« Nice Landing... | Main | This is a Test »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

From UofA's website "The University of Arizona is the state's premier research university, ranked among the top 20 of public research universities nationwide." . . . we are among the best in the world."

Then, please explain Prof. Gary E. Schwartz,PhD and his VERITAS parapsychology research at UofA. How many tax dollars are spent on this hogwash?

Greg, let's say you have two clients, each of whom pays you $100. One of them says, "Next year, I'm only going to pay you $75." You go to the other client and say, "Hey, could you pay me $125 next year?" That client agrees. So, next year you'll earn $200, just as you did this year.

Well, you and I are at a cocktail party one night, and I hear you complaining about the client who cut your fee down to $75. I say, "What do you care? I happen to know that your other client agreed to bump your fee to $125, so you're in exactly the same place that you started off."

I can think of two entirely reasonable things you might say here.

First, "Taking me down to $75 suggests that the first client doesn't really value the work I do for them. I mean, I work very hard and produce great results, and they 'reward' me with a pay cut. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth."

Second, "You think asking my other client for a $25 pay hike was cost-free? Times are tough for them, too, so they were not at all happy with the request. They also told me that my work better be flawless from this point forward...and that I shouldn't plan to ask for another bump for at least five years."

All things considered, you'd probably prefer the previous situation--$100 from each client--pretty strongly. Accordingly, you'd complain about the client who cut your pay by $25...even though your total compensation (between both clients) remained the same.

In short, you'd be just like Shelton.

David Dodenhoff is correct. While you may not have a whole lot of experience practicing law and dealing with clients in terms of negotiating fees, he is absolutely correct in the example of having a client not appreciate the value of services. Syte funding decreases are hard to come back from, and soon, the other sources of funding (research grants) will ask an appropriate question -- why should I give you funds when your own state doesn't believe in you and keeps cutting basic funding.

It's like being on a Board of Directors of a 501 (c) 3 and requesting $ from the private donors. The first question the private donors ask is what type of Board support do you have ? Have all the members of the Board paid membership fees (if any) or made any donations to the 501(c) 3? Some donors will not give unless there's 100% Board participation in giving (unwritten Board obligation). If the state thinks the universities aren't worth funding, the private funds and research grants will dry up. Until the state gets a clue that businesses don't want to be here if the state doesn't support the educational system, why would a company want to send its employees (and families) into a school system such that it is in Arizona?

While you can say "gotcha" to Shelton and the U of A, you miss the real world point that Dodenhoff makes.

Should have said "state" funding not syte funding.

The comments to this entry are closed.