Started By
Message
re: 2012 revenues per USA Today
Posted on 5/8/13 at 1:27 am to tmc94
Posted on 5/8/13 at 1:27 am to tmc94
Well, certainly, a big chunk of it's tied to tickets and their location.
But what I've noticed about A&M's seat donations as compared to The University of Texas'... A&M sets every year the minimum donation necessary to keep those seats -- if you don't meet that minimum, you lose the seats.
At Texas, the donation you gave to get the seat originally becomes the baseline, and never changes unless you up your donation.
Therefore, Texas is leaving A LOT of money on the table in relation to donations/tickets as compared to A&M.
I would suspect if Texas adopted A&M's policy of the university setting the minimum donation for the seats as opposed to the baseline being the original donation (make sense?), there would be a mutiny and a march on Bellmont in Austin, Texas.
You mention debt service... you don't think all this money being spent by A&M is just magically going to be gobbled up and hidden, and have no impact on the bottom line? Of course it will.
Texas' debt service comes from projects undertaken about 15 years ago... yours is just beginning.
And on top of that, you are helped by the hotel tax that was foisted on the Bryan-College Station governments as ransom for the improvements, or else you'd play your games in Houston during the renovations, killing the hotel industry in your neck of the woods. LINK
I'll be damned if UT athletics ever held the city hostage over a hotel tax to pay for a football stadium.
But what I've noticed about A&M's seat donations as compared to The University of Texas'... A&M sets every year the minimum donation necessary to keep those seats -- if you don't meet that minimum, you lose the seats.
At Texas, the donation you gave to get the seat originally becomes the baseline, and never changes unless you up your donation.
Therefore, Texas is leaving A LOT of money on the table in relation to donations/tickets as compared to A&M.
I would suspect if Texas adopted A&M's policy of the university setting the minimum donation for the seats as opposed to the baseline being the original donation (make sense?), there would be a mutiny and a march on Bellmont in Austin, Texas.
You mention debt service... you don't think all this money being spent by A&M is just magically going to be gobbled up and hidden, and have no impact on the bottom line? Of course it will.
Texas' debt service comes from projects undertaken about 15 years ago... yours is just beginning.
And on top of that, you are helped by the hotel tax that was foisted on the Bryan-College Station governments as ransom for the improvements, or else you'd play your games in Houston during the renovations, killing the hotel industry in your neck of the woods. LINK
I'll be damned if UT athletics ever held the city hostage over a hotel tax to pay for a football stadium.
This post was edited on 5/8/13 at 1:28 am
1
Posted on 5/8/13 at 1:39 am to texashorn
I was trying to be nice. I actually implied that we will also see a false boost on both sides of the ledger. It's accounting games. When Blue Bell gives us $30m for a new baseball park, that money is amortized as a donation. Correspondingly we get debt service payment on the other side of the ledger. That was entirely my point. Your revenue numbers are grossly overstated because this is exactly what you did to expand DKR. And it's exactly what we're going to do when we expand Kyle.
The hotel tax is ridiculously small and a total non-issue. The city wasn't gouged in the least. It's being paid over 30 years and is less than 1mm per year. They would easily get that from more hotels that are already in the works without even increasing rates but the city of CS is using this as an excuse to collect more revenue.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News