Saw article Barry is suing our BOT

[NorthernStatePSU]

Is it safe to say you’re associated with the U’s leadership? Explain why approaching others is both necessary and likely to be successful. Is it that the people he approach needed to defer? If so, why didn’t they say that, or did they and his account leaves that out?

Let me be crystal clear:

I don't have any affiliation, personal or private, with ANYONE on the BOT. I saw Jay at a golf outing a few times.

But I know investment returns and I know when there are good returns and bad ones. And I know *really* good money managers have higher fees.

And I also know dragging your institution and only focusing on the fees is very much missing the whole point of endowment reuturns. Which is my biggest issue with Barry outside of him very publicly dragging my institution into expensive lawsuits so he can get information on a fee.

 

[PSU Mike]

Penn State's 10 year endowed return is 9% which beats the mean by 1.8%. Should a university pay more for better performance or risk worse returns by paying less in fees with a lesser manager?

Is it all about the fees, or is it about returns less fees?

Because right now apples to apples, fees included, PSU's return is *well* in the money and *well* above average nationally.

And a 5 star fund remains a 5 star fund in perpetuity, correct?

 

[NorthernStatePSU]

And a 5 star fund remains a 5 star fund in perpetuity, correct?

As someone who makes their money in the markets, past performance is not indicative of future returns,. But if I got someone who's done a good job in tough environments, I consistently evaluate returns at all times and do so with context.

 

[nittanymoops]

He seems to be entitled to the information as a trustee of the institution. Denying him the information would then be illegal. If you are backing illegal acts, how can they be in the fiduciary best interest of the institution. If the information supports the power bloc, so be it. If it doesn't, shouldn't lies be exposed?

 

[ApexLion]

From Barry's website today: https://barryfenchak.com/why-im-suing-the-penn-state-board-of-trustees/

On Tuesday I filed suit in Centre County, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas for declaratory and injunctive relief against the Penn State Board of Trustees, and Matthew Schuyler in his capacity as Board Chair.
Read Barry Fenchak's lawsuit here (PDF, 51 mb)

I did not take this action lightly.

My complaint is straightforward: by Pennsylvania legal statute Title 15 Section 5512(a), a trustee of a nonprofit corporation has the right to ‘access and copy the University’s books, records, and documents so long as doing so is reasonably related to the performance of the duties of a trustee.’ If the leadership refuses to provide that access, they are breaking the law. If some members of the corporation are provided that information and others are denied, that is also breaking the law. Part (b) of the statute says that a trustee may sue to ‘compel the inspection or the obtaining or providing of the information’.

You can read my complaint here. It’s not long, and I think you’ll find it interesting.

Since I was elected to the Board in 2022, I have made my concerns about the management of the Penn State endowment clear (see here, here, and here). The endowment is the University’s largest asset, currently valued at approximately $5 billion, and is managed by the Office of Investment Management. They are directly overseen by the Board, which maintains final responsibility for the endowment. The Board also appoints the members of an oversight group known as the Penn State Investment Council (PSIC). Trustees Brandon Short and Emeritus Trustee Barb Dolan are members of this council.

According to the PSIC policy statement ,“PSIC meetings are not subject to Open Meeting Laws and are only open to PSIC members and invited guests.” They don’t have to take minutes, or allow other trustees access to their information. Once a year they report to the full board but that presentation is a broad-brush overview with little detail provided.

Despite the secrecy, I have tracked publicly available information in the University’s IRS 990 endowment filings. Among the items of interest to me was the significant jump in administrative fees paid to investment fund managers beginning in 2016, a clear departure from the reasonable 75 basis points paid yearly between 2008-2015.

When I joined the Board in 2022 and requested relevant information regarding the endowment, I was told by Finance, Business, and Capital Planning Committee Vice-Chair Trustee Robert Fenza, “You don’t need it. You need to mind your own business and trust others.”

The next 20 months were a runaround of bouncing between being provided useless data instead of the information I requested and being told I was asking the wrong person. I was then reprimanded by Board leadership for requesting the information necessary to fulfill my fiduciary duties. My request culminated on February 16, 2024 when Finance, Business, and Capital Planning Committee Vice-Chair Trustee Mary Lee Schneider told me, “You will never be given that information. That is my decision, and I will make sure you never get it.”

Well. I had no choice but to take legal action, so here we are.

To be clear, I am making no allegations of malfeasance or gross negligence. But activities like those would be impossible to uncover without access to the information requested. And for the record, I hold several financial industry licenses and certifications so I do know what I’m looking for.

I am filing this motion pro se, or representing myself. I am fully aware of Abraham Lincoln’s advice, “The man who represents himself has a fool for a client.” But I have four kids, two of whom just graduated from college and two who are working their way through, and after discussing it with my wife it is clear that taking on large legal expenses was not an option. I am in debt to smart friends who love Penn State and have given their time and good counsel. That is the best kind of debt one can take on, and I am very grateful. I hope that I prevail.

I am happy to answer any questions you may have, and appreciate your support.

Go get em Barry! Open the books and ask questions.

 

[ApexLion]

The difference in tone/support for this effort on this board versus the premium board is very interesting.

Yes the degenerates have taken over there.

 

[nittanyfan333]

But I know investment returns and I know when there are good returns and bad ones. And I know *really* good money managers have higher fees.

10000% agree. however would this information be gleaned from the details he's requesting? by that, I mean if he's asking "why was there a 150% increase in management fees" and the response is "because we changed managers to a higher-caliber manager and thus the increase is shown in their fees AS WELL AS the returns" that clears it all up right? what if the response is "well the manager hasnt' changed, so we just decided to increase the fees regardless of return/manager" does that change the calculus?

that's how it works in my non-financial management mind, but please correct me if i'm wrong

 

[ApexLion]

The difference between people who want to fix something and people who want to be heard is their approach. Barry's approach is much more about wanting to be heard.

Barry, you could have valid concerns, but the way you go about airing them inflicts more damage to the institution at large. This is an internal dispute. You expose all of us and damage our institiution reputationally when you pull a stunt like this.

If you were really concerned you were being stonewalled, you can bring that to the attention of folks without filing a lawsuit against the institution you seek to govern.

Disagree. These cretins don’t want light.

 

[ApexLion]

So Barry isn't capable of filing an FOIA request?

You guys would rather harm the institution publicly on what effectively boils down to an internal squabble over access to records for the endowment fees based on the premise of a fee structure that is 8 years old?

It’s no big deal then. Provide access and no worries, right?!?!

 

[BobPSU92]

I don't know dude, but I do know that Mary Lee responded to Barry "Go ahead but I won't get it, I've blocked your emails" .... does that sound like somebody capable of resolving this internally?

Bob - this is good, but you're missing the part where Trustee 2 says, [[blocked Barry's emails so unable to respond]]

I’m sure it’s all just a misunderstanding.

 

[Keyser Soze 16802]

IIRC when people have tried FOIA requests, the PSU response is "we are state RELATED so we are not complying"

They protect information like the Mafia.....omerta all around

 

[LionJim]

IIRC when people have tried FOIA requests, the PSU response is "we are state RELATED so we are not complying"

They protect information like the Mafia.....omerta all around

What documents can a reporter obtain from Penn State officials? - Student Press Law Center

The developments at Penn State are in so many ways national news: the sex abuse allegations, the cover-up, Joe Paterno’s unceremonious dismissal, the riots, the tears – the list of stories goes on and on.

splc.org

 

[Bwifan]

What documents can a reporter obtain from Penn State officials? - Student Press Law Center

The developments at Penn State are in so many ways national news: the sex abuse allegations, the cover-up, Joe Paterno’s unceremonious dismissal, the riots, the tears – the list of stories goes on and on.

splc.org

The cockroaches at PSU made sure the sunlight would never see their inner workings....

 

[s1uggo72]

Let me be crystal clear:

I don't have any affiliation, personal or private, with ANYONE on the BOT. I saw Jay at a golf outing a few times.

But I know investment returns and I know when there are good returns and bad ones. And I know *really* good money managers have higher fees.

And I also know dragging your institution and only focusing on the fees is very much missing the whole point of endowment reuturns. Which is my biggest issue with Barry outside of him very publicly dragging my institution into expensive lawsuits so he can get information on a fee.

clear departure from the reasonable 75 basis points paid yearly between 2008-2015.

and now the fees go up??
I dont think Bobby Axlerod got 75 bps on $5 Billion!!!

 

[NorthernStatePSU]

clear departure from the reasonable 75 basis points paid yearly between 2008-2015.

and now the fees go up??
I dont think Bobby Axlerod got 75 bps on $5 Billion!!!

Well Wassu is paying 150 bps and Illinois is paying 135 bps.

What investment vehicles does that fee go to? Are you able to get access to better returns via the investment? Are there contractual non-disclosures for these investment vehicles? Because judging by Penn State's rebuttal, that answer appears to be yes.

Analyzing the fee, and only the fee, and arbitrarily deciding this is too much is fifth grade analysis.

Barry sees what we see, a 1.8% mean market beat vs other endowments in the country over the past 10 years.

Yet Barry in his filing says it's underperforming. Ok, so by what metric is it 'undeperfoming?' Becsuse in 2022 we beat the S&P by 10.5%.

How in the hell does that make sense?

 

[s1uggo72]

Well Wassu is paying 150 bps and Illinois is paying 135 bps.

What investment vehicles does that fee go to? Are you able to get access to better returns via the investment? Are there contractual non-disclosures for these investment vehicles? Because judging by Penn State's rebuttal, that answer appears to be yes.

Analyzing the fee, and only the fee, and arbitrarily deciding this is too much is fifth grade analysis.

Barry sees what we see, a 1.8% mean market beat vs other endowments in the country over the past 10 years.

Yet Barry in his filing says it's underperforming. Ok, so by what metric is it 'undeperfoming?' Becsuse in 2022 we beat the S&P by 10.5%.

How in the hell does that make sense?

'cause Wassu and Illinois are dumb asses, doesnt mean it's right. Those fees are way outside the current market rates for that size money. BTW what is the the average ROR for endowments? and you want to pay those guys because in 2022 they only went down 8%?

 

[NorthernStatePSU]

'cause Wassu and Illinois are dumb asses, doesnt mean it's right. Those fees are way outside the current market rates for that size money. BTW what is the the average ROR for endowments? and you want to pay those guys because in 2022 they only went down 8%?

The average ROI over 10 years is 7.2%. I posted that already so keep up.

Penn State returns 9% over the same period. These are returns *after* fees are deducted.

And you keep dodging the question. What vehicles do higher fee structures provide and what access does that grant you vs paying a lower rate? If you don't know (you dont) how can you make any possible claim about the fees being too high?

 

[NorthernStatePSU]

Barry made a lot of claims in his filing...well...if it's underperforming, show your work.

Otherwise this just seems a lawsuit to force himself onto a the committee to the outside observer.

 

[Psu00]

I hate our BOT. It is too large and full of me first egos that think they cannot be touched.

Yep. I don’t care if you hate Barry and he’s a pain in your backside. If you’re in leadership of a BoT you have to remain professional. Her childish and petty response of ‘I’ll make sure you never get it’ and ‘I’m blocking your emails’ is ridiculous. Is she still in 6th grade?

 

[Sharkies]

Yet Barry in his filing says it's underperforming. Ok, so by what metric is it 'undeperfoming?' Becsuse in 2022 we beat the S&P by 10.5%.

Can you show where you are getting these figures? Based on this website: it says, and I quote:

"For the one-year period ending June 30, 2023, U.S. equity markets posted positive returns, with the S&P 500 returning 19.0 percent ... As of June 30, 2023, LTIP’s investment return was 3.9 percent over the last year"

So in 2023, we "beat" the S&P by a whopping -15.1%... that's a nice, round, negative number btw...

 

[PSUSignore]

Penn State's 10 year endowed return is 9% which beats the mean by 1.8%. Should a university pay more for better performance or risk worse returns by paying less in fees with a lesser manager?

Is it all about the fees, or is it about returns less fees?

Because right now apples to apples, fees included, PSU's return is *well* in the money and *well* above average nationally.

Bernie Madoff had good returns too. Was he also worth the money?

 

[s1uggo72]

The average ROI over 10 years is 7.2%. I posted that already so keep up.

Penn State returns 9% over the same period. These are returns *after* fees are deducted.

And you keep dodging the question. What vehicles do higher fee structures provide and what access does that grant you vs paying a lower rate? If you don't know (you dont) how can you make any possible claim about the fees being too high?

actual according to P & I the average ROI over 10 yrs is 8.79% gross of fees. the Average $billion pension fund isnt paying 1.59% in fees
P & I list PSU ROR @ 9% Gross of fees in the chart https://www.pionline.com/section/endowments

yet in the article it says net of fees https://www.pionline.com/endowments...-university-records-39-net-return-fiscal-year. so it is difficult to tell what the 9% is " For the three, five and 10 years ended June 30, the investment pool returned an annualized net 12.4%, 10.1% and 9%, respectively, above the respective benchmarks of 8.2%, 7.3% and 7.4%."

You'll generally pay more for Private equity than public markets , though private equity isnt always the magic bullet it is made out to be. At least with public markets the value is given everyday. PSU 24 % in private equity which helped in that the other markets did better

 

[NorthernStatePSU]

Can you show where you are getting these figures? Based on this website: it says, and I quote:

"For the one-year period ending June 30, 2023, U.S. equity markets posted positive returns, with the S&P 500 returning 19.0 percent ... As of June 30, 2023, LTIP’s investment return was 3.9 percent over the last year"

So in 2023, we "beat" the S&P by a whopping -15.1%... that's a nice, round, negative number btw...

Wrong year, I posted cal year 2022. Penn state did not beat the S&P in 2023.

 

[NorthernStatePSU]

actual according to P & I the average ROI over 10 yrs is 8.79% gross of fees. the Average $billion pension fund isnt paying 1.59% in fees
P & I list PSU ROR @ 9% Gross of fees in the chart https://www.pionline.com/section/endowments

yet in the article it says net of fees https://www.pionline.com/endowments...-university-records-39-net-return-fiscal-year. so it is difficult to tell what the 9% is " For the three, five and 10 years ended June 30, the investment pool returned an annualized net 12.4%, 10.1% and 9%, respectively, above the respective benchmarks of 8.2%, 7.3% and 7.4%."

You'll generally pay more for Private equity than public markets , though private equity isnt always the magic bullet it is made out to be. At least with public markets the value is given everyday. PSU 24 % in private equity which helped in that the other markets did better

Good to see discussuion on the finer points here, much more constructive.

Youre correct, you be docked more in fees for PE. You also know that as a Qualified Institutional Buyer you have access to funds others do not, which themselves may carry specific fees attached to them as well. Large university endowments still generally outperform the 70/30 traditional models as well.

Large endowments also traditionally (for the most part) outperform pension funds too. Their willingness and ability to go into alt investments and slightly riskier bets is rewarded (these assets often carry a higher premium).

This isn't a pension fund. This is an endowment. Pension funds have a different purpose and thus different demands on their capital vs endowment. The strategies differ so its not a great proxy for this exercise (in my view anyway). But even so, the ROI is better for the traditional large university endowment vs pension funds. So the higher fee structure may be 'worth it'.

 

[Sharkies]

Wrong year, I posted cal year 2022. Penn state did not beat the S&P in 2023.

Yet Barry in his filing says it's underperforming. Ok, so by what metric is it 'undeperfoming?'

Right - but you're the one who wrote that Barry was incorrect in it "underperforming" - I'd say the metric where we got smoked by 15% if we had just had it in the S&P for 2023 is a half decent metric, no?

 

[Bison13]

I don’t know why anybody would be against what Barry is trying to do. I don’t care if it’s about under performance, branch campuses, salaries, whatever. The fact that the board of trustees is keeping information from one of the people on the board is asinine. What are those people trying to hide that they can’t give out this information, where are the final plans for the $700 million stadium renovation?

 

[Bob78]

I don't know... How is the fee structured? If it's a straight percentage of the full $5B endowment, and I don't know that that's the case, every .5% is $25million.
If so the reasonable .75% fee is $37.5m on the full fund. Going from that to 1.5% doubles it to $75m.

I'm guessing that with that amount of money, perhaps the fee is tiered based on incremental gains? (My personal experience is probably of no help with numbers this big!)

That's a lot of money for a University hell-bent on fiscal prudence, eliminating jobs and maybe campuses, etc. $37.5m pays for a lot of stuff. Saving or not spending that amount should be a priority.

As Sen. Everett Dirkson once said, 'A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money.'

 

[Taycro]

[deleted]

 

[BobPSU92]

I smell a lot of f*ck us. If Barry does nothing, the bot keeps on keepin’ on, which means continued obfuscation, decisions in hiding, and an overall lack of transparency. If Barry sues the bot, he’s airing our dirty laundry in public and is hurting our university’s reputation, which is largely in the sh|tter but could now get even worse.

All of the above said, there is a greater, worse f*ck us in doing nothing. Of course, if Barry loses the lawsuit, then it’s f*ck us coming and going. Still, he has no other remedy than to sue the bastards. I applaud his efforts.

If Barry wins the lawsuit, things could get better internally. Of course, everyone will hate us anyway. So, f*ck us.

 

[NorthernStatePSU]

Right - but you're the one who wrote that Barry was incorrect in it "underperforming" - I'd say the metric where we got smoked by 15% if we had just had it in the S&P for 2023 is a half decent metric, no?

One year of 'not as great' returns a year after outperforming by 10.5% is not a great case for underperforming when you're asking about management fees back to 2016.

It's a cherry pick, and I suspect PSU (like many) were in less riskier assets in 2023 institutionally because of massive rate hikes advertised by the Fed.

Being underweight equities last year was a common thing.

 

[NorthernStatePSU]

I don’t know why anybody would be against what Barry is trying to do. I don’t care if it’s about under performance, branch campuses, salaries, whatever. The fact that the board of trustees is keeping information from one of the people on the board is asinine. What are those people trying to hide that they can’t give out this information, where are the final plans for the $700 million stadium renovation?

Devils advocate, but Barry has a history of broadcasting information that is not always complete and in this case, could jeopardize PSU if they have institutional confidentiality agreements on assets that are much better (structured more favorable to psu) than other institutions nationally. That said, I again ask why not FOIA instead of costing the school money in legal fees? All this for you to look into a fee structure that up to this point has *STILL* beaten national mean by a sizable percentage on a net return.

Ive said this before, but the way you ask and approach people matters. He is by all means quite combative in his approach given his history and there could also be personal mistrust he has formented himself through his own actions. I'm just saying, being a blunt force object isn't always going to get you what you want. And showing little to no regard to dragging the rest of the institution through the mud isn't going to make people trust him either. Especially if he paints a slanted picture with the information he's given.

I don't know... How is the fee structured? If it's a straight percentage of the full $5B endowment, and I don't know that that's the case, every .5% is $25million.
If so the reasonable .75% fee is $37.5m on the full fund. Going from that to 1.5% doubles it to $75m.

I'm guessing that with that amount of money, perhaps the fee is tiered based on incremental gains? (My personal experience is probably of no help with numbers this big!)

That's a lot of money for a University hell-bent on fiscal prudence, eliminating jobs and maybe campuses, etc. $37.5m pays for a lot of stuff. Saving or not spending that amount should be a priority.

As Sen. Everett Dirkson once said, 'A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money.'

Barry is taking a very arbitrary number at .75 is my point. He has decided Penn State should not see any fee increase over 18 years even if returns are outsized due to adding different products. If PSU chose different asset packages that have generally made higher returns which they may not have had access to in prior years, there may be higher fees with those. That's not nefarious, that's a higher net ROI.

His entire motivation is that PSU is 'overpaying and underperfoming' even though PSU is returning more money than a large percentage of our peers. This is all based on a percentage he pulled out from before Ukraine was invaded the first time.

 

[fairgambit]

Concern about information and investments is fine, but my primary concern is integrity, which, with a few individual exceptions, is collectively lacking on the Board of Trustees. So be it. After 40 years of giving, I no longer donate. I haven't been on campus in nearly 15 years. I no longer care.

 

[gimb14]

Devils advocate, but Barry has a history of broadcasting information that is not always complete and in this case, could jeopardize PSU if they have institutional confidentiality agreements on assets that are much better (structured more favorable to psu) than other institutions nationally. That said, I again ask why not FOIA instead of costing the school money in legal fees? All this for you to look into a fee structure that up to this point has *STILL* beaten national mean by a sizable percentage on a net return.

Ive said this before, but the way you ask and approach people matters. He is by all means quite combative in his approach given his history and there could also be personal mistrust he has formented himself through his own actions. I'm just saying, being a blunt force object isn't always going to get you what you want. And showing little to no regard to dragging the rest of the institution through the mud isn't going to make people trust him either. Especially if he paints a slanted picture with the information he's given.



Barry is taking a very arbitrary number at .75 is my point. He has decided Penn State should not see any fee increase over 18 years even if returns are outsized due to adding different products. If PSU chose different asset packages that have generally made higher returns which they may not have had access to in prior years, there may be higher fees with those. That's not nefarious, that's a higher net ROI.

His entire motivation is that PSU is 'overpaying and underperfoming' even though PSU is returning more money than a large percentage of our peers. This is all based on a percentage he pulled out from before Ukraine was invaded the first time.

Also, notice he was here to pump up the lawsuit and then disappeared as soon as he was challenged....

What's next? A Facebook group for future students and parents that kicks out anyone questioning him? Oh, wait.

 

[Midnighter]

Devils advocate, but Barry has a history of broadcasting information that is not always complete and in this case, could jeopardize PSU if they have institutional confidentiality agreements on assets that are much better (structured more favorable to psu) than other institutions nationally. That said, I again ask why not FOIA instead of costing the school money in legal fees? All this for you to look into a fee structure that up to this point has *STILL* beaten national mean by a sizable percentage on a net return.

Ive said this before, but the way you ask and approach people matters. He is by all means quite combative in his approach given his history and there could also be personal mistrust he has formented himself through his own actions. I'm just saying, being a blunt force object isn't always going to get you what you want. And showing little to no regard to dragging the rest of the institution through the mud isn't going to make people trust him either. Especially if he paints a slanted picture with the information he's given.



Barry is taking a very arbitrary number at .75 is my point. He has decided Penn State should not see any fee increase over 18 years even if returns are outsized due to adding different products. If PSU chose different asset packages that have generally made higher returns which they may not have had access to in prior years, there may be higher fees with those. That's not nefarious, that's a higher net ROI.

His entire motivation is that PSU is 'overpaying and underperfoming' even though PSU is returning more money than a large percentage of our peers. This is all based on a percentage he pulled out from before Ukraine was invaded the first time.

Is Penn State subject to FOIA?

Also, notice he was here to pump up the lawsuit and then disappeared as soon as he was challenged....

What's next? A Facebook group for future students and parents that kicks out anyone questioning him? Oh, wait.

Link to FB page?

 

[RWC5113]

Devils advocate, but Barry has a history of broadcasting information that is not always complete and in this case, could jeopardize PSU if they have institutional confidentiality agreements on assets that are much better (structured more favorable to psu) than other institutions nationally. That said, I again ask why not FOIA instead of costing the school money in legal fees? All this for you to look into a fee structure that up to this point has *STILL* beaten national mean by a sizable percentage on a net return.

Ive said this before, but the way you ask and approach people matters. He is by all means quite combative in his approach given his history and there could also be personal mistrust he has formented himself through his own actions. I'm just saying, being a blunt force object isn't always going to get you what you want. And showing little to no regard to dragging the rest of the institution through the mud isn't going to make people trust him either. Especially if he paints a slanted picture with the information he's given.



Barry is taking a very arbitrary number at .75 is my point. He has decided Penn State should not see any fee increase over 18 years even if returns are outsized due to adding different products. If PSU chose different asset packages that have generally made higher returns which they may not have had access to in prior years, there may be higher fees with those. That's not nefarious, that's a higher net ROI.

His entire motivation is that PSU is 'overpaying and underperfoming' even though PSU is returning more money than a large percentage of our peers. This is all based on a percentage he pulled out from before Ukraine was invaded the first time.

This pretty much sums it up.

 

[Keyser Soze 16802]

Concern about information and investments is fine, but my primary concern is integrity, which, with a few individual exceptions, is collectively lacking on the Board of Trustees. So be it. After 40 years of giving, I no longer donate. I haven't been on campus in nearly 15 years. I no longer care.

I haven't been back in 12 years. Might never be

Did we lose the Penn State we loved or did it never really exist?

 

[Keyser Soze 16802]

Hard to understand how it is even debatable that a fiduciary such as a trustee should be told who the contractor is

The potential for shenanigans and buddy deals is high

And this BOT has a history of both

 

[s1uggo72]

Devils advocate, but Barry has a history of broadcasting information that is not always complete and in this case, could jeopardize PSU if they have institutional confidentiality agreements on assets that are much better (structured more favorable to psu) than other institutions nationally. That said, I again ask why not FOIA instead of costing the school money in legal fees? All this for you to look into a fee structure that up to this point has *STILL* beaten national mean by a sizable percentage on a net return.

Ive said this before, but the way you ask and approach people matters. He is by all means quite combative in his approach given his history and there could also be personal mistrust he has formented himself through his own actions. I'm just saying, being a blunt force object isn't always going to get you what you want. And showing little to no regard to dragging the rest of the institution through the mud isn't going to make people trust him either. Especially if he paints a slanted picture with the information he's given.



Barry is taking a very arbitrary number at .75 is my point. He has decided Penn State should not see any fee increase over 18 years even if returns are outsized due to adding different products. If PSU chose different asset packages that have generally made higher returns which they may not have had access to in prior years, there may be higher fees with those. That's not nefarious, that's a higher net ROI.

His entire motivation is that PSU is 'overpaying and underperfoming' even though PSU is returning more money than a large percentage of our peers. This is all based on a percentage he pulled out from before Ukraine was invaded the first time.

With the size of those assets they should see a reduction not an increase!!! Besides they could have put it all in the Investment company of America ( Aivsx) gotten better 10 yr return, with a heck of lot less fees

 

[SleepyLion]

So Barry isn't capable of filing an FOIA request?

You guys would rather harm the institution publicly on what effectively boils down to an internal squabble over access to records for the endowment fees based on the premise of a fee structure that is 8 years old?

This is from The Pennsylvania State University Long Term Investment Pool Investment Policy Statement,
"PSIC meetings are not subject to Open Meeting Laws and are only open to PSIC members
and invited guests."
It is the second bullet on the 5th page. There is a link above in one of @PSUFTG2 's posts.

Also, if you think a FOIA request would put this issue to bed, you could always file the request yourself. Give the information received in PSU's response directly to Barry and then not make a bigger deal about it.

Given PSU's history of fighting FOIA requests, I doubt you will get the information either. Let us know how this works out for you.

 

[CbusLion]

Devils advocate, but Barry has a history of broadcasting information that is not always complete and in this case, could jeopardize PSU if they have institutional confidentiality agreements on assets that are much better (structured more favorable to psu) than other institutions nationally. That said, I again ask why not FOIA instead of costing the school money in legal fees? All this for you to look into a fee structure that up to this point has *STILL* beaten national mean by a sizable percentage on a net return.

Ive said this before, but the way you ask and approach people matters. He is by all means quite combative in his approach given his history and there could also be personal mistrust he has formented himself through his own actions. I'm just saying, being a blunt force object isn't always going to get you what you want. And showing little to no regard to dragging the rest of the institution through the mud isn't going to make people trust him either. Especially if he paints a slanted picture with the information he's given.



Barry is taking a very arbitrary number at .75 is my point. He has decided Penn State should not see any fee increase over 18 years even if returns are outsized due to adding different products. If PSU chose different asset packages that have generally made higher returns which they may not have had access to in prior years, there may be higher fees with those. That's not nefarious, that's a higher net ROI.

His entire motivation is that PSU is 'overpaying and underperfoming' even though PSU is returning more money than a large percentage of our peers. This is all based on a percentage he pulled out from before Ukraine was invaded the first time.

So we dont like Barry's approach so we will defend trustees keeping secrets? Barry could have and possibly should have chosen an alternative avenue to gain this information, but attempting to keep pertinent information "a secret" because you don't like the guy's style is out-of-bounds.

We have multiple unprofessional trustees. Some who are obfuscating babies, and others attention-starved grandstanders. Great.

I'm a strong proponent for professionalism and transparency in regards to a board of trustees, corporate or otherwise, and it seems we are lacking in both areas. And these people haven't exactly earned the benefit-of-the-doubt with alumni.