Shooter: Due to significant drop in attendance this season, U projected to lose $3MM


What he wrote:"Pssst: The Gophers football program, due to a significant drop in attendance this season, is projected to lose $3 million."

Making it sound like a secret. Not sure what he means by "lose". Revenue might be $3 million less, but I'm pretty sure the football program doesn't lose money. The athletic department might operate at a deficit, but I'm also pretty sure that's not unexpected.
 

Not sure of the point to that but I'm sure it will lead to idiots yammering on about how many more kids lost the opportunity to go to the U because of this. I tried to have a discussion one time about this with one of those far left against all sports types who couldn't grasp the concept that the U's athletic department has a separate budget not funded by the general fund that comes from tv contracts and ticket sales. For an intellectual it was surprising the lack of grasp they had on the subject. All I could do was shake my head.
 

So an easy solution is to just lower ticket prices, right? Except some of us who were spurned by the Norwood increase may not come back.
 

Please find another big ten team to follow. Better yet join the talented Dave ..lee at st Thomas. Like Dave, it was all about the dinero cuz once he got canned he began to say dumb things like st Thomas incoming class is in the same level as the u.
 
Last edited:


Not sure of the point to that but I'm sure it will lead to idiots yammering on about how many more kids lost the opportunity to go to the U because of this. I tried to have a discussion one time about this with one of those far left against all sports types who couldn't grasp the concept that the U's athletic department has a separate budget not funded by the general fund that comes from tv contracts and ticket sales. For an intellectual it was surprising the lack of grasp they had on the subject. All I could do was shake my head.

In fact, doesn't the AD pay the school for each athletic scholarship? That'll cost you.
 

2015 attendance is proof that Minnesota can fill TCF and begin creating a waiting list if they want to.

But this program still needs to overcome the Teague disaster (both his donation scholarship seating plan and the drunken inappropriate behavior). This, along with the media-lynching of a dozen players (most of who clearly had nothing to do with the incident), and the firing of a winning coach, led to huge decline in attendance.

The already questionable proposition of “scholarship seating” was then completely destroyed by the IRS.

Then this year’s home schedule was about the worst ever. When the most compelling game of the year is vs. Iowa, it’s going to be a really bad year for attendance.

We’ve seen how attendance is a lagging indicator of success. This is a very competitive sports market. This program needs to get to the point that it can be competive with WI, IA and NE, and win the West Division once every 3-5 years. When it looked like the program was there after the 2014 season attendance spiked in 2015.
 

So an easy solution is to just lower ticket prices, right? Except some of us who were spurned by the Norwood increase may not come back.

It would actually be a very simple pricing model. But start it up front and give good discounts to the season ticket holders and students to build the loyalty base. Don’t give deep discounts to single gamers later, that just upsets your loyal base and devalues the point of locking in early. The U is a very good business school, it should be easy to find some bright students/professors that can take on that project.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

It would actually be a very simple pricing model. But start it up front and give good discounts to the season ticket holders and students to build the loyalty base. Don’t give deep discounts to single gamers later, that just upsets your loyal base and devalues the point of locking in early. The U is a very good business school, it should be easy to find some bright students/professors that can take on that project.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree the U has missed the boat on taking care of STHers and that is an issue. When you give 2 free tickets to anyone buying Red Barron pizza it is bound to make someone who paid full price think twice.

That is #2 tho, IMO, behind getting the students to go to the game. However you can.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



Without digging through a lot of budget documents - (and if someone knows, chime in) - but I assume there is an overall athletic department budget, and within that, separate budgets for each team or program.

So, I suppose it's possible that the football program might have had an operating loss on paper, but the overall athletic department turned a profit. I'm talking about the direct costs of operating the football program versus football-specific revenues. with the drop in FB attendance, and the resulting drop in revenue, I can see where it would be possible to have an operating loss on paper. (including things like depreciation of equipment and facilities, and the need to show long-term pension obligations in a budget statement under GASB.)

That would depend on how the BTN revenue is accounted for. do they split it out by program, or does it go into one pot as "TV revenue?" Likewise, how do they account for money from the B1G for sharing bowl-game revenue, etc.

If anyone knows, or can find the actual athletic department budget online, let us know.
 

So an easy solution is to just lower ticket prices, right? Except some of us who were spurned by the Norwood increase may not come back.

That lusty lush megatongue Woody did a lot of damage to the season ticket holder base. I hope it is not irreparable.
 

That lusty lush megatongue Woody did a lot of damage to the season ticket holder base. I hope it is not irreparable.

Agree, except that my comment was half true. I’ll never go back to being a STH, primarily because I moved over to the Vikings instead. But I’d certainly go to more than 1 gm in 4 yrs (despite that one game being free, I would be inclined to pay)
 

Minnesota's "2017 NCAA Financial Report" (the most recent available online) is 82 pages long, and someday I may actually wade through the entire thing. Here are the highlights for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2017 (so for the 2016 football season):

Ticket sales: $9.99 million
Media rights: $18.7 million
Conference distributions (non-media and non-bowl): $10.3 million
Bowl revenues: $2.1 million
All other revenue: $14.6 million
TOTAL REVENUE: $55.69 million

TOTAL EXPENSES: $33.31 million

PROFIT: $22.38 million

Bottom line: Shooter is either full of **** or financially illiterate. Or both. Especially when you consider media rights increased to more than $50 million this year (an increase of more than $30 million).

It may be possible football revenue came in $3 million under budget. That is nowhere near the same as "losing $3 million." How the hell does an editor let something like that get printed?

Two other interesting takeaways:

• The U spent $296,000 on "fund raising, marketing and promotion." I'd love to see how that money was misspent.

• The U's total revenues from "program, novelty, parking and concession sales": $6,415. SIX THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN DOLLARS! How the ever-loving hell do you run an organization that has $10 million in ticket sales, and only manage to clear $6,400 on concessions and novelties? More importantly, how the hell do I get the right to run those operations?

JTG
 



The bowl revenue sharing is bs. Schools should take home the profit from whatever bowl they earn, and miss out if they fail to qualify.

As for the attendance, that's Coyles job. Right now he is struggling at it.
 

What he wrote:"Pssst: The Gophers football program, due to a significant drop in attendance this season, is projected to lose $3 million."

Making it sound like a secret. Not sure what he means by "lose". Revenue might be $3 million less, but I'm pretty sure the football program doesn't lose money. The athletic department might operate at a deficit, but I'm also pretty sure that's not unexpected.

Correct.

Talking about college athletics like a for-profit business is a fallacy.

Using those terms, the main library on campus "lost" millions of dollars every year. Ridiculous
 

• The U's total revenues from "program, novelty, parking and concession sales": $6,415. SIX THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN DOLLARS! How the ever-loving hell do you run an organization that has $10 million in ticket sales, and only manage to clear $6,400 on concessions and novelties? More importantly, how the hell do I get the right to run those operations?

It's all accounting hand-waiving tricks, to put different money under different titles. You really think the U only made $6k, just even from parking sales?? No
 

Correct.

Talking about college athletics like a for-profit business is a fallacy.

Using those terms, the main library on campus "lost" millions of dollars every year. Ridiculous

Sounds like you have a few books you need to return.
 

The bowl revenue sharing is bs. Schools should take home the profit from whatever bowl they earn, and miss out if they fail to qualify.

As for the attendance, that's Coyles job. Right now he is struggling at it.

Unless you're going to one of the top bowls, schools don't make money by going to one. By the time you pay for the team, coaches, cheerleaders, band, equipment, hotels, trainers, admin., etc., the pricetag is more than the $750k you may get to some crap bowl.
 

I saw in another thread that the B1G helps cover expenses, but these low bowls aren't gigantic money making opportunities. It's better than the $6k from concessions, but it's not like it's even close to one million.
 

According to the most recent report, all sports (men and women's) generated a profit of $2.175 million.

Football had a $22.4 million profit, and men's basketball contributed $6 million.

Women's basketball lost $3.3 million.

All other sports combined (no breakdown available) lost $22.2 million.

One way of looking at that particular situation:
• Football finances all other sports except the basketball teams.
• Men's basketball generates enough profit to finance the women's team and return a small profit to the department.

With Lindsay Whalen in charge of the women's program, it appears highly likely this formula will change ... for the better.

JTG
 

It's all accounting hand-waiving tricks, to put different money under different titles. You really think the U only made $6k, just even from parking sales?? No

Well, in the previous five years, they reported 0 in revenue from "program, novelty, parking and concession sales." Somebody is making money off those activities, and it doesn't appear to be the U.

A likely situation: An outside vendor is contracted to handle those operations, under terms not favorable to the U. The revenue and expense doesn't show up on the U's books, only the pittance it receives (if any). Again, somebody is making money off those activities, and it doesn't appear to be the U.

If you'd like to try your hand at forensic accounting, have at it. It's public information.

JTG
 

According to the most recent report, all sports (men and women's) generated a profit of $2.175 million.

Football had a $22.4 million profit, and men's basketball contributed $6 million.

Women's basketball lost $3.3 million.

All other sports combined (no breakdown available) lost $22.2 million.

One way of looking at that particular situation:
• Football finances all other sports except the basketball teams.
• Men's basketball generates enough profit to finance the women's team and return a small profit to the department.

With Lindsay Whalen in charge of the women's program, it appears highly likely this formula will change ... for the better.

JTG

Based on these numbers, there's $725K missing...
 


According to the most recent report, all sports (men and women's) generated a profit of $2.175 million.

Football had a $22.4 million profit, and men's basketball contributed $6 million.

Women's basketball lost $3.3 million.

All other sports combined (no breakdown available) lost $22.2 million.

One way of looking at that particular situation:
• Football finances all other sports except the basketball teams.
• Men's basketball generates enough profit to finance the women's team and return a small profit to the department.

With Lindsay Whalen in charge of the women's program, it appears highly likely this formula will change ... for the better.

JTG

That raises an interesting question. given the need, or desire, for football to subsidize other sports - IF the FB team had a drop in ticket-sales revenue, how big of a drop was it, and how does that impact the bottom line? If FB ticket-sales revenue was down by $1-million, that is an issue that has to concern the powers-that-be.

At the risk of beating a dead horse, Coyle did say that Fleck was hired - in part - to help boost ticket sales. So, the entire athletic department has a vested interest in seeing Fleck succeed. If the Gophers win games, and sell more tickets, it benefits the rowing program, the swimming and diving program, gymnastics etc.

At the same time, the University needs to be doing anything it can, within reason, to help promote and sell FB tickets.
 

That raises an interesting question. given the need, or desire, for football to subsidize other sports - IF the FB team had a drop in ticket-sales revenue, how big of a drop was it, and how does that impact the bottom line? If FB ticket-sales revenue was down by $1-million, that is an issue that has to concern the powers-that-be.

At the risk of beating a dead horse, Coyle did say that Fleck was hired - in part - to help boost ticket sales. So, the entire athletic department has a vested interest in seeing Fleck succeed. If the Gophers win games, and sell more tickets, it benefits the rowing program, the swimming and diving program, gymnastics etc.

At the same time, the University needs to be doing anything it can, within reason, to help promote and sell FB tickets.

Glad you asked. From the reports, I'm not exactly sure which year these numbers pertain to. The reports are based on fiscal years, which end June 30. So you'd think they pertain to the previous football season. But that doesn't appear to jibe well with what you'd expect, based on W-L record.

So, here's the report year, along with football ticket sales:

2017: $9.989 million
2016: $12.474 million
2015: $10.512 million
2014: $14.024 million
2013: $11.475 million
2012: $11.238 million

How's that ticket price increase working out?

JTG
 

At the same time, the University needs to be doing anything it can, within reason, to help promote and sell FB tickets.

Keep in mind that the most recent report shows that ticket sales provided only 17.9% of revenue for the football program. It was dwarfed by media revenue ... and media revenue has increased considerably since that report.

You may be interested to know that the U recorded 0 for marketing the football program in the 2012 through 2015 reports. It spent $250,000 to $300,000 in each of the following two years.

Bottom line: There's no freaking reason in the world to not have affordable ticket prices. TV pays the freight.

JTG
 

Well, in the previous five years, they reported 0 in revenue from "program, novelty, parking and concession sales." Somebody is making money off those activities, and it doesn't appear to be the U.

A likely situation: An outside vendor is contracted to handle those operations, under terms not favorable to the U. The revenue and expense doesn't show up on the U's books, only the pittance it receives (if any). Again, somebody is making money off those activities, and it doesn't appear to be the U.

If you'd like to try your hand at forensic accounting, have at it. It's public information.

JTG

Your hypothesis is that the U just lets some company come in to sell concessions at TCF and keep all the money for themselves?? I’m afraid that is not he U works.

You do have a solid idea though. Sure, it is probably likely that the U contracts out the operations of gameday concessions, as well as merch sales. Maybe parking too. But those contracts aren’t free. Zero chance. The U is making probably quite a lot (wild guess, in the seven figures) for those contracts per year. And then that revenue is just appearing under some other line item, maybe contracts or something else.
 

Your hypothesis is that the U just lets some company come in to sell concessions at TCF and keep all the money for themselves?? I’m afraid that is not he U works.

You do have a solid idea though. Sure, it is probably likely that the U contracts out the operations of gameday concessions, as well as merch sales. Maybe parking too. But those contracts aren’t free. Zero chance. The U is making probably quite a lot (wild guess, in the seven figures) for those contracts per year. And then that revenue is just appearing under some other line item, maybe contracts or something else.

They lost money on beer sales the first year.
 

Your hypothesis is that the U just lets some company come in to sell concessions at TCF and keep all the money for themselves?? I’m afraid that is not he U works.

You do have a solid idea though. Sure, it is probably likely that the U contracts out the operations of gameday concessions, as well as merch sales. Maybe parking too. But those contracts aren’t free. Zero chance. The U is making probably quite a lot (wild guess, in the seven figures) for those contracts per year. And then that revenue is just appearing under some other line item, maybe contracts or something else.

Parking is contracted with the U itself. Parking services is not part of the athletic department.
 

The bowl revenue sharing is bs. Schools should take home the profit from whatever bowl they earn, and miss out if they fail to qualify.

As for the attendance, that's Coyles job. Right now he is struggling at it.

The university benefits greatly from the current very socialiastic redistribution of conference wealth. If conference revenues were apportioned via percentage of BTN/Fox/ESPN eyeballs per program, bowl revenue, and March Madness revenue the program would be destitute.

Also, the football program is not losing money. The football program pays for itself, and all the non-revs (with some kicked in from men’s bball and hockey).
 




Top Bottom