(06-03-2013 09:32 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(06-03-2013 09:01 PM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  

(06-03-2013 08:55 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(06-03-2013 08:25 PM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  There is a way to tax college athletics - tax the revenue, not the profit. If the state legislatures made a rule that every team that receives more than $10 million/year from their conference has to split that money with the state general education fund. That would be an effective tax that could not be dodged, and it would be similar to the way research grants are already handled, where part of the grant goes to "university overhead."

The nice part about this proposal is that it has a chance to get passed. It would not be nonBCS vs BCS. It would be soccer moms and teachers unions vs. the BCS, and that makes it a completely different animal. People would have skin in the game, and the money stream is enough to make the legislature take notice. How would your state legislator answer if publically asked whether he would rather fund Playstations for football players or a better educational system for the state?

Go Cougs!!!!!!!!

The Virginia Legislature, representing the taxpayer, got VT into the ACC by leaning on UVA. VT fans, of all people, should realize there should be some payback. Why should the investment of my tax dollars not see a return on investment?

As a transplant, I am much more interested in the overall health of the education system in Virginia (which is declining somewhat) than I am interesting in seeing VT put up luxury football facilities. I think the soccer moms and teachers unions agree with me.

Why shouldn't the Commonwealth receive a return on our investment of tax dollars? All those millions flowing in every year should be going to the state, to help pay for the lights, heating, and janitors of the entire school system, not to mention the teachers as well.

Go Cougs!!!!!!

The state is seeing a huge return on their investment. The hotels from Wytheville to Roanoke are full every weekend there is a home game. The state doesn't pay for any of the athletic expenditures. Athletic facilities are funded through donations and athletic revenues. The athletic department acts as a huge advertising arm of the Univeristy as well. After the national championship game in 99 the applications soared.

All of the schools in Virginia are climbing the national rankings so I don't know where you got the notion that education is slipping.

Tell me again - how did VT get into the ACC? Yeah, that's just what I thought - state intervention. You don't seem to like to talk about that.

You can't be sure the state is actually making money on the hotels (or how much) because you can't compute the opportunity cost of how else that money would be spent. If the people spent it in other ways the state may make even more money. However, $15-20 Mill is a pretty straightforward and clear revenue stream, and part of that profit should go back to the shareholders. Big5 athletics is a commercial enterprise.

The elementary and high schools are "teaching to the tests" in VA, and they have slipped in the few years I've been here. The SOL's have been a great negative for many schools. The Big5 bonus could help increase teacher pay after a period of stagnation.

Tell me, what will building more luxury athletic facilities at VT do for soccer moms? VT is a public institution, and therefore accountable to the taxpayers.

Go Cougs!!!!!!!

(06-03-2013 09:23 PM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  

(06-03-2013 08:59 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  There is a difference between a grant and athletic revenue received from a conference. Grants, are moneys that is given without having to incur hardly any expenses (A lot of grant writers aren't even paid unless they are successful in receiving the grant.) The revenue generated by athletics is incurred through means of expenses. I guess you could tax revenues from booster donations to the athletic program, but that would be a small drop in a big bucket

Quote:Actually, there is a fair amount of effort and acquisition of preliminary results that go into successful grant applications.

True, but the majority of the cost associated are fixed cost, there is very little variable cost associated with a grant. You could eliminate an entire athletic department and theoretically reduce all it's cost as most of it's cost are variable and can be traced. However, if you remove a specific grant from a particular field of science, the entire college of science will still be around because and incurring fixed cost.

Quote:A schools athletic expenses can easily be met if their conference outlay is reduced by half.

A schools athletic expenses could greatly be reduced and more accurately attributed to the athletic department, if the true cost associated with an athletic scholarship is determined by only it's variable cost (food, books, room and board) because the rest of the entire scholarship expense is a fixed cost that the university would have incurred had they sponsored or not sponsored athletics. Therefore, it would reduce any subsidized money received from the state by the University.

Quote:Plenty of other revenue streams exist. Part of the problem in college sports is too much money, which leads to waste and lack of administrative focus on education.

I agree

Quote:Taxing booster donations would probably be unwise as it would get other nonprofits on edge, and would not be sound policy.

I was thinking more along the lines of removing the non-profit status from only athletic programs, and possibly implementing industry specific laws (which I think would be impossible to achieve), that would prohibit athletic departments from using charitable donations as a way of reducing their tax liability.

Quote: However, conference revenues are clearly commercial revenues, and thus are a good candidate for profit sharing - just like any good business. It is simply a dividend on the State's long-term investment in the institution. By putting the level at $10 mill, you also coordinate your threshold with California, and avoid unduly taxing schools that aren't getting much money anyway, simplifying the overall process.

Possibly, but your idea of taxing revenue as opposed to profit would be a first for any for-profit industry

(06-03-2013 09:59 PM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  Tell me again - how did VT get into the ACC? Yeah, that's just what I thought - state intervention. You don't seem to like to talk about that.

You can't be sure the state is actually making money on the hotels (or how much) because you can't compute the opportunity cost of how else that money would be spent. If the people spent it in other ways the state may make even more money. However, $15-20 Mill is a pretty straightforward and clear revenue stream, and part of that profit should go back to the shareholders. Big5 athletics is a commercial enterprise.

The elementary and high schools are "teaching to the tests" in VA, and they have slipped in the few years I've been here. The SOL's have been a great negative for many schools. The Big5 bonus could help increase teacher pay after a period of stagnation.

Tell me, what will building more luxury athletic facilities at VT do for soccer moms? VT is a public institution, and therefore accountable to the taxpayers.

Go Cougs!!!!!!!

I don't talk about it because it is overblown and not relevant at all.

Your argument has gone from stupid to insane. What the hell do private suites at VT have to do with how much Virginia spends on elementary education? The reason suites are built is because they bring in much more money than they cost to build. No public money goes to building athletic facilities. You are still ignoring that. The more money VT makes on things like the CRC and patents, the less money the state gives them in their budget. The same would be true if athletics returned a lump sum to the University every year. The licensing fees on apparel already go to the academic side unlike at some universities. The contract for selling sodas anywhere on campus including at games is given to the academic side already. There are many ways that athletics is already making VT worth more for their "shareholders".

I know you aren't serious about the economic impact of home games. If you are then you need to do a Google search about the impact having home football games has on the local economy. There were a lot of articles on it when the B12 was breaking up and every time someone's seventh game gets threatened.

You can't just invent new "taxes" every time you see someone with money. This country is turning into a banana republic.

(06-03-2013 10:33 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(06-03-2013 09:59 PM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  Tell me again - how did VT get into the ACC? Yeah, that's just what I thought - state intervention. You don't seem to like to talk about that.

You can't be sure the state is actually making money on the hotels (or how much) because you can't compute the opportunity cost of how else that money would be spent. If the people spent it in other ways the state may make even more money. However, $15-20 Mill is a pretty straightforward and clear revenue stream, and part of that profit should go back to the shareholders. Big5 athletics is a commercial enterprise.

The elementary and high schools are "teaching to the tests" in VA, and they have slipped in the few years I've been here. The SOL's have been a great negative for many schools. The Big5 bonus could help increase teacher pay after a period of stagnation.

Tell me, what will building more luxury athletic facilities at VT do for soccer moms? VT is a public institution, and therefore accountable to the taxpayers.

Go Cougs!!!!!!!

I don't talk about it because it is overblown and not relevant at all.

It is completely relevant. Let's rehash: VT wants to get into the ACC as the Big East is losing teams, but does not make the cut. Virginia legislature threatens UVA, which didn't want VT, to vote for VT or else lose funding. UVA caves, and VT gets into the ACC.

Fast forward to today. VT has made a boatload of money from being in the ACC, and is in the ACC because of the Commonwealth legislature. VT is part of a hundred-million TV contract, and they will get paid the same amount if they never win another game in any sport. Any objective observer would clearly find that VT athletics has benefited greatly from this action of the state legislature.

Since VT has profited from the investment of the legislature and taxpayers of the Commonwealth, then it stands to reason that the legislature and taxpayers deserve some compensation for their investment - a little profit sharing, or dividends. Money that in the past has been spent on putting Playstations in every locker could instead be used for something productive and beneficial.

What does VT hoarding the money do for me, as a taxpayer of Virginia, and therefore one of an estimated 8 million owners of VT?

Go Cougs!!!!!!

(06-03-2013 08:25 PM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  There is a way to tax college athletics - tax the revenue, not the profit. If the state legislatures made a rule that every team that receives more than $10 million/year from their conference has to split that money with the state general education fund. That would be an effective tax that could not be dodged, and it would be similar to the way research grants are already handled, where part of the grant goes to "university overhead."

Apples and oranges.

The rationale for using grant money for "university overhead" is that the "overhead" is the salaries and facilities that are used to perform the research for which the grant money is awarded. In other words, a physics professor is awarded a $300,000 NSF grant, and some of that money goes toward the salaries of the professor and the other researchers who do the work, a little bit toward the salaries of the physics department adminstrators, and a little toward paying off the bonds used to finance construction of the department's buildings and equipment.

A direct analogy would be proposing that ACC TV money be used for stadium renovations or the salaries of Beamer or London or their coaching staffs.

But you're proposing something completely different -- you want the TV money diverted to primary and secondary schools. That would be like taking the physics professor's NSF grant money away from the university and giving it to high schools.

(06-03-2013 10:33 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(06-03-2013 09:59 PM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  Tell me again - how did VT get into the ACC? Yeah, that's just what I thought - state intervention. You don't seem to like to talk about that.

You can't be sure the state is actually making money on the hotels (or how much) because you can't compute the opportunity cost of how else that money would be spent. If the people spent it in other ways the state may make even more money. However, $15-20 Mill is a pretty straightforward and clear revenue stream, and part of that profit should go back to the shareholders. Big5 athletics is a commercial enterprise.

The elementary and high schools are "teaching to the tests" in VA, and they have slipped in the few years I've been here. The SOL's have been a great negative for many schools. The Big5 bonus could help increase teacher pay after a period of stagnation.

Tell me, what will building more luxury athletic facilities at VT do for soccer moms? VT is a public institution, and therefore accountable to the taxpayers.

Go Cougs!!!!!!!

I don't talk about it because it is overblown and not relevant at all.

Your argument has gone from stupid to insane. What the hell do private suites at VT have to do with how much Virginia spends on elementary education? The reason suites are built is because they bring in much more money than they cost to build. No public money goes to building athletic facilities. You are still ignoring that. The more money VT makes on things like the CRC and patents, the less money the state gives them in their budget. The same would be true if athletics returned a lump sum to the University every year. The licensing fees on apparel already go to the academic side unlike at some universities. The contract for selling sodas anywhere on campus including at games is given to the academic side already. There are many ways that athletics is already making VT worth more for their "shareholders".

I know you aren't serious about the economic impact of home games. If you are then you need to do a Google search about the impact having home football games has on the local economy. There were a lot of articles on it when the B12 was breaking up and every time someone's seventh game gets threatened.

You can't just invent new "taxes" every time you see someone with money. This country is turning into a banana republic.

How is taxing a "for profit" enterprise inventing new taxes?

Right now revenue producing sports in college athletics have an exemption from existing taxes because they are sponsored by a tax exempt entity. But this has become a completely transparent fraud.

Revenue that is used to support Olympic sports should be deducted from profits, but after that everything should be taxable just as it is for any other profit making venture.

As many have pointed out before, big time programs are typically run off the books with no use of university dollars because their revenue covers all their expenses. Well, if they exist as a stand-alone entity with employees making multi-million salaries, they should be treated the same as any other similar enterprise. They clearly no longer fit the definition of a non-profit and no longer serve the needs that the on-profit designation was created for.

Some people want to have it both ways by claiming that big time football and basketball justify their high salaries and other expenses by claiming that they generate huge profits and are not a drain on university funds but then want to claim that they are non-profits when it's convenient to do so. That doesn't pass the smell test.

Major college sports generate tons of income for the cities in which the colleges are located. The influx of fans for every home game fills up the hotels in the area, keeps the restaurants busy and profitable, generates income for stores in the area, as well as generating income for the university. This income comes from fans of the local university, as well as fans of the visiting school. We are talking about millions in tax revenue, all of which is a benefit of the univerisity's sports programs. Once you start taxing the university's sports programs, you make those sports more expensive. That will cause a reduction in the number of people able to attend such things, which will cause a drop in the various revenues generated as a result of all the visiting fans. The net result will be a loss of tax revenue, businesses unable to keep their doors open, and a generalized reduction of the atmosphere in the city where the university is located...

But most people, especially those whose schools are not part of the power structure, don't get that aspect. They only want to punish the power schools, hoping that they'll be forced to accept them unwillingly. That won't happen. It will do far more damage to their school, since their schools are just as vulnerable to those side effects, if not more so, than schools in the P5 conferences...

(06-07-2013 03:49 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(06-03-2013 10:33 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(06-03-2013 09:59 PM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  Tell me again - how did VT get into the ACC? Yeah, that's just what I thought - state intervention. You don't seem to like to talk about that.

You can't be sure the state is actually making money on the hotels (or how much) because you can't compute the opportunity cost of how else that money would be spent. If the people spent it in other ways the state may make even more money. However, $15-20 Mill is a pretty straightforward and clear revenue stream, and part of that profit should go back to the shareholders. Big5 athletics is a commercial enterprise.

The elementary and high schools are "teaching to the tests" in VA, and they have slipped in the few years I've been here. The SOL's have been a great negative for many schools. The Big5 bonus could help increase teacher pay after a period of stagnation.

Tell me, what will building more luxury athletic facilities at VT do for soccer moms? VT is a public institution, and therefore accountable to the taxpayers.

Go Cougs!!!!!!!

I don't talk about it because it is overblown and not relevant at all.

Your argument has gone from stupid to insane. What the hell do private suites at VT have to do with how much Virginia spends on elementary education? The reason suites are built is because they bring in much more money than they cost to build. No public money goes to building athletic facilities. You are still ignoring that. The more money VT makes on things like the CRC and patents, the less money the state gives them in their budget. The same would be true if athletics returned a lump sum to the University every year. The licensing fees on apparel already go to the academic side unlike at some universities. The contract for selling sodas anywhere on campus including at games is given to the academic side already. There are many ways that athletics is already making VT worth more for their "shareholders".

I know you aren't serious about the economic impact of home games. If you are then you need to do a Google search about the impact having home football games has on the local economy. There were a lot of articles on it when the B12 was breaking up and every time someone's seventh game gets threatened.

You can't just invent new "taxes" every time you see someone with money. This country is turning into a banana republic.

How is taxing a "for profit" enterprise inventing new taxes?

Right now revenue producing sports in college athletics have an exemption from existing taxes because they are sponsored by a tax exempt entity. But this has become a completely transparent fraud.

Revenue that is used to support Olympic sports should be deducted from profits, but after that everything should be taxable just as it is for any other profit making venture.

As many have pointed out before, big time programs are typically run off the books with no use of university dollars because their revenue covers all their expenses. Well, if they exist as a stand-alone entity with employees making multi-million salaries, they should be treated the same as any other similar enterprise. They clearly no longer fit the definition of a non-profit and no longer serve the needs that the on-profit designation was created for.

Some people want to have it both ways by claiming that big time football and basketball justify their high salaries and other expenses by claiming that they generate huge profits and are not a drain on university funds but then want to claim that they are non-profits when it's convenient to do so. That doesn't pass the smell test.

The athletic departments aren't running off their own revenue. They are relying on donations from boosters. Without donations they wouldn't be self sufficient at all.

When is the last time you heard of people just donating to Apple or Google? Those are for-profit companies that have to raise all of the money they make. College sports makes a portion of their money on television fees and other revenues then relies on donations for the rest.

So it is inventing a new tax if you aren't going to let colleges deduct expenses before calculating their rates and they won't be solvent at all without their tax exempt status that allows donors a tax reduction.

All you will have accomplished is killing a major economic enterprise for small towns all across the country in some attempt to "give everyone a trophy" like this is tee-ball.