• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!

House settlement approved. Now what?

Bsu is claiming they'll do a private equity firm to infuse money. Not going to lie. Outside of what you read on message boards or main press, I have no idea of how the nuts and bolts of that work or if something possible fit WYO.
 
ragtimejoe1 said:
Bsu is claiming they'll do a private equity firm to infuse money. Not going to lie. Outside of what you read on message boards or main press, I have no idea of how the nuts and bolts of that work or if something possible fit WYO.
Click to expand...
So they are selling an equity stake in their public athletics department to a private equity firm? wtf ?
 
evilpoke said:
. However, it's probably more likely here than in any other state in the nation.
.
Click to expand...
Far from the truth!! Georgia, Alabama and Tennessee’s legislatures have already passed specific laws facilitating paying players. New Mexico just passed a specific appropriations bill to pay players (albeit at a MUCH smaller level than the SEC states).

We are more likely the last legislature in the nation that would support it. But frankly, I’m fine with that. Using public dollars/taxes to pay college athletes is a gross misuse of funds in my opinion.
 
www.footballscoop.com

Private equity coming to college football (Updated)

After spending the past few years circling from above, the private equity industry is at last swooping in to take a bite out of the college athletics industry.Sports Business Journ
www.footballscoop.com www.footballscoop.com

Private equity firms in conferences too? This could be interesting. Could a private equity firm help WYO capitalize on the value? Some time back someone posted program valuations and WYO was pretty decent.

Way out of my area but maybe some partnership between states, universities, and equity firms that can profit from outdoors-related activities. They enhance college athletics and use it as a platform to promote whatever they profit from. States chip in some for tourism.

Probably ridiculous since I have no idea what I'm talking about. We do have outdoor activities and using UW as advertising platform when we play around the US might make sense?
 
OrediggerPoke said:
Far from the truth!! Georgia, Alabama and Tennessee’s legislatures have already passed specific laws facilitating paying players. New Mexico just passed a specific appropriations bill to pay players (albeit at a MUCH smaller level than the SEC states).

We are more likely the last legislature in the nation that would support it. But frankly, I’m fine with that. Using public dollars/taxes to pay college athletes is a gross misuse of funds in my opinion.
Click to expand...
"Gross misuse" is a pretty tough label if it is paid for and is voted on by elected representatives. Some Georgians and Alabamans surely don't want that money used in that way... But state representatives hew fairly closely to their electorates wishes. They may come to regret what they choose or view it as a mistake some day.... But that is different than "gross misuse".

Wyoming politicians and the public opinion upstream of them seem really allergic to spending a public dollar anywhere.... Paying UW athletes who are nearly all from out of state and end up out of state is not going to happen.
 
This is interesting..

“Requires athletic conferences to operate within single time zones, drastically reducing travel burdens and prioritizing student-athletes’ academic and physical well-being,” Baumgartner stated. “Sets reasonable limits on coaching salaries, reallocating savings to student-athlete educational resources, healthcare, and support services.”
Click to expand...

mynorthwest.com

Baumgartner challenges NCAA settlement for fair pay reform

Baumgartner's bill aims to reshape NCAA pay structures and promote fair compensation for athletes while pushing for vital conference reforms.
mynorthwest.com mynorthwest.com
 
ragtimejoe1 said:
This is interesting..



mynorthwest.com

Baumgartner challenges NCAA settlement for fair pay reform

Baumgartner's bill aims to reshape NCAA pay structures and promote fair compensation for athletes while pushing for vital conference reforms.
mynorthwest.com mynorthwest.com
Click to expand...
Not that this will ever come to pass...but it's nice to see people actually looking at the issue squarely. This or something like this is about the only way I see UW sports, and maybe even college sports in general, being something that looks like what I grew up loving.
 
ragtimejoe1 said:
Check this out. 100 mill in debt then not until July 1 and back to 100 mill in debt. No wonder they don't want to pay poaching penalty.

pullmanradio.com

WSU Regents To Briefly Transfer 100 Million Dollars To Cover Athletics Cumulative Debt-Money Coming From Several Units Including Housing, Dining, Parking & Transportation-Athletics Did Not Run Overbudget This Year

The Washington State University Regents are set to briefly transfer nearly 100 million dollars in the annual exercise to cover Cougar Athletics cumulative debt. State law in Washington requires the…
pullmanradio.com pullmanradio.com
Click to expand...
Very strange accounting practice there!
 
Whatever people think is going to happen with this won't. Women are already filing lawsuits.

Expecting Congress to fix title IX seems just as laughable.
 
OrediggerPoke said:
Far from the truth!! Georgia, Alabama and Tennessee’s legislatures have already passed specific laws facilitating paying players. New Mexico just passed a specific appropriations bill to pay players (albeit at a MUCH smaller level than the SEC states).

We are more likely the last legislature in the nation that would support it. But frankly, I’m fine with that. Using public dollars/taxes to pay college athletes is a gross misuse of funds in my opinio
Click to expand...
 
71lincoln said:
Where does the money in revenue sharing come from?
Click to expand...
Theoretically - ticket sales, donations, media deals, NCAA postseason payouts. In Wyoming’s case, I’m sure we are counting student fees and legislative appropriations in that bucket too.

But realistically, most athletic programs don’t turn a profit under the old model. Wyoming uses football revenues to subsidize other programs. Some years, football itself operates in the red. So the whole notion of now paying players a bunch of money on top of the scholarships/stipends/facilities benefits that they already get makes zero fiscal sense at Wyoming with current revenues. But then again - we live in a country which is largely supportive of the CSU model that apparently believes debt should have no limits and we shouldn’t worry about it.
 
OrediggerPoke said:
Theoretically - ticket sales, donations, media deals, NCAA postseason payouts. In Wyoming’s case, I’m sure we are counting student fees and legislative appropriations in that bucket too.

But realistically, most athletic programs don’t turn a profit under the old model. Wyoming uses football revenues to subsidize other programs. Some years, football itself operates in the red. So the whole notion of now paying players a bunch of money on top of the scholarships/stipends/facilities benefits that they already get makes zero fiscal sense at Wyoming with current revenues. But then again - we live in a country which is largely supportive of the CSU model that apparently believes debt should have no limits and we shouldn’t worry about it.
Click to expand...
If you eliminate "university-based revenue" and look only at revenue coming from outside the University (conference payout, ticket sales, apparel, etc.), is the football team profitable? And also paying facility costs?

Honest question.
 
Here's the thing, if you invite private equity into a discussion, you had better be prepared to perform. Private money is usually not patient and will not tolerate (or invest in) mediocrity and malaise. I would guess that the risk adjusted returns associated with a team like Wyoming would be extremely low. I don't exactly know how these deals are being constructed, but nothing in our performance, governance, or personnel would justify anything more than a speculative investment in UW, meaning the returns to us would likely be anemic. Further, the terms of any deal would likely be unfavorable - as they say, beggars can't be choosers.

The beauty of capitalism and private money is that it is usually brutally honest - with no brown- and gold-colored glasses to shield admin, fans, players, and coaches from the harsh truths and realities they have created and become subject to through time (somewhat related to things outside our control and somewhat tied to things they/we have failed at or refused to do). I can't see UW or the athletic department inviting that level of scrutiny any time soon.
 
LawPoke said:
Here's the thing, if you invite private equity into a discussion, you had better be prepared to perform. Private money is usually not patient and will not tolerate (or invest in) mediocrity and malaise. I would guess that the risk adjusted returns associated with a team like Wyoming would be extremely low. I don't exactly know how these deals are being constructed, but nothing in our performance, governance, or personnel would justify anything more than a speculative investment in UW, meaning the returns to us would likely be anemic. Further, the terms of any deal would likely be unfavorable - as they say, beggars can't be choosers.

The beauty of capitalism and private money is that it is usually brutally honest - with no brown- and gold-colored glasses to shield admin, fans, players, and coaches from the harsh truths and realities they have created and become subject to through time (somewhat related to things outside our control and somewhat tied to things they/we have failed at or refused to do). I can't see UW or the athletic department inviting that level of scrutiny any time soon.
Click to expand...
I see the Wyoming Constitution as probably serving as a bar to a private equity relationship with the University athletics program (which receives public dollars). See Article 3, Section 36.

Article 3, Section 36 – Aid to Private Enterprises Prohibited​

“No appropriation shall be made for charitable, industrial, educational or benevolent purposes to any person, corporation or community not under the absolute control of the state, nor to any denominational or sectarian institution or association.”
Click to expand...

2. Article 16, Section 6 – Loan of Credit; Donations Prohibited​


“Neither the state nor any county, city, township, town, school district, or any other political subdivision, shall... loan or give its credit or make donations to or in aid of any individual, association or corporation, except for the necessary support of the poor...”
Click to expand...
 
ragtimejoe1 said:
If you eliminate "university-based revenue" and look only at revenue coming from outside the University (conference payout, ticket sales, apparel, etc.), is the football team profitable? And also paying facility costs?

Honest question.
Click to expand...
Not even close. UW is spending $80 million on the stadium upgrades this year. You cannot overcome the expenditures on facilities when you start looking at an income statement. You also have all the health insurance for the coaches and administrators AND the costs to keep the lights on etc. which is why i get frustrated when they talk about how much money they are making from television or bowl appearances or ticket sales or anything. If you look, the athletic department is already getting $20MM subsidy from the state:


fun to play around with this and look at how much subsidy every school gets when they start talking about how much money they are making.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top