UW otherwise – he’s a Harvard guy, but maybe he has family that’s gone to the UW. He’s a sports fans (most notably a basketball fan) which helps, but him not being a UW alumnus makes things harder, especially if he doesn’t have any other connections to the school like Paul Allen does.
I would imagine Paul Allen and Bill Gates have been courted as well, given their family connections to the school.
I still don't see Paul Allen giving to athletics
I may be wrong about it in the end, but it’s my view. He gives to research, and gives quite a bit, but never to athletics as far as I know. I’m of the opinion that he owns a pro football and pro basketball team and has no need to invest in collegiate athletics.
I hear you, but who figured Phil Knight would become a huge booster of Oregon sports other than Track & Field?
Allen owns a huge sports company valued in billions of dollars.
by John Berkowitz on Feb 26, 2010 4:07 PM PST up reply actions
True
But one (Nike) is based around sports apparel, the other (Vulcan) is based around pro teams and the Rose Garden. Point being that Allen has his pro teams to play with while Knight now has his college team to play with.
Yeah, there are definite differences. Knight’s an Oregon alum, Allen attended WSU. Knight didn’t have any sports other than the Track & Field program that he was affiliated with; Allen owns the Seahawks & Blazers.
But, Allen does have a history of donating money to the UW based off of his parents, he attended UW games growing up, and has proven to be a fan of football. He was the one that offered to renovate Husky Stadium on his dime in exchange for being allowed to have the Seahawks move there permanently.
It’s not out of the realm of possibility that he could be talked into becoming a deep pockets booster for UW football.
But Woodward will have to get to him before Moos does… ;)
UW-WSU battle for Allen!
I remember the offer to renovate HS back in the day and you definitely can’t deny he’s a football fan. I know he loves giving money to research at UW and has given a ton, as well. It’s definitely not out of the realm of possibility that he steps up (for either school), but it’s probably not likely at this point.
It’ll be interesting to see, though, as I’m sure both schools are going to be throwing pitches his way
Allen
If it’s unlikely that Allen donates to sports (cougfans argument), even UW sports which he is known to have history with, it’s extremely unlikely that he’ll donate to WSU sports. IMHO, Allen donating to WSU is as likely as the State of Washington lowering our taxes.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
I think the $150 mill is guys like you and me...
That is the combined total of what people will pay for preferred seating and ticket surcharges over many years. I don’t think it would include a big downstroke from guys such as but not including Balmer, Gates, and Allen. Those three could take care of it if they wanted and really not notice the difference in their wallets.
Even during this economic downtime there is enough big wallets in the Puget Sound area to write the checks if they were so motivated.
by John Berkowitz on Feb 26, 2010 10:39 AM PST up reply actions
It'll be a combination of a lot of things.
Naming rights, seat licenses similar to the model at Cal, and simply asking more people to pony up even more money. It’s inevitable that the field will be renamed; I simply hope that the AD is selective with the sponsor.
The University should easily be able to loan itself the money for any shortfall, if needed. The land the UW owns in downtown Seattle alone could finance the entire project a few times over.
Agreed
I was just about to post the same thing. It’s going to have to be all of the above. The last time I heard something from the ADs office it was that “everything” was on the table. Naming rights for the Football Building is another. Dempsey Indoor raised 10 million with the naming rights, so I would imagine the football building would get at least that much. WSU’s student body voted to levy fees upon itself, with all of the tuition hikes somehow I don’t think that will happen at UW. This whole thing may have be phased in over 10 years. I think the lower bowl and the south side sould be the top prioriites and in doing that, the new track will have to be built by the baseball field. Do you guys think the athletic department will borrow money to get this thing started? I imagine they would have to, it takes time to raise this kind of money.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
This whole thing may have be phased in over 10 years. I think the lower bowl and the south side sould be the top prioriites and in doing that, the new track will have to be built by the baseball field.
Unfortunately, I don’t think they can do this in phases unless they completely change their remodel plans. The entire lower bowl really needs to be rebuilt, and if they’re going to do that, now is the time to lower the field, remove the track and bring the West end zone in close to the field. I don’t see how that can be done in phases.
What could be split off from that work is the idea of using the outer upper portion of the new West end zone seating as new football offices, but that’s likely a small percentage of the total cost, so I don’t think the UW would be able to reduce their price tag a whole lot.
The nature of what they need to do unfortunately doesn’t appear to lend itself to phases.
I hope you're right...
…but the economics may force the issue. I’m not a construction engineer but it would seem that this project could be phased in. The bulk of the project is the lower bowl replacement and lowering the field. The football building and the renovation of the North and South Concourse areas are other parts of the whole. The east end zone completion is not even part of this equation, and if I recall correctly, has already been planned for Phase II.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
I guess what I’m saying is, replacing the lower bowl & lowering the field pretty much covers everything that’s scheduled to be done – there’s not much else in their plans beyond that. As I said, the West end zone revision also contains plans to build in new football offices – that could maybe be done later as a Phase 2 project. But all the rest has to be done at once; if you’re going to redo the lower bowl and you want to lower the field, remove the track and move the West end zone much closer to the field, you do that all at once. The concourses are part and parcel of the lower bowl, so redoing the lower bowl means you reconfigure the concourses outside of the bowl.
You’re right about the East end zone – anything they want to do there can wait for a Phase 2, because nothing there is scheduled to be attached to the lower bowl (at least as far as I’ve seen).
But the bulk of the costs are very likely tied in with removing the track, lowering the field and rebuilding the lower bowl, and I just don’t see any way that any of that can be done in phases.
The UW should be able to do that….however the value of the total endowment has slid enough because of the markets to make them think more than twice about doing that.
There are Plan B’s out there withing the University and outside of it to get it done without the state getting involved.
by John Berkowitz on Feb 26, 2010 10:41 AM PST up reply actions
Do you think new TV deal money has been factored in? $18-20MM/year from a nice Pac 12 network could go a long way.
Well Canzano, maybe your parents didn’t believe in you.
Addicted to Quack
Every bit helps...
…but that’s not near enough to finance the Husky Stadium renovation.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Student seating
right on the 50 is probably going to disappear. By making all seats between 35 yard lines TYEE, you can amp up the $$ to get good seats. Something else to consider is making Husky Stadium capacity less by making luxury boxes and taking them from general seating. That would go over splendedly with the Montlake crowd, would probably bring in more $$ due to luxury boxes than general admission seats, and make the tickets scarcer to come by.
I used to be of the mindset we should increase the capacity to 90000 and play with the big ten, but it makes more sense to make the seats harder to come by and of more value, then you can raise the prices and $$. This is essentially what they are doing in Hec Ed, the former B of A founders club seats are now going to be TYEE 1100, while the TYEE 900 is going up to 950. I think the rest of TYEE (450/250/150) is remaining the same for next year. I expect the ticket prices will also increase slightly.
They won’t do boxes but they will do club seating.
by John Berkowitz on Feb 26, 2010 4:08 PM PST up reply actions
There Will Definitely Be More Tyee Seats
But not necessarily occupying the present student seats…it WILL be the South-side lower bowl seats between the goal lines. I had always assumed that such prime seats were Tyee; however, about 18 months ago I was in the Tyee offices at the Graves Building working with a prominent person who oversees the Tyee seating assignments for football and basketball. He showed me on his computer screen every seat in Husky Stadium occupied by Tyee donors. Those seats are presently occupied by the longest of longtime season ticket holders, basically families literally dating back before any of us were born.
It’s apparently always been a “handshake” agreement that those seats would remain non-Tyee, but I was told—unequivocally—that those days are over once the renovation is complete. Those who presently occupy the seats will have a right of first-refusal on paying the Tyee fees and keeping their seats, but otherwise the seats will go to those with the highest Tyee point totals. That’s about 8000 additional Tyee seats…not a huge dent in the millions of dollars necessary for renovation, but it’s a start.
by Purple Reign 91 on Feb 26, 2010 5:13 PM PST up reply actions
TYEES
Make me sick to my stomach. They have no loyalty to the UW and are mostly fed up SEAHAWKS fans. Attended 44 years and
never heard a player booed until the TYEES showed up.
It is damm right disgusting what money is doing to this University. Sorry state of affairs. I was surprised there were any long time Husky fans outside of the end zone.
I've been a Husky fan
since the McElhenny/Heinrich days and I’ve been a Tyee for 20 years. I dispute your contention Tyees are band wagon fans. All the Tyees I tailgate with and/or know have a history similar to mine. I also have very nice seats on the east 45 yard line.
I am with T90,
Have been a longtime TYEE and most of those around us are also long time TYEE donors. Purple Dawg, I think your anger is misplaced, if you look at the attendance the last few years, you would have noticed the TYEE sections were still full, and mostly full even at the end oif the games. The bandwagon fans appeared to be in the West end zone.
Got to agree with T90 and prrbrr
I am NOT a Tyee and I think your anger is greatly misplaced. I know a lot of Tyee’s who have a very, very, very long history of supporting the Huskies. I know of Tyee’s who buy tickets even when they know they aren’t going to make very many games, yet they spend ALL of that money and make sure other loyal Husky fans get the tickets they can’t use. Without Tyee’s we wouldn’t have enough money to have a real football program, think WSU.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
BRAVE NEW WORLD
I was wrong to tarnish all TYEE’S with the same brush. But if my memory serves me right the TYEE program started with the SEAHAWKS in their usual doldrums and there was a mass influx of PRO FANS who showed no respect for the collegiate players.
I knew of HUSKY FANS who were on the 50 yard line under cover and ended up in the end zone because they could not afford the higher prices. Had their tickets over 50 years in name of daughter who was a nun in Africa.
Not many remember how bad this program was for 20 years but we stuck with them through thin and thin only to shoved into the end zone when Warren Moon and Sonny Sixkiller arrived and the program revived with them. For four years on every play with Sonny the guy behind us would yell “throw the bomb Sonny!” And he usually did. But the all time hilite was Steve Emtman and the 1991 National Champions.
Well I hope they get a lot of TYEE endowments because mine will go to Community college and Technical school. You cannot buy loyalty but you can sell it out.
Welcome to America.
That’s what we call a free market society. If you want a football program that is going to be successful, it takes big money. That’s just part of life, and no matter what anybody tries to tell you, life is NOT fair. Sorry.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
I will agree with you...
…that money is becoming too big of a priority for all of the big time college football programs. Everytime you turn around something costs more money.
by doubledeucedawg on Feb 27, 2010 5:11 PM PST up reply actions
Tyee Program history
The Tyee program consists of the Huskies’ most generous annual donors whose commitment and loyalty to the UW creates opportunities for over 650 student-athletes. Private support began as a grant-in-aid support group in the 1940s and evolved into its current structure of seat-related giving, annual scholarship support, team enhancement, capital projects, endowments and planned giving.
by John Berkowitz on Feb 27, 2010 9:15 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, I find it stunning to see someone that is supposedly a fan of UW athletics ripping the Tyee Club. I will agree that those of us that are Tyee don’t necessarily love UW athletics more than non-Tyee, but give us credit for the willingness to contribute a little more than the average fan to help fund the success of our favorite teams.
Especially since...
…if I’m not mistaken quite a few of those seats will be in the new club section.
by doubledeucedawg on Feb 27, 2010 5:20 PM PST up reply actions
I was surprised...
…because according to what I read there are 13000 Tyee seats and most of them are Purple Donors. My seats are unreal on the south upper deck, way better than when I was on the North Upper Deck. I’m sure glad I moved.
by doubledeucedawg on Feb 27, 2010 5:22 PM PST up reply actions
Ticket prices
2010 Football Tickdet prices remained the same for Purple Tyee, however we only have six home games. The Tyee Portion of the renewal process went up $50 per seat.
Think how expensive it is for us retired non working folks
Thank you for working to pay social security so I can use it to pay for Husky ball. LOL
You're talking total price right...
….tickets and the Tyee donation? That sounds like the total that I paid for my seats. It is getting expensive but my seats are unreal!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
If we win and go to a bowl game, I anticipate the $$ will go up
in 2011 also. I am actually surprised the building for excellence $$ per seat hasn’t gone up already. After all, it was instituted to pay for the softball, baseball, soccer and relocating the track by Ms Hedges years ago.
If and when Husky Stadium gets done with private money, if a public entity from the state wishes to use it (say Dalai Lama or Mandela speaking), I think the Athletic Department should charge a users fee to recoup the cost of the safety upgrades which is what the state should have paid for anyway.
Sadly, it didn't help matters for the Admin. to destroy the program
Ten years ago, this renovation project would have been green lighted with little fuss. The deep pockets are the most likely means of financing the expansion. You can only go to the Tyee and general admissions route for increased revenue so far, until they buckle under the weight.
RETURN TO AMATEUR STATUS
Harvard, Columbia, Brown, Fordham and the U. of CHICAGO have survived splendidly without semi PRO teams and put their emphasis on academic achievement and research.
WHAT A NOVEL IDEA!A University devoted to academia. Believe me there is no end to this money whirlpool we are caught up in, the race to the bottom. The NCAA is a very minor impediment and will soon be sidelined and replaced by a full speed ahead DOLLAR SIGN.
You can't compare UW to Ivy schools
And you’ve gotta choose. Do you want a crappy product on the field? Or do you want to field competitive teams? It may not be fair, but you have to have money to field competitive teams and a competitive athletic department.
UW is actually known as one of the Public Ivy's
College of William & Mary (Williamsburg, Virginia)
Miami University (Oxford, Ohio)
University of California (Berkeley)
University of Michigan (Ann Arbor)
Michigan State University (East Lansing, Michigan)
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
University of Texas at Austin
University of Vermont (Burlington)
University of Virginia (Charlottesville)
University of Colorado at Boulder
Georgia Institute of Technology
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
New College of the University of South Florida (Now New College of Florida)
Pennsylvania State University at University Park
University of Pittsburgh
State University of New York at Binghamton
University of Washington at Seattle
University of Wisconsin–Madison
by John Berkowitz on Feb 27, 2010 9:18 PM PST up reply actions
I misworded the post
I meant in terms of athletics. I was actually going to post about the good academics at UW (med school, law school, etc). Athletic wise, though, no Ivy gives scholarships (financial aid, woo), won’t compete with the big boys, and is really was conference for academics and not athletics. While some schools could go that route, I think the fans would be unhappy with the product that results.
Public Ivy
It looks like you’re using Richard Toll’s list of Universities from his 1985 book Public Ivies.
When he lists University of California, he actually refers to all the campuses of the UC system in 1985 (which are all of them except Merced), not just Berkelely.
The original nine Public Ivies
The original nine Public Ivies list by Moll (1985):2
College of William & Mary (Williamsburg, Virginia)
Miami University (Oxford, Ohio)
University of California (campuses as of 1985)6
University of Michigan (Ann Arbor)
Michigan State University (East Lansing, Michigan)
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
University of Texas at Austin
University of Vermont (Burlington)
University of Virginia (Charlottesville)
Moll also offered in the same book “a list of worthy runners-up” and brief summaries of them7:
University of Colorado at Boulder
Georgia Institute of Technology
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
New College of the University of South Florida (Now New College of Florida)
Pennsylvania State University at University Park
University of Pittsburgh
State University of New York at Binghamton
University of Washington at Seattle
University of Wisconsin–Madison
The list you use looks like the same as this list I got from Wikipedia, except there’s no distinction between the original nine and his list of “worthy runners-up” and that “campuses as of 1985” was changed to “Berkeley”
Personally...
…I agree to an extent some of this insane spending on athletics needs to be reined in.
by doubledeucedawg on Feb 27, 2010 5:18 PM PST up reply actions
The problem is that its too late
With the BCS and the money in athletics, we’ve come to far to try to reverse it or even slow it down at this point
by cougfan on Feb 27, 2010 5:22 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I don't know about that...
…if the Presidents want to make some changes, I’m sure they could.
by doubledeucedawg on Feb 27, 2010 5:24 PM PST up reply actions
But why would they
You’re talking about leaving tens of millions of dollars on the table and the national exposure big time athletics brings their institutions
by cougfan on Feb 27, 2010 5:53 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Turning down the revenue that comes from the programs
isn’t feasible for most though.
De-emphasizing means belt tightening when belts are already tight., and the emphasis must be on enhancing revenue producing programs.
Andy Wooldridge, andy_wooldridge@yahoo.com
Go Beavs!
Husky Stadium
It should have been included in the Campaign FTSA. The lower bowl built in the 1920s, what were they thinking! They could have taken the 40 million they spent on Dempsey and had see money to begin the renovation and like you said the timing would have been much better. The CFTSA kicked off the night before the Nebraska game in 1997. Husky Stadium probably would have been completed just after Tui and the Rosebowl win over Purdue. Can you imagine the surge in funding after that win?
by doubledeucedawg on Feb 27, 2010 5:16 PM PST up reply actions
It should have...
It should have been part of FTSA but you had less than dynamic leadership in charge of the athletic department at that time. they had a goal of raising $90 million and to this day have not achieved that goal. That is why the soccer and baseball stadiums are unfinished.
Hedges biggest legacy at UW is failing to raise enough funds to renew ALL of UW’s athletic facilities during the greatest period of economic prosperity the country has ever seen.
by John Berkowitz on Feb 28, 2010 6:10 AM PST up reply actions
It's funny...
…that Husky Stadium wasn’t ever in the equation for that Campaign. Demsey and Conibear also ended up costing way more than projected.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Oh Purp...
You are like on a huge losing streak of fallacies in this thread…you better quit while you are way behind.
She is a 1963 graduate of Arizona State.
by John Berkowitz on Feb 28, 2010 5:41 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
