What will it take to send Brooke and hubby packing???

[FriscoDawg]

Well, if Tech couldn't generate positive cash flow in WBB up to about 2003 or so then shame on 'em, and all the more reason to fire every effing English major, Education major in administration and hire MBAs to be president(CEO), CFO, COO, etc...

The annual NCAA AUP reports weren't broken out by sport until 2004-2005.

In that 2004-2005 year women's basketball had $187,171 in ticket sales and ran a deficit of $439,330 with university support of $96,944 included. Men's basketball that same year had $88,583 in ticket sales and ran a deficit of $484,573 with university support of $39,245 included.

In the first C-USA year 2013-2014, women's basketball had $75,698 in ticket sales. It showed a surplus of $131,225 after $1,051,661 after university support was allocated. Men's basketball had $217,927 in ticket sales and showed a $133,750 surplus after $980,347 of university support was allocated.

In 2019-2020, women's basketball had $58,657 in ticket sales and showed a $99,074 surplus that included $1,179,048 in allocated university support. Men's basketball had $159,918 in ticket sales and showed a $118,287 surplus with $1,292,948 of allocated university support.

[dawg80]

A lot of those so-called expenses are just accounting mumbo jumbo. I bet if I did a true, direct cash flow, w/o the accounting BS, our WBB had positive cash flow, and if they didn't, then shame on the powers-that-be.

For one thing it could be ticket prices were too low. I don't remember what they were because when we went it didn't matter. Season tix sales and walk-ups for most Techster games meant there were 5,000 paying customers on average. I only saw the TAC truly full, I mean NO, NADA. ZILCH empty seats about 6 times and 4 of those were WBB games. That's 7,000+. The 1998 Tennessee game was SRO. I was there and saw it.

Another thing, all those suits on the bench is ridiculous. Some of them are grad assistants, getting paid little to nothing, and there should be only two paid coaches. Period. I bet some of those expenses, via the silly accounting stuff, is charging the basketball teams for use of the TAC, allocated costs of the construction and maintenance of the building. Some operational costs are appropriate, those directly related to the teams using the TAC. Otherwise the construction costs are sunk costs, it's spent, that money is gone and the cost of construction of the building doesn't magically vanish if we dropped basketball.

Anyway...you get the point.

[Blue Dawg]

A lot of those so-called expenses are just accounting mumbo jumbo. I bet if I did a true, direct cash flow, w/o the accounting BS, our WBB had positive cash flow, and if they didn't, then shame on the powers-that-be.

For one thing it could be ticket prices were too low. I don't remember what they were because when we went it didn't matter. Season tix sales and walk-ups for most Techster games meant there were 5,000 paying customers on average. I only saw the TAC truly full, I mean NO, NADA. ZILCH empty seats about 6 times and 4 of those were WBB games. That's 7,000+. The 1998 Tennessee game was SRO. I was there and saw it.

Another thing, all those suits on the bench is ridiculous. Some of them are grad assistants, getting paid little to nothing, and there should be only two paid coaches. Period. I bet some of those expenses, via the silly accounting stuff, is charging the basketball teams for use of the TAC, allocated costs of the construction and maintenance of the building. Some operational costs are appropriate, those directly related to the teams using the TAC. Otherwise the construction costs are sunk costs, it's spent, that money is gone and the cost of construction of the building doesn't magically vanish if we dropped basketball.

Anyway...you get the point.

Agreed.

I get why its done, but it always skeeves me out to see "well, if you consider the million dollars the university sunk into the team, they actually made money this year!"

[Champ967]

I only saw the TAC truly full, I mean NO, NADA. ZILCH empty seats about 6 times and 4 of those were WBB games. That's 7,000+. The 1998 Tennessee game was SRO. I was there and saw it.

Man, that one was fun. And then UConn in 99. Good times.

[FriscoDawg]

A lot of those so-called expenses are just accounting mumbo jumbo. I bet if I did a true, direct cash flow, w/o the accounting BS, our WBB had positive cash flow, and if they didn't, then shame on the powers-that-be.

For one thing it could be ticket prices were too low. I don't remember what they were because when we went it didn't matter. Season tix sales and walk-ups for most Techster games meant there were 5,000 paying customers on average. I only saw the TAC truly full, I mean NO, NADA. ZILCH empty seats about 6 times and 4 of those were WBB games. That's 7,000+. The 1998 Tennessee game was SRO. I was there and saw it.

Another thing, all those suits on the bench is ridiculous. Some of them are grad assistants, getting paid little to nothing, and there should be only two paid coaches. Period. I bet some of those expenses, via the silly accounting stuff, is charging the basketball teams for use of the TAC, allocated costs of the construction and maintenance of the building. Some operational costs are appropriate, those directly related to the teams using the TAC. Otherwise the construction costs are sunk costs, it's spent, that money is gone and the cost of construction of the building doesn't magically vanish if we dropped basketball.

Anyway...you get the point.

Positive cash flow in 2019-2020? That is ridiculous. Coaches' salaries alone exceed the total of all revenue sources excluding the direct institutional support transfer which is not cash inflow.

WBB Revenue
Ticket sales $58,657
Direct institutional support $1,179,048 (includes the athletics student aid cost offset allowed by the state)
Contributions $322,586
In-kind $7,660
Media rights $61,626
NCAA distributions $96,298
Conference distributions $32,243
Program, novelty, parking, and concession sales $18,956
Athletics restricted endowments and investments income $3,869
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES $1,780,943 ($601,895 not including direct institutional support)

WBB Expenses
Athletics student aid $463,174
Guarantees $22,200
Coaching salaries and benefits $646,910
Support staff administrative compensation, etc. $74,557
Recruiting $58,784
Team travel $184,370
Equipment, uniforms, and supplies $35,675
Game expenses $96,828
Fundraising, marketing, and promotions $2,519
Direct overhead and administrative expenses $31,382
Medical expenses and insurance $200
Memberships and dues $850
Student-athlete meals $17,389
Other operating expenses $47,031
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $1,681,869 ($1,218,695 not including student aid)

EXCESS $99,074 (deficit of $616,800 excluding direct institutional support and student aid)

[dawg80]

No, I said thru about 2003. I said nothing about now.

[FriscoDawg]

Cue Pink Floyd again.....

[Blue Dawg]

Pitiful.

[techman05]

Cue Pink Floyd again.....

Maybe we could try “Comfortably Numb”?

[DJDAWG]

Has Tech ever started conference 0-5? If AD, I'd fire the male co-head coach as the "scapegoat" (maybe the whole staff besides the other co-head) and maybe the other co-head would just resign. That'd save on a buy out.

[FriscoDawg]

No, I said thru about 2003. I said nothing about now.

The figures from 2003 were never available to the public because reporting was in totals only. I am skeptical that there has ever been positive cash flow from women's basketball at Tech. Ticket prices just weren't high enough.

The 2002-2003 total ticket sales for all sports was just $1,013,416. Even if 40% of that was for women's basketball, that wouldn't have exceeded team travel costs in the WAC, staff salaries and benefits, scholarships, and other expenses.

[champion110]

The numbers are one thing, but getting the TAC filled up and getting some national press can do wonders for a university. Yes, MBB and Football gets more press. The fact is, though, that we have never ever had a D1 program that was that nationally prominent. I wish it could be MBB and football, but I don't think they are going to win 3 national championships on the highest level. Maybe if the men could get a few rounds in the NCAA Tournament each year it would help. You can't buy press like that. The MBB program has to just MAKE the NCAA Tournament first, though.

[dawg80]

The figures from 2003 were never available to the public because reporting was in totals only. I am skeptical that there has ever been positive cash flow from women's basketball at Tech. Ticket prices just weren't high enough.

The 2002-2003 total ticket sales for all sports was just $1,013,416. Even if 40% of that was for women's basketball, that wouldn't have exceeded team travel costs in the WAC, staff salaries and benefits, scholarships, and other expenses.

I never said there ever was positive cash flow, I said there SHOULD/COULD have been with proper leadership. First, we would have to have a proper direct cash flow statement produced w/o all those stupid accounting tricks like "non-cash cash items." Then if we came up short you practice actual business administration and change expenses (decrease) and revenues (increase) until we are in the black. Da dah!

[FriscoDawg]

I never said there ever was positive cash flow, I said there SHOULD/COULD have been with proper leadership. First, we would have to have a proper direct cash flow statement produced w/o all those stupid accounting tricks like "non-cash cash items." Then if we came up short you practice actual business administration and change expenses (decrease) and revenues (increase) until we are in the black. Da dah!

That's why I only looked at the ticket sales number for 2002-2003. In-kind contributions back then were basically 15% of the listed total revenue on the AUP report.

[LouisianaSelect]

You complainers don't know 1/100th about basketball that Brooke does.

☝