The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Got this from Love and Honor on the main page.

http://www.mrsec.com/2012/12/big-bang-th...ore-260564


As I look at these numbers, I believe they include ALL athletic dept. revenues, including general fund assistance. Hence, I do not believe this a true number of what revenue the athletic dept. "generates" on a yearly basis.

You're correct.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/co...54955804/1

If we want to talk about things like assistant coaches' salaries as they relate to revenue, a better place to start would be "what percent of revenue comes from subsidy?" not "how much total revenue is reported?" because the total revenue includes general fund $$$.

WMU's 72.6% puts them right about in the middle..

WMU, by the way, is one of five MAC schools (EMU, Buffalo, KSU, Ohio, WMU) reporting under $1M in private contributions to the athletic department. Toledo is #1 in both ticket revenue and contributions and their MAC-lowest 52% subsidy is largely as a result of those two items.

Ya see, they lose me when it reports EMU with 27 million in revenue, WMU with 25 million, and UT at 19 million.

Seriously, EMU would have to charge $1000 a ticket to garner even half that revenue.

There is so much accounting b.s. in these reports they're not even worth examining.

(12-20-2012 02:45 PM)Chipdip Wrote:  Ya see, they lose me when it reports EMU with 27 million in revenue, WMU with 25 million, and UT at 19 million.

Seriously, EMU would have to charge $1000 a ticket to garner even half that revenue.

There is so much accounting b.s. in these reports they're not even worth examining.

Well, that's the point. Of that "revenue", most comes from either the "general fund" or "student fees" for every MAC school. EMU reports 27M, but of that, more than 85% comes from university subsidy, which counts as "revenue" for accounting purposes.

Your point stands, though, that you can't just look at the revenue column and glean anything. Have to look deeper.

(12-20-2012 02:53 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(12-20-2012 02:45 PM)Chipdip Wrote:  Ya see, they lose me when it reports EMU with 27 million in revenue, WMU with 25 million, and UT at 19 million.

Seriously, EMU would have to charge $1000 a ticket to garner even half that revenue.

There is so much accounting b.s. in these reports they're not even worth examining.

Well, that's the point. Of that "revenue", most comes from either the "general fund" or "student fees" for every MAC school. EMU reports 27M, but of that, more than 85% comes from university subsidy, which counts as "revenue" for accounting purposes.

Your point stands, though, that you can't just look at the revenue column and glean anything. Have to look deeper.

Agreed. The author tailored it towards big time FBS conferences. Just looking at the MAC, a lot of those numbers don't make sense.

does this also include revenue from advertising and such? I would think the Convo Center at EMU brings in a bit due to all the events that are held there

(12-20-2012 03:15 PM)SilentStryk09 Wrote:  does this also include revenue from advertising and such? I would think the Convo Center at EMU brings in a bit due to all the events that are held there

I say yes to advertising. No to outside events that generate money. ie-a concert held at the Convo.

yeah, i just figured their advertising demands more given the big name concerts held there that we don't really get at WMU since we have Miller.