Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Total Revenues by Team (2013)
Author Message
NJ2MDTerp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,344
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Maryland
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Total Revenues by Team (2013)
Equity in Athletics defines revenues as follows:

Revenues

All revenues attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities. This includes revenues from:

(1) appearance guarantees and options,

(2) an athletic conference, tournament or bowl games,

(3) concessions,

(4) contributions from alumni and others,

(5) institutional support,

(6) program advertising and sales, radio and television,

(7) royalties, signage and other sponsorships,

(8) sport camps,

(9) state or other government support,

(10) student activity fees,

(11) ticket and luxury box sales, and

(12) any other revenues attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities.

https://surveys.ope.ed.gov/athletics/Vie...Terms.aspx
12-26-2013 10:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #42
RE: Total Revenues by Team (2013)
(12-26-2013 10:37 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  Equity in Athletics defines revenues as follows:

Revenues

All revenues attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities. This includes revenues from:

(1) appearance guarantees and options,

(2) an athletic conference, tournament or bowl games,

(3) concessions,

(4) contributions from alumni and others,

(5) institutional support,

(6) program advertising and sales, radio and television,

(7) royalties, signage and other sponsorships,

(8) sport camps,

(9) state or other government support,

(10) student activity fees,

(11) ticket and luxury box sales, and

(12) any other revenues attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities.

https://surveys.ope.ed.gov/athletics/Vie...Terms.aspx

Exactly. Revenue, is revenue, is revenue.

Cheers,
Neil
12-26-2013 10:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wolfman Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,459
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 181
I Root For: The Cartel
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post: #43
RE: Total Revenues by Team (2013)
Different organizations have different rules for reporting revenue. The number a school reports to the IRS is going to be different than the number they report to the NCAA which is going to be different than the number they report to the Department of Education. For a personal reference - is your income the number on the W2 you receive or the number that excludes pretax deductions (SS, 401k, etc.)? Or is it the Adjusted Gross Income from your tax return?

There are so many rules, it would not surprise me to see a swing of 20% or more between lists.
12-26-2013 10:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #44
RE: Total Revenues by Team (2013)
(12-26-2013 10:53 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  Different organizations have different rules for reporting revenue. The number a school reports to the IRS is going to be different than the number they report to the NCAA which is going to be different than the number they report to the Department of Education. For a personal reference - is your income the number on the W2 you receive or the number that excludes pretax deductions (SS, 401k, etc.)? Or is it the Adjusted Gross Income from your tax return?

There are so many rules, it would not surprise me to see a swing of 20% or more between lists.

Maybe so, but we are focusing solely on total revenues as reported at the EADA website information and whatever source the USA Today article used.

And in that regard, we have far too many exact or near exact matches in the data set to make the blanket statement above in regard to the topic at hand. It's great to say that for general purposes, but if I have two different organizations asking me for my gross income (especially when both spell it out what I should and should not include), the answer is going to be the same, just as it would be the same if asked for my adjusted gross income.

And in that instance a 20% discrepancy in my reporting of my gross earnings to two different agencies would be sheer stupidity on my part.

Cheers,
Neil
12-26-2013 11:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
lumberpack4 Offline
Banned

Posts: 4,336
Joined: Jun 2013
I Root For: ACC
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Total Revenues by Team (2013)
(12-26-2013 10:37 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  Equity in Athletics defines revenues as follows:

Revenues

All revenues attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities. This includes revenues from:

(1) appearance guarantees and options,

(2) an athletic conference, tournament or bowl games,

(3) concessions,

(4) contributions from alumni and others,

(5) institutional support,

(6) program advertising and sales, radio and television,

(7) royalties, signage and other sponsorships,

(8) sport camps,

(9) state or other government support,

(10) student activity fees,

(11) ticket and luxury box sales, and

(12) any other revenues attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities.

https://surveys.ope.ed.gov/athletics/Vie...Terms.aspx

The statement that revenue is revenue is not true for entities like this. Some of you are applying accounting principles that don't jibe with the reality of public entities and some of this money is illusory.


(9) state or other government support,

(5) institutional support,
(10) student activity fees,


These are not revenues for the university, they are internal transfers into the Athletic Fund by the university. This is no different from an internal service you might set up to determine how much the companies internal garage function or internal IT department actually costs. This is not income. If you think it's income, you need to enroll in an Urban Studies/Public Administration/Public Accounting class or two.

(12) any other revenues attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities.

This is the most difficult to determine from school to school. Where and why did the Ohio State sweatshirt or UNC tie sell? Is attributable to the academic side of the university or the athletic. If it sells at Wal-Mart or the Alumni Office, or the Student Store - how do you know? Each university can apply it's own rules.

(4) contributions from alumni and others,

If you have had a hand in raising money at the university level, you know that athletic, academic, and cultural donations can be blurred. Who cultivated the donation? Where did the relationship start? What was given in return? Again all universities can account this as they please.

Real revenue is that which is directly attributable to the sporting events, otherwise it's just a transfer of funds or the sometimes random application of a donation to a certain fund. If the donation is not cash money, how do you value the donation? If Big Kentucky Fan X gives 1000 acres to the University of Kentucky and it's his farm, and he says, use it as you see fit - who sees fit? If he says spend in the basketball program, when is the "value" actually recorded? In the year it's received, or when it sold at a later date.

The numbers used as a base set of numbers is too imprecise to measure very much, not only that, we can't even be certain the gross reporting is accurate.

This is how so many private operations end up in bankruptcy, they can't distinguish between real revenue and illusory revenue just used to cook or balance the books. Use GAAP rules, and modified accrual accounting together an you can have a data set that is useful. As it is now, we don't really know much other than large schools tend to make more total money than smaller school and even that generalization is somewhat devoid of meaning because real earnings as a value is based on an analogy of the seat being akin to a stock. The more seats, and the more value, the more money, but without expenses, legitimate expenses and not another set of phony transfers, we still know little of value.

It worries me that folks would look at the raw numbers and attempt to draw specific conclusions. However revenue is not always revenue, nor is profit always profit.

Let me boil it down to it's most simple form.

You are 16 years old and you have a job making 5.00 an hour 10 days a week cutting grass. Your income is 50 bucks a week. Your dad loans you $1000 to buy a car. That loan in NOT INCOME but according to the numbers we are given, that loan can be shown as income despite the fact we know damn well that a loan in not income. We would need to see the books of almost all the private fundraising arms of these schools, as well as how they handle their capital projects to fully understand what's happening.

If you attempt to make the case that all that matters about the data set is that it is what it is, well so is measuring the height of trees using sea level as your stating point. The trees in the mountains will always be higher than the trees on the coast.
(This post was last modified: 12-27-2013 03:02 PM by lumberpack4.)
12-27-2013 02:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NJ2MDTerp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,344
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Maryland
Location:
Post: #46
RE: Total Revenues by Team (2013)
LP4, I understand your point. Maryland, for example, has several entities that provide support to the athletic department. So the data is neither accurate or complete. And it most likely will never be. But I don't think the Department of Education is interested in the accuracy, completeness, relevance and timeliness of financial data. I thing I did notice after comparing revenues between the DoE and USA data is that there's very little movement among the top 25 schools. Same schools year after year.
12-28-2013 11:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
lumberpack4 Offline
Banned

Posts: 4,336
Joined: Jun 2013
I Root For: ACC
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Total Revenues by Team (2013)
(12-28-2013 11:03 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  LP4, I understand your point. Maryland, for example, has several entities that provide support to the athletic department. So the data is neither accurate or complete. And it most likely will never be. But I don't think the Department of Education is interested in the accuracy, completeness, relevance and timeliness of financial data. I thing I did notice after comparing revenues between the DoE and USA data is that there's very little movement among the top 25 schools. Same schools year after year.

You are correct that the DOE does not care about accuracy. I'm thinking about writing a set of papers on the subject so that I can quit raving about it here and other places.

Here are a few other major skews in the numbers:

T. Boone Pickens
Phil Knight
The Under armor Guy
Oil Money
Blatantly incompetent accountants
Blatantly crooked accountants

I will not name them, but there are three schools in the ACC where showing all the income is VERBOTTEN. In all three cases it has to do with the faculty bitching about the money. Two of them are cow colleges.

There are also a few ACC schools that I know of that have been handed major WHITE ELEPHANTS to environmentally remediate. These projects have a modesty fig leaf placed over them to make them look like athletic projects when they are actually lead, asbestos, sick building remediation.

That first set of numbers makes an okay place to start so that you can get an idea of the context of revenue, but I swear a good 20% to 30% of the numbers are hiding something major that would either reduce or increase the real revenue number and of course what do revenues really mean without expenses.

It's like having a 200K income. That's good if your house payment is less than $2500 a month. If your house payment is 10K a month, that 200K is not so great.
12-28-2013 02:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tj_2009 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,326
Joined: Apr 2009
Reputation: 49
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Total Revenues by Team (2013)
(12-25-2013 01:22 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  When Louisville comes in, they will be the ACC's first $100 million school when they start to receive their Acc payout as opposed to a BE payout. SU should come in 2nd or 3rd with revenues approaching $90 million, depending on if the Acc payout will be enough to surpass FSU.

I imagine Syracuse will come in number 2 or 3 behind Louisville once the ACC TV contract is boosted. There will be years that the football team plays at Metlife which will add an extra $5 million per year. Plus the basketball team will be able to sell even more tickets at a higher cost, against marquee opposition (Duke, North Carolina). I think Georgetown, UConn, Villanova and St. John's will be regulars on the schedule in the future.
12-29-2013 01:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #49
RE: Total Revenues by Team (2013)
(12-28-2013 02:23 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  
(12-28-2013 11:03 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  LP4, I understand your point. Maryland, for example, has several entities that provide support to the athletic department. So the data is neither accurate or complete. And it most likely will never be. But I don't think the Department of Education is interested in the accuracy, completeness, relevance and timeliness of financial data. I thing I did notice after comparing revenues between the DoE and USA data is that there's very little movement among the top 25 schools. Same schools year after year.

You are correct that the DOE does not care about accuracy. I'm thinking about writing a set of papers on the subject so that I can quit raving about it here and other places.

Here are a few other major skews in the numbers:

T. Boone Pickens
Phil Knight
The Under armor Guy
Oil Money
Blatantly incompetent accountants
Blatantly crooked accountants

I will not name them, but there are three schools in the ACC where showing all the income is VERBOTTEN. In all three cases it has to do with the faculty bitching about the money. Two of them are cow colleges.

There are also a few ACC schools that I know of that have been handed major WHITE ELEPHANTS to environmentally remediate. These projects have a modesty fig leaf placed over them to make them look like athletic projects when they are actually lead, asbestos, sick building remediation.

That first set of numbers makes an okay place to start so that you can get an idea of the context of revenue, but I swear a good 20% to 30% of the numbers are hiding something major that would either reduce or increase the real revenue number and of course what do revenues really mean without expenses.

It's like having a 200K income. That's good if your house payment is less than $2500 a month. If your house payment is 10K a month, that 200K is not so great.

I get the "accuracy" part of your stance. What you are failing to acknowledge is that the reported revenue between the two sources are matching each other, or within a reasonable difference considering the size of the budgets we are talking about to state they have "no value".

When only 6 institutions out of 228 (2.6% of the data set) are out of whack, then the entire data isn't worthless. Rather one throws out those 6 altogether or go with the lower number since they obviously don't know what they are doing.

Now, once you get to the baseline number and then want to talk about the inaccuracies of those numbers due to how they may account for things, fine. But even then, the usefulness of the data isn't worthless. Because basically it shows value in terms of the comparison amongst these institutions.

There is a reason why BiG and SEC teams tend to gravitate to the top moreso than Pac-12 and ACC teams.

Cheers,
Neil
12-29-2013 02:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.