Again, in fairness, there's a massive difference between tallying historical donations to something versus campaigning to donors to save that thing.
If I received an email or a solicitation to donate to the school's nursing program? No thanks. If I received a solicitation to donate to the women's golf team? No thanks. Not because I have an issue with either, but I only have so much to give and typically would do so to that of my closest ties to the school. Also, the University perpetually asks for money for ALL things (like most colleges). How are donors to know what is in most need if not told?
If I we were notified that the women's golf team was set to be dissolved or that the nursing program were set to be removed from the offerings due to funding and a campaign was created to save both.....I would absolutely redirect funds to both. Look, just because donors want certain things to excel typically doesn't mean they want everything else to flounder.
Perhaps your insider or someone else inside knows if we actually broached high net worth alums about saving this program? Or did the University, as it was known to do back then, just sit on their a$$ and hope their generalized requests to donate, while provide zero 411 on the health of its various programs, paid off?
I think you and I simply disagree fundamentally here on the worth of the track program, the decision making of the school, and how typical individuals think when it comes to donating to it. It is what it is. But I'm confident I'm not alone in my thought process.
