Shooter: Due to significant drop in attendance this season, U projected to lose $3MM

[rockford]

Your hypothesis is that the U just lets some company come in to sell concessions at TCF and keep all the money for themselves?? I’m afraid that is not he U works.

You do have a solid idea though. Sure, it is probably likely that the U contracts out the operations of gameday concessions, as well as merch sales. Maybe parking too. But those contracts aren’t free. Zero chance. The U is making probably quite a lot (wild guess, in the seven figures) for those contracts per year. And then that revenue is just appearing under some other line item, maybe contracts or something else.

I don't think your supposition jibes with how mandated reporting works.

Per the NCAA: "Member institutions submit financial data detailing operating revenues and expenses related to its intercollegiate athletics program to the NCAA on an annual basis. The financial data are subject to agreed-upon procedures performed by a qualified independent accountant annually for DI members ..."

Check out this document:
http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2018NCAAFIN_Agreed_Upon_Procedures_20180525.pdf

From page 19:
Category -- Program, Novelty, Parking and Concession sales: Input revenues from game programs, novelties, food and concessions, parking. Advertising should be included in Royalties, Licensing, Advertisement and Sponsorships.

(The U reports 0 for royalties, licensing, advertising, etc.)

Checking out Wisconsin's report for 2013, I see $1.958 million in the slot for programs, concessions, etc.

The only other line item revenue from this area could be stuffed into is Contributions, which includes: "Amounts received from individuals, corporations, associations, foundations, clubs or other organizations designated for operations of the athletics program." The U reports $7.7 million in this area. But Wisconsin reported $11 million in this slot in its 2013 report, along with revenue from concessions, etc.

My background is in journalism and publishing, and back in the late '90s I looked into this. The U was contracting with Dave Mona's outfit to produce its game program. The arrangement was that Mona's group sold the advertising and got the thing designed and printed. I'm pretty sure the U received nothing, other than getting its program printed at no cost to itself. That's what I was told by an individual contracted to sell the advertising.

JTG

 

[Great Plains Gopher]

So an easy solution is to just lower ticket prices, right? Except some of us who were spurned by the Norwood increase may not come back.

The price hike ended ticket buying near of us young couples with small children and of a group of "blue collar" folks (don't mean to be condescending) who had four seats. I know others, including retired people, who dropped their tickets because of Norwood's grand plan.

 

[rockford]

The extrapolation I arrive at is this: Ticket sales are of increasingly minor importance to athletic department revenues.

TV is king.

Therefore, in order to provide the most exciting show for the TV audience, it makes sense to FILL THE STADIUM UP. It was freaking embarrassing to see the thousands of empty seats at this year's late-season games. And yes, I was watching via TV. Because I couldn't justify the price of season tickets.

JTG

 

[hello-world]

What he wrote:"Pssst: The Gophers football program, due to a significant drop in attendance this season, is projected to lose $3 million."

Making it sound like a secret. Not sure what he means by "lose". Revenue might be $3 million less, but I'm pretty sure the football program doesn't lose money. The athletic department might operate at a deficit, but I'm also pretty sure that's not unexpected.

I wouldn't expect a sports reporter to correctly separate revenue declines from profit.

If their pricing people are competent what this really means is that they are in the elastic part of their demand curve and should drop prices to optimize revenue.
We might get what we've been waiting for after all.

 

[hello-world]

The price hike ended ticket buying near of us young couples with small children and of a group of "blue collar" folks (don't mean to be condescending) who had four seats. I know others, including retired people, who dropped their tickets because of Norwood's grand plan.

This is Minnesota, you're not being condescending or insulting. If they think their market segment is only rich people then they're in for a stinging disappointment.

 

[dinkything]

The university benefits greatly from the current very socialiastic redistribution of conference wealth. If conference revenues were apportioned via percentage of BTN/Fox/ESPN eyeballs per program, bowl revenue, and March Madness revenue the program would be destitute...

Not sure we want to be looking this gift horse in the mouth?!
This current model of equally shared revenue has been a stumbling block for the Texas Longhorns as they've looked into the possibility of joining the B1G.