USA Today released its report on athletic finances for the 2016-17 year.

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

JMU is the first non-FBS school on the report, at #62, with $48,210,400 in revenue. We're ahead of such FBS schools as Hawaii, Boise State, and ODU, and we're ahead of every Sun Belt school.

The amount of revenue generated by the top 5 -10 schools amazes me.

If I'm interpreting % allocated as student fees. 22nd highest % subsidized. 2nd highest $ amount subsidized. In all of D1.

There is no way this list is correct. Texas State is listed as making ~10million less than us in revenue but they are a substantially bigger prize then lil old JMU, aren't they?

(06-28-2018 03:44 PM)doubleduke2016 Wrote:  There is no way this list is correct. Texas State is listed as making ~10million less than us in revenue but they are a substantially bigger prize then lil old JMU, aren't they?

Ironically Texas State's revenues would be even greater if they were overpaying their head football coach. They could pay the minimum and get the same number of wins they are now.

This isn't really a good thing. Personally don't consider student fees athletic "revenue", but I understand it's technically correct.

YEAR
2017

TICKET SALES
$3,090,411

CONTRIBUTIONS
$2,405,641

RIGHTS / LICENSING
$2,938,886

STUDENT FEES
$37,072,699

SCHOOL FUNDS
$2,047,221

OTHER
$655,542

TOTAL REVENUES
$48,210,400

JMU
ticket revenue
2017 - $3.1
2010 $1.1

Contributions
2017 $2.4
201 $1.3

Licensing
2017 $2.9
2010 $1.7

small numbers but pretty impressive growth

Interestingly

ODU
Ticket Sales
2017 $3.4
2016 $4.2

Contributions
2017 $5.7
2016 $5.9

Coaching salaries
2017 $13.8
2016 $13.1

Scholarships
2017 $9.5
2016 $9.0

Facilities
2017 $11.5
2016 $9.8

Revenues down, expenses up, since they dont have an accountant running the athletic department, someone might want to tell them in the business world these are not good trends.

A little surprised to see Delaware that high up the list. They are bringing in considerable revenue despite a rebuilding athletics program.

(06-28-2018 05:54 PM)PhillyDuke Wrote:  A little surprised to see Delaware that high up the list. They are bringing in considerable revenue despite a rebuilding athletics program.

It’s all those estates starting to make payments.

The amount the big boys are raking in is absolutely staggering, the student athletes at those schools need to be compensated. We're not far off from student athletes going on strike and once that spark is lit, watch out college football. Particularly once the NBA moves beyond the "One & Done" rule.

The part that surprises me is our spending nearly matches ECU, Memphis, and USF, all AAC teams.

(06-28-2018 04:57 PM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  JMU
ticket revenue
2017 - $3.1
2010 $1.1

Contributions
2017 $2.4
201 $1.3

Licensing
2017 $2.9
2010 $1.7

small numbers but pretty impressive growth

Interestingly

ODU
Ticket Sales
2017 $3.4
2016 $4.2

Contributions
2017 $5.7
2016 $5.9

Coaching salaries
2017 $13.8
2016 $13.1

Scholarships
2017 $9.5
2016 $9.0

Facilities
2017 $11.5
2016 $9.8

Revenues down, expenses up, since they dont have an accountant running the athletic department, someone might want to tell them in the business world these are not good trends.

But operating with an 81% shortage is good in the business world?

Let's keep looking for easy targets so we don't have to look in the mirror.

(06-29-2018 08:17 AM)2Buck Wrote:  

(06-28-2018 04:57 PM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  JMU
ticket revenue
2017 - $3.1
2010 $1.1

Contributions
2017 $2.4
201 $1.3

Licensing
2017 $2.9
2010 $1.7

small numbers but pretty impressive growth

Interestingly

ODU
Ticket Sales
2017 $3.4
2016 $4.2

Contributions
2017 $5.7
2016 $5.9

Coaching salaries
2017 $13.8
2016 $13.1

Scholarships
2017 $9.5
2016 $9.0

Facilities
2017 $11.5
2016 $9.8

Revenues down, expenses up, since they dont have an accountant running the athletic department, someone might want to tell them in the business world these are not good trends.

But operating with an 81% shortage is good in the business world?

Let's keep looking for easy targets so we don't have to look in the mirror.

At least some of you are realistic. Can't wait til y'all have to deal with the 55% cap.

Instead of looking at JMU 2017 vs 2010 and ODU 2017 vs 2016 it would be interesting to see ODU 2017 vs 2010.

We were peers back then in the CAA. Each program has certainly progressed since 2010; the question is how much?

edit - oops, didn't see the link.
Here is the ODU info 2017 vs 2010

Ticket sales 2017 $3.5 million 2010 $2.5 million
Contributions 2017 $5.6 million 2010 $4.4 million
Licensing 2017 $6.1 million 2010 $1.0 million this seems to be the biggest jump in revenue
Coach salaries $13.5 million 2010 $8.7 million
Scholarships $9.4 million 2010 $4.7 million
Facilities $11.5 million 2010 $8.3 million

in the 7 year timeframe their overall revenue has increased $14 million and expenses have increased $17 million.
Some may see that as a problem. Others may see that as a sound $3 million annual investment in the brand while keeping their overall spend equal to their revenue.

JMU has increased overall revenue $20 million while also increasing expenses $20 million.


interesting numbers

Guys, JMU does its accounting differently. If you notice on the USA Today report, we are the only school that claimed revenues EXACTLY equal to our expenditures. Hilarious.

(06-29-2018 08:49 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  Instead of looking at JMU 2017 vs 2010 and ODU 2017 vs 2016 it would be interesting to see ODU 2017 vs 2010.

We were peers back then in the CAA. Each program has certainly progressed since 2010; the question is how much?

edit - oops, didn't see the link.
Here is the ODU info 2017 vs 2010

Ticket sales 2017 $3.5 million 2010 $2.5 million
Contributions 2017 $5.6 million 2010 $4.4 million
Licensing 2017 $6.1 million 2010 $1.0 million this seems to be the biggest jump in revenue
Coach salaries $13.5 million 2010 $8.7 million
Scholarships $9.4 million 2010 $4.7 million
Facilities $11.5 million 2010 $8.3 million

in the 7 year timeframe their overall revenue has increased $14 million and expenses have increased $17 million.
Some may see that as a problem. Others may see that as a sound $3 million annual investment in the brand while keeping their overall spend equal to their revenue.

JMU has increased overall revenue $20 million while also increasing expenses $20 million.


interesting numbers

Let's keep looking for easy targets so we don't have to look in the mirror.

so we shouldnt look at a peer who made the jump and see how they have fared? Yeah, the information wouldnt be of any value.


We were peers back then in the CAA. Each program has certainly progressed since 2010; the question is how much?

ok, fair enough.

So ODU goes FBS and for 2017 their ticket sales are $300k more than us and down from 2016? that is with us having a $hi??y basketball team. I thought FBS was going to lead to more ticket revenue. I would be interested in their jump in Rights and Licensing. I dont think it is TV revenue? is this FBS pay days? Not sure.

2017 Sagarin - while not perfect, it is one bench mark

ODU football - 148
JMU football -44

ODU student fees $28 million
JMU student fees $37 million

I do agree here. We need to control this and get it down.

FYI: You can see the full financial reports for all VA public schools on the Auditor of Public Accounts website. USA Today just takes this info and consolidates it down.

http://www.apa.virginia.gov/APA_Reports/Reports.aspx


Type the school name in report title and select "Agreed Upon Procedures" under category.

(06-29-2018 09:10 AM)Dadgum Wrote:  Guys, JMU does its accounting differently. If you notice on the USA Today report, we are the only school that claimed revenues EXACTLY equal to our expenditures. Hilarious.

We aren't even the only school in the CAA where revenue = expenses. Delaware, Middle Tennessee State, Youngstown St, Cleveland State are all equal and that was just on a cursory glance. Western Kentucky shows expenses are $1 more than revenue, which is actually hilarious. How is a $1 difference a goal?

The article addresses some of the questions surrounding the criteria for each category.
Rights/Licensing seems to be the biggest slam dunk for programs that move football from FCS to FBS.
It includes
"revenue for athletics from radio and television broadcasts, Internet and e-commerce rights received from institution-negotiated contracts, the NCAA and conference revenue-sharing arrangements; and revenue from corporate sponsorships, licensing, sales of advertisements, trademarks and royalties. Includes the value of in-kind products and services provided as part of a corporate sponsorship (e.g., equipment, apparel, soft drinks, water and isotonic products). Also includes revenue from food, concessions and parking."

Also, there was a question about game guarantees in a previous post. They fall under the OTHER category
"All other sources of revenue, including game guarantees, school-specific revenue from bowl games, support from third-parties guaranteed by the school such as TV income, housing allowances, etc.; revenue from sports camps; income from athletics restricted endowments and investments that are used for operations in the reporting year."

Even Fake GSU has increased their Rights/Licensing 700% since 2010. They have be an example of the worst case scenario for a program that had very little support even at the FCS level.

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse every time I address this, but I'm not sure how many of you are currently paying for a student to attend JMU. I am, and quite frankly I don't give a crap how much of what I'm paying is categorized as a student fee. I have one at JMU and one at Longwood Nursing, and since my nursing student has a $3,000 scholarship I'M PAYING EXACTLY THE SAME AMOUNT FOR EACH STUDENT.

WTH difference does it make if we categorize a % of the total cost as a student athletic fee? Of 14 public schools in VA, JMU ranks 10th in overall cost. A recent $1,000 increase in tuition moved us up to 9th, and another $1,000 increase won't move us up on the list at all. We can make jokes about our creative accounting, but as a parent footing the bill all I care about is how much is all of this going to cost me.

So let's say they cut that student fee in half, that bit of assistance would barely make a dent in what I'm out of pocket every year. It also would barely make a dent in what those kids that have student loans would have to pay back. It's not like there isn't going to be ANY student athletic fee.

And I'll add, if you want to look at what the real problem is take a look at the General Assembly and those representatives that forced JMU to move their percentage of out of state students from 29% to 25% (which will actually become 22%, since it's hard to stop that train rolling down hill). You can make up a lot of that budget with out of state tuition. And by the way, at the same time we were being forced to take fewer out of state students UVA as allowed to increase their's by substantial percentages.