The gap between predicted and actual outcomes--following a university's removal of their controversial Native American nickname--may be rather wide. This study investigates what alumni threaten or promise to do upon a potential school nickname change, and what actual actions result once change does occur. The University of North Dakota's (UND) "Fighting Sioux" nickname serves as a notable case study, from its heightened controversy in the 1990s through its ultimate removal in 2011. Two UND data sources are analyzed--alumni survey responses collected a decade prior to the change and financial donation figures from the university's alumni association--to assess alumni attitudes and actions, respectively. Less than one-quarter threatened to punish UND by reducing their donations if the nickname was removed, while very few claimed they would instead reward the university with increased donations. However, there is little evidence of permanent consequences resulting from the nickname's change; in fact, post-change contributions were slightly--albeit insignificantly--higher. Consequently, alumni expressions of "attitudinal" loyalty (expressions of support) toward the university was contingent upon nickname retention, while "behavioral" loyalty (actions in support) appeared unrelated to nickname change. These findings suggest two practical cautions for stakeholders: (1) for university administrators who fear hardline alumni threats may threaten budgetary stability, despite a lack of follow-through on such threats, and (2) for Native American nickname removal advocates of the importance to transcend debates which center the importance of alumni financial support.