The Private Equity College Sports Hellscape Thread | Page 12 | The Boneyard

The Private Equity College Sports Hellscape Thread

nelsonmuntz said:
I have not seen an analysis of how a private equity investment into college athletics would work that doesn't feel like the logic of the underpants gnomes in South Park.

View attachment 110317
Expand ...

I am in the same place I was 3.5 months ago. I don't see how a PE investment works in an industry where the costs just spiked (House payments) and there is downward pressure on revenues (the ESPN salad days are ending).
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I am in the same place I was 3.5 months ago. I don't see how a PE investment works in an industry where the costs just spiked (House payments) and there is downward pressure on revenues (the ESPN salad days are ending).
Expand ...
The private capital firms believe there is untapped revenue/value and that is why they're sniffing around.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I am in the same place I was 3.5 months ago. I don't see how a PE investment works in an industry where the costs just spiked (House payments) and there is downward pressure on revenues (the ESPN salad days are ending).
Expand ...

If so many of these schools are losing money, then how is it that PE can come in make back $2B+ to actually get an ROI?
 
ZooCougar said:
If so many of these schools are losing money, then how is it that PE can come in make back $2B+ to actually get an ROI?
Expand ...
That's why those Ivy League types make the big bucks. They are smart.

Nothing will happen if you look at the current model. Private Equity would want a pay back period of 5 years and college football would want 50 years. No one is getting shafted. Nothing will happen.

Something will happen if the PE guys can figure out how to millions into spending more for college football than it is actually worth. If you look at pro sports, it's not out of the realm. In my opinion, college football and all of the bowls have more juice than the boring NBA so who knows.
 
Kolumbo said:
That's why those Ivy League types make the big bucks. They are smart.

Nothing will happen if you look at the current model. Private Equity would want a pay back period of 5 years and college football would want 50 years. No one is getting shafted. Nothing will happen.

Something will happen if the PE guys can figure out how to millions into spending more for college football than it is actually worth. If you look at pro sports, it's not out of the realm. In my opinion, college football and all of the bowls have more juice than the boring NBA so who knows.
Expand ...

Ehhh. I’ll believe it when I see it.

I know this: most Universally Presidents suck business.

But also, streamlined and cost effective college sports would probably be very bland. We love the excess of it all.
 
.-.
ZooCougar said:
Ehhh. I’ll believe it when I see it.

I know this: most Universally Presidents suck business.

But also, streamlined and cost effective college sports would probably be very bland. We love the excess of it all.
Expand ...
It's all a crap shoot. They are ruining rivalries and fans hate it but they are making more money. screw them.
 
Some more rankling going on:
Billionaire booster, conference commishes at odds
The dispute began with an argument Thursday by Cody Campbell, Texas Tech's billionaire head of regents, about how the proposed pooling of college TV rights could feed additional billions into school coffers, but that progress is being held back because "the conferences are all represented by commissioners who are very, very self-interested."

"The commissioners don't really care what happens at the institutional level," Campbell said at a panel discussion held by the Knight Commission, an oversight group that released a survey in which a majority of college executives who responded said Division I sports was headed in the wrong direction. "All they care about is what happens to them. And I think that is fundamentally the problem."
Expand ...

"The fact that we're bringing private equity into something that is, in my view, owned by the American public in college sports, is outlandish," Campbell said. "We have halfway professionalized this thing. And so we have a professionalized cost model on one side where we pay coaches a lot. We're now paying players a lot. But we have this amateurish media-rights marketing effort that makes absolutely no sense to anybody."
Expand ...

Campbell portrayed the SCORE Act as too broad a giveaway to the NCAA and the conference commissioners he challenged for wanting to run their own fiefdoms instead of looking out for the good of college sports in general.

"Protecting your position and protecting your importance and your ego, I could not care less about that," Campbell said. "Because I know that if we don't change something and bring more revenue in, a lot of sports are going to be cut, a lot of scholarships are going to be cut, and a lot of kids are going to lose opportunity."
Expand ...

Hang on a tick, a billionaire who actually seems concerned what happens to schools and sports beyond football...what a time we live in. ^,^
 
KryHavok said:
Some more rankling going on:
Billionaire booster, conference commishes at odds






Hang on a tick, a billionaire who actually seems concerned what happens to schools and sports beyond football...what a time we live in. ^,^
Expand ...
Well, perhaps I'm a bit cynical, but this is a billionaire booster, whose team will be, essentially, relegated to the second tier. It's in his best interest to restructure the whole system in order to prevent that.
 
.-.
If this happens, how would that impact B1G expansion? I'm assuming the B1G would not want to share their influx of money with new members, just as I'm sure the Cal Pension Fund may not want to give more money to pay for new members.
 
huskymedic said:
Expand ...

Boneyard bus
Rufus said:
If this happens, how would that impact B1G expansion? I'm assuming the B1G would not want to share their influx of money with new members, just as I'm sure the Cal Pension Fund may not want to give more money to pay for new members.
Expand ...
We were in until this. Rule 1 lives 😀
 
Ha Who said:
Boneyard bus

We were in until this. Rule 1 lives 😀
Expand ...
Tough to negatively impact the odds of us joining the Big Ten.
 
Rufus said:
Would a $2.4 billion deal from the University of California Pension Fund be contingent on the University of California joining the B1G?
Expand ...
UCLA is part of the University of California system.

As for conference realignment, I think there could be a push to add a couple of members in the near future as it appears the Big 10 will be set for the next 20 years. (Notre Dame, in or out?). Maybe the Big 10 and SEC go to 20 schools?
 
Rufus said:
Would a $2.4 billion deal from the University of California Pension Fund be contingent on the University of California joining the B1G?
Expand ...
This. If I’m Governor Newsom, I’m making sure that a condition of this deal is Cal and Stanford joining the Big Ten (probably around 2030).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
pick6s said:
This. If I’m Governor Newsom, I’m making sure that a condition of this deal is Cal and Stanford joining the Big Ten (probably around 2030).
Expand ...
Cal and SDSU is where is where it's at. Big Ten needs to get with the program and head south. Forget about Stanford and the sling blade mofos

 
.-.
It seems to me that any private equity deal would only come after a conference is done expanding and has all of its wanted members for at least a generation. Signing this deal would complicate adding Notre Dame, Miami, UNC, FSU, or anyone else for the B1G. How would the new members receive private equity to match their conference peers if the deal was already signed before expansion?

Unless the B1G plans to stop at its current 18 members.
 
Rufus said:
It seems to me that any private equity deal would only come after a conference is done expanding and has all of its wanted members for at least a generation. Signing this deal would complicate adding Notre Dame, Miami, UNC, FSU, or anyone else for the B1G. How would the new members receive private equity to match their conference peers if the deal was already signed before expansion?

Unless the B1G plans to stop at its current 18 members.
Expand ...
I would think that the private equity investment would set the Big 10 valuation for expansion candidates. In other words if the Big 10 revenue rights are worth $2 billion for 10%, or $20 billion total, it may cost an expansion candidate $1 billion to join the Big 10. So, pay $1 billion and get a revenue stream of $75 million growing say 8% per year.
 
.-.
One note on the Big Ten potentially taking Stanford and Cal. Unexpectedly, it could mark the end of the ACC as a relevant conference due to lack of a significant television contract. Here's why:

Remember how the PAC 12 died partially because the Big 12 had taken the last remaining tv slots and there were none left for the PAC 12? There may be a similar situation coming where no significant networks will broadcast a substantial number of ACC games on tv (after the ACC GOR expires in 2036), because all the main networks are already taken. The Big Ten has gobbled up FOX (and FS1), CBS, and NBC (which they share with Notre Dame). The SEC has taken ESPN, ESPN2, and ABC. What's left?

The only available slots I see remaining are during the late night hours. The Big Ten will take that slot on FS1 since they now have western teams; none of FOX, CBS, or NBC are likely to broadcast 10pm football games nationally. Meanwhile, ESPN has late night openings since the SEC won't have any 10pm games. The question is whether they'd rather broadcast Big 12 or ACC games during that time.

The Big 12 currently has five teams out west: Utah, BYU, Arizona, Arizona State, and Colorado. Meanwhile, the ACC only has two teams out west: Stanford and Cal. If those two get invited to the Big Ten, the ACC will have no western teams and thus no value for ESPN, in terms of filling its late night slots. In this scenario, ESPN would pick the Big 12 over the ACC, leaving the ACC with no significant tv contract. To make matters worse, that'll likely lead to the main remaining ACC schools bolting for the Big 12, and then the ACC is really screwed. Remember that they're already going to lose UNC and one or all of UVA/FSU/Clemson to the SEC. They can't afford to lose all of them plus Miami and more to the Big 12 on top of that.

However, if Cal and Stanford remain in the ACC, the conference will likely add a few western teams- probably Boise State and one or more of UNLV/San Diego State/Washington State- and then it becomes unclear whether ESPN would prefer the Big 12 or ACC. So unexpectedly, it seems to me like the key to the ACC having a shot at survival as a relevant and main conference hinges on keeping Stanford and Cal.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
167,951
Messages
4,546,054
Members
10,428
Latest member
CarloPFF


Top Bottom