(04-25-2016 08:55 AM)Bruce Monnin Wrote:  That's a lot of debt for UC, but I believe our endowment is about the same amount?

Yes our endowment is approx 1.2 Billion (This reflects 2014 figures, and I thought I heard fundraising has been pretty strong starting the Centennial Campaign so it is likely higher).

Edit: puts us in the top 25 according to - http://colleges.startclass.com/stories/1...Cincinnati

(04-25-2016 11:06 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(04-25-2016 07:12 AM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:53 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 02:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-21-2016 06:53 PM)OhioIsMySacredHome Wrote:  I really love CFB but I have a very hard time coming to grips with students subsidizing the AD through fees. I can accept some degree of taxpayer subsidization as an advertising expense.
I would like to see greater self sufficiency.

OSU is in debt to a tune of about 1 Billion. That is more troubling than student fees.

preach it

As of 2015, debt at selected Ohio Public Universities:

Total debt outstanding at Ohio public universities
Borrowing at Ohio's 14 public universities more than doubled over the last decade. Most spending was for building construction and renovations

.



That's a lot of debt, folks.

Source: http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news...65b/nj83M/

For schools that are sitting on a lot of liquid assets with a good return and acceptable risk, the debt financing is a good thing.

For example, let's assume that you have $100k in a low risk, good return mutual fund and you want to buy a new car for $25k. You are able to get a loan for the car at an interest rate that is less than the return on the mutual fund. You would be foolish to pay cash for the car since you would be lowering your overall return on your assets.

The list of debt is a good thing, but without more information (e.g., current liquid position, current and projected 5 year return on assets, etc.), there is little true information that can be gleaned from the list.

I am also assuming that a good portion of these debts are BONDS which are financed and will be repaid on a schedule as opposed to pure "deficit." The list makes it look like (and it could be, I guess) that OSU and UC (among the others) are running in a huge deficit mode while bonds...construction bonds etc...are current spending that is financed and is different than having an unfinanced deficit hanging over your head.

(04-25-2016 12:20 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(04-25-2016 11:06 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(04-25-2016 07:12 AM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:53 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 02:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  OSU is in debt to a tune of about 1 Billion. That is more troubling than student fees.

preach it

As of 2015, debt at selected Ohio Public Universities:

Total debt outstanding at Ohio public universities
Borrowing at Ohio's 14 public universities more than doubled over the last decade. Most spending was for building construction and renovations

.



That's a lot of debt, folks.

Source: http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news...65b/nj83M/

For schools that are sitting on a lot of liquid assets with a good return and acceptable risk, the debt financing is a good thing.

For example, let's assume that you have $100k in a low risk, good return mutual fund and you want to buy a new car for $25k. You are able to get a loan for the car at an interest rate that is less than the return on the mutual fund. You would be foolish to pay cash for the car since you would be lowering your overall return on your assets.

The list of debt is a good thing, but without more information (e.g., current liquid position, current and projected 5 year return on assets, etc.), there is little true information that can be gleaned from the list.

I am also assuming that a good portion of these debts are BONDS which are financed and will be repaid on a schedule as opposed to pure "deficit." The list makes it look like (and it could be, I guess) that OSU and UC (among the others) are running in a huge deficit mode while bonds...construction bonds etc...are current spending that is financed and is different than having an unfinanced deficit hanging over your head.

Yeah OSU floated one for 99 years.

(04-25-2016 12:20 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(04-25-2016 11:06 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(04-25-2016 07:12 AM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:53 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 02:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  OSU is in debt to a tune of about 1 Billion. That is more troubling than student fees.

preach it

As of 2015, debt at selected Ohio Public Universities:

Total debt outstanding at Ohio public universities
Borrowing at Ohio's 14 public universities more than doubled over the last decade. Most spending was for building construction and renovations

.



That's a lot of debt, folks.

Source: http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news...65b/nj83M/

For schools that are sitting on a lot of liquid assets with a good return and acceptable risk, the debt financing is a good thing.

For example, let's assume that you have $100k in a low risk, good return mutual fund and you want to buy a new car for $25k. You are able to get a loan for the car at an interest rate that is less than the return on the mutual fund. You would be foolish to pay cash for the car since you would be lowering your overall return on your assets.

The list of debt is a good thing, but without more information (e.g., current liquid position, current and projected 5 year return on assets, etc.), there is little true information that can be gleaned from the list.

I am also assuming that a good portion of these debts are BONDS which are financed and will be repaid on a schedule as opposed to pure "deficit." The list makes it look like (and it could be, I guess) that OSU and UC (among the others) are running in a huge deficit mode while bonds...construction bonds etc...are current spending that is financed and is different than having an unfinanced deficit hanging over your head.

Bonds are a great way for Ohio schools to finance capital stuff since, if structured correctly, they are double tax free (i.e., free from Federal and State income tax). That way, the return on the bond can be lower than market rates since the investor gets rid of taxes on the earnings.

(04-25-2016 11:06 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  For schools that are sitting on a lot of liquid assets with a good return and acceptable risk, the debt financing is a good thing.

For example, let's assume that you have $100k in a low risk, good return mutual fund and you want to buy a new car for $25k. You are able to get a loan for the car at an interest rate that is less than the return on the mutual fund. You would be foolish to pay cash for the car since you would be lowering your overall return on your assets.

The list of debt is a good thing, but without more information (e.g., current liquid position, current and projected 5 year return on assets, etc.), there is little true information that can be gleaned from the list.

For the no debt / pay cash successful people, that bolded part in your response above makes them restless. The wealth "isms" handed down from generations past are tough to overcome.

(04-25-2016 01:03 PM)SeniorBearcat Wrote:  

(04-25-2016 11:06 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  For schools that are sitting on a lot of liquid assets with a good return and acceptable risk, the debt financing is a good thing.

For example, let's assume that you have $100k in a low risk, good return mutual fund and you want to buy a new car for $25k. You are able to get a loan for the car at an interest rate that is less than the return on the mutual fund. You would be foolish to pay cash for the car since you would be lowering your overall return on your assets.

The list of debt is a good thing, but without more information (e.g., current liquid position, current and projected 5 year return on assets, etc.), there is little true information that can be gleaned from the list.

For the no debt / pay cash successful people, that bolded part in your response above makes them restless. The wealth "isms" handed down from generations past are tough to overcome.

Thanks, Senior. As they say, a picture...

(04-25-2016 11:36 AM)nati streets Wrote:  

(04-25-2016 08:55 AM)Bruce Monnin Wrote:  That's a lot of debt for UC, but I believe our endowment is about the same amount?

Yes our endowment is approx 1.2 Billion (This reflects 2014 figures, and I thought I heard fundraising has been pretty strong starting the Centennial Campaign so it is likely higher).

Edit: puts us in the top 25 according to - http://colleges.startclass.com/stories/1...Cincinnati

Without more context as pointed out above, equal debt / assets does not mean much. There is good debt and bad debt...hopefully UC has enough smart people in their corner making sure they are using debt efficiently.

On a completely unrelated note but on the subject of equal debt / assets, how could the government deal with the next debt ceiling

U.S. National Debt - 19.26T
U.S. Retirement Assets - 23.99T
(IRAs - 7.3T, DC Plans - 6.7T, Private DB 2.9T, State / local Pensions 3.6T, Federal Pensions 1.5T, Annuities 1.9T as of 12/31/15)

Great points made by all. Deficit spending never makes me comfortable. However, I clearly accept the very sound rationale of proper debt leverage that was evinced so logically in this thread. Without itthe massive construction/renovation projects that have been completed or are underway at places like OSU and UC wouldn't be feasible.
I still would like to see Athletic Departments and, even to some extent, Academic departments being more accountable.
I read somewhere that OSU college of arts and sciences are operating at a tremendous loss because so few students are choosing to major in liberal arts compared to the general admission era.