Feb. 17, 2010

We’re a few weeks into the annual fund drive that raises resources to support our student-athletes, and I’m encouraged with the results so far. Launched February 1, this year’s Beaver Athletic Student Fund (BASF) campaign is serving as our springboard to double our donor base by 2012.

You’ve heard it from me before. We’ve begun an all-out effort to grow our donor base from roughly 6,000-where it’s hovered for the last several years-to 12,000. Our “Expanding Beaver Nation—12,000 Strong by 2012” campaign is officially under way with volunteers making calls for renewals and new donors.

Although it’s still early in this two-month effort, I can see that many in Beaver Nation are hearing the message and responding. Momentum is on the rise. Last year at this time, we had 2,100 donors. This year our numbers already tally 2,300 at the same point. Additionally, our stats show that we have gained 170 new donors in the early stages of this year’s fund-raising drive.

http://www.osubeavers.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/021710aab.html

So there I stood on the brink of becoming the latest BASF donator, one of the “12,000 needed by 2012” when…Bobby D’s greedy palm stood in my path and bitch slapped me across the nose. Apparently my $10, $20, $30, $35, or $39 donation is not enough. No, the “minimum accepted online donation is $40”!  So get this, gentlemen, an AD who has cried and begged for money the past two seasons, is not willing to accept my donation of $39.99. Halt! He needs that extra penny or the transaction is not worth his time.

First of all, if I am running a fundraiser, and I truly need money, I am accepting any donation above breaking even, and I believe it costs 2% to process a credit card transaction. In the case of my 10 dollars, that would be $0.20, leaving the BASF folks with a net profit of $9.80 or 4900% markup and a 98% gross margin. I think any business in America would be thrilled with those numbers in a time of prosperity, yet Bob Decarolis and the OSU athletic department find those numbers offensive, even in this time of recession.

So what if I open my wallets and donate $39.99? That’s a $0.80 processing fee, leaving $39.19 to the athletic department. My cursory knowledge of high finance should be enough to figure out this calculation as well. Yes! That is a 4,900% markup and a 98% gross margin.

And what about the $40 donation that Bob insists on? Well, as you can imagine, that is $40-.80=$39.20 or a 4,900.00% markup and 98% gross margin.

That is right folks, since 2% is a ratio (2/100), there is actually equal markup on the higher donation and the same exact gross margin. Which in short suggests that the Beavers AD is more interested in gouging your wallet than getting your donation for all important facilities, scholarships, and upgrades.

What is likely going on here is probably not so calculated. Bob D probably thinks that someone who can definitely afford $10 or $39 is in the same economic class as someone who can afford $40, and he is right, but what he’s failed to understand (yet again) is that we’re in a recession and $40 is someone’s cable bill, gas, or groceries, where as $10 is much easier to part with. Why not just open the donation process to everyone? Is two people donating $20 not the same as one person donating $40?

I’m a huge supporter of Bobby D when it comes to the hiring process, but I view this latest campaign as yet another marketing nightmare, missed opportunity, and bottom line a turn-off for this particular Beaver. Bob could have had my $10, $20, or even $25, but he’s not getting my $40.

Keep your posts confined to this area. We don’t need that kind of vitriol spewed across various threads. I see you’re all swarming over here like decapitated chickens; likely in response to the below linked thread and your lionized leader, “Shov”, telling you my opinions are shit.

Listen, lemmings, just book your tickets to El Paso and continue to blindly follow Riley and Mamma Machado whilst gloating over every minor OSU accomplishment, like say, a victory from the…gymnastics team. Oh, and this is the kind of crap I have to deal with from you nitwits:

Your enjoyment over the injury of one of our players is just disgusting. I am fully aware of who you are and what your goal is. I hope you are just trying to get a rise out of people, and that you don’t actually believe what you write. I find it funny that you write so that what you say is perceived as fact and not the poorly informed opinion that it really is.

A couple other notes that don’t make sense. You think Wilson is the leader to take over Pankey’s position??? Wilson is an Middle Linebacker, he will never play on the outside for the Beavers. Keo Camat may be the starter during the spring but he will get surpassed by the young guys very quickly. Robinson and the Unga’s will get the first shot and don’t count out Michael Doctor who you only mentioned once. I like Akuna’s potential, but I highly doubt that he will come in during the fall and start. Riley only plays true freshman when there is an absolute need at the position. We are stacked at LB so unless Akuna comes in as a world beater, which he may well do, it is more likely that we redshirt him.

Do you attend practices regularly? If you do then I would be up for a friendly chat during one of them. I always enjoy a good discussion. It would also help put a face to this cowardly blog.

And my (much more rational) reply:

First off, thanks for your input. Now let me show you how ridiculous and blind your opinions are. If you’d kindly remove your oranges glasses:

1. You say I “enjoy” the injury of a player. Show me where I get enjoyment. It would have to involve a comment such as, “Keith Pankey is hurt, this is awesome and I am enjoying it!” and I simply don’t see that. I said the replacement will be better. Instead of focusing on the perceived “negative” that I wrote, how about focusing on the positive–that I said we have better players. That wouldn’t be convenient for you, though, would it?

2. You say Wilson is a MLB, then you mention Robinson (another MLB) as someone who could take over outside. Like Kristick, Wilson is a player who can play middle or outside. At least be consistent. That is, don’t mention a MLB for OLB after you berate me for doing it.

3. “Riley only plays true freshman when there is an absolute need at the position”. Um, define absolute need. Phillip started last year and we had other tackles, you know. Quiz started as a freshman and we had McCants (and others). I’m not going to make a blanket statement like you did, or another one, such as “Riley always plays the best player” because even that isn’t true (e.g. Pankey over Roberson, #28 over Collins, etc, etc). Riley’s decisions are many times baffling, and probably a weighing of many factors.

4. You call me a coward, yet I am the only dissenting, well-spoken, voice of reason in “Beaver Nation” (can we think up a more original moniker, please?). You’re a coward for blindly following the opinions of your cohorts, uttering stupid, brainwashed phrases such as “in Mike Riley we trust”, and closing your mind to what this blog is: due criticism in an attempt to make the team better.

When the Beavers are routinely making the Rose Bowl (or heck, higher than a Sun Bowl), come back and tell me there is no room for criticism. Until then, I suggest you shut your mouth, bite your tongue, and go back to burying your head in the sand.

And I’ll even expound upon the “cowardly” remark, just because it’s fun to show people how emotion flaws logic.

1. Are newspapers cowards when they don’t attend practice, yet write their opinions and observations of players or games?

2. Are you a coward for not coming to my door to deliver your message and instead posting it behind the anonymity of an IP address?

3. Make sense–your logic is a disgrace to humanity and a reason our academics aren’t up to par. Stop embarrassing the intelligent, objective readers who post here and enjoy the blog for the breath of fresh air that it is.