The excitement over the class of 2012 Ring Premiere was still running high when the class of 2013 ring committee met for the first time Thursday to begin the ring design process anew.
“It’s the 102nd ring — it’s a more-than-a-century old tradition on our shoulders and we want to make it the best ring Virginia Tech has ever seen,” said Clayton Miller, 2013 ring design chair. “All eight of us are really pumped to see the outcome.”
With one of the largest ring traditions in the nation, Tech is unique in that the class ring is redesigned every year by students.
“The Texas A&M ring does not change except for the year. What’s cool about Tech’s ring is that it’s being remade and those traditions are being renewed every year,” said Laura Wedin, student programs director with alumni relations. Wedin works as an adviser for the classes.
Despite this difference, both schools hold contracts with the ring company Balfour.
“Balfour has Texas A&M and they have us; two of the largest ring accounts in the U.S.,” Wedin said.
Tech has worked with Balfour since the 1998 class ring, though the company had also created Tech’s rings off and on in the past — starting in 1948.
Part of Balfour’s contract with Tech states each class receives commission on the money generated from the sale of their rings.
“The money goes through Balfour and Balfour issues us a commission check,” Wedin said. “That money allows the class to market their ring, do their ring dance and give their class gift.”
Tech’s contract with Balfour operates in accordance with the Virginia Public Procurement Act, which states “all public contracts with nongovernmental contractors ... shall be awarded after competitive sealed bidding.”
This means Tech released a request for proposals for ring supply companies and reviewed several of those proposals before selecting Balfour. It is the same process used for any contracts between public entities and private contractors and the same process used for large construction jobs on campus.
Tech recently renewed its three-year contract with Balfour, which will cover the 2013, 2014 and 2015 class rings.
Wedin said the revenue generated by a class can range from $90,000 to $100,000, depending on the number of rings sold.
“The ring dance is pretty expensive, but they still have funds left over for other things that they want to do,” she said.
For example, Wedin said the large bronze centennial ring statue dedicated last month by the class of 2011, President Charles Steger and his wife, Janet, cost about $25,000.
Miller said the money comes through Balfour from ring sales, Tech and alumni donations.
But the revenue generated from ring sales depends largely on how well the ring committee comes together to design and market their class ring — a process which takes more than a year.
Cameron Campbell is one of the ring design committee members for the class of 2012. He said the process began with a lot of brainstorming, which would eventually be followed by sketches, meetings with Balfour and castings.
“You’re focusing on the university’s unique traditions and also focusing on what the students want on the ring,” Campbell said.
Campbell said the 2012 committee was especially influenced by the fact that theirs was the first year of the second century of ring tradition.
The class of 2011 marked the 100-year anniversary of Tech’s first ring, which was created for the class of 1911.
Leave a comment 2 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
The chart that accompanied this article made literally no sense. Were you trying to suggest people shouldn't buy rings? Or that the revenues from the rings should be spent elsewhere? Poorly done. The article also has nothing to do with the accompanying chart, no references or related criticism.
Reply to this Top
Where's this chart in the online version? Why does the online CT suck? Why can't it be the same (or *gasp* BETTER) than the print version??
Reply to this Top