24 replies to this topic

[TCUfrat]

http://www.smudailyc...99#.T6AHoO3mOmP

doesn't surprise me

[Frog-in-law1995]

Quote

Dozens of SMU students, faculty members and staffers spent the first Thursday of the 2012 spring semester celebrating a new era at the university — SMU’s invitation to join the Big East Conference.

Dozens?

[Boykin4Prez]

Frog-in-law1995, on 01 May 2012 - 10:23 AM, said:

Dozens?

[AEAfrog]

Funny how a realistic article from SMU reads like it would be perfectly at home in The Onion.

[jack the weed]

Read that article and it is easy to see who is calling the shots at again at smu. Surprised Blount isn;t back in the fold.

[Pure Purple]

Wait until SMU get a load of the increase in expenses they'll incur when

having to send their athletic teams on trips to the East Coast. While TV

money in the Big East will be somewhat greater...their expenses will also

increase substantially. Travel to C-USA destinations was in comparison...

a veritable walk in the park.

[Kaiser]

I can't believe people still try to make travel cost arguments. The flights to the MWC sure bankrupted us, and the BE was going to bankrupt us for sure.

[froginaustin]

Pure Purple, on 01 May 2012 - 12:26 PM, said:

Wait until SMU get a load of the increase in expenses they'll incur when

having to send their athletic teams on trips to the East Coast. While TV

money in the Big East will be somewhat greater...their expenses will also

increase substantially. Travel to C-USA destinations was in comparison...

a veritable walk in the park.

SMU has a superior B-school, or so they tell us.  Could it be possible that their world-class administration doesn't know what travel in the BE will cost?

Quote

. . .
Over the past seven years, its losses have topped $113 million. The deficit is equal to almost half of all tuition and fees paid by students in the 2011 to 2012 school year.

The losses shocked students.

“After hearing this, I find it ridiculous and humiliating,” Mark Butler, a senior finance major, said. “With all of the smart individuals involved at this university, you would think that we could find ways to not burn through cash over such a secondary priority. I think any student should be outraged at this fact.”

The athletic department’s annual deficit rose dramatically after Turner selected Steve Orsini as athletic director in 2006.

During the three years before Orsini arrived, the athletic department lost an average of $12.9 million a year.
In Orsini’s first four years, the annual losses jumped to an average of $18.6 million — an increase of 44 percent. . . ..

[crunch]

Who do these yahoos think they are?  They don't 'deserve to see where the money is going' anymore than I deserve to see the millions Wes and Scott make on KF.c.   Smu, like TCU, is a private institution.  They do not have to report their finances in a public way, but rather choose how and what to report to best serve their own needs.  Smu chooses to report a loss in the entire athletic dept?  Hmm, I wonder why?  They recently had one of their most successful fundraising years in history.  Hmm, I wonder if there could be a correlation?

TCU has historically chosen to equate the 'official' athletic budget with the 'official' amount spent.  Therefore it appears to be a breakeven department.  OK.  Much of this information is used (to the University's advantage) for comparison purposes only, not as a real accounting of actual spend or income.  A hallmark of the TCU philosophy on spending and capital programs is pre-funding, from concept through ongoing maintenance and upkeep.  Big donors want to see numbers, results and naming opportunities.

I am sure most D1 U's have a similar view of athletics budgets.  Part operational, part promotional, rarely 'profitable'.

[froginaustin]

This a crude hatchet job on the SMU athletic department (not that it doesn't entertain me).

Quote

Over the past seven years, its losses have topped $113 million. The deficit is equal to almost half of all tuition and fees paid by students in the 2011 to 2012 school year.

I suppose that if the author(s) were touting the SMU athletic department, they could say that one year's loss by the athletic department was only a small fraction of the tuition and fees that SMU students paid in the last 7 years.  It'd make as much sense as what they said.

[ShadowFrog]

Frog-in-law1995, on 01 May 2012 - 10:23 AM, said:

Dozens?

Sounds like 25 to me.  Isn't that the same number as the line for hotcakes in the BLUU ?

[FungoFrog]

Well, our "deficit" really hasn't been much smaller over the same period, so........

[froginaustin]

It's not the "deficit" it's the attitude,

and last year notwithstanding the results,

that count.

[cdsfrog]

FungoFrog, on 01 May 2012 - 03:36 PM, said:

Well, our "deficit" really hasn't been much smaller over the same period, so........

Maybe, not as bad as you think. Also compare the forecast for 2012-2013 season. Our outlook is great, their outlook is horrid

[Big Frog II]

Well if our loss has been similar, at least it got us into the Big 12, a Rose bowl win, and a new football stadium.  The new conference and stadium will go a long way towards increasing our revenue significantly.

[FungoFrog]

TCU 2010-2011 Athletics "Deficit": $10,794,437

SMU 2009-2010 "Deficit": $18.45 Million

[cdsfrog]

can't read it. whats the link?

[BleedNPurple]

They can always print more "Pony Bucks" that can be spent in Dallas and do some quantatative easing!

[AEAfrog]

cdsfrog, on 01 May 2012 - 04:42 PM, said:

can't read it. whats the link?

Article from the SMU newspaper

[cdsfrog]

He fixed the format, maybe it's me. Either way a deficit nearly half the size when we spend 20 million more. That's also before any of the premium seats bringing in additional couple million not to mention the projected 8000 new season ticket holders. Future looks bright for TCU