Started By
Message
re: The NIL shite show thread
Posted on 10/18/23 at 12:25 pm to HailToTheChiz
Posted on 10/18/23 at 12:25 pm to HailToTheChiz
quote:
HailtotheChiz
2
Posted on 10/18/23 at 12:32 pm to jangalang
One other thing. THE NCAA is hapless. They cannot prevent revenue sharing. Its only a matter of time before NIL transitions into the above so there may not be enough time for NIL costs to rise. NIL could be considered temporary measures.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 12:36 pm to jangalang
quote:
34 dollars is "giant spending"
You are too stupid to talk about this with. How the hell is that what you get out of this? That is not at all what’s meant by my statements.
quote:
Your logic of escalation of costs is absurd as well because even if youre right that we pay 34 just to put us back on the same level until costs get raised again youre still helping my argument by assuming paying 34 will get us on the same level playing field (which we are not on right now.)
This doesn’t make an ounce of sense. When did we ever argue about anything you’re talking about?
Posted on 10/18/23 at 12:36 pm to jangalang
This post was edited on 10/18/23 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 10/18/23 at 12:46 pm to Weagle25
quote:
You are too stupid to talk about this with. How the hell is that what you get out of this? That is not at all what’s meant by my statements.
34 dollars a month is literally what you told fans to not contribute unless you have "frick you" money."
Otherwise, please point out the giant spending that "they" are going to put on us regarding NIL.
quote:
It’s not hard to understand. 1. Corporation A charges $10 for a product. Makes a $5 profit. 2. Costs for the product go up $1. 3. Corporation can choose to charge $11 for the product or eat into their profit and make $4 now. 4. Most corps are going to raise the price to $11 and maintain their $5 profit or even increase their profit by charging $12. 5. The only control on that is what the customer is willing to pay. If the $12 price is too much, customers stop buying. That’s when the corporation considers eating the cost themselves. Answer key for you: Corporation is the collection of major universities. The customer is average Joe fan. The cost increase is NIL.
quote:
You’re going to end up paying $34 a month. Every other school will do the same thing and we’ll be in the same boat competitively that we were before. Except you’ll be paying more for it. If that’s what you want to do, go ahead. I don’t care.
There are so many flaws in your posts.
This post was edited on 10/18/23 at 1:00 pm
Posted on 10/18/23 at 1:01 pm to jangalang
quote:
34 dollars a day is literally what you told fans to not contribute unless you have "frick you" money."
Right and you asked what that $34 was enabling.
I said giant spending. Ever increasing costs the customer.
People donating to the NIL can’t enable donations to the NIL. That makes no sense.
quote:
Otherwise, please point out the giant spending that "they" are going to put on us regarding NIL.
As long as fans are willing to eat costs and pay more. There’s no incentive for Auburn to cut wasteful spending. It’s really not a hard concept to grasp.
Nothing you quoted or highlighted is even relevant in what your last post talked about.
I’m actually done this time. This is the most circular argument I’ve ever been in.
This post was edited on 10/18/23 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 10/18/23 at 1:06 pm to jangalang
quote:
You’re going to end up paying $34 a month. Every other school will do the same thing and we’ll be in the same boat competitively that we were before. Except you’ll be paying more for it. If that’s what you want to do, go ahead. I don’t care.
quote:
Giant spending. Ever increasing costs to the consumer. Never fight on the price you pay for these things.
Does anybody know where the Auburn sports thread is around here? Our Auburn sports guys decided they would rather punt on a stronger collective because of the giant spending of 34 dollars per month as set by corporate (collection of major universities) because they wear shirts that say "DONT TREAD ON ME" and have become their own resistance.....to wins....
This post was edited on 10/18/23 at 1:15 pm
Posted on 10/18/23 at 1:07 pm to jangalang
I don’t spend money on garbage
Posted on 10/18/23 at 1:10 pm to Weagle25
quote:
Right and you asked what that $34 was enabling.
I said giant spending. Ever increasing costs the customer.
It is 34 dollars a month.
quote:
People donating to the NIL can’t enable donations to the NIL. That makes no sense.
I did not put words in your mouth. It took forever for you establish what in the world was getting enabled. Giant spending is apparently getting enabled whatever that means.
quote:
As long as fans are willing to eat costs and pay more. There’s no incentive for Auburn to cut wasteful spending. It’s really not a hard concept to grasp.
Who the frick cares about this. Go to the money thread about this shite. Auburn isnt even allowed to fund NIL yet. Let us get back to the stuff that favors Auburn, or that is actually relevant. Auburn is not spending a dime here. Whenever that changes, then we can reconvene.
This post was edited on 10/18/23 at 1:31 pm
Posted on 10/18/23 at 1:12 pm to auburnnyc94
quote:
I don’t spend money on garbage
Well if you believe NIL to be garbage that is your opinion, however Bruce lost several battles because of NIL, so there is still a clear rub in reality here. I cant say it any more clearer than that.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 1:42 pm to BrounHaller
Couple of comments, then you "gentlemen" can have this shiteshow to yourselves.
1. Profit. Most schools don't make one. The number varies year to year, but it's usually between 15 and 25 schools out of over 100 that make a profit each year. The rest run at a loss that is made up from......taxes, tuition, etc. Are you ready for taxpayers and student tuition to find NIL? F anyone who is, and the players who think they actually deserve that.
2. Where does the revenue come from and where does it go? Most of you don't know. Hit this link and look at slides 13-14 in particular.LINK
3. Some of you think coach buyouts come from these magical "profits" that most schools don't make. You'd be wrong. Those come from alumni donors, and I don't think they ever even hit the university's bank account. They pass through booster orgs and sometimes athletic department-associated entities instead.
4. I can agree that coaching salaries are outrageous, and this is where the entire problem started spiraling out of control. I think you can make a solid argument that the root of NIL and today's mess is Saban's original "highest paid coach in CFB" contract. Some of you seem to think "administrators" are also getting rich. They get paid well, but take 2 zeros off what the HC is being paid, and maybe a third at some schools. The admins make about what an equivalent management position would make in industry. They're not "Head Ball Coach Rich".
5. Athletics is NOT the primary revenue source for any university, and at many, it's not even close to the main generator, which is research. Auburn brings in $175M in athletics revenue, but $266M in research dollars and we're far more elite in athletics than in research. We're ranked around 61st in research $ nationally. The UTexas system, if you count its medical campuses, reels in something in the mid-BILLIONS of research dollars, vs a paltry $239M in athletics revenue. Athletes and jock sniffers alike have a very skewed perspective on the importance of college athletics to universities. Time for a comeuppance is approaching.
I will never contribute to NIL. It's not the university's core mission to get athletes paid. As CPD said, "Alabama people are fans of Alabama football, Auburn people are fans of Auburn". Alabama fans will pay to keep Alabama football competitive, but they may not be able to keep up with vastly wealthier alumni bases at other schools. Auburn people, even if they have the $, won't pay at levels to remain elite in the long term. It's not who we are, and its not what we're really fans of.
I'm done, back to your regularly scheduled purse swinging.
1. Profit. Most schools don't make one. The number varies year to year, but it's usually between 15 and 25 schools out of over 100 that make a profit each year. The rest run at a loss that is made up from......taxes, tuition, etc. Are you ready for taxpayers and student tuition to find NIL? F anyone who is, and the players who think they actually deserve that.
2. Where does the revenue come from and where does it go? Most of you don't know. Hit this link and look at slides 13-14 in particular.LINK
3. Some of you think coach buyouts come from these magical "profits" that most schools don't make. You'd be wrong. Those come from alumni donors, and I don't think they ever even hit the university's bank account. They pass through booster orgs and sometimes athletic department-associated entities instead.
4. I can agree that coaching salaries are outrageous, and this is where the entire problem started spiraling out of control. I think you can make a solid argument that the root of NIL and today's mess is Saban's original "highest paid coach in CFB" contract. Some of you seem to think "administrators" are also getting rich. They get paid well, but take 2 zeros off what the HC is being paid, and maybe a third at some schools. The admins make about what an equivalent management position would make in industry. They're not "Head Ball Coach Rich".
5. Athletics is NOT the primary revenue source for any university, and at many, it's not even close to the main generator, which is research. Auburn brings in $175M in athletics revenue, but $266M in research dollars and we're far more elite in athletics than in research. We're ranked around 61st in research $ nationally. The UTexas system, if you count its medical campuses, reels in something in the mid-BILLIONS of research dollars, vs a paltry $239M in athletics revenue. Athletes and jock sniffers alike have a very skewed perspective on the importance of college athletics to universities. Time for a comeuppance is approaching.
I will never contribute to NIL. It's not the university's core mission to get athletes paid. As CPD said, "Alabama people are fans of Alabama football, Auburn people are fans of Auburn". Alabama fans will pay to keep Alabama football competitive, but they may not be able to keep up with vastly wealthier alumni bases at other schools. Auburn people, even if they have the $, won't pay at levels to remain elite in the long term. It's not who we are, and its not what we're really fans of.
I'm done, back to your regularly scheduled purse swinging.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 2:14 pm to TheRealTigerHorn
I think Auburn's irrelevant profits and Auburn's spending (wasteful spending) was needlessly talked bout long enough today. But I agree there were a lot of half-truths about the profits and I almost want to start posting in the other thread and leave this thread to die.. Good work dude.
The world does not need sports enough for NIL to be taxed. Could it factor into tuition once the school starts revenue sharing? Doubtful. Student poulation demograhics is set to contine decreasing and I fully expect tuition will not be able to go up much if at all. If anything the student poulation could drop by 20% around 2025.
LINK
The world does not need sports enough for NIL to be taxed. Could it factor into tuition once the school starts revenue sharing? Doubtful. Student poulation demograhics is set to contine decreasing and I fully expect tuition will not be able to go up much if at all. If anything the student poulation could drop by 20% around 2025.
LINK
Posted on 10/18/23 at 3:13 pm to TheRealTigerHorn
quote:
very skewed perspective on the importance of college athletics to universities.
Actually, athletics is a big source of what helps drive alumni loyalty. I remember my dad who was president of Martin Marietta in Orlando meeting with the president of UCF and told him that UCF needs to put a bigger emphasis on their main sports because they will drive up alumni loyalty and in turn will drive up alumni contributions to the school, and he didn't mean sports specifically, but made it easier to fundraise for learning facilities and such.
So, you may be correct about a school being able to survive without a sports program, but it thrives when they have a competitive one. Obviously there are schools that will thrive regardless because of their research arms are massive, or like in the case of the Texas schools don't they also thrive from the oil industry royalties?
Posted on 10/18/23 at 3:35 pm to jangalang
quote:
Student poulation demograhics is set to contine decreasing and I fully expect tuition will not be able to go up much if at all. If anything the student poulation could drop by 20% around 2025.
For once, I wish you were right.
But you're not. Student population at AU is growing, with every freshman class. Auburn is becoming more competitive every year for entry. Tuition shows no signs of decreasing.
In fact, for the fifth year in a row, Auburn has set a record not only for its highest enrollment ever of 33,000, but it also recorded its largest freshman class – 5,935 students.
Every tuition check that my fam has ever paid over the last 60 years, has increased annually.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 3:36 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
in the case of the Texas schools don't they also thrive from the oil industry royalties?
Yep, I am in the OG&C industry, and the UTexas endowment is around $70B fueled by their leases. They are pushing Harvard who has systematically been divesting from fossil fuel interests.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 3:50 pm to BrounHaller
quote:
quote:
in the case of the Texas schools don't they also thrive from the oil industry royalties?
Yep, I am in the OG&C industry, and the UTexas endowment is around $70B fueled by their leases. They are pushing Harvard who has systematically been divesting from fossil fuel interests.
That's the Permanent University Fund, which was a brilliant piece of legislation by the Texas government a century ago. It has nothing to do with UT or ATM research funding at all, it all goes to their endowments.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 3:56 pm to TheRealTigerHorn
Endowments can, have, could be used for funding research, no?
Posted on 10/18/23 at 3:59 pm to slacker130
Pool to draw students from will continue decreasing.
But that's good to hear.
Demographic cliff from 2008 timeframe doesnt begin until
after 2025 timeframe.
But that's good to hear.
Demographic cliff from 2008 timeframe doesnt begin until
after 2025 timeframe.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 6:12 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
Endowments can, have, could be used for funding research, no?
Yes, but that money is not counted when considering research revenues.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 7:17 pm to jangalang
quote:If it all goes straight to NIL, looks cool, and we become the new Georgia I'm all for it
Do you want our jerseys turning into advertisements?? Yes or no.
Orange and Blue Apple Logo
Orange and Blue SUPREME Logo
You guys can bitch and moan but I'm in if we can buy whatever players we want!
Page 5 of 7
Latest Auburn News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News