Stewardship of Valuable Resources....

[mu03eng]

OK, here's the problem with Marquette. One of the opening posts compared Marquette to other schools, like Notre Dame, Harvard etc. All are great schools. In my case, I'd be tickled if one of my children wanted to go to MU, could do MU work and came home four years later with an MU degree.

But here's the real world. A degree from Notre Dame, Harvard, Yale, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, Northwestern and Stanford command respect and attention throughout the United States. Look at who recruits and hires from these schools! Marquette isn't in this league.

Marquette's a great school, no doubt. But on a value basis, if my choice for a liberal arts degree is Marquette at $43,000 or the University of Illinois in the mid-$20,000 range, guess where I'm pointing my child! In Journalism, for example, you come out of Marquette with a BA, no job or, in best circumstances, a job that pays $30,000 a year and you have $100,000 plus of debt. The exception is the students who get federal or university aid because some program wants them.

I can't see saddling a child with an enormous amount of debt they can't repay -- especially if they go into liberal arts. Nor can I see risking my retirement for the Marquette name alone.

It's a tough choice for many parents, I know.

At the core though, I think the early posters are right -- as long as enrollment is up and someone is willing to pay it, tuition will continue to rise exponentially. That's the free market.

I haven't found the study yet, but I read an analysis about a year ago looking at costs of the top 100 universities and the average salaries of alumni.  They basically did a simple ROI calculation and found that there was about 1.5% salary difference in the number 1 and number 100 schools.  So you can say oh I went to ND but as long as the price at MU and ND aren't the same there is plenty of value.  It's all about if you want the "brand name" which I think is getting more and more diluted.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

Regardless of whether MU bumps their list price then folks get a discounted price .. the cost of tuition, room, and board are outpacing inflation, but more importantly, outpacing both parental income, and expected graduate income. 

There's a universe of people who can afford MU's tuition.  That universe gets smaller each year.  Projected out a few decades, and that universe drops to near zero.

In 10 years, MU will cost $68k.  20 years, $111k.  PER YEAR!

Sorry, personal income inflation will no where near catch up to that.   It is simply unfathomable that MU will exist in 30-40-50 years.

If MU, and all private schools for that matter, want to survive in the long term .. they need to bend the cost curve IMMEDIATELY. 

What I wonder is, what do the schools that are USNWR ranked 150++ do? Marquette's tuition is outrageous, just like all other private tuition, but it's probably right in line with all of the other private schools in Wisconsin. How are St. Norberts or Ripon College surviving?

My guess is that if the public student loan market were cut off, a lot of these schools would be in trouble. How else can students afford to attend?

[avid1010]

the uw-system is going to take a hit in quality as walker's cuts come full circle.  while it's easy for staff to be transient in regards to state's paying higher wages (free market), it's not the same for in-state students looking to capitalize on the reduced in-state tuition.  if the uw-system continues to raise tuition, mu will have a chance to either charge more and keep enrollment stable, or leave tuition where it is and make a play at part of a population it previously couldn't attract. 

dr. blackheart mentioned that students are looking for a different "experience," and i think the real game changer may be that we're going to start seeing more of an international competition for the best and brightest in our universities.  transportation and technology continues to shrink the world, and i know of many families that have sent their high achieving students overseas because the educational value was so much greater.  our nation is going to have to decide if we want to compete in higher education or essentially allow it to be outsourced.  this has been a concern to the ivy league schools for years, but i believe it will filter down... 

[mu_hilltopper]

  if the uw-system continues to raise tuition, mu will have a chance to either charge more and keep enrollment stable, or leave tuition where it is and make a play at part of a population it previously couldn't attract. 

That's gonna take some time.  UW is roughly half MU's cost right now, including room & board, UW is $24k, MU is $43.    UW's rate of increases are 5-8% .. it'll take decades for them to catch MU's tuition rate, if ever.  -- And who knows.  Wisconsin's political landscape will swing the other direction at some point in the future.  It always does.

[Benny B]

Lift the bankruptcy discharge exemption on student loans and force recipient schools to provide a partial-guaranty on the loans.  You'll be mindboggled at how quickly tuition rates drop.

[mr.MUskie]

Here's the problem that colleges face - the vast majority of their costs are personnel related...about 75% at most places.  That makes it very hard to control costs year-to-year.  That means no raises and no benefit increases.  Extremely unlikely.  Of course there are other options...including cutting positions or cutting back elsewhere.  But that is difficult unless you want to put more kids into classrooms or give them less services.

So if Marquette is looking to control costs - and it should be - the obvious place to look is where you can replace personnel with the highest salaries with competent, adequate personnel who would accept a lower salary.  Isn't Buzz #1 on the salary hit parade?

[Lennys Tap]

So if Marquette is looking to control costs - and it should be - the obvious place to look is where you can replace personnel with the highest salaries with competent, adequate personnel who would accept a lower salary.  Isn't Buzz #1 on the salary hit parade?

Why not drop basketball altogether? Marquette will save tens of millions which we can then spend on professors. MU will become Harvard in no time.

And if we just raise the minimum wage to $150/hour we can end poverty and collect enough tax revenue to pay off the national debt.

This stuff is easy if you just think it through.

[dgies9156]

Why not drop basketball altogether? Marquette will save tens of millions which we can then spend on professors. MU will become Harvard in no time.

And if we just raise the minimum wage to $150/hour we can end poverty and collect enough tax revenue to pay off the national debt.

This stuff is easy if you just think it through.

Thanks a lot Lenny!

You have just given some pointy head in the Philosophy department something to research for the next year. You'll start a debate that will chase Buzz off to the Southwest and resurrect Bob Dukiet's corpse and make him head basketball coach.

Or better yet, we'll be a Mid-Major at best and some of the folks in this room can get all excited because we'll play Green Bay and UWM twice a year.

Oh... and that $150 per hour minimum wage -- looks like more room to tax the wealthy!

Thanks but no thanks, Lenny. Go back to basketball.

[avid1010]

That's gonna take some time.  UW is roughly half MU's cost right now, including room & board, UW is $24k, MU is $43.    UW's rate of increases are 5-8% .. it'll take decades for them to catch MU's tuition rate, if ever.  -- And who knows.  Wisconsin's political landscape will swing the other direction at some point in the future.  It always does.

and i don't think the state system will ever balance with mu (if it does a good system is done)...but, with scholarships, if the difference is near 10k a year, i'd consider it for my children, if the difference is 20-30k a year that decision is much more difficult.  the "free market" is fine, but it doesn't go exactly hand-in-hand with what mu beliefs are...often times i think the "free market" is used to make a complicated system sound easy.  in this case, how much does mu charge those who can afford to attend, and what kind of options do they provide for those who don't have the $$$ to attend, but have earned the right to attend more so then many of the students (parents) that do have the $$$.  as a catholic i believe we have a moral obligation to ensure opportunities are provided for all.

[Dr. Blackheart]

My senior year, the Friday Special at the Gym was 10 cent beers.  The Friday Special at Caff's now is a $3 bottle of Pabst or Schlitz. Tuition was $6000 then.  At that rate, Marquette's tuition should be $180,000 a year today.  Have students stopped drinking at this ungodly rate of inflation?

[avid1010]

Why not drop basketball altogether? Marquette will save tens of millions which we can then spend on professors. MU will become Harvard in no time.

And if we just raise the minimum wage to $150/hour we can end poverty and collect enough tax revenue to pay off the national debt.

This stuff is easy if you just think it through.

or mu can put a strategical plan in place that allows it to move past its current competition, and earn an improved status in regards to higher ed.  

i'm not sure why mu can't continue to have a solid basketball program that gets better over time and have an educational model that improves its status over the next 10-15 years.

your minimum wage sarcasm makes no sense in either direction...and if there's one thing a really tough economy provides is the enhanced opportunity for those who do it right to rise to the top and those who make mistakes to lose ground to their competition.  

[jsglow]

Of the personnel costs that I mentioned above, administrative is generally very small.  Faculty costs are usually the highest.  No offense guys, but Marquette charges this because they can.  I mean, we have two parents on this thread complaining about their costs....but still pay for their kids to attend. 

There are plenty of places to get a high quality education in this country, but your families are choosing MU.  And you are not alone. 

I think you need to be careful Sultan as I wouldn't suggest that either Goose or WC were complaining.  We've just got to be very careful with resources going forward, especially in light of the economic picture we all face.  One thing to note in terms of the university's seriousness regarding budgetary constraint is the fact that they just asked Dean Salchenberger to leave Bus. Ad. and oversee the university budgeting process.  I'm envisioning her role a "$$ cop'.  I know Linda reasonably well and hope she succeeds in that newly created role.

One other note.  MU takes pride in its ability to provide college educations to those 'first in family' to attend.  Escalating tuition makes that increasingly difficult.

And to one last point, Sultan astutely observed that all private universities have gotten very good at individually pricing their product to attract the top talent.  Neither warriorchick jr. nor jsglow jr. would be there without the very valuable scholarships THEY earned.  Sure one can go to MU with a 27 ACT; you'll just pay the 'rack rate' published on the back of the motel room door.   

[GGGG]

So if Marquette is looking to control costs - and it should be - the obvious place to look is where you can replace personnel with the highest salaries with competent, adequate personnel who would accept a lower salary.  Isn't Buzz #1 on the salary hit parade?

I know you aren't being serious here, but cutting salaries to control costs simply isn't going to work.  Talented professors, administrators, etc. would go elsewhere and you would make the school less valuable.  Now strategically figuring out what positions are needed, and what really aren't, and how you can re-image what you are doing...that is a different story.

My experience with a lot of people in higher education, and I work with them on a daily basis, is that they try to do everything they have traditionally done without looking at it to see if it is strategically important...or if they can do it differently or forego it entirely.  A lot of higher education administrators are well-intentioned...but simply not great managers.

[GGGG]

jsglow...you are right..."complaining" isn't the right word.  It's just that there are perfectly good alternatives to a MU education that are going to give the education you need to make a fine life for yourself.  I mean if you are Joe Student from Brookfield, and you want to major in business, you have four schools in the state that really are going to get you what you need.  MU and UW are the top two, but Milwaukee and Whitewater are just a little bit behind.  Those last two might not get you the *first* job when compared to the other two, but they certainly are going to give you the knowledge you need to succeed and develop a nice career.  But despite that, people still choose MU.  Probably because of a perceived quality difference...but also because of the urban environment, campus life and private school atmosphere.  (smaller class sizes, etc.)

[jsglow]

My experience with a lot of people in higher education, and I work with them on a daily basis, is that they try to do everything they have traditionally done without looking at it to see if it is strategically important...or if they can do it differently or forego it entirely.  A lot of higher education administrators are well-intentioned...but simply not great managers.

This.

[warriorchick]

My experience with a lot of people in higher education, and I work with them on a daily basis, is that they try to do everything they have traditionally done without looking at it to see if it is strategically important...or if they can do it differently or forego it entirely.  A lot of higher education administrators are well-intentioned...but simply not great managers.

Well, said, Sultan. I am sure it's the same at most schools, but I can't tell you the number of administrators I have met at Marquette, where after they describe what they do, I thought to myself, "Really? That's a full-time job?"  I think university administration is very similar to government in that any time they decide to take on a new program or new initiative, no matter the size, it is automatically assumed that it needs a new department full of additional FTEs instead of carefully considering if it could be handled with current resources.

[mr.MUskie]

I know you aren't being serious here, but cutting salaries to control costs simply isn't going to work.  Talented professors, administrators, etc. would go elsewhere and you would make the school less valuable.  

The point I was trying to make is that administrators might be working hard to save $100,000 here and $10,000 there and realize that they can save $1,000,000 by pushing out Buzz and hiring a lesser coach, and if they have to turn MU into SLU on the athletics side, they might be ok with that.

[GGGG]

The point I was trying to make is that administrators might be working hard to save $100,000 here and $10,000 there and realize that they can save $1,000,000 by pushing out Buzz and hiring a lesser coach, and if they have to turn MU into SLU on the athletics side, they might be ok with that.

Considering they just dropped big $$$ on Chew, I doubt it.

[real chili 83]

The point I was trying to make is that administrators might be working hard to save $100,000 here and $10,000 there and realize that they can save $1,000,000 by pushing out Buzz and hiring a lesser coach, and if they have to turn MU into SLU on the athletics side, they might be ok with that.

That's where a department by department ROI comes in handy.  The ROI On successful athletic departments is tough to beat.  Especially when you factor in all the donations that are attributed to the good will that comes from alums who enjoy supporting successful athletics.

Academic and athletic excellence are not mutually exclusive.  Athletic excellence can contribute in a big way (if done right) to academic excellence.

[mu_hilltopper]

The point I was trying to make is that administrators might be working hard to save $100,000 here and $10,000 there and realize that they can save $1,000,000 by pushing out Buzz and hiring a lesser coach, and if they have to turn MU into SLU on the athletics side, they might be ok with that.

In addition to the ROI argument above .. the Athletic Department is self-funding, as in the BBall program brings in enough revenue to not only pay for itself, but all other sports. 

In return for no money, it gives the University a huge marketing boost and makes the Marquette brand (and all degrees) far more valuable.

You /might/ be able to make the argument that if MU had a crappier BBall program, the donors to the Blue & Gold fund would instead make donations to MU's general fund.   This would be true for a fraction, yes.  Most people are donating to B&G because they want to improve their point standing/seats.

[Goose]

MU basketball is stand alone business to some degree. It not only funds itself but covers all other sport expenses. Hands down the greatest marketing tool the school has and ROI is off the charts. Only rub in the mix is negative basketball exposure probably could hurt far greater than all the positives it provides. The BOT and President have big job in balancing the unreal positives over potential negatives. No need to lessen ball program provided it is clean and well run. Only concern in big picture is if the President is more concerned about possible issues in future.

[avid1010]

My experience with a lot of people in higher education, and I work with them on a daily basis, is that they try to do everything they have traditionally done without looking at it to see if it is strategically important...or if they can do it differently or forego it entirely.  A lot of higher education administrators are well-intentioned...but simply not great managers.

agreed, but the higher paying admin positions should be people with successful management experience and successful educational experience.  i've worked in the public and private sector, and have seen my share of awful management on both sides of the coin...the major difference being that the private sector was paying 2-20 times more for a similar workload.

i'm not as knowledgeable as most of you on what mu has for administration, but the important positions are being filled under the watch of mu's board...which is made up of "managers" from the private sector.  when someone states that they work with administrators that are well-intentioned but not great managers, it makes me believe the school has an issue with upper management being able to increase the effectiveness of mid-level managers/admin. and model something as simple as a project managment system that should clearly place accountability on administration to focus on what is in the strategic plan. 

[77ncaachamps]

77champs


Hate to say that my 19y son's biggest interest in going to MU was the basketball program. He would never admit to my wife that was reason but in reality he picked MU over other schools because he has lived MU ball for 19 years. That being big part of decision did not bother me because the other schools in contention were comp cost and academic reputation. If he picked MU over Harvard because of program I would have been pissed.

Yep. My choices were Boston U and NYU in addition to MU. Both are waaaaay better cities but I couldn't see myself rooting for the BU hockey team (not a hockey fan) nor their basketball team. And NYU?! Yeah right.

I went to MU for a program, came from a Jesuit school, had a Jesuit scholarship, loved the distance from CA, weather, and different experiences it offered. And cheering on my school at bk games made it a no-brainer.

My senior year, the Friday Special at the Gym was 10 cent beers.  The Friday Special at Caff's now is a $3 bottle of Pabst or Schlitz. Tuition was $6000 then.  At that rate, Marquette's tuition should be $180,000 a year today.  Have students stopped drinking at this ungodly rate of inflation?

And the kicker is that today's beer is watered down!