lol,
do you read?
I did that, no response. Jane is dismissive to people, including to myself in one conversation.
I guess I try again, not sure why I would. She's like 73 years old, I doubt she's at a state of her life of actually learning how to become an inspirational leader.
but that's my opinion.
again, not all her decisions have been bad. She's just should retire and get out of the way versus just building up her money / retirement fund or maybe she feels a need to in her mind remain relevant. 
Previous Message
I write often and receive a response very quickly. Try it. Previous Message
lol, I enjoy when people use the "just write to so and so directly" tactic
it's mostly BS.
I've written to Jane twice.
1) Censorship, she cancelled an event about 7 years ago just after she started. no response
2) Fund-raising. 2021. no response
who knows why, she might have that stuff screened
maybe she classifies me as an OWG (old white guy) lol
I've spoken to her 3 times, not a long each time, you can get some sense, heard her speak three seperate times.
She has NOT raised $300+ million, and I doubt she's been responsible via her personality/salesmanship of raising even $3 million on her own. She lacks inspiration in all sorts of ways. Not that a lot of leaders have that quality.
Jane has her bias, like a poker player has tells.
Her decisions tend to be pre-ordained no matter how muchshe says she's data driven
her 'tells'
1) The mascot issue. She ram-rodded that to a pre-ordained outcome
2) The funding update to athletics. Now that was a boost and I think most on these boards loved the decision. To me, it was in a ways like the mascot . She went thru a process knowing the final answer. Albeit I think it was more transparent, mabye becasue she emphasized boosters/alumni in the process, unlike the mascot where she emphasized the sub-set of supporters that wanted the 'old white guy' mascot gone, lol. not that other execs don't use that same playbook
3) putting a buffer in (VP) between her and AD, because.......lol, she didn't want to deal with it and wanted to insulate herself. why a PRes would do that for such a huge function is fascinating. but IMO goes to her dismissiveness of people
but to answer your advice. No, she probably won't respond, lol. And no, she hasn't raised anywhere close to $300+ million. It's all a bunch of BS Previous Message
If you have any true questions about the number, email Dr. C, she will respond. Previous Message
We quite obviously have all been sleepin' on El Chapo Jane! Previous Message
both schools about 40,000
so what differentiates Northridge raising so much more than Beach?
both commuter schools
both produce lots of teachers
what are they doing that the Beach does not?, I would have thought Beach engendered as much or more support from grads and community but apparently not
Northridge's endowment now almost twice that of Long Beach. Previous Message
this is scandalous!
I go to the other board to be informed Beach via Jane's expert fund-raising prowess raised over $300 millio.
can someone show the off-shore account that must have gone to?!
our endowment is only about $120 million, the Beach endowment has always been a sore point, for as solid a Cal State reputation, it's frankly very low
and then to find out Jane gathered all these donors out of thin air, and got $300 million, so it went where? lol
man, Jane should run for President, with skills like that, heck, I'd vote for her if she could show she even raised $50 mil over the last 5 years
smh
commented a few years back, the "No Barriers" campaign was doomed to failure from the moment the horrific slogan was made. NEVER, marketing 101, put the word No in any sort of slogan, but that critical mistake was the first of a flawed idea to begin with
$300+ million, lord oh lord, Jane owns a money printing press apparently, no wonder she does not want to quit, they might trace out where she staashed all that cash!
157
Message Thread
« Back to index
on 6/27/2024, 9:52 am, in reply to "