[All Systems Go]

Originally Posted by pig

Do you not agree that Universities in "general" are indeed doing ok. I mean essentially a University regardless of what it does is a business and if you compared it to other businesses I would say that on paper the figures of most universities don't look at all to bad.

I base this on a few things. The increase in fees for home students. The increase in overseas students to British Universities, like you said grants and sponsorship deals with large corporations, money from the government, the increase in students at universities and in general universities paying shit wages to its staff in relation to other institutions across the world (Australia, USA and Canada).

I have absolutely no idea about the financial well-being of universities so any opinion I give would be just a guessed based on an outward appearance and therefore pretty much irrelevant. From your previous post, I have taken it that you have not seen data on the financial well-being of universities, so I suppose we are both in the same boat.

It is true that universities are not shutting down left, right and centre but that doesn't mean they have the necessary funding to provide the adequate level of education. Let's take secondary schools as an example. Some of them are in desperate need of extra funds, but they remain open.

With the increased number of students going to university then there needs to be more places. As a result the poorer performing universities can still get students as there is demand. Whether or not they are able to charge enough to improve the university or just prevent it from decaying is another matter.

I would imagine grants from corporations would be for a specific purpose, such as building a new superconductor or supercomputer or whatever to teach the next generation of scientists that particular corporation will need in the future. If they tried to spend the money on things like history books or musical instruments then I'm not sure how happy the corporation would be. this is all hypothetical but I would imagine most (if not all) corporate sponsership is made with the idea of directly benefitting the company.

I don't know how much money the universities get from the government but I would imagine that the disability changes (which are mandatory under the law) are being (at least) partially funded by the government. these changes have to be made so whatever aspect of 'wealth' this development seems to portray is offset by the fact that they had to find the money somewhere as these changes had to be made.

True that was my mistake, but I felt that readers would be able to understand and work out for themselves how and where university income comes from and that I wouldn't have to spell it out in BIG RED LETTERS. I wanted to point out that a substantial amount comes from overseas students.

Firstly, I'm not psychic so I don't know what you're thinking. Secondly, you have already admitted you have no idea where the money is coming from, except for what you think in your head. In this sense 'substantial' is meaningless as it has no parameters to be judged by. 20% of the budget is substantial, but so is 80%. You seemed to put a lot of emphasis on overseas students bringing in the cash but without being able to look at it in presective (alongside the rest of the university budget) it's difficut to work out what impact they have had.

there is also the matter of how sustainable is this? If this has been going on for a long time then it becomes difficult to see it as a new windfall, unless overseas students are paying far more than they previously were. If this is a new phenomena then it is possible that it might end in a few years and universities may well be in trouble again.

Glad we agree.

Except that neither of us have any statistical evidence to back up this point. Again, I'm not sure how far we agree anyway. What I consider a lot of money might just be a fraction of what you a thinking of.

I just want to make a quick assertion here. A Union and a University are two different entities. You may have made a simple mistake here. But a Union is funded by the University, it is run by students, for students and it's aim isn't to make profits. In fact Kent Union was in masses of debts a few years ago due to the mickey mouse policies it adopted under its previous management of students. Under the new regime they have capitalised on the fact that they are in a city which lacks clubs and been very smart with how they balance the books.

Cardiff Union I am in no doubt probably doesn't do as well as Cardiff University. The University gives the Union x amount per year and after that it is up to them. If you meant Cardiff Uni as oppose to Cardiff Union I apologise.

I've no idea how well Cardiff University is doing, though I would imagine that it is pretty rich being the biggest university in Wales, in the best location and with the best reputation.

What I do know is that Cardiff Union has an awful lot of money in the bank, what I have been told is millions of pounds. that seems to be backed up by furball's comment about the new building.

Swansea University closing departments may not be an indication of it doing badly financially. Indeed going back to my earlier point, Universities are now businesses. It may make business sense to get rid of certain courses that don't provide enough profit/income to make them viable to run them and instead concentrate/specialise in areas that the university suceeds in and can capitalise on.

this is certainly a possibility, though it is a sad day when educational facilities only teach that which is profitable. I still cannot seeing as a sign of being that financially stable as the limiting of courses seems to be (to me, at least) to be a negative development in regards to a universities prestige.

Fair enough, but I hope you understand my assertion a bit more.

I see where you're coming from but at the end of the day all of this is based on nothing concrete.

I wouldn't call it a snide comment, as you put thought into and replied with an answer suitbale to begin calling this a debate. I applaud you. I welcome your reply.

Hmm, just looking at the time of your post. I thought you had left so I went to bed about 10 minutes before this post as it said you were off-line, oh well. Better late than never I suppose.