Started By
Message
re: 89% of aggy students vote to bring back TEXAS game
Posted on 2/23/19 at 9:09 pm to Smart Post
Posted on 2/23/19 at 9:09 pm to Smart Post
Aggy misses daddy.
0
Posted on 2/23/19 at 9:25 pm to Montgomery Hill
quote:
Stanford doesn't really need television revenue to survive because they take 40% off the interest from their endowment and they put it back into the university. Including sports.
Can you offer a link there?
Endowments by their nature are for academics, not athletics. Not saying you are incorrect yet, just surprised if the rules have changed.
Posted on 2/23/19 at 9:29 pm to Cheese Grits
Stanford is a private school....
They can do anything that want with their endowment unlike public schools
The endowment is actually a collection of more than 7,000 individual gifts from donors. These generous gifts are meant to support in perpetuity a wide range of university programs, including teaching and research, financial aid, facilities maintenance, athletics and many more. These programs enable the students and faculty of Stanford to weave a rich tapestry of scholarship and achievement. You can view the endowment as one of the most important threads that holds that tapestry together. The stronger the thread, the brighter and more ambitious Stanford’s tapestry can be. Almost all of the endowment gifts have specific, restricted uses that the university is legally obliged to observe.
LINK
They can do anything that want with their endowment unlike public schools
The endowment is actually a collection of more than 7,000 individual gifts from donors. These generous gifts are meant to support in perpetuity a wide range of university programs, including teaching and research, financial aid, facilities maintenance, athletics and many more. These programs enable the students and faculty of Stanford to weave a rich tapestry of scholarship and achievement. You can view the endowment as one of the most important threads that holds that tapestry together. The stronger the thread, the brighter and more ambitious Stanford’s tapestry can be. Almost all of the endowment gifts have specific, restricted uses that the university is legally obliged to observe.
LINK
Posted on 2/23/19 at 9:40 pm to Montgomery Hill
Your obsession with Stanford is easily the weirdest thing about you and thats saying something
Posted on 2/23/19 at 9:43 pm to WestCoastAg
Learning things is not obsession.
If it is I think more people should be obsessed.
Texas has dealt with Stanford a few different times.
More than that the PAC 12 is on the chopping block with the Big XII and the ACC.
I have a good understanding of all three conferences.
If it is I think more people should be obsessed.
Texas has dealt with Stanford a few different times.
More than that the PAC 12 is on the chopping block with the Big XII and the ACC.
I have a good understanding of all three conferences.
Posted on 2/23/19 at 9:45 pm to Montgomery Hill
quote:
Stanford is a private school....
Really? (sarcasm)
quote:
They can do anything that want with their endowment unlike public schools
Not true, endowments usually have legal restrictions that apply no matter if public or private.
Thanks for the link, read the full article but outside that one vague sentence I am unsure if you are correct. A athletic scholarship could clearly be interpreted by that statement but funding for say coaching salaries is not spelled out. Would be interesting to know.
Posted on 2/23/19 at 9:48 pm to Cheese Grits
Money donated to Stanford has been put into their endowment.
Their endowment is managed by the Stanford Management Company (SMC).
So if someone donates 20 million for atheltic use that money is invested and turn into more money.
Similar to IPTAY but at a wider scale and with more big time donors.
Their endowment is managed by the Stanford Management Company (SMC).
So if someone donates 20 million for atheltic use that money is invested and turn into more money.
Similar to IPTAY but at a wider scale and with more big time donors.
Posted on 2/23/19 at 9:51 pm to Montgomery Hill
You are so weird 
Posted on 2/23/19 at 9:56 pm to Montgomery Hill
quote:
So if someone donates 20 million for atheltic use that money is invested and turn into more money.
Show me the actual money?
Historically this has been pretty strictly defined as often tax issues arise. If you are correct Alabama would have a billion dollar endowment for football yet this does not appear to be the case.
Posted on 2/23/19 at 10:05 pm to Cheese Grits
Public universities have endowments created by gifts from the state.
This is why the money cannot be spent on athletics.
Alabama is in the red. Big time.
So that money is already spent when someone donates anything.
When someone donates to Stanford for atheltic use that money becomes investable.
You understand the difference.
Stanford only spends what they have.
Now they spent off the interest from the money invested.
In short, DAPER is a unique but financially healthy enterprise — despite the ever-rising costs of competing at the highest levels of intercollegiate athletics — and will likely continue to be so, provided its endowment, which is valued somewhere between $400-500 million and releases 5.5 percent per annum, remains strong. That is, unless the market hits the skids and/or other revenue streams dry up, DAPER’s varsity athletics unit should, theoretically, never have to receive direct institutional support or student fees to cover its costs, though I doubt it would refuse the extra help if ever offered.
LINK
This is why the money cannot be spent on athletics.
Alabama is in the red. Big time.
So that money is already spent when someone donates anything.
When someone donates to Stanford for atheltic use that money becomes investable.
You understand the difference.
Stanford only spends what they have.
Now they spent off the interest from the money invested.
In short, DAPER is a unique but financially healthy enterprise — despite the ever-rising costs of competing at the highest levels of intercollegiate athletics — and will likely continue to be so, provided its endowment, which is valued somewhere between $400-500 million and releases 5.5 percent per annum, remains strong. That is, unless the market hits the skids and/or other revenue streams dry up, DAPER’s varsity athletics unit should, theoretically, never have to receive direct institutional support or student fees to cover its costs, though I doubt it would refuse the extra help if ever offered.
LINK
This post was edited on 2/23/19 at 10:07 pm
Posted on 2/23/19 at 10:10 pm to Montgomery Hill
Posted on 2/23/19 at 10:11 pm to Smart Post
Texssessed
Posted on 2/23/19 at 10:20 pm to Montgomery Hill
Buck Cardinal funds alone are sitting near half a billion. Stanford doesnt even bother to charge students for any home sporting events, the AD is 100% self financed and kicks a lot of money back to academics.
Stanford money/liquidity is flat crazy.
Stanford money/liquidity is flat crazy.
Posted on 2/23/19 at 10:21 pm to OldSchoolHorn
texas fans in this thread not letting it die 
Posted on 2/23/19 at 10:28 pm to OldSchoolHorn
Texas doesn't have any leverage on Stanford.
Maybe if the conference has an uprising and demands Larry Scott to step down.
But the PAC 12 network is a potential goldmine...
Because the conference doesn't have to share the profit if it can turn a huge profit.
Maybe if the conference has an uprising and demands Larry Scott to step down.
But the PAC 12 network is a potential goldmine...
Because the conference doesn't have to share the profit if it can turn a huge profit.
Posted on 2/23/19 at 10:56 pm to Montgomery Hill
Interesting as others in sports siphon off part of the revenue stream to go back to the academic side. Stanford seems pretty open about buying their sports.
With Bob now at Dan's old desk is he doing the same for the B12?
Define share? My understanding was when USC got hammered by the NCAA they finally accepted equal revenue sharing. All member schools get an equal share with some offsets for travel to certain events.
If you are saying the PAC can increase revenue without selling part or all to the likes of FOX or ESPN I already got that. Problem is the only really rabid conferences for networks are the B1G and SEC because of the connection of fan support across the schools. PAC has a nice geographic moat but that is off set by fan apathy as a whole.
With Bob now at Dan's old desk is he doing the same for the B12?
quote:
Because the conference doesn't have to share the profit if it can turn a huge profit.
Define share? My understanding was when USC got hammered by the NCAA they finally accepted equal revenue sharing. All member schools get an equal share with some offsets for travel to certain events.
If you are saying the PAC can increase revenue without selling part or all to the likes of FOX or ESPN I already got that. Problem is the only really rabid conferences for networks are the B1G and SEC because of the connection of fan support across the schools. PAC has a nice geographic moat but that is off set by fan apathy as a whole.
Posted on 2/23/19 at 11:02 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
Well, well. Major Aggy is here.
How would you have cast your ballot? "Indifferent?"
I saw a pic the other day that reminded me of you and your buddies.
How would you have cast your ballot? "Indifferent?"
I saw a pic the other day that reminded me of you and your buddies.
Posted on 2/23/19 at 11:11 pm to DaronTexas
quote:
Aggy scared. Texas used to abuse them they have traumatizing memories of getting owned by Texas. A&M is just a bigger version of Texas tech when it comes to men's sports.
Sounds like yet ANOTHER reason to nevef play you dildo-waving **** again.
Consider me convinced. We will never play you again.
Now, GET THE frick OUT!!
Posted on 2/23/19 at 11:12 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
If you are saying the PAC can increase revenue without selling part or all to the likes of FOX or ESPN I already got that. Problem is the only really rabid conferences for networks are the B1G and SEC because of the connection of fan support across the schools. PAC has a nice geographic moat but that is off set by fan apathy as a whole.
By this reasoning, the ACC Network is D.O.A.
Not counting basketball in your analysis of rabid?
Plus I thought aggy claimed that all that matters is TV sets, hence Rutgers getting a Big 10 invite.
Page 11 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News