T Denny Sanford

[2nd Degree Gopher]

What would Stanford's motivation be to make sure they build a smaller stadium?

$125m ... even at that time would have been way out of scale for a B1G stadium.

This was about 20 years ago, so my recollection could be a bit off. Not sure where the $125M figure came from, but I do recall hearing a number like that at the time. Sanford placed restrictions of his proposed $35M gift including that he wanted full naming rights, he wouldn't contribute his money until construction was completed, and he wouldn't allow the University to seek any funding for the stadium from the legislature. I believe that, at the time, he was also going through a divorce and was thought to have a few hundreds of millions of dollars, not the billions he does now.

He did eventually donate $6M to the stadium fund, at least in part to fund the Hall of Fame.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

This was about 20 years ago, so my recollection could be a bit off. Not sure where the $125M figure came from, but I do recall hearing a number like that at the time. Sanford placed restrictions of his proposed $35M gift including that he wanted full naming rights, he wouldn't contribute his money until construction was completed, and he wouldn't allow the University to seek any funding for the stadium from the legislature. I believe that, at the time, he was also going through a divorce and was thought to have a few hundreds of millions of dollars, not the billions he does now.

He did eventually donate $6M to the stadium fund, at least in part to fund the Hall of Fame.

Very strange….


That whole proposal is riddled with reasons not to make that deal.

 

[howeda7]

Opinions will probably vary on whether this is an admirable way to make money. Does he operate out of South Dakota due to usury laws, tax treatment, or both? I recall South Dakota doesn’t restrain max interest rate but not sure in the particulars at the moment.

They actually cap interest at 29.99% now, but didn't for a long time.

There are a lot of other shady laws that encourage foreign/dark $$ to hide their stashes in SD though.

 

[Gophers_4life]

for whatever reasons or motivation, the guy has basically given away most of the money he's earned. would any of us do the same? so if he wants to slap his name on a bunch of buildings, that's his perogative.

That's just fine. So long as the HQ building is in Minnesota.

N.O. to Minnesota health care being dictated by South Dakota's state government and being in Sioux Falls.

N.O.

 

[Spaulding!No!]

Where is all the Sid Hartman money? 80 years of free tickets, food and parking had to be worth something.

 

[#2Gopher]

I remember that the AD was very frustrated with Sanford during negotiations. Sanford was very strict that every sheet of paper, every whatever, Sanford's name had to be just so on everything. While the AD felt bad about losing a donor, he couldn't keep up with his demands regarding his name being everywhere. Quite frankly, I don't blame the AD.

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

That's just fine. So long as the HQ building is in Minnesota.

N.O. to Minnesota health care being dictated by South Dakota's state government and being in Sioux Falls.

N.O.

Sanford isn't moving their headquarters to Minneapolis, plus they are larger than Fairview. If the deal goes through, it will be headquartered in Sioux Falls.

This isn't the first time they've attempted this merger, so it wouldn't surprise me if it fell through, again.

 

[disco]

Where is all the Sid Hartman money? 80 years of free tickets, food and parking had to be worth something.

He allegedly lost a lot in the Bernie Madoff scandal. I would assume his money went to Chad and his sister.

 

[Cobra]

I remember that the AD was very frustrated with Sanford during negotiations. Sanford was very strict that every sheet of paper, every whatever, Sanford's name had to be just so on everything. While the AD felt bad about losing a donor, he couldn't keep up with his demands regarding his name being everywhere. Quite frankly, I don't blame the AD.

Sanford sounds like a bitchy diva, no thanks, not worth it.

 

[Gophergrandpa]

Where is all the Sid Hartman money? 80 years of free tickets, food and parking had to be worth something.

He had a lot invested with Bernie Madoff, which went poof. Also had a lot invested in McClatchey (newspaper), which ended up being a dog.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

Sanford sounds like a bitchy diva, no thanks, not worth it.

Sounds like a guy who needs to make deals with smaller organizations. He wants to call the shots / lay down some arbitrary rules. That's fine but it doesn't work at a big University.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

for whatever reasons or motivation, the guy has basically given away most of the money he's earned. would any of us do the same? so if he wants to slap his name on a bunch of buildings, that's his perogative.

BTW - the Sanford Pentagon in Sioux Falls is a really fun arena with an old-style "Hoosiers" like main court. If you ever get a chance, you should take in a game there.

The usual deal is concern about legacy and image. He reportedly made some or most of his billions as the owner of a bank with arguably questionable societal value trading on the habits of apparently unsophisticated and/or irresponsible customers, as much as the bank was specifically placed in a state with lax usury law. Fine, so be it, it’s legal. The statues, naming rights and so on seems a bit much, though? The gifts are nice but not if they help enable, say, the monopolization of healthcare in the upper Midwest which would have a very negative effect on a wide swath of workers and patients. A lot to unpack with T. denny.

 

[Gophers_4life]

the monopolization of healthcare in the upper Midwest which would have a very negative effect on a wide swath of workers and patients.

Which is exactly why if that does indeed happen, the company headquarters must be located in Minnesota and thus be answerable to Minnesota state government.

That should be written into state law.


No different to Xcel and the PUC.

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

Which is exactly why if that does indeed happen, the company headquarters must be located in Minnesota and thus be answerable to Minnesota state government.

That should be written into state law.


No different to Xcel and the PUC.

Fairview isn't run by the government, so why do they or Sanford have to answer to the Minnesota government?

Sanford already operates in Minnesota and Xcel doesn’t only operate in Minnesota.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

my local hospital is affiliated with Sanford. I have no complaints. Sanford brings in doctors to see people locally on an out-patient basis - otherwise, I'd have to drive to Sioux Falls any time I needed to see my Cardiologist.

FWIW, there is also a local clinic affiliated with Avera, which is headquartered in....Sioux Falls.

and on the HQ - when two companies merge, the larger or stronger company usually gets preference on a lot of those decisions. why should this be any different?

 

[Pompous Elitist]

“named "worst credit card in America" by Consumer Reports in 2010”

Deserves a statue, or recognition of some kind





First Premier Bank, notorious for its high-cost credit cards, is suing a credit card comparison site and the site's owner, because the site refuses to take down data on the rates and fees charged on First Premier credit cards. Saying that publication of this data constitutes trademark infringement, First Premier sued CardHub and its owner Odysseas Papadimitriou for $5 million in April.

In a recent legal response, Papadimitriou and CardHub contend that First Premier's suit is aimed at silencing critics and making it harder for consumers to comparison shop. Saying the suit is about First Amendment rights, not trademarks, CardHub's legal response reads, "if suits like First Premier's are allowed to proceed, any company dissatisfied with a bad review of its products or services -- whether in a website, or in a printed newspaper or magazine -- would be able to bring an infringement action to halt publication of the unwanted review."

"This lawsuit is a transparent attempt to keep consumers in the dark, and it raises troubling First Amendment issues," said Deepak Gupta, the attorney representing CardHub in a prepared statement. "The trademark laws are about ensuring fair competition; they don't entitle companies to censor critical commentary online."

First Premier Chief Executive Miles Beacom failed to return a reporter's phone calls. However, the company has said in previous statements to the media that it needs to "retain control" of its product.

CardHub notes that data about the rates and fees charged by First Premier, named "worst credit card in America" by Consumer Reports in 2010, do not appear in graphic credit card comparisons on any other site, causing Papadimitriou to speculate in legal filings that his site is not the only one being intimidated by First Premier. Ted Rossman, a spokesman for CreditCards.com, acknowledged that his site removed the data at First Premier's request. Bill Hardekopf, CEO of LowCards.com says his site doesn't list First Premier because the company does not provide automated updates of rates and fees.

Card comparison site gets sued for showing rates, fees

A sub-prime credit card issuer argues that publication of its rates and fees constitutes trademark infringement

www.cbsnews.com

 

[Pompous Elitist]

my local hospital is affiliated with Sanford. I have no complaints. Sanford brings in doctors to see people locally on an out-patient basis - otherwise, I'd have to drive to Sioux Falls any time I needed to see my Cardiologist.

FWIW, there is also a local clinic affiliated with Avera, which is headquartered in....Sioux Falls.

and on the HQ - when two companies merge, the larger or stronger company usually gets preference on a lot of those decisions. why should this be any different?

Sanford doesn’t own Sanford Health, he “bought” naming rights with large donations. He has done similar elsewhere. How much he has to do with day to day operations is completely unknown, I’d guess.

 

[Catechol]

I have seen some rumors about the U considering purchasing back UMMC to separate themselves from Fairview but this wouldn’t be financially viable. The cost to buy now compared to what they sold it for 25 years ago would be enormous. And they need to build a new hospital anyway to have enough revenue generating capacity. Even then, academic medical centers can’t really survive anymore without being part of a healthcare system as both an internal referral network and revenue buffer (academic medical centers/physicians don’t often do high volumes of highly reimbursed procedures on highly insured suburban patients). Mayo has a health system. Northwestern, U Chicago, IU (Indiana), U Michigan, they are all expanding their footprints.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Fairview isn't run by the government, so why do they or Sanford have to answer to the Minnesota government?

Sanford already operates in Minnesota and Xcel doesn’t only operate in Minnesota.

Xcel is a monopoly where they operate in Minnesota, for a large chunk of the population. Therefore, they should and do answer directly to the state government.

All I said is, if that becomes the situation (as was described by the post I was replying to), then absolutely the same setup should be forced upon them.

 

[Gophers_4life]

my local hospital is affiliated with Sanford. I have no complaints. Sanford brings in doctors to see people locally on an out-patient basis - otherwise, I'd have to drive to Sioux Falls any time I needed to see my Cardiologist.

FWIW, there is also a local clinic affiliated with Avera, which is headquartered in....Sioux Falls.

and on the HQ - when two companies merge, the larger or stronger company usually gets preference on a lot of those decisions. why should this be any different?

Sure, sure ... but you practically live in a suburb of Sioux Falls now, am I wrong?

As to the bolded: consider the situation with the major Japanese car companies. Their overall HQ's are all in Japan. Of course. But each one has what is really a completely separate company for North American operations that have headquarters in the US. Toyota Motor North America, for example. So perhaps a similar thing like that could be required.

 

[Gophers_4life]

I have seen some rumors about the U considering purchasing back UMMC to separate themselves from Fairview but this wouldn’t be financially viable. The cost to buy now compared to what they sold it for 25 years ago would be enormous. And they need to build a new hospital anyway to have enough revenue generating capacity. Even then, academic medical centers can’t really survive anymore without being part of a healthcare system as both an internal referral network and revenue buffer (academic medical centers/physicians don’t often do high volumes of highly reimbursed procedures on highly insured suburban patients). Mayo has a health system. Northwestern, U Chicago, IU (Indiana), U Michigan, they are all expanding their footprints.

What is "M Health Fairview"? What is "U of M Physicians"?

Are these just "in name only" things? Just wanting to have some of the prestige and "shine" of the U attached to their operations?


As to your point: why can't the U just do whatever it is that the U of Iowa, U of Wisconsin, U of Illinois, etc. do with whatever medical system/facilities are associated with their respective medical schools?



I thought the two main things of an "academic medical center" are:
1. to teach and train new doctors, nurses, and perhaps administrative as well
2. to provide a clinical setting for cutting edge medical research.



All the other stuff ... just being a routine medical system ... I don't see why our academic/U of M facility has to be the same thing as that?

 

[BilldGopher]

A quirk at the time has allowed me to personally still use Boynton after graduating 30+ years ago...which of course sent me then to UM Hospitals and now into the MHealth Fairview system...so watching all this closely. Allowed me to keep the same GP for 20+ years until retired. Many future doctors have learned from me on the table over the years...

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

Xcel is a monopoly where they operate in Minnesota, for a large chunk of the population. Therefore, they should and do answer directly to the state government.

All I said is, if that becomes the situation (as was described by the post I was replying to), then absolutely the same setup should be forced upon them.

You're trying to compare apples and oranges and are making zero sense while doing so.

 

[Gophers_4life]

I don't see why. Electric service and healthcare are both critical services that must be provided in a continuous and fair way.

Government oversight is appropriate if/when a single company has a monopoly on providing that service.

Happy to agree to disagree. But that's how it is in Minnesota. Perhaps not how it is in South Dakota. So right there, pretty significant cultural difference that perhaps should give Minnesotans pause about letting a South Dakota company take over!

 

[disco]

Sure, sure ... but you practically live in a suburb of Sioux Falls now, am I wrong?

As to the bolded: consider the situation with the major Japanese car companies. Their overall HQ's are all in Japan. Of course. But each one has what is really a completely separate company for North American operations that have headquarters in the US. Toyota Motor North America, for example. So perhaps a similar thing like that could be required.

Part of that is the so-called "chicken tax" which imposes huge tariffs on trucks coming into the country. The popularity of trucks and SUV's here makes it much more profitable to make them here.

Case in point how this works. Ford (an American company) produced the Transit Connect - the small delivery van - in Turkey. In order for it to be imported as a car and be exempt from the tax, it had to come in with a side window and a back seat. Since most were destined for small cargo use, Ford then removed the side window and the back seat and threw them away once they were past US customs.

 

[Gophers_4life]

I don't see why. Electric service and healthcare are both critical services that must be provided in a continuous and fair way.

Government oversight is appropriate if/when a single company has a monopoly on providing that service.

Happy to agree to disagree. But that's how it is in Minnesota. Perhaps not how it is in South Dakota. So right there, pretty significant cultural difference that perhaps should give Minnesotans pause about letting a South Dakota company take over!

I must not have been too far off. That or this STrib writer reads GH!

https://www.startribune.com/sanford...esota-south-dakota-cultural-divide/600252768/

Sanford-Fairview health merger exposes Minnesota, South Dakota cultural divide​

 

[Plato]

There are two monopolies in health care.
The first and the larger are the health insurance companies that set the prices paid for everything in health care.
The second are health care companies that provide health care.
They hope to get big enough to negotiate from a position of strength with the insurance companies.
Inflation has reduced the very narrow profit margins of healthcare companies and insurance companies have not increased payments.
That has put many companies on the edge of bankruptcy and looking for mergers.
Sanford has cash because of the donor's contributions.
The U of MN medical school's survival as an entity is essential to the state so it must be subsidized and independent of individuals like Sanford.
To compete for physicians to teach, medical schools encouraged them to practice more to get the revenue needed for salaries.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

There are two monopolies in health care.
The first and the larger are the health insurance companies that set the prices paid for everything in health care.
The second are health care companies that provide health care.
They hope to get big enough to negotiate from a position of strength with the insurance companies.
Inflation has reduced the very narrow profit margins of healthcare companies and insurance companies have not increased payments.
That has put many companies on the edge of bankruptcy and looking for mergers.
Sanford has cash because of the donor's contributions.
The U of MN medical school's survival as an entity is essential to the state so it must be subsidized and independent of individuals like Sanford.
To compete for physicians to teach, medical schools encouraged them to practice more to get the revenue needed for salaries.

Due to the unintended consequences (or intended?) of the Affordable Care Act MLR (80-85% of premiums must be allocated to reimbursements) there is a perverse incentive for ever-growing premiums to reimburse ever-larger charges negotiated by mega healthcare systems. A symbiotic relationship. The system is stacked against patients, employers. This trend is not good, and maybe we should look at why smaller clinics and hospitals find it difficult to survive in this climate. Some uncomfortable truths.

 

[Gophers_4life]

(Mod team: feel free to move this thread to OTB at any time. It hasn't been about the OP question for some posts now. Or don't.)

Fairview VP write-in to the STrib: (this is not the full text of it, but the meat of it)

Rather than continue to focus on what will happen if Fairview and Sanford Health combine, it's time to ask: What will happen if they don't combine?

Let's start with the facts: More than half of U.S. care delivery systems lost money last year due to increasing labor and supply costs, and declining health care reimbursements from government and private payers. As a result, many health systems have had to make difficult decisions to cut services, reduce staff or worse — leave a community altogether.

Fairview has been transparent about its financial challenges. In line with previous years where reimbursements did not keep pace with costs, Fairview is expected to lose more than $300 million in 2022. And with current labor costs and Fairview's ongoing commitment to fund the university to the tune of $80 million a year, 2023 looks to have another significant negative operating margin. This path is simply not sustainable.

Given these losses, Fairview will have a difficult time investing in needed infrastructure and expansion of hospitals such as St. John's in Maplewood, which is experiencing crushing demands on its emergency room and hospital beds. This trajectory will not slow down as our population ages. To meet the long-term care needs of baby boomers, social and public policy changes must begin soon. As health care providers, we cannot sit idle and wait for change to happen. We must innovate now to provide the care our patients deserve, when they need it.

Like all hospital systems, Fairview also needs to make future investments in rapidly changing medical technology and facilities if it is to remain relevant in Minnesota. Sanford will bring some of those needed resources as it has done in Minnesota over the past 25 years. Look no further than Bemidji for evidence. Since merging with North Country Health Services in 2011, Sanford Health has invested more than $100 million to increase access to primary and specialty care. Sanford has also kept its commitments to ensuring accessible, culturally competent care for Native American and tribal communities, and other underserved populations.

This is not about growth for growth's sake. This is about doing the right thing for Minnesotans. The pandemic underscored the importance of working together to deliver critical health care under extraordinary circumstances. Once again, we must join forces — urgently — to prepare for a new world of health care delivery, one that can address the many health and wellness needs of our state.

This is a merger between two very complementary organizations and does not create a monopoly in either the Twin Cities or greater Minnesota. Both Fairview and Sanford Health are not-for-profit organizations, have shared experience in providing care to patients in the Upper Midwest, and have demonstrated high quality of care in the communities they serve.

Last, I am surprised by the vehement opposition to this merger by the University of Minnesota and its portrayal of it as a takeover of the Medical School. This is simply not true. This bears repeating — Fairview and the U are separate organizations and do not control the other's destiny. Fairview has never been involved in the operations, research, education or direction of the Medical School or its provider group, and neither will Sanford.

 

[Gophers_4life]

It's not like Sanford is actually better at running hospitals than anyone else.

As was mentioned, they have supplementary income from the donations. And the other thing is, at least in my perception, they only so far run hospitals and clinics in more rural areas.

Taking care of old folks in Bemidji is a lot different than having to incur ER costs from poverty and gang violence in a heavy urban area, don't you think?


Also a little bit of trickery by the VP there to try to frame the discussion as the U's Medical School on its own.

I don't think Med school is just purely lectures and textbook learning/testing, right? Isn't there also a significant clinical portion? I know that once you graduate med school you have the rotations etc.

So he's trying say "we don't control anything in the Med School!" Well yeah, duh, but the whole point is that med school students have to come to your clinics to gain practical knowledge.