I wanted to spin this off from the Big 12 thread to ask this to those that have a closer relation to the school. All I can do is look at the university budgets they put out, but that doesn't tell me much.

https://knightnewhousedata.org/reports/d4513e60

This link compares the revenue of the three leaving the AAC with Memphis over the past five years. They used decent sized subsidies to help fund their athletic departments. Here are some specific shots from the link.


UCF used their large student base to collect fees providing 34%-40% of their athletic revenue during this timeframe.




Houston and Cincinnati relied on large Institutional/Government support for their departments with Houston getting as much as 61% of their athletic revenue from this area.




Houston’s and Cincinnati’s route is obviously the better fit for Memphis. So my main question is the same as the thread title. Was it not considered? Is the money not there to bump up the subsidies like the other schools? It seems pretty clear these subsidies are the reason these schools had larger athletic revenues than Memphis.

(11-04-2022 05:31 AM)Alanda Wrote:  I wanted to spin this off from the Big 12 thread to ask this to those that have a closer relation to the school. All I can do is look at the university budgets they put out, but that doesn't tell me much.

https://knightnewhousedata.org/reports/d4513e60

This link compares the revenue of the three leaving the AAC with Memphis over the past five years. They used decent sized subsidies to help fund their athletic departments. Here are some specific shots from the link.


UCF used their large student base to collect fees providing 34%-40% of their athletic revenue during this timeframe.




Houston and Cincinnati relied on large Institutional/Government support for their departments with Houston getting as much as 61% of their athletic revenue from this area.




Houston’s and Cincinnati’s route is obviously the better fit for Memphis. So my main question is the same as the thread title. Was it not considered? Is the money not there to bump up the subsidies like the other schools? It seems pretty clear these subsidies are the reason these schools had larger athletic revenues than Memphis.

Is this another situation where our relatively small enrollment plays a role?

Institutional/Government support at a per student rate:
$871 Houston
$793 Memphis
$652 Cincinnati

Even if Memphis raised their per student support to the same rate as Houston, that would only raise our total revenue by 1.7 million.

Assuming all other categories remain the same, to reach a total revenue level of 64 million we would need 34 million from Institutional/Government support.

(11-04-2022 07:53 AM)jamgut Wrote:  

(11-04-2022 05:31 AM)Alanda Wrote:  I wanted to spin this off from the Big 12 thread to ask this to those that have a closer relation to the school. All I can do is look at the university budgets they put out, but that doesn't tell me much.

https://knightnewhousedata.org/reports/d4513e60

This link compares the revenue of the three leaving the AAC with Memphis over the past five years. They used decent sized subsidies to help fund their athletic departments. Here are some specific shots from the link.


UCF used their large student base to collect fees providing 34%-40% of their athletic revenue during this timeframe.




Houston and Cincinnati relied on large Institutional/Government support for their departments with Houston getting as much as 61% of their athletic revenue from this area.




Houston’s and Cincinnati’s route is obviously the better fit for Memphis. So my main question is the same as the thread title. Was it not considered? Is the money not there to bump up the subsidies like the other schools? It seems pretty clear these subsidies are the reason these schools had larger athletic revenues than Memphis.

Is this another situation where our relatively small enrollment plays a role?

Institutional/Government support at a per student rate:
$871 Houston
$793 Memphis
$652 Cincinnati

Even if Memphis raised their per student support to the same rate as Houston, that would only raise our total revenue by 1.7 million.

Assuming all other categories remain the same, to reach a total revenue level of 64 million we would need 34 million from Institutional/Government support.

Your first post mentioned Houston and Cincinnati, and I was going to mention that UCF got a ton of money from their student base.

The major difference is with enrollment and endowment, or both. We are at around 23,000 students. All three schools have a much higher enrollment. UCF is at over 70,000 and Houston and Cincinnati are at around 46,000. UCF has the same endowment amount as us at around $220 million, but almost 3 times the enrollment. Cincinnati's endowment is $1.7 billion and Houston's is $1.3 billion.

(11-04-2022 07:53 AM)jamgut Wrote:  Is this another situation where our relatively small enrollment plays a role?

Institutional/Government support at a per student rate:
$871 Houston
$793 Memphis
$652 Cincinnati

Even if Memphis raised their per student support to the same rate as Houston, that would only raise our total revenue by 1.7 million.

Assuming all other categories remain the same, to reach a total revenue level of 64 million we would need 34 million from Institutional/Government support.

I wondered that as well. What's interesting is that when I looked at the school budgets right, Memphis has brought in more than Houston lately. UCF and Cincinnati had huge budgets so I could sort of understand their ability to subsidize athletics. But how is Houston doing it with a smaller budget than ours?

(11-04-2022 08:10 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-04-2022 07:53 AM)jamgut Wrote:  Is this another situation where our relatively small enrollment plays a role?

Institutional/Government support at a per student rate:
$871 Houston
$793 Memphis
$652 Cincinnati

Even if Memphis raised their per student support to the same rate as Houston, that would only raise our total revenue by 1.7 million.

Assuming all other categories remain the same, to reach a total revenue level of 64 million we would need 34 million from Institutional/Government support.

Your first post mentioned Houston and Cincinnati, and I was going to mention that UCF got a ton of money from their student base.

The major difference is with enrollment and endowment, or both. We are at around 23,000 students. All three schools have a much higher enrollment. UCF is at over 70,000 and Houston and Cincinnati are at around 46,000. UCF has the same endowment amount as us at around $220 million, but almost 3 times the enrollment. Cincinnati's endowment is $1.7 billion and Houston's is $1.3 billion.

I considered endowment. But looking at Houston's budget they made no endowment transfers to their operating budget.