9 ms·
Mark Benioff donated $100M to the UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital and got his name on the INSTITUTION (not just a building). What many don't know is that dona
by anonAndOn 6y ago
Mark Benioff donated $100M to the UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital and got his name on the INSTITUTION (not just a building). What many don't know is that donation was to complete a match of $125M offered by Chuck Feeney (who does not have his name on a building anywhere on the campus, AFAIK).[0]. That $125M was only part of the $394M Chuck ended up giving to UCSF.[1]
[0]https://www.healthleadersmedia.com/finance/ucsf-childrens-hospital-gets-100m-gift-build-new-hospital https://www.healthleadersmedia.com/finance/ucsf-childrens-ho...
[1]https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2015/02/123366/ucsf-receives-100m-gift-advance-health-sciences-mission https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2015/02/123366/ucsf-receives-100m-...
- olivermarks 6y agoFeeney is a wonderful human being!
- benatkin 6y agoI'm OK with his name on it. It seems to be a mutually beneficial branding move. Also it's Marc Benioff. Edit: I'm more than fine with it because it makes Zuckerberg seem less special.
- anonAndOn 6y agoHow is it mutually beneficial for the guy who donated the most money?
- alasdair_ 6y agoThe guy who donated the most money explicitly wanted anonymity.
- jldugger 6y agoThen why are we talking about it?
- renewiltord 6y agoBecause societally we want to encourage the act of giving anonymously with a big reveal in the twilight years? Doesn't sound that hard to understand.
- jldugger 6y agoSorry, I guess i interpreted anonymous donation as a Truly Morally Selfless act, and the fact that we're talking about it now would be some weird flex. But sure, if you put out a call for solicitiations when you announced you were giving it all away, you probably also need a big announcement when you're done or you'll be dealing with development officers all day every day.
- renewiltord 6y agoWell, sure, anonymous donation is that. Then we want to encourage that so we find anonymous donors, deanonymize them, and canonize them. That makes more people want to be anonymous donors, a thing we want.
- smattiso 6y agoNamely something after yourself is tacky. But what should buildings be named after? Famous scientists? Planets? Feeney seems like an awesome guy but sadly in 100 years nobody will know his name!
- Xavdidtheshadow 6y agoWhy not "SF General Hospital"?
- anonAndOn 6y agoBecause that's the Zuckerberg SF General Hospital and not just for kids. [0] [0]https://zuckerbergsanfranciscogeneral.org/ https://zuckerbergsanfranciscogeneral.org/
- gpm 6y agoRight, this isn't a general hospital so replace general with children's, but the point stands. If there actually two general hospitals, do what Toronto East General Hospital did, subdivide by location.
- cellis 6y agoSaint Francisco was also a person at one point.
- waterhouse 6y agoSaint Francis, actually. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_of_Assisi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_of_Assisi
- gumby 6y agoI feel sorry for people who want their names on things. They are broadcasting their insecurities.
- halfmatthalfcat 6y agoThis is a very presumptuous take.
- nix23 6y ago>They are broadcasting their insecurities. Not when it's on a submarine ;)
- aj7 6y agoI see what you did here.
- jonahx 6y agoThe Anonymous Donor: https://youtu.be/ZAKrb9b4s28?t=100 https://youtu.be/ZAKrb9b4s28?t=100
- jandrese 6y agoFrom the article: > And he gave it away anonymously. While many wealthy philanthropists enlist an army of publicists to trumpet their donations, Feeney went to great lengths to keep his gifts secret.
- dumbfounder 6y agoI think that's a shame. I have never heard of him. How many could he inspire if he was more vocal? But, to each their own.
- lotsofpulp 6y agoI think it's a shame that all donations aren't anonymous. The government should at least take away the tax deductibility of non anonymous donations.
- lordnacho 6y agoWouldn't the reduce the amount of donations greatly? Gotta think most people do it at least partly for recognition, otherwise there'd be nothing noteworthy about the article we're discussing.
- lotsofpulp 6y agoI would get rid of all tax deductions period, but in the case of non anonymous donations, the chance of quid pro quo and inability to prove it is so high, that I just view it as a tax loophole for the rich. If it lowers the amount people donate, then it proves my point...that people were intending to get something in return, hence not a donation.
- Ericson2314 6y agoAbsolutely a good comment. Tax the rich, replace philanthropy with Democracy. Pathetic that PP is getting downvotes.