University of Washington athletics reports worsening financial situation--looking for a solution
UW athletic department dollar numbers since 2020 are not good, and they will likely get worse.
--the Washington athletic department’s credit outlook was listed as “negative due to operating losses, sector uncertainty, and low and declining reserve levels.” Cash reserves are at $9.1 million. Were at $34.5 pre-2020, in 2019.
--ticket sales still have not recovered from 2020---something the BIG10 and SEC are not suffering from
--they're looking to the next media deal to help with things: “successful multimedia rights negotiations in FY24 are critical to [intercollegiate athletics’] financial health in FY25 and beyond.” They don't seem to be specifying a Pac-12 media deal in that statement. That possibly could mean a media deal with any conference. It seems clear that with USC and UCLA gone, the Pac-12 may not be able to flex enough muscle to expect help for Washington there. But who knows what aces those Pac-12 suits have up their sleeves.
--2012 stadium renovation debt payments are $9.8 million a year. They jump to $17.7 million a year in 2026.
I'm finding the timing of this report interesting. News from Colorado and Arizona, about whether they will be changing conferences or not, is expected any time on or after July 1. Was this report a way to help make clear why they need to either get a very good Pac-12 media deal, or they are going to leave the conference? I can't say I'd blame them if they were looking for help with their boat that is taking on water. If that help means looking to another conference to be part of, well, I wish them the best.
I won’t believe it until Brett McMurphy tweets it.
Now this is fucking hilarious. I'd upvote you X 1000 if I could.
Good lord, how much was their stadium renovation? They've been paying on it for over a decade? Sounds like they spent way too much money and are now drowning in debt.
It's not uncommon to have a 20 year debt service on a stadium or arena.
What stuck out for me is that it's going up and not down. Most agreements that I've seen, it gets lower and lower...and once you hit year 12-15, you just pay it all off with TV money.
They had to have been banking on the Pac-12 getting a BTN and it doing well like BTN and the SEC Network. Instead, the Pac-12 (and ACC) Network are nothing more than add-on channels that carry a game a week in the fall that people will watch.
Meanwhile, last I checked...the B1G Network was preparing to go all in on Volleyball. They can't get Football to work and the B1G is showing and apparently making enough money to broadcast all of its volleyball matches.
$261 million
To pay for the stadium, the UW is drawing on a loan from the university’s internal lending program that will cover the total cost of the project minus the total of private donations. Thirty-year bonds will be sold to finance the renovation. To cover $200 million, the school needs to generate an estimated $14.3 million annually through new revenue sources associated with the stadium, including premium seating options and sponsorship opportunities. The remaining $50 million was raised privately through the philanthropic “Drive for Husky Stadium” that launched in 2010. Neither the state nor the UW contributed money to the project.
It's got to be the boat parking.
I'm really hoping my son will go there as they join the B1G. If he wants my tailgate food, however, it will be under a Michigan banner when we play them.
That's a great setting and all, but I think M paid $225M for the renovation while UW paid $200M? for do the same for a stadium half the size and would make 1/4 the money.
--2012 stadium renovation debt payments are $9.8 million a year. They jump to $17.7 million a year in 2026.
They are FUUUUUUUUCKED
You may not understand how expensive trades are here. Plumbers are getting $250/hour and up for commercial work, just as an example. I can't even get one to come to my house to fix a leak- not worth it to them for a two hour job.
I've been to games in Husky Stadium since the renovation. It's nice, but it's not NICE. The venue is amazing and unique. The roof doesn't cover all the seats and one time I sat right on the drip line from the roof. A quarter billion doesn't get you here what it would get you in SE Michigan.
People not living in the big cities of the West Coast can't really get a feel for how expensive it is to live here. The house I live in is valued at $1.2 million. In a small town in Michigan it would probably go for $120,000.00, ten times less. Rent for a nice 2 bedroom apartment is from $2000.000 to $4000.00 a month. I saw a one bedroom place about 4 blocks from the UC Berkeley campus. It really wasn't much of a place. It goes for $4000.000 a month and is used by visiting professors. The West Coast is nuts. There's been a huge exodus out. I am going to be leaving soon too.
Yes, CA--I have read--has the highest poverty rate in the country, adjusted for COL. I am the farthest thing from a conservative, believe in taxes and the Keynesian welfare state and an absolute need to continually adjust for the disparities that a modern corporate Wall Street-led economy visits on us. But think about what that really means when we are looking down on the Alabamas and Mississippis of this world and their poverty. On a West Coast (and I lived twice in SF for long stretches, loved it) that is, in truth, so racially segregated, so dependent on cheap immigrant labor, has such miserable housing, prison-crowding and gang problems. The amount of back-patting and self-delusion that a certain stratum of the country practices about the West Coast is. . . astonishing. Don't even get me started, as an ecologist, about the environment or water.
Born in Flint, 8 years at the U , and I went to the SF Bay Area and have not looked back in 40 years. Definitely problems here on the left coast but almost nobody leaves here because they WANT to , they leave because they cannot afford it. Too many people want to live in too little area. No flat fields for miles to build on ( except the Central Valley ) only coast and valleys are inhabitable. Any good place for a city already taken .
As for dependent on cheap immigrant labor the entire country is. Prison overcrowding ? Also the entire nation. Gang problems ? I'll take Oakland over Detroit any day of the year. Back patting ? and self delusion I am probably guilty of to some extent.
cal has lost what, a million folks in the last 4-8 yrs? and it is the ultimate 'born on third base' state with it's beauty and resources. people have left for the same reasons that all the hotels and businesses have left, and it's waaaay more than 'can't afford'. called by a buddy today who moved his family out of there just last year. he, like me, could afford it. he, like me, could see that its not going well and its getting worse. look at the cities emptying out, SF being the best example. the two main hotels closing. rents will crater. property values will crater. you'll certainly be able to afford it, but nobody will actually want to live in those places despite their third-base nature. comparing detroit to oakland is like comparing a vega to a corvette. oakland is the corvette, but it, like most of cal, is being driven into a wall.
By ‘not going well and getting worse’ do you mean the policies enacted by local and state governments? Just curious.
From what I read the (un)affordable housing issue is the main problem, which is ultimately a financial limitation for many. The one person that I know personally who moved her family out of California did so because the wildfire smoke a couple of years ago meant keeping her kids inside for weeks on end.
Yes, SF is in very bad shape. I don't know how politicians have made it ok to shoplift there. But they have. Now, Sacramento wants to pass a law that makes it illegal for store employees to stop shoplifters. Stupid is as stupid does.
I left on purpose. (Born in Detroit, grew up in Flint and A2.) And check your evening news tonight: You can practically here the whooshing of cars out of San Francisco. My point isn't that it's not beautiful or appealing, though--of course. It's that there's actually wild fierce poverty there. And problems, as you yourself admit, commensurate with everywhere else. Oakland is in fact a pretty good example of that.
I think there's regulation against allowing more housing to be built. Dublin has decided to allow a massive amount of houses to be built. That's why all those houses have popped up there along 580 by Tassajara and Fallon roads. But I don't know if any other city in the Bay Area wants to do the same, at least I don't know of them. Some cities have taken votes on allowing much more housing. But they get voted down because people don't want to "change the beauty" of where they live. I don't really see any change of beauty in the Dublin area. There's ways to solve the expensive housing problem. It's just no will to from politicians, for reasons, that equal a can of worms, I don't want to start to get in to. The housing problem has been here for decades. And it's always been for the same reasons.
Compare apples to apples man.
Ann Arbor is a lot more expensive than a small town in Michigan, too.
The house I live in would not go for $1.2 million in Ann Arbor.
Plus this area has a history of botched civil engineering projects like the Highway 99 tunnel and the ongoing fiasco with the Sound Transit Light Rail System. Don't get me started on Sound Transit!
Jen is a very solid AD, she knows what she's doing. It could very well be intentional.
I'd love to see the B1G add Washington (and Oregon), but if it doesn't make sense...excuse me, cents...then it'll never happen.
Interesting that ticket sales are still down...I wonder if TV ratings are also down for sports in the pacific NW. They've certainly recovered everywhere else.
If ticket sales are still down, after an 11-2 season, yikes.
Interesting isn’t it? Great stadium, tradition, good team returning. But if the games are all on tv, which I assume they are, people may watch at home instead just like most other places.
But this is UW, not WSU or Oregon St we’re talking about…if they are struggling then it bodes really poorly for the rest of the Pac 12.
Obviously nobody could see COVID coming but this sounds like exaggeration or really poor leadership and planning. The stadium rennovation seems like a stupid investment (and I don't think that's hindsight). I mean I wish them the best but obviously really poor fiscal planning if all it took for your AD to become practically insolvent is a slight drop in football ticket sales
Don't most atheltic departments run on razor thin margins?
They do, so you'd think they'd plan carefully. Since they have some kind of balloon payment, it appears they said "We'll worry about it later, someone will bail us out." The magic of wishful thinking.
Informative post, EC. I can see where people might tire of hearing about speculation on conference realignments, but I find the topic interesting.
Seriously, though, would it hurt to just link directly to the source? Here's a trimmed URL that gives some indication of what you'll get on the other side:
“Help us Big Ten” said UW athletic director
I still think that Oregon / Washington (and perhaps Cal / Stanford) will wind up in the Big Ten. It is not sustainable for USC and UCLA to be the only teams in their time zones out on an island versus the rest of the Big Ten, especially for sports that have to play multiple times per week.
USC and UCLA need playmates in their own time zone to break up the constant travel to the midwest and east coast. They won't last in the Big Ten without it.
Adding Oregon / Washington / Cal / Stanford to the Big Ten needs to be viewed as part of the cost of getting USC and UCLA to join.
The real question for Washington is: Would a partial share (at least for a while) of Big Ten member money be worth more than a full share of Pac 12 member money. The stability factor also needs to be considered.
Washington is there for the taking.
I think you hit it on the head. The politics and negotiation probably revolve around taking a partial share transition and what that amount will be.
I suspect (hope) they will get it done. UW will be a great addition to the Big Ten.
The problem with unequal revenue sharing is that it leads to conference instability. This is the issue the current ACC is facing in light of the 7 schools trying to force an exit from their Grant of Rights agreement; since they apparently can't get out of it they want a bigger share of the current pie based on performance/success. That may happen as a stopgap measure but eventually the conference members who get a smaller share will become dissatisfied.
I have no idea if UW/UO would accept a smaller share in exchange for joining the B1G if they were offered it to join. Maybe for a few years at most...but on the other hand the Pac 12 just doesn't seem able to generate the media rights $$$ that the schools need to stay competitive.
Something's gotta give and my guess is that within the next couple of years there will be major moves toward an eventual super conference setup, with the B1G and SEC each spearheading one half of the conference. The name brand schools in the ACC, Big 12 and Pac 12 will eventually join and the lesser brand schools will be left behind to figure out how to proceed on their own terms.
Not only for sports but for academics. A great underrated Medical School and University. While we are at it Stanford too so NW can no longer claim the academic honors of the B1G . Cal sports suck , but they are the only state University consistently ranked above UM
Not consistently. U-M is above Cal in some rankings. (Some also have UCLA above both.)
Here’s one: https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/pictures/the-best-public-colleges-in-america-for-2023-ranked/
Overall I think we can say that between U-M, Virginia, Cal and UCLA it’s about a wash.
I could see objections to Cal and Stanford as not being really additive to the B1G outside of alumni relations. If they join their "home" games will be filled with original B1g alumni living on the west coast. While I'm sure they'd enjoy that I don't know what the rest of the conference really gets. The Pac-12 hilariously failed to make SF care about college sports for 10+ years.
Oregon and Washington would be nice but they come with baggage - their meddling legislatures will want their Michigan State like Ag schools to come along for the ride and there's just no way the B1g will want WSU or OSU (NTOSU)
Yet without divisions, it will actually create more travel since the bulk of the teams remain in the midwest. It will save USC & UCLA some travel, yes, but the midwest teams will travel more.
The real question for Washington is: Would a partial share (at least for a while) of Big Ten member money be worth more than a full share of Pac 12 member money.
It may not, but it will transition to a full share eventually. They wouldn't hesitate a second.
I have always liked the Washington program. Their teams usually play tough, well coached football and they just seem like a class operation. I am sorry to see that they and programs like them seem to be facing a bad future.
this is some boring-assed shit.
seriously, why does anyone give a shit about this stuff? are we going to talk about tv ratings next? average attendance in conference-usa? assistant coach salaries in gymnastics programs? i guess we will, if brett mcmurphy starts flogging it.
Seriously, why does anyone give a shit about this stuff?
I'll take a stab at answering this.
First, it's the off-season. Conference realignment affects who our opponents are going to be and the landscape for earning championships. So, it's relevant to Michigan sports.
Second, some of us live in the neighborhood of these schools and care because it's an opportunity to see Michigan games on a more regular basis and be more involved in B1G sports.
Lastly, if you don't like the thread, there is also the option that you don't have to read it. The only one boring yourself is you... for taking the time to engage the topic.
you’re right about the last point, of course. no argument.
i would only say that you could find articles about various athletic departments’ money problems every single day. the only differences between *any* of them are the names involved and the amounts.
suggesting they have anything to do with whether you’ll be able to see more or less michigan sports is a huge, huge stretch. washington’s money problems have absolutely zero to do with michigan, and won’t affect us in any way whatsoever. you know this.
heck, maryland has had a decade-plus of financial crap in their athletic department, and it hasn’t meant diddly to michigan sports. and they’re actually IN the conference. supposedly.
EC, this is nothing unique than what he rest of that remaining conference sans LA teams is going to experience going forward. I have no problem adding them but they (& Oregon) would probably have to take a significant financial conference cut to be considered for the B1G based on their overall value.
Just guessing but Tony Petitti is monitoring all options and will react accordingly.
Over the last 2 years I would rank Washington below only Ohio State in terms of the stadium atmosphere and energy level for a home game. I sit near the visitors and Washingtons fans were some of the loudest I can remember. Most of the ones around me were still enjoying themselves and just soaking in the experience even after it became clear Michigan was going to win. I wouldn't mind seeing them in the B10.
Agree 100%. That Washington game set the tone for what became 2021 & 22 championship seasons. Only OSU 2021 topped it. Next to maybe UTL I, the “Ohio State is Vanquished” game is the the best game for a generation
Washington was the game where the spark was back in the Big House. It wasn’t even matched by undefeated Top-10 Penn St coming to Ann Arbor, or the night game revenge vs MSU before the tunnel acted a fool.
Growing up in the pacific NW, the U of Washington has been the gold standard for many things. They have an excellent medical school & hospital, and they were a historic power in football back in the early 90's. Alot has changed since then, but I've always been impressed when UW has a good sports program. I honestly hate to see the Pac12 breakup in it's current form - with only 2 LA teams leaving. Would like to see 4 more join the B1G so they can still have the regional competitions. And those teams should be UW, Oregon, Cal & Stanford. Arizona schools and OSU/WSU can join either the Big 12 or Mtn West.
If the Washington Athletic Department is looking for a solution, it's right there, almost right under their noses.
Puget Sound is salt water. Just ask any of those boaters who drop anchor there.
Maybe it’s because I haven’t had any coffee yet, but I don’t follow you—what does salt water in Puget Sound offer as a solution?
Presumably referring to the sea being a solution of salt in water.
BOOM