quote:
A&M and Texas have been swapping #1 and #2 for some number of years now. The $279M is ahead of Texas's $271 they reported but there is an anomaly this year as there is an subsidy reported by A&M as a loan which is unusual considering the profits after operating expenses is much more than the subsidy.

At any rate, this "ranking" as it were just take revenues from the big 3 sports and add them up. A&M does take a penalty there for seating 35k or so students in prime seats at a subsidized price. So it is not surprising A&M is down the list a little.

Texas would be the runaway number 1 overall if revenue from merchandise was thrown into the equation as they have many more sidewalk fans than A&M.

Texas follows GAAP rules.

Kind of interesting that the $10 million A&M “anomaly”, the loan from the university to the athletic department, is just enough to surpass Texas in revenue. FYI, obtaining a loan is not generating revenue. It may affect cash flow, but they are not the same.

Texas athletics makes contributions to the university every year and does not get loans from the university.

A&M also includes $50+ Million raised from capital contributions and donations and fund raising as revenue. It is not.