Author Topic: Disclaimer: This is only the Wall Street Journal . . . this is not . . . (Read 5393 times)

sonofdaxjones · « **on:** February 09, 2012, 11:39:50 AM »

I repeat, this is NOT an unknown blog guy citing a "friend" who "works in the TV industry".

So keep that in mind, it's ONLY the Wall Street Journal.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203462304577138611484143588.html#project%3DCOUNT010520120105

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #1 on:** February 09, 2012, 11:43:58 AM »

You sir, are no unnammed "tv insider" . . . Ryan Brewer, an assistant professor of finance at Indiana University-Purdue University Columbus

bws · « **Reply #2 on:** February 09, 2012, 11:44:45 AM »

Surprised KU is up so high, figured they would be around 100.

Nice to see Louisville up there.

SdK · « **Reply #3 on:** February 09, 2012, 11:44:48 AM »

110 millon dollar disparity?

Also: I feel like we've played every team on the third page under Snyder.

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #4 on:** February 09, 2012, 11:48:19 AM »

5th in the Big 12. Hopefully we can pass Tech after our stadium expansion.

Panjandrum · « **Reply #5 on:** February 09, 2012, 11:51:39 AM »

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on February 09, 2012, 11:48:19 AM

5th in the Big 12. Hopefully we can pass Tech after our stadium expansion.

Yeah, my thoughts, too.

wabash909 · « **Reply #6 on:** February 09, 2012, 11:54:07 AM »

Surprised Missouri was as low as they were, in all honesty. That's an interesting list.

420seriouscat69 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 09, 2012, 12:05:23 PM »

Minnesota is pretty high for being one of the worst programs in college football right now.

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #8 on:** February 09, 2012, 12:12:50 PM »

Well, I feel as though I must remind each of you that this was published in the Wall Street Journal, so please have your salt shakers at the ready. That is no obscure blog citing unnamed "tv insiders" by any stretch.

Trim · « **Reply #9 on:** February 09, 2012, 12:28:44 PM »

yachtbroker · « **Reply #10 on:** February 09, 2012, 12:49:05 PM »

Quote from: sonofdaxjones on February 09, 2012, 12:12:50 PM

Well, I feel as though I must remind each of you that this was published in the Wall Street Journal, so please have your salt shakers at the ready. That is no obscure blog citing unnamed "tv insiders" by any stretch.

Ryan M. Brewer, Ph.D.

wabash909 · « **Reply #11 on:** February 09, 2012, 12:50:54 PM »

LickNeckey · « **Reply #12 on:** February 09, 2012, 12:56:18 PM »

Ryan Brewer, an assistant professor of finance at Indiana University-Purdue University Columbus, calculated the intrinsic valuations for 115 of the 120 teams in the Football Bowl Subdivision (excluding Air Force, Navy, Tulane, Tulsa and Wake Forest).

Thank You OB

wes mantooth · « **Reply #13 on:** February 09, 2012, 12:56:46 PM »

These threads are what i love most about Dax

MadCat · « **Reply #14 on:** February 09, 2012, 01:00:17 PM »

New Big 12:
1 Texas $805.1
10 Oklahoma $470.2
25 Oklahoma State $206.9
28 Texas Tech $160.9
31 Kansas State $153.4
36 West Virginia $132.7
47 Iowa State $112.8
60 Texas Christian $67.4
67 Baylor $51.7
74 Kansas $40.0

CatsNShocks · « **Reply #15 on:** February 09, 2012, 01:27:03 PM »

Ouch at KU being the lowest of any AQ conference school.

CatsNShocks · « **Reply #16 on:** February 09, 2012, 01:36:25 PM »

Quote

CopterHawk
Frosh
Rating: 3.6/5 this site
1330 posts this site
Posted: Today 12:32 PM
RE: WSJ: Football program valuations
Clearly he is valuing the programs solely on the basis of recent earnings and not taking into account potential earnings. There are a bunch of BCS programs that have way less earning potential than KU.

Panjandrum · « **Reply #17 on:** February 09, 2012, 01:48:21 PM »

Quote from: CatsNShocks on February 09, 2012, 01:36:25 PM

Quote
CopterHawk
Frosh
Rating: 3.6/5 this site
1330 posts this site
Posted: Today 12:32 PM
RE: WSJ: Football program valuations
Clearly he is valuing the programs solely on the basis of recent earnings and not taking into account potential earnings. There are a bunch of BCS programs that have way less earning potential than KU.

Clearly.

wes mantooth · « **Reply #18 on:** February 09, 2012, 01:53:45 PM »

Quote from: CatsNShocks on February 09, 2012, 01:36:25 PM

Quote
CopterHawk
Frosh
Rating: 3.6/5 this site
1330 posts this site
Posted: Today 12:32 PM
RE: WSJ: Football program valuations
Clearly he is valuing the programs solely on the basis of recent earnings and not taking into account potential earnings. There are a bunch of BCS programs that have way less earning potential than KU.

WE HAVE POTENTIAL!

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #19 on:** February 09, 2012, 01:53:56 PM »

Is Indiana really 3 times more valuable than KU?

wes mantooth · « **Reply #20 on:** February 09, 2012, 01:57:04 PM »

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on February 09, 2012, 01:53:56 PM

Is Indiana really 3 times more valuable than KU?

Maybe factors in stadiums? KU's stadium can't be worth more than 80k?

AbeFroman · « **Reply #21 on:** February 09, 2012, 02:14:31 PM »

Quote from: CatsNShocks on February 09, 2012, 01:36:25 PM

Quote
CopterHawk
Frosh
Rating: 3.6/5 this site
1330 posts this site
Posted: Today 12:32 PM
RE: WSJ: Football program valuations
Clearly he is valuing the programs solely on the basis of recent earnings and not taking into account potential earnings. There are a bunch of BCS programs that have way less earning potential than KU.

Just amazing.

MadCat · « **Reply #22 on:** February 09, 2012, 02:16:42 PM »

Earning potential banner

CNS · « **Reply #23 on:** February 09, 2012, 03:01:07 PM »

I like how, with the exception of 9 SEC schools, KSU is more valuable than every single SEC school.

wes mantooth · « **Reply #24 on:** February 09, 2012, 03:19:03 PM »

Quote from: CNS Casey on February 09, 2012, 03:01:07 PM

I like how, with the exception of 9 SEC schools, KSU is more valuable than every single SEC school.