Tops in College Sports Revenue and Who's OSU

[legelegel]

There are two things that are wrong in this report. The first is referring to The Ohio St. Univ. as OSU in the same article in which Oklahoma State University. is mentioned. The second is something that doesn't happen very often, that is someone referring to the University of Oklahoma and writing Oklahoma State University. There are just some real stupid reporters out there.

Report: UT No. 1 for sports revenue

June 15, 2009 3:10 PM ET

The University of Texas at Austin's athletics program generated the highest revenue total of any college in the nation during the 2007-08 school year, according to a report released Monday in Street & Smith’s Sports Business Journal.

The sister publication of the Austin Business Journal, citing Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act forms, found that Longhorn sports brought in $120.3 million in the school year that ended June 2008. UT, Ohio State University and the University of Florida were the only three college athletics programs during the school year to top the $100 million mark.

Not surprisingly, the bulk of Texas' sports revenue came from the football program, which generated nearly $73 million alone.

Other Southern schools ranking in the top 20 in overall sports revenues were the University of Tennessee at ninth with $88.72 million and LSU at 12th with $84.18 million.

The following is a full listing of the top 10 revenue-generating college sports programs in the U.S.:

1. Texas – $120.3 million
2. OSU – $118 million
3. Florida – $106 million
4. University of Michigan – $99 million
5. University of Wisconsin – $93.5 million
6. Pennsylvania State University – $91.6 million
7. Auburn University – $89.3 million
8. University of Alabama - $88.9 million
9. University of Tennessee – $88.7 million
10. Oklahoma State University – $88.6 millionhttp://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=ACBJ&date=20090615&id=10023126

[FalseGod]

Not bad. Should be higher next year after we win the FNC. (:

[CaliforniaCowboy]

I don't know how they compiled those numbers, but OState is NOT tenth from sports revenue; not over OU and A&M.

They must have counted that donation from Mr Pickens, or something.

aren't we still 9th in the conference in "budget"?

More than Georgia? Something doesn't seem right about those numbers.

[Verb]

I think it's simply a mistake, and they meant OU.

[Lewis the Pike]

yup, that's what legel said in the original post

Paperclips, not us are # 10

[CaliforniaCowboy]

right, my bad.

[Ivan]

Works for me, people call us the sooners all the time on tv. About time they call them osu cowboys =]

[Verb]

True--it's nice to see the mix-up go the other way for a change!!

[CowboyOrangeFan]

I don't think it is a mix up. If you go all the way back to the original article, they intentionally have us listed as number 10. Now how they got their totals I do believe is a mistake, but it isn't a ou/OSU error.

[CaliforniaCowboy]

I read on another board that they are counting the Mitchell stock donation, since it was unrestricted.

($25 million at the time, and $5 million now; if we still have it)

[legelegel]

I believe the above article is about revenue (sales), and not charitable giving (donations).

If someone posted the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act documents filed by Oklahoma State and the Univ. of Okla., we really know who's who.

Here's the original article which is not much without a subscription.

Top revenue producers in college athletics

Published June 15, 2009 : Page 26
The following shows the college athletic programs that had the highest revenue in the 2007-08 school year, based on Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act documents filed by each school to the U.S. Department of Education. School … http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=article.preview&articleid=62825

[CaliforniaCowboy]

I believe the above article is about revenue (sales), and not charitable giving (donations).



I think it clearly says "revenue" not ticket sales.

Revenue would certainly include "season ticket required donations" (i.e., "charitable giving"), as well as suite and club level revenues (donations)

anyway, I was just stating what I had read on another board, which could be an explination (or they meant to say OU).

[CowboyOrangeFan]

Again, it isn't a mix up. We are number 10. The $88.6 million is based on the DOE totals (below).

http://djhosu.googlepages.com/SP32-20090616-105813.jpg

Now how they come up with approximately $50 million for not allocated by gender/sport, is where I think the oddity lies. As far as counting revenues, and trying to compare apples to apples.

BTW the image is pulled from post by OSUDave on rivals. You can pull the same data for yourself by visiting this link. DOE (http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/Index.aspx)

[CaliforniaCowboy]

Again, it isn't a mix up. We are number 10. The $88.6 million is based on the DOE totals (below).

http://djhosu.googlepages.com/SP32-20090616-105813.jpg

Now how they come up with approximately $50 million for not allocated by gender/sport, is where I think the oddity lies.

Not allocated by gender/sport = DONATION

how can you have "revenue" not allocated by "sport", without it being a "donation"?

If is its OSU, then it is a one-time anomoly.

[topdaug]

I think it's simply a mistake, and they meant OU.

OU made about $77 million in revenue, with $40+ million coming from football sales, so it's not a mistake...

But it does appear to be a donation that was counted as "revenue" which seems a little deceiving, as donations aren't revenue...but oh well...

[CaliforniaCowboy]

OU made about $77 million in revenue, with $40+ million coming from football sales, so it's not a mistake...

But it does appear to be a donation that was counted as "revenue" which seems a little deceiving, as donations aren't revenue...but oh well...



well... if you're doing your income and expense statement, is it income or expense?

It might be "income from other sources", but it is still income/revenue

[legelegel]

well... if you're doing your income and expense statement, is it income or expense?

It might be "income from other sources", but it is still income/revenue

Not really, CC. When one thinks of revenue, sales and gross income, one should not classify gifts and loans into that category.

Gifts and loans are cash flow sources, but they are not taxable events when a business or individual receives them. That's the real difference.

[CaliforniaCowboy]

Not really, CC. When one thinks of revenue, sales and gross income, one should not classify gifts and loans into that category.

Gifts and loans are cash flow sources, but they are not taxable events when a business or individual receives them. That's the real difference.

Yeah, but it's not broken up into those categories, is it.

I think the whole thing is non-profit, and thus non-taxable. (isn't it?)

[legelegel]

Yeah, but it's not broken up into those categories, is it.

I think the whole thing is non-profit, and thus non-taxable. (isn't it?)

Well sure, I'm talking about how money coming into any normal business would be classified. The accounting practices would carry over in part to nonprofit entities in their classifications, too.

[CaliforniaCowboy]

I know legal, but this is not a P&L statement, it's a summary of the Income categories.

Clearly it's not GAAP.

My guess, is that "restricted" donations go directly to the Foundation and are placed in restricted accounts, where as unrestricted donations, are placed in the general department investment account.

but I'm just guessing.

[Nasty Nate]

I did some research on this subject. Here are the intriguing results.....


Remember this is from the 2007 football season.

We actually finished 6th in the Big 12 in football revenue. This is pretty amazing when you consider that we had the smallest stadium in terms of seating capacity in 2007.(43,500)

I can't wait to see the 2008 numbers. I promise you, the football team made a heckuva lot more money in 2008.

Big 12 Football Revenue in 2007.....


1. Texas 72.9 million
2. Nebraska 49 million
3. Texas A&M 42.5 million
4. Oklahoma 41 million
5. Colorado 28.7 million
6. Oklahoma State 23 million
7. Kansas State 21.9 million
8. Texas Tech 20.2 million
9. Missouri 19 million
10. Iowa State 17.4 million
11. Kansas 15 million
12. Baylor 11 million

Here is the Big 12 revenues for men's basketball in 2007-2008....

1. Kansas 14.6 million
2. Texas 12.9 million
3. Oklahoma State 9.7 million
4. Texas A&M 9.2 million
5. Missouri 8.0 million
6. Texas Tech 7.1 million
7. Oklahoma 6.3 million
8. Nebraska 6.3 million
9. Kansas State 6.2 million
10. Iowa State 6.0 million
11. Colorado 3.8 million
12. Baylor 3.5 million

If you take out athletic donations, this is the Big 12 Total Revenue numbers....

1. Texas 96.9 million
2. Nebraska 60.4 million
3. Texas A&M 60.3 million
4. Oklahoma 49.8 million
5. Oklahoma State 38.4 million
6. Colorado 34.6 million
7. Kansas 30.7 million
8. Texas Tech 30.7 million
9. Kansas State 29.8 million
10. Baylor 28.8 million
11. Missouri 28.1 million
12. Iowa State 27.6 million

[Nasty Nate]

Not allocated by gender/sport = DONATION

how can you have "revenue" not allocated by "sport", without it being a "donation"?

If is its OSU, then it is a one-time anomoly.

While are "donation" total was large everybody else in the Big 12 had over 20 million in that category. In fact, KU had 55 million in the "Not allocated by gender/sport" column.

We did very well all things considered. The 2008 results will be even more impressive. 2009 will be fantastic.

[CaliforniaCowboy]

yeah, but all that still leaves us deadass broke.

[Nasty Nate]

yeah, but all that still leaves us deadass broke.

For the time being.:cool: