|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Where is the $20 million difference in revenue
Jun 14, 2014, 8:15 AM
|
|
I always thought SEC money was why SCAR had more revenue.
The ACC just paid out $20.8 million per school.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11044060/acc-distributed-record-2917-million-total-revenue-2013-14-fiscal-year
The SEC just paid out $20.9 million per school.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/24577128/sec-announces-209-million-average-payout-per-school
USA Today just published the ranking of schools by athletic department revenue. SCAR was at $90.4 million for last year and Clemson was at $69 million.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/
If the conference payouts are the same, why is SCAR raking in $21 million more?
The State just published the numbers for SC's athletic department revenue that is projected for the upcoming year.....it's $94 million and $23 million is from SEC revenue.
Revenue Amount
Admissions (Ticket sales) $21,822,000
Guarantees $3,500
Premium Seat Payments $5,803,400
Student Fees $2,425,000
Gamecock Club Revenues $13,645,000
Gifts and Donations $9,920,000
SEC Revenue $23,070,000
Ancillary Sales $4,010,200
Sponsorship and Royalties $9,700,000
Other Revenue $3,667,300
Total Revenue $94,066,400
Using these numbers above, can one of you guys who is up to speed on Clemson's athletic department revenue explain where the $21 million difference is coming from? The numbers above are projected, so based on next year's revenue it could be a $25 million difference.
The reason I ask is because it's obviously not SEC money that is creating the difference. I know schools probably label revenue differently and it could be hard to identify exactly where the difference is, but to further my confusion, if you look at the list on USA Today you will see Louisville had $96 million in revenue.....that is more than any ACC member and Louisville hasn't even joined the conference yet.
What is SCAR and Louisville doing that Clemson is not? I'm trying to figure out where the big difference is coming from, any ideas?
|
|
|
|
 |
Oculus Spirit [93667]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95418
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Evidently all the chickens got raises.
Jun 14, 2014, 8:34 AM
|
|
Either that or they got promoted from fries to upfront working the register.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
viztiz and several others have posted your answer too many
Jun 14, 2014, 8:36 AM
|
|
times to chronicle.
You've been here since 2003, I'm sure you can find one of viztiz's numerous posts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Re: viztiz and several others have posted your answer too many
Jun 14, 2014, 8:56 AM
|
|
Thanks DSP, I found it. Looks like the primary difference is that IPTAY donations are not being included in Clemson's reporting. If those donations were reported the difference in school revenue is not that great.
I do question why the AD would choose not to include IPTAY in the revenue that is reported. Ranking high on the list of athletic department revenue would seem to be just another great selling point to recruits.
Here is what I found from Viztiz.
http://www.tigernet.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=1116702&start=10&tstart=0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2609]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6653
Joined: 9/1/11
|
Re: viztiz and several others have posted your answer too many
Jun 14, 2014, 9:05 AM
|
|
Looks like our selling point is strong enough. #2 in ranking. And we dont ride conference coattails like scar has to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [514]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 858
Joined: 2/4/03
|
Re: viztiz and several others have posted your answer too many
Jun 14, 2014, 9:48 AM
|
|
IPTAY is a private organization and its contributions are not
Athletic Dept. revenue. The university bills IPTAY for the cost
of scholarships and the learning center. The Gamecock Club
is part of the USC Athletic Dept.
IPTAY cooperates with the Athletic Dept. to help fund some
projects like the indoor practice facility, but the IPTAY BOD must approve the transfer of funds. The AD cannot arbitrarily
take funds from IPTAY.
At most schools the athletic support group is under the control
of the Athletic Dept.(Athletic Director).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Re: Top 5 APR, top 10 in coachs' salaries, Top 10 finishes
Jun 14, 2014, 12:29 PM
|
|
> with the 3 straight 10+ win seasons, BCS bowl
> victory...
>
> https://clemsontigers.exposure.co/bestisthestandard
>
> I'm not sure why the school would have to show
> anything off, besides the existing facilities, the
> plans for the future, the results both on and off the
> field.
Hmmmm......don't you think Texas takes pride in being #1 in Athletic Department revenue?
Texas is a top 20 public institution with lots of national championships and great facilities. They could not include a significant portion of their athletic department revenue and drop in the rankings, but why would they?
I don't get your point that looking like a middle of the road revenue earner when the reality may be a top 25 revenue earner, is meaningless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
IDK if Tejas takes pride in it? They forced out their coach
Jun 14, 2014, 12:48 PM
|
|
last year; that just oozes pride. Hookem' Horns!
The number is the number and Clemson spends their number with the very best of them. If you can't see that, I can't help you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Re: Where is the $20 million difference in revenue
Jun 14, 2014, 8:39 AM
|
|
Well I just realized you can click on each school in the USA Today article and get a bit of a breakdown.
For 2013 the breakdown in millions for SCAR, Louisvile and Clemson is:
Tickets Contbtns Rights/Lic. Stud. Fees Other
SCAR $20.0 $25.8 $31.2 $2.5 $10.7
Louiv. $25.8 $28.9 $23.3 $1.9 $17.0
Clems. $21.9 $13.9 $26.0 $0 $7.0
Why are contributions at Clemson half of that at Louisville and SCAR?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
see viztiz.***
Jun 14, 2014, 8:42 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [60228]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42556
Joined: 11/30/98
|
well, when you consider Clemson' is #241 in enrollment
Jun 14, 2014, 8:47 AM
[ in reply to Re: Where is the $20 million difference in revenue ] |
|
look at the schools we rank around in enrollment - have you ever even heard of any of these?
Smaller enrollment = fewer alumni = less contributions
#238 Community College of Philadelphia Pennsylvania 19,503
#239 Southwestern College California 19,476
#240 Chaffey College California 19,469
#241 Clemson University (CU) South Carolina 19,453
#242 James Madison University (JMU) Virginia 19,434
#243 Webster University (Webster) Missouri 19,342
#244 Richland College (RLC) Texas 19,201
#245 Oakland University (Oakland) Michigan 19,053
#246 Monroe Community College (MCC) New York 18,995
#247 Santa Barbara City College (SBCC) California 18,827
http://www.matchcollege.com/top-colleges
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44044]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32956
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Outstanding post with very good data.
Jun 14, 2014, 1:50 PM
|
|
It is very interesting to see which schools have similar enrollment to Clemson. People seem to forget how much smaller we are than most schools in power conferences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [2]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 12
Joined: 2/25/01
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2896]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 3530
Joined: 1/13/02
|
The biggest advantage that coots have is a city, county and
Jun 14, 2014, 8:39 AM
|
|
state that will fund whatever the hell they want to build. During the recession, they never slowed down building and actually increased it. If you haven't driven through their lately then you should just to see all of the new construction. They have local and state government officials in their back pocket and always have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [2]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 12
Joined: 2/25/01
|
IPTAY
Jun 14, 2014, 9:03 AM
|
|
IPTAY
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16902]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10768
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: Where is the $20 million difference in revenue
Jun 14, 2014, 9:49 AM
|
|
Thanks to everyone for invoking my last replies on this topic. Since I'm not forced to argue the basics there are a couple of things I'd like to point out.
Conference revenue differences between our conference were fueled by tv revenue disparity and the SEC streak of multiple BCS games. The ACC has managed two BCS teams the last two years which has nullified this advantage. A renegotiated tv contract has closed the gap here too. In addition, I read a ton of negativity about the Notre Dame deal but this is actually hugely advantageous to us. They exist outside the conference potentially allowing us to block out other conference - imagine an undefeated ACC champ (who didn't play Notre Dame in the regular season), an undefeated Notre Dame, and a one loss ACC team (a division runner up to our champ) gobbling up 3 of 4 playoff spots. It couldn't happen if they were a full member. We get a potential strength of schedule boost across our conference and a definite tv ratings value. NBC's tv contract with Notre Dame is for home games. That's 14 home games every two years. The ACC's arrangement with Notre Dame guarantees us 5 ACC home game with them every two years. That more than a 1/3 of the value of their contract with NBC instantly added to the value of our tv contract. This is very good money especially considering it is predominantly replacing FCS caliber competition.
The other factor is IPTAY versus Gamecock Club giving. For 30 years we absolutely dominated booster donations. In a single swoop Eric Hyman leveled the playing field with their YES program. clemson dominated Carolina because Clemson fans gave more to support their program. This is no longer true. If we want that to change we're going to have to willing to outspend our neighbors - which doesn't usually get a great response.
Message was edited by: viztiz®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4504]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9112
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Interesting post viztiz and right on the money. Have never
Jun 14, 2014, 10:43 AM
|
|
understood all the negativity concerning ND being a member of the ACC in all sports except football. Hopefully one day they will have to become a full member in football also. While we might not like it, ND is probably the top name in college sports even when they are down and does nothing but add prestige to the ACC. Nobody can dispute that the ACC and Clemson are way better off than a few years ago and the future looks brighter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Re: Where is the $20 million difference in revenue
Jun 14, 2014, 12:20 PM
[ in reply to Re: Where is the $20 million difference in revenue ] |
|
Viz-
The comments from another poster above makes sense in that the Athletic Department would invoice IPTAY for scholarship funds.
I understand that contributions from fans to IPTAY would not show in the total revenue since IPTAY is private, but why doesn't the money received by the AD from IPTAY show up in the revenue numbers? This is obviously income into the athletic department, but you are saying it is arbitrarily excluded aren't you?
I'm not arguing, it's just dat I has da confused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16902]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10768
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: Where is the $20 million difference in revenue
Jun 14, 2014, 1:53 PM
|
|
In the breakdown I've seen the money received from IPTAY to the University is reflected in the numbers The University provides for these reports. But that appears to be just the amount reimbursed to the University for scholarships. Certain other projects are financed and paid for entirely by IPTAY and don't cross over into the University column. I'm going to work off memory but the numbers I last saw in detail were for 2012 with roughly $20 million being donated directly to IPTAY and about $6million being paid from IPTAY to Clemson University. That $6 million was included in Clemson's revenue reporting. So to simply add IPTAY contributions of $20 million would be disingenuous. But it's also misleading when trying to compare gross athletic department income to not include the sum total of the contributions. Also, IPTAY has amassed a fairly substantial surplus at this point.
As far as why the difference in reporting, IPTAY is in fact an entirely separate entity from the University, There is no reason to include these funds. This information is being collected by the department of education solely for information purposes, supposedly. University athletic departments and booster organizations like IPTAY have so far operated as non-profits. I find the p*ssing contest between big schools like Ohio State, Texas and all of the SEC to show off the biggest numbers here to be in real poor form. With the $6 million threshold for coaches being shattered this year and showing these kind of gaudy numbers, the federal government is eventually going to decide that they are leaving too much money on the table not to take a piece of the action. If college sports does lose its tax exempt status it will fall squarely on the shoulders of these kind of reports and then every school can expect to see their cash flow cut nearly in half. The concussion issues will probably be more than enough for the government to sway public sentiment if they want to get their hand in this cookie jar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38427]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33200
Joined: 7/28/11
|
Re: Where is the $20 million difference in revenue
Jun 14, 2014, 3:16 PM
|
|
Coots is ritcher , but Clemson's smarter and wa@ay purdier .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
