Nice work Tingey and Vailas!

[Red Hill]

I’m not sure how they did it but ISU brought in more revenue than any other athletic department in the state. Maybe the Big Sky isn’t that bad.
http://www.boardofed.idaho.gov...11/bahr_fin.pdf
Page 114, BSU made $6.4k in '10, and should make $10.4k in '11
Page 118, ISU made $670k in '10, and should make $29k in '11
Page 112, UI made $33k in '10, and should make $175k in '11.

 

[biobengal]

IMO, what you're seeing here is not revenue; instead, this is probably due to an athletic department very careful about overspending, especially with the significant deficit they ran a few years ago.

Actually, ISU doesn't make that much money selling tickets.... I was very surprised when Skippy pointed this out a few years ago. Most of the "revenue" is from student fees and direct university support. ISU is one of the worst funded schools in the Sky... for this to change we need guys like Kramer increasing donations and selling tickets. Also, a couple of million dollar body bag games wouldn't hurt.

 

[Skippy]

(I should point out, these are FY2010 numbers. The 2011 estimates are also posted in the State Board meeting minutes.) Here's the breakdown by state school, according to the figures all three reported at the last State Board meeting:

Boise State

Cash revenue: $31.6 million ($7.1 M in contributions, $6.5 M in ticket sales). Total revenue: $36 M. Total expenditures: $31.6 M.

ISU

Cash revenue: $8.7 M ($2.3 in state funding; $2.2 M in student fees; $1.3 million in game guarantees; $250 K in ticket sales; $383 K in contributions). Total revenues: $10.6 M. Expenditures: $9.98 M.

University of Idaho
Cash revenue: $12.7 M ($2.35 M in contributions; $1.57 M in conference/NCAA revenues -- this will certainly shrink with the demise of the WAC; $2.2 M in student fees; and $2.5 M in state funding). Total revenues: $15.5 M. Total expenditures: $15.1 M.

The numbers I quoted are just items I find of interest in the report, not the total source of revenues or expenditures. You look at Idaho and you just have to shake your head. The Vandals are spending $17 million less than Boise State (whose budget is in the lower third of the Mountain West), and their funding sources will no doubt decline with the departure of the Broncos, Reno and Fresno State from the WAC. They are spending much more like a Big Sky program than an FBS school.

ISU is living off of money games ($1.3 M), state support and student fees. The ISU administration is doing a good job managing expenses and updating facilities with private contributions -- that's how they are keeping their heads above water while generating only $253,000 in ticket sales for all sports. The good news is there is great potential to increase revenue with some success in the major sports.

 

[Skippy]

BTW, USA Today has an interesting table that shows the "subsidy rates" (percentage of total budget that is student fees and state money) for most of the Division I schools in the country:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2011-06-23-2011-athletic-department-subsidy-table_n.htm?loc=interstitialskip" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interestingly, Idaho State is one of the lowest subsidized schools in the Big Sky Conference at 61 percent. (Montana is the lowest by far, at 39 percent, followed by North Dakota, at 46 percent). Then come Montana State and Northern Colorado (62), Cal Poly (70), NAU (73), Southern Utah and Portland State (76), Eastern Washington and Cal Davis (77), and Sac State (78). (Weber State was not included in the table).

Idaho's budget is 52 percent subsidized, and Boise State's is 29 percent.

 

[Red Hill]

I'm not a math expert but if my calculations are correct, ISU brought 17 times more positive revenue than the other two schools.....combined!

 

[Skippy]

Your definition of "revenue" is a little different than most accountants' -- including the State Board's. BSU took in $36 million in revenue in FY 2010, and an estimated $32.7 million in FY11. ISU, by comparison, took in total revenue of $10.6 million in 2010 and $10.3 million in FY 11. I don't care how you slice that, BSU took in about 25.5 million more in 2010 and 22.4 million in FY 11.

Now it's true that BSU is SPENDING most of its revenue each year, while ISU is banking several hundred thousand dollars over the last two years. That's merely a function of decisions made by each athletic department on whether to bank or spend income from that particular year. I'm assuming BSU already has a healthy reserve fund it can dip into in the event cash flow doesn't meet projections in any given year. ISU probably has a much lower "reserve" fund, and therefore is putting away more for a rainy day in these two particular years.

But other than the issue of how much each school banks, there really is no comparison. As I noted above, ISU is doing a good job keeping expenses down and stretching revenues from "money games" to pay the bills. And if the major sports like football and basketball can turn things around, there is potential for significant revenue increases in the future.