Michigan up to #2 in football profits
Michigan finished 2nd behind Texas in terms of football profits in 2011/2012.
http://espn.go.com/blog/playbook/dollars/post/_/id/2556/texas-tops-in-f…
December 13th, 2012 at 2:54 PM ^
By "right pricing" his "product" and ever more effective "branding", without concern for pitfalls down the road, DB has managed to turn a profit in just 1 year big enough to pay ARod's salary for 2, count 'em 1-2, years. I know I'll sleep better knowing our public, not-for-profit university is so effective at emptying our collective wallets. Looking forward purchasing another banner home schedule in 2014.
December 13th, 2012 at 3:09 PM ^
In the case of big-time athletics, it's go big or go home. That isn't going to change any time soon.
December 13th, 2012 at 3:17 PM ^
Do not email DB and reference this data when trying to "gently" explain to him that a third consecutive year of a significant ticket price hike seems unreasonable.
He will explain to you that you don't know more about department revenues and expenses than him just because you pulled some articles from the internet.
True Story.
On a related note, DB can be one sarcastic SOB when he wants to be.
December 13th, 2012 at 3:38 PM ^
You should have tweeted him.
/boom hashtagged #
December 13th, 2012 at 3:17 PM ^
Man I can't wait until Weis and Willingham are off the payroll. ND will shoot up in no time.
December 13th, 2012 at 3:21 PM ^
I'll make sure to write that in the memo section of my check to the University for my increased PSD
December 13th, 2012 at 3:42 PM ^
Wolverine Network inevitable?
/s
December 13th, 2012 at 3:41 PM ^
....is knowing the amount of varsity athletic programs it subsidizes. That way you can tell what you are spending and making on a per team basis. See below (best performers bolded):
Team: #of teams, Rev/team, Exp/team, Profit/team
Texas: 20 teams, $5.2M, $1.3M, $3.9M
Michigan: 27 teams, $3.2M, $0.9M, $2.3M
Georgia: 19 teams, $3.9M, $1.2M, $2.8M
Florida: 19 teams, $3.9M, $1.2M, $2.7M
Alabama: 21 teams, $3.9M, $1.8M, $2.1M
LSU: 14 teams, $4.9M, $1.7M, $3.2
Auburn: 19 teams, $4.1M, $1.8M, $2.3M
Notre Dame: 23 teams, $3.0M, $1.1M, $1.9M
Arkansas: 19 teams, $3.4M, $1.3M, $2.1M
Nebrasksa: 21 teams, $2.6M, $1.0M, $1.7M
For good measure, OSU: 39 teams! This actually explains a lot.
|
School |
Rev. | Exp. | Profit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas | $103.8 | $25.9 | $77.9 |
| Michigan | $85.2 | $23.6 | $61.6 |
| Georgia | $75.0 | $22.7 | $52.3 |
| Florida | $74.1 | $23.1 | $51.1 |
| Alabama | $82.0 | $36.9 | $45.1 |
| LSU | $68.8 | $24.1 | $44.8 |
| Auburn | $77.2 | $33.3 | $43.8 |
| Notre Dame | $69.0 | $25.8 | $43.2 |
| Arkansas | $64.2 | $24.3 | $39.9 |
| Nebraska | $55.1 | $18.7 | $36.4 |
December 13th, 2012 at 6:28 PM ^
December 13th, 2012 at 9:17 PM ^
These "profit" lists are useless because there's no standard across Universities on how they report athletic revenue.
For example, Ohio State doesn't report their apparel/merchandise revenue.
Other schools break up athletic revenue into specific sports, some lump all sports in together.
Some schools report conference sharing revenue, others do not.
December 13th, 2012 at 9:24 PM ^
Of course OhioSt doesn't report apparel/merch revenue. That is because its given to players so they can sell it themselves. Man I thought this was common knowledge.