That's where the game has changed, though. It used to be that spending was investing. Build expensive practice facility --> Attract players --> Make that money back.
Nowhere did I mention Ohio State. You did. Stop twisting things.
Geez dude, agree or disagree, but at least stay on track.
I am staying on track - you either can't comprehend or are just twisting things. To make it simpler for you - I am speaking about all of the Big10, SEC, Big12, ACC and the rest. You keep homing in on Ohio State.
How so? Maybe the surgeon general will issue a warning that football can be hazardous to your health and college football will fold entirely. Until that day comes, let us know when you think the bubble will really burst. I'll be the first to admit the game of football is very overrated. The Super Bowl is the single biggest marketing farce. Play best of 7 like everyone else mo-fos. Each player only plays half the game anyway as it is. It's a fugazi.
You do realize that depreciation isn't an actual cash outlay right?
We're having a discussion about whether going $30m in the hole hurts a university. What I linked to shows how much money a university has in any given year to spend on things they are not contracted/required to spend. If you remove $30m from $112m, that will have a huge impact on instruction.
Got it. By fungible you mean non-restricted.
It is simply a reserve that is generated for instructional purposes. So, for instance, each department generates revenue through various endeavors (speaking engagements, tickets, donations given to the department, etc.), but those funds are controlled by the university. So, for instance, I run a very small endowment for someone who left us $1m+. The budget is only $25k a year for programming, but each charge must be approved by the university even though it is dedicated to the dept. We put on 4 events in total per year. That money can be encumbered if the university gets desperate, and this has happened in the past. Other things that go are any extra programming for classes, adjunct professors, travel to conferences, conference fees, recruitment funds, etc. I think of all this as essential to instruction, but it can easily disappear on a whim. Heck, our department owns classrooms and we had to vote, as a department, whether to spend our money on a one-time outlay for tech equipment (I remember it because the price was ludicrous). Other weird example about how money moves in the university: departments charge other units for room rental, so instead of paying them, I rent a few buses for 1/10th the price of the room and instead I reserve an auditorium in our city owned by a pretty well known folk singer; she gives it to us for free.
www.post-gazette.com
I understand, but surplus revenue isn't a dedicated pool of existing funds. It is the excess of anticipated revenue over known existing expenses. So, it would be more analogous to "annual salary" rather than a "savings account." Say you make $200,000 a year and your known annual expenses are $75,000 a year. Your projected surplus revenue the excess of your salary over your anticipated expenses would be $125,000 a year. So, when the university talks about surplus revenue, aren't they saying this is the amount of money that we will bring in over the amount for which we have known commitments, not including depreciation, which isn't an actual outlay, and capital expenditures?It is simply a reserve that is generated for instructional purposes. So, for instance, each department generates revenue through various endeavors (speaking engagements, tickets, donations given to the department, etc.), but those funds are controlled by the university. So, for instance, I run a very small endowment for someone who left us $1m+. The budget is only $25k a year for programming, but each charge must be approved by the university even though it is dedicated to the dept. We put on 4 events in total per year. That money can be encumbered if the university gets desperate, and this has happened in the past. Other things that go are any extra programming for classes, adjunct professors, travel to conferences, conference fees, recruitment funds, etc. I think of all this as essential to instruction, but it can easily disappear on a whim. Heck, our department owns classrooms and we had to vote, as a department, whether to spend our money on a one-time outlay for tech equipment (I remember it because the price was ludicrous). Other weird example about how money moves in the university: departments charge other units for room rental, so instead of paying them, I rent a few buses for 1/10th the price of the room and instead I reserve an auditorium in our city owned by a pretty well known folk singer; she gives it to us for free.
These are the kinds of things that go on with that money.
One recent thing we're seeing is people taking a hatchet to PhD programs. That's also unrestricted funding. PhD students are expendable. Vanderbilt, UPenn, Pitt, dozens of others have announced halts openly. I'm imagining a ton of others haven't made it public yet. But this is not wise. It is "penny-wise, pound-foolish" type of stuff, since grad students are a form of cheap labor. The ultimate savings will be marginal at best.
Amid funding uncertainty, Pitt pauses doctoral admissions
The University of Pittsburgh has paused admissions to doctoral programs amid federal funding uncertainty as a judge in Massachusetts considers whether...
It says it right in the quote off Ohio State's page:
OK, I understand. It is counterintuitive language. I feel like I would get a better understanding if I actually looked at the numbers, rather than a narrative, but I'm not feeling that ambitious about it.
I'm sure the sports information file clerk is allowed to pursue NIL deals. If they have a hot young girl in that position she may do well with only fans.
