Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="nzm136, post: 1681654, member: 2531"] Thank you for digging up the numbers. I've been saying this for years. The Big Ten has the best PR machine on the planet. Sure it's a very, very good conference, but the distance between the Big Ten and #3 isn't as big as they pretend. Depending on how they calculate conference revenue (i.e. if this is included) then they massively overstate it. They could very well have effectively passed ~$3 million dollars from their right hand to their left hand back to their right hand and counted it as revenue in 2009. Assume a conservative 3% yearly growth rate in the numbers (i.e. inflation and population growth) and, if this factors in as "conference revenue" (which I think it does), the B1G inflates distributions by $3.5 million dollars. Keep in mind that the B1G has a 6 year buy-in (i.e. only receiving partial distributions). Assuming that they start with a 50% payout and walk up to a 100% payout (i.e. average a 75% payout over those 6 years) and that the average total payout is $30 million (conservative going forward), then ignoring the time value of money (to be conservative) new additions will have invested $45 million in the conference by the time they are full members. If the opportunity cost was an 8% return on investment (i.e. roughly average for most endowments - SU has been just over 6% over the last 10 years, which included the Great Recession), then anything under a $3.6 million bump is a net loss (ignoring the impact of increased volatility from the network - to be conservative). Combined that means that the B1G is overstating revenues by between an estimated $3.6 million and $7.1 million per school. Given there's a $9-10 million nominal gap between the ACC and the B1G, the real gap is between $1.9 million and $6.4 million (my guess is closer to $1.9 million). Yes, it's better and it would be great if SU could have the extra couple of million, but it isn't close to what the B1G likes to pretend is going on. The B1G enjoys a better reputation (although FSU and Clemson are doing a good job narrowing the gap) and the ACC enjoys better recruiting territories. **Type "Syracuse Endowment Investment Performance" into google to see the endowment numbers over the last decade. EDIT: *The gap is bigger for the smaller schools (Northwestern, Rutgers, Purdue, etc.) than the bigger schools because the bigger schools are net losers when it comes to redistributing gate revenue. *It's also worth noting that conference membership extends beyond conference payouts. Many B1G teams travel well, and that is a huge monetary advantage that I'm not taking into account. Still, my basic point is that the conferences are closer than they appear. *Finally, it's worth noting that the above calculations don't apply as much to the SEC. They don't share gate and they spent way less buying back content (apparently they don't actually own the SECN - so I hear). As such, they are a legitimate #1 with a ~$7-8 million edge (back-of-the-envelope calc.), but they're locked into a really, really long term contract, so they are exposed to slightly different risks. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?