Page 10 of 21 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 20 ... LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 306

Thread: 2020 UL Development

  1. #136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cajun4life View Post
    As mentioned earlier as well, this was a complete development. Also included stadium renovations and naming rights b
    They could’ve leased it for $1 a year if a complete stadium renovation was included for all I care. That’s, like, THE pressing money matter facing our athletic department.

  2. #137

    Default Re: Here we go again

    Quote Originally Posted by BrockMeaux View Post
    They could’ve leased it for $1 a year if a complete stadium renovation was included for all I care. That’s, like, THE pressing money matter facing our athletic department.
    100% true

  3. Default Re: Here we go again

    Quote Originally Posted by Cajun90 View Post
    Sorry but those numbers are NOT realistic. You are talking a lease payment of 83K per DAY!! If you assume a very good margin of 30% profit on sales you are looking at yearly sales revenue of 100 million just to pay the rent.

    Not buying it. The figures just aren't adding up.
    You don’t know the numbers and we don’t know the numbers but the sad thing is that the President of our University chose not to know the numbers.

    Passing on a development opportunity without effort and supporting BLM - obviously without checking into what they are - are both unacceptable results from the leader of our university.

  4. #139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cajun90 View Post
    Sorry but those numbers are NOT realistic. You are talking a lease payment of 83K per DAY!! If you assume a very good margin of 30% profit on sales you are looking at yearly sales revenue of 100 million just to pay the rent.

    Not buying it. The figures just aren't adding up.
    Let’s take away the numbers for just a second.

    The fact of the matter is that we had people with some massive financial prestige in the business world that showed interest in investing in our university and community, and we sat on it by not returning a phone call.

  5. #140

    Default Re: Here we go again

    Quote Originally Posted by ULvictory View Post
    Let’s take away the numbers for just a second.

    The fact of the matter is that we had people with some massive financial prestige in the business world that showed interest in investing in our university and community, and we sat on it by not returning a phone call.
    I agree 100%. It also feeds into a stereotype that our people may not be the brightest or most educated. I would walk away thinking, ‘If a deal that sounds this good can’t even generate a meeting with a university president, these are not serious people.’

  6. Default Re: Here we go again

    Quote Originally Posted by CajunT View Post
    Again the number thrown out was around $30m in total dollars. That could include a number of things beyond leases. It wasn't defined for me and a few others.
    $30 million in total dollars sounds a lot more reasonable than $750 million.

    Still I can't comprehend Savoie playing hardball over $30 million, especially when UL retains ownership.

    $30 mil is FIVE TIMES what he got for the horse farm where UL lost ownership and $30 million times more than Authement got for the Cajun Dome where he kept ownership.

  7. Default Re: Here we go again

    Lots of speculation.....

    CajunT, why don't you do a FOI(Freedom of Information) request to expose all of this. If this is accurate, their will be a huge uproar within the community.


  8. Default Re: Here we go again

    Quote Originally Posted by Cajunfever View Post
    Lots of speculation.....

    CajunT, why don't you do a FOI(Freedom of Information) request to expose all of this. If this is accurate, their will be a huge uproar within the community.
    I would bet it was nipped in the bud so early there won't be much revealed from this. FOYA only requires that govt provides written info or documents.

  9. Default Re: Here we go again

    Quote Originally Posted by CajunVic View Post
    I would bet it was nipped in the bud so early there won't be much revealed from this. FOYA only requires that govt provides written info or documents.
    Correct.

    I am assuming there is an email thread especially if someone resigned over this as was mentioned. If nothing exists in writing, maybe this is all speculation. If a developer made an offer for $30M a year rent for 25 years, the developer would put this in writing to the university. If I am T-Joe, I would not entertain anything until it is in writing. Maybe T-Joe called their bluff if they would not put anything in writing.....If this is a legit business proposal, there would be a written proposal to the university.

    Maybe T-Joe told them not to waste their time, If I am the developer I would put the proposal in writing to force T Joe to formally reject the proposal. I would then leak this proposal to the media which would get T-Joe to publicly explain why he is rejecting the offer.

  10. Default Re: Here we go again

    There could have been a confidential meeting where demonstrations were made by PowerPoint or confidential document information that was retrieved after the meeting - view only - pending required NDA protections to move forward. In that instance, there may not be much on the plan. I do however agree that if someone resigned on the subject there should be emails and also emails setting up any meetings. I doubt there will be much on the substance of the proposed development, however.

    What I do know, however, is that now the president is in a pickle and owes some explanation. Maybe there is one. Not listening is not an acceptable explanation.


  11. #146

    Default Re: Here we go again

    Quote Originally Posted by Cajunfever View Post
    Lots of speculation.....

    CajunT, why don't you do a FOI(Freedom of Information) request to expose all of this. If this is accurate, their will be a huge uproar within the community.
    Here's what I've done along with most of the people that have spoken out on this subject that I personally know and Dr. Savoie's support of #BLM. I've called his and Dr. Blohm's phones and left messages, neither have called me back. In fact they have not returned no ones calls that have left messages calling for him to clarify his support for that organization and for justice and equality.

    Supposedly he was to meet with some of the universities major benefactors, including one that had pledged upwards of $15m to $20m towards the development of the supposed medical school at the old Lady of Lords property. I doubt he will do anything different in the face of possibly losing millions of dollars in support for academics and athletics.

  12. Default Re: Here we go again

    Quote Originally Posted by CajunT View Post
    Here's what I've done along with most of the people that have spoken out on this subject that I personally know and Dr. Savoie's support of #BLM. I've called his and Dr. Blohm's phones and left messages, neither have called me back. In fact they have not returned no ones calls that have left messages calling for him to clarify his support for that organization and for justice and equality.

    Supposedly he was to meet with some of the universities major benefactors, including one that had pledged upwards of $15m to $20m towards the development of the supposed medical school at the old Lady of Lords property. I doubt he will do anything different in the face of possibly losing millions of dollars in support for academics and athletics.
    Maybe I am missing something, what does the BLM comments have to do with the $750 million development offer?

    If T Joe is not returning your call, send in a freedom of information request for both the $750 million development and the plans for development of the Lourdes property.

  13. #148

    Default Re: Here we go again

    It’s a pretty big deal that nobody has chimed in defending T-Joe by now. Usually at this stage of a hot thread the other side of the pancake is exposed...very interesting. Breaks my heart that we didn’t even entertain this opportunity.


  14. #149

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Buds View Post
    It’s a pretty big deal that nobody has chimed in defending T-Joe by now. Usually at this stage of a hot thread the other side of the pancake is exposed...very interesting. Breaks my heart that we didn’t even entertain this opportunity.
    If true, how can he be defended? It's nauseating just to think about. This needs to be investigated.

  15. #150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rainman66 View Post
    I agree 100%. It also feeds into a stereotype that our people may not be the brightest or most educated. I would walk away thinking, ‘If a deal that sounds this good can’t even generate a meeting with a university president, these are not serious people.’
    This offer could also fulfill another stereotype: “If it sounds too good to be true, it’s probably not” haha

Page 10 of 21 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 20 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 3rd, 2020, 03:58 pm

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •