Author Topic: USA Today Athletic Department Finances  (Read 9935 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Shacks

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1829
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #25 on: May 08, 2013, 01:09:01 PM »
If the student fees are used to help fund a super impressive football weight room, as a buyout for oscar or to pay 5* basketball players to come here I will stop complaining

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 46698
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #26 on: May 08, 2013, 01:10:55 PM »
Just a little bullshit to hit the students for $640K while they're pocketing nearly 13 million

gmafb.  eat a dick and pay the $30, it should be a lot higher.

Wouldn't have a problem with it if KSU's athletic budget was barely breaking even, but when they're profiting over 10 million it is bullshit to nickel and dime a group that is already paying thousands every semester to the university

the "university" is separate from the AD though.  and students aren't being nickled and dimed.  how any student can complain about the small amount of athletic fees they pay, given everything that is going on within the AD, is insane. 

i guess titletown, WSC, BTF, oscar's buyout, it should all be free.  a little perspective wouldn't hurt.

Texas charges students $0 and look where it's gotten them! :o

good point, we own texas and we paid for them with student fees.  how can they compete???  answer:  they can't


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline eastcat

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2502
  • Labeled by children.
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #27 on: May 08, 2013, 01:14:13 PM »
The real question is how do we keep expenses down to ~50m?

I wonder what kind of financial concession we make vs programs like KU and even OU who spends nearly twice as much.

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 46698
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #28 on: May 08, 2013, 02:02:42 PM »
The real question is how do we keep expenses down to ~50m?

I wonder what kind of financial concession we make vs programs like KU and even OU who spends nearly twice as much.

we maintain the bare minimum of teams allowed in division 1.  and it sucks that we chose to.


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline Belvis Noland

  • Katpak'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ***
  • Posts: 3964
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #29 on: May 08, 2013, 02:06:29 PM »
If the student fees are used to help fund a super impressive football weight room, as a buyout for oscar or to pay 5* basketball players to come here I will stop complaining

What we know:  Student fees aren't being used to line anybody's pockets. 

What we don't know:  How we account for "profit" or how we alocate "profit" $$$.   


 

Offline scottwildcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16430
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #30 on: May 08, 2013, 02:10:54 PM »
The real question is how do we keep expenses down to ~50m?

I wonder what kind of financial concession we make vs programs like KU and even OU who spends nearly twice as much.

we maintain the bare minimum of teams allowed in division 1.  and it sucks that we chose to.

It wouldn't suck if we keep pumping profits directly into improvements and coaching bonuses for trophies. I really hope we have some of these solid gold bricks sitting around to let Sean hire the assistants he wants.

Offline Belvis Noland

  • Katpak'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ***
  • Posts: 3964
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #31 on: May 08, 2013, 02:15:26 PM »
I found KSU 2011 AD Financial Statements online.  Accountants get to work. 

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/ksu/genrel/auto_pdf/2011-12/misc_non_event/FY11AuditorReportFinancials.pdf

Offline Belvis Noland

  • Katpak'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ***
  • Posts: 3964
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #32 on: May 08, 2013, 02:16:34 PM »
Actually, all of our financials are available on kstatesports.com

http://www.kstatesports.com/ot/financial-info.html


Offline Belvis Noland

  • Katpak'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ***
  • Posts: 3964
    • View Profile

Offline cfbandyman

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9540
  • To da 'ville.
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #34 on: May 08, 2013, 03:04:00 PM »
Actually, all of our financials are available on kstatesports.com

http://www.kstatesports.com/ot/financial-info.html

Nice work, just browsing through, but the very last page of the 2012 report is my favorite.
A&M Style: 1/19/13 Co-Champion of THE ED's College Basketball Challenge

The art of the deal with it poors

OG Elon hater with a tesla


Offline eastcat

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2502
  • Labeled by children.
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #35 on: May 08, 2013, 04:02:24 PM »
We spend $278,500 on parking?

Am I reading this right?

Offline CyberToothCat

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 673
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #36 on: May 08, 2013, 06:06:15 PM »
What we don't know:  How we account for "profit" or how we alocate "profit" $$$.   

For tl;dnr:  we say we have a profit, but we really don't.

I'm not an accountant.  However, I don't think we really have a "profit".

As has been discussed on here, K-State counts all donations made during the year even if some of the money is pledged and won't be received until some future year.  For example, for WSC assume donors in the luxury boxes had to make a 5 year commitment... they've given cash to K-State for year 1, but won't give K-State the money for years 2 through 5 until the future.  However, K-State is counting all of that cash in the current year.

If the pledge was for $100,000 per year for 5 years, K-State is counting all $500,000 in the current year even though we've only received $100,000 in cash.  The remaining $400,000 will come later even though we're counting it now.

I think that's where our profit appears.  We say on the financial statements that we had revenue of $60-some million, but the amount of cash we received is somewhat less than that.  IMO, it's highly likely that we're spending every dollar we have.  If our total expenses are $50-some million, that probably means our total cash received for the year is also $50-some million.  The difference or "profit" are the other pledges we counted as revenue this year even though we haven't actually received the cash yet.

For the people complaining about a freaking $30 student fee, don't worry.  No one in the Ath Dept is lining their pockets with your cash.  Every penny that comes into the Ath Dept is being spent.

Offline hjfklmor

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 222
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #37 on: May 08, 2013, 06:41:37 PM »
What we don't know:  How we account for "profit" or how we alocate "profit" $$$.   
As has been discussed on here, K-State counts all donations made during the year even if some of the money is pledged and won't be received until some future year.  For example, for WSC assume donors in the luxury boxes had to make a 5 year commitment... they've given cash to K-State for year 1, but won't give K-State the money for years 2 through 5 until the future.  However, K-State is counting all of that cash in the current year.

We are just accruing the contributions revenue and we leave the rest as a receivable. We still have a profit (just not from a cash flow perspective). It's a perfectly acceptable accounting treatment.

I'm not familiar with athletic departments, but the vast majority of companies use the accrual method instead of the cash method.

Offline hjfklmor

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 222
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #38 on: May 08, 2013, 06:48:30 PM »
We spend $278,500 on parking?

Am I reading this right?

Could be that Kansas State University or another K-State entity owns the parking lot and K-State Athletics, Inc. (the AD) just leases it from that entity.  :dunno:

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 46698
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #39 on: May 08, 2013, 06:58:18 PM »
What we don't know:  How we account for "profit" or how we alocate "profit" $$$.   
As has been discussed on here, K-State counts all donations made during the year even if some of the money is pledged and won't be received until some future year.  For example, for WSC assume donors in the luxury boxes had to make a 5 year commitment... they've given cash to K-State for year 1, but won't give K-State the money for years 2 through 5 until the future.  However, K-State is counting all of that cash in the current year.

We are just accruing the contributions revenue and we leave the rest as a receivable. We still have a profit (just not from a cash flow perspective). It's a perfectly acceptable accounting treatment.

I'm not familiar with athletic departments, but the vast majority of companies use the accrual method instead of the cash method.
ladies and gentlemen, i present to you, KIM CHARLAND!!!


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline hjfklmor

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 222
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #40 on: May 08, 2013, 07:03:03 PM »

ladies and gentlemen, i present to you, KIM CHARLAND!!!

 :barf:

Offline meow meow

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 11132
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #41 on: May 08, 2013, 08:47:27 PM »
What we don't know:  How we account for "profit" or how we alocate "profit" $$$.   
As has been discussed on here, K-State counts all donations made during the year even if some of the money is pledged and won't be received until some future year.  For example, for WSC assume donors in the luxury boxes had to make a 5 year commitment... they've given cash to K-State for year 1, but won't give K-State the money for years 2 through 5 until the future.  However, K-State is counting all of that cash in the current year.

We are just accruing the contributions revenue and we leave the rest as a receivable. We still have a profit (just not from a cash flow perspective). It's a perfectly acceptable accounting treatment.

I'm not familiar with athletic departments, but the vast majority of companies use the accrual method instead of the cash method.

Hi Jo Lyle

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 46698
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #42 on: May 08, 2013, 09:02:18 PM »
What we don't know:  How we account for "profit" or how we alocate "profit" $$$.   
As has been discussed on here, K-State counts all donations made during the year even if some of the money is pledged and won't be received until some future year.  For example, for WSC assume donors in the luxury boxes had to make a 5 year commitment... they've given cash to K-State for year 1, but won't give K-State the money for years 2 through 5 until the future.  However, K-State is counting all of that cash in the current year.

We are just accruing the contributions revenue and we leave the rest as a receivable. We still have a profit (just not from a cash flow perspective). It's a perfectly acceptable accounting treatment.

I'm not familiar with athletic departments, but the vast majority of companies use the accrual method instead of the cash method.

Hi Jo Lyle
HI KATHY BROCKWAY


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline AbeFroman

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 8330
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #43 on: May 08, 2013, 11:01:52 PM »
Mizzou's net loss  :lol:

Offline scottwildcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16430
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #44 on: May 09, 2013, 07:24:57 AM »
Mizzou's net loss  :lol:

Mizzou is pure comedy.

Offline Belvis Noland

  • Katpak'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ***
  • Posts: 3964
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #45 on: May 09, 2013, 09:04:32 AM »
seriously, can there be a more poorly run AD than M-I-Z?   :facepalm:

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 53702
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #46 on: May 09, 2013, 09:39:57 AM »
Oh no guys.   According to Tigerboard K-State's revenues are all smoke and mirrors and even when they are shown the multiple accepted accounting rules that are applicable to K-State's AUDITED financial records they still try to say it's all smoke and mirrors.

Of course I've searched all over the place (because I'm weird that way) to find audited financial results for mu athletics and not just the sanitized reports they send to the DOE and the NCAA and I've yet to find one (meanwhile ku and K-State's has their AUDITED financial results publically available on their respective athletic department websites).

Then again, that is the same bunch that accepts every pro SEC article, even one's filled with nothing less than utter projective speculation as the absolute gospel truth, and any positive news for the Big 12 as nothing less then speculative conspiracy. 

Offline scottwildcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16430
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #47 on: May 09, 2013, 10:56:53 AM »
jfc Mizzou fans are just so dumb.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37171
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #48 on: May 09, 2013, 10:59:44 AM »
2 or 3 more years like this last one, and Mizzou athletics will be almost as irrelevant as Missouri State.

Offline scottwildcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16430
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #49 on: May 09, 2013, 11:17:16 AM »
2 or 3 more years like this last one, and Mizzou athletics will be almost as irrelevant as Missouri State.

well that just isn't true, but they will be in a lot of trouble.