Meeps

Also, give me access to the main forums. You said my presence was a nice change from bull on bull in-fighting. Let me spread the wealth.  C'mon, there's nothing like a good ol fashion gang jumping every now and then.

3 hours ago, Triple B said:

Peeps, although 100 more pages of you droning on and whining about this would be mildly entertaining, how about we leave it like this. An ocs is a better option, financially, long term but at this point in time USF has decided, and most concerned parties agree, that an ipf is a more critical NEED and that’s where we are. 

The necessity of an IPF was never in question. I appreciate - if nothing else, you're consistent. It's kind of a shame we've hit the end of the line. I was really hoping you'd at least attempt to rebut why renting was better, but it's clear you never believed that in the first place, and neither does Puc. Hopefully you guys will figure it out before the chairs realign in 2024 and if not, i'll be interested to see how that works out for you come realignment time.

2 hours ago, Triple B said:

Fitting 45,000 in that death trap that's supposed to seat 45,000 should be some sort of code violation.

This might surprise you but this happens across the country during big games. We have concourses that people can stand at the top of stadium to view the game. Some of this area has been blocked off because our AD build Loge suites + Roth Tower connects to this concourse. But there is about 280 degrees of standing room at the top that is unused.

There is also standing room available in front of mid level seats that are elevated, so the people standing in these areas don't block people's view. Normally that space is used to go from one section to another, or down below where the concessions are. 45,000 is seats available, that's not max capacity. Between those two areas, they could probably hit 50k.

2 hours ago, Triple B said:

It's amazing that in a half a sentence you've said basically the same thing that it's taken Meeps thousands and thousands of wasted words to try and convey .... without specific figures from a feasibility study for a USF ocs, there's no way for someone to compare the financial advantages/disadvantages of having a USF ocs versus renting Ray Jay without just conveying their opinion.

I guess this is further proof that you would rather stick your head in the sand when information is being presented from a non-bull that highlights EXACTLY why my point made sense that having an OCS is superior than renting a stadium. Instead, you opt for a fellow-bull's opinion that wasn't really backed up by anything other than it being his opinion. And you call Knight fans delusional? 

Delusional: a disorder where a person has trouble recognizing reality. A delusion is a false belief that is based on an incorrect interpretation of reality. 

The reality is that there are numerous reasons why an OCS is better, and by saying that the only way to know for sure is to have a feasibility study is EXACTLY why you're delusional. You can't admit reality because you willfully ignore evidence and use a bogus premise that "well gee - if only we had done an OCS feasibility study" - Newsflash, you did! Why don't you go through that feasibility study and prove me wrong?

12 minutes ago, Triple B said:

John, if there is info out there that actually shows USF would be financially better off at this point in an ocs over renting RayJay, AND has the resources to build one now, please help Meeps out by providing it. 

This is exactly what i'm talking about. You have other people try to make points for you instead of addressing them directly yourself; and then you talk big after Puc, et al come back with counter points.

Why don't YOU show how any of what I posted is incorrect? Why don't you break down your financial statements showing why renting is financially superior? We've already done the groundwork for you. Simply click on the link, go through the itemized lines and form a coherent argument in support of renting.  

But you're not going to do that. It's simple, you can't. There are an overwhelming amount of reasons why an OCS is better than renting. And until you can articulate why there are more reasons to rent, than own an OCS - my point remains proven.

On 8/3/2019 at 6:00 PM, Triple B said:

You have not provided ANY fact based reasons why an ocs would be financially better for USF.

From a fan standpoint, we all agree it would be a much better USF centric experience and it will be easier for our lazier students to get to a game. There are no other fact based reasons.

No you're right. Renting a stadium and not getting to take advantage of "keeping the dollars associated with tickets, parking, suites, and concessions" must be an opinion, not a fact - according to you. I've already shown that UCF is turning a net positive profit of 3+ million per season and thats AFTER the stadium debt/interest is being paid off and is on track to have the whole stadium paid off in 20 years. That's a fact. It's also a fact that the maintenance over a 20 year period is also going to be FAR less than the money you're losing out over renting Ray Jay for 20 years. That statement alone trumps any argument, period. As Puc says, the blue chip programs have had stadiums that have been paid off for decades and they are reaping the rewards for that initial investment.

Trying to equate a $50 million dollar OCS investment versus a $500 million-$1 billion dollar NFL stadium is not even apples to oranges. It's like apples to durian. Those massive stadiums aren't nearly as lucrative due to the incredible amount of interest alone being paid annually. 

To recap - these are facts:

1. In the AAC - a 65k stadium that can only be filled to half unless playing FSU/UF etc does not trump a normal AAC schedule where the stadium is filled at half capacity. 

2. The "home game" advantage is 100% apparent with an OCS. (https://247sports.com/LongFormArticle/College-football-toughest-environments-2019-Clemson-Alabama-Texas-Georgia-Ohio-State-UCF-127802172/#127802172_6)

• Stands very close to the field (far, far closer than others)
• Enclosed stadium, with echoing aluminum

That's how 47K sounds like 70K. We pack 47K in much, much closer than other stadiums pack in <45K in their lower bowl.

"Many of the players said they were able to feed off the energy of the announced crowd of 47,795 in attendance at Spectrum Stadium.
“Knight Nation was unreal,” Connors said. “That was the loudest … even away games, when we were at Michigan or South Carolina … that was the loudest stadium I’ve ever been in.

3. Team pride is exponentially elevated when the home game is played on the school's campus compared to off site in a rented stadium.

4. Bringing alumni BACK to campus, has a profound effect on people willing to donate and not just attend games.

5. Paying off a stadium WHILE STILL having money left over trumps renting a stadium and LOSING money yearly.

6. The fan experience derived from being in an OCS where traditions take root is what college football is all about. No matter how many gators fill  up Ray Jay, it's never going to come close to what it will be like on black friday this year. (Even Chris Fowler and Herbstreit mentioned this during the UCF/Cincinatti game last year [that an OCS experience trumps college NFL stadium games).

7. Our net position will continue to increase year after year as the interest goes down and thus, more money being made from each home game will allow for higher coaching salaries and thus a better chance to hold onto successful coaches.

8. Being able to modify the stadium at will based on the needs of the conference (i.e. adding more and more luxury suites, expanding Roth tower, adding stadium wide alcohol and all the revenue generated goes to the school) is fundamentally better than watching that income go to the Glazers/City of Tampa Bay.

TripleB, feel free to dispute any of these in favor of your current situation being superior than finding a way to build an OCS.

Just now, Triple B said:

You and Square are fighting different battles.

I've ignored all the "facts" you've thrown this way because none of them have proved a thing toward an ocs being better for us than renting at this time. We are at a different place than you were when you built yours, and are at a different place than you now, but you refuse to recognize that. As far as riding puc's coattails, we all have different ways of getting points across. Puc's way is the long and winding, somewhat tedious at times, one like yours. My way is to go through and mine puc's stuff for Cliff Notes versions that maybe will get through to you quicker. Both approaches seem to be failing woefully.

 

First, I can't remove you. Second, you are providing an invaluable service board and I would be negligent in my duties to hamper that.

I stand corrected, you are capable of producing a post without being disparaging in the process. Puc's way involves producing points and counterpoints, yours posts fail to address anything specifically. One could say your approach is the ol' college group project effort. Supply a bunch of fluff and see if anything sticks. When that fails, use name calling as a distraction. Both approaches failed woefully because there hasn't been a single thing either of you have said that has shown why renting is superior in any way, regardless of where our two programs are or have been. On the other hand, we've provided a myriad of reasons why an OCS is better from both a financial and fan standpoint. We'll just have to agree to disagree since you vehemently think we're wrong, and facts be damned.

2 minutes ago, puc86 said:

We are both on the same titanic, you just happened to pack a giant anchor with you. The AAC and being G5 is what’s dragging us down and not our stadium situation. It’s not simple for you to understand because while this is the worst conference situation we have been in it’s sadly the best you have ever had. If some conference decides you know what we need? A high school stadium to force our fans to travel to then you will be right and I will be wrong but to date we seem to have done a much better job of figuring out what conferences want, but don’t fret your little head because I’m sure this will be the time you finally get it right and we get wrong.

What high school stadiums have 44,000 seats? Hint: there aren't any. However, there are several P5 teams that don't even have stadiums with as many seats as we have. Furthermore, the stadium was built from the ground up with the capability of going to 65,000. But, you know - facts and all that be damned. 

Saying this AAC is the best for us and the worst for you, is a red herring and has zero to do with the current discussion. If what you guys are doing is superior, why is usf never a front runner in expansion discussions? If usf is mentioned, it is ALWAYS in conjunction with UCF. However, there are plenty of references saying UCF + Cinci/Houston makes more sense.

As for saying your program has done a better job at figuring out what conferences, what specifically has usf done? That's like saying, well - I played the lottery and won. It wasn't luck, I am just good!! If you think this time we'll get it right, and you won't - then I guess there is a part of you that believes we've done something superior. Care to shed some light on that? 

1 hour ago, puc86 said:

What if it makes sense for us to be fine with that? Is it completely unfathomable to  you that circumstances dictated to you that it was in your best interest to build a stadium but circumstances could dictate that it’s in our best interest to rent RayJay?

If you truly believe that, hey - that's great. I know there are a number of members here who disagree with that notion. Enjoy rearranging chairs on the deck of the titanic. Like I mentioned before, you should pay a visit to Orlando and see for yourself what an OCS does for a program before you make any lasting judgement.

54 minutes ago, Triple B said:

If you have moved on it's because you gave up trying to actually prove it, because you certainly haven't ...... that part hasn't gone over my head.

Do you find that throwing insults at people and offering zero to discussions, works in real life? In addition to the barrage of insults, you come across like you've actually proven something. Here's a newsflash - you haven't offered a single thing to disprove anything of what I or SquareKnight have presented. Instead, you have rode Puc's coat tails, all the while ignoring all the facts we've thrown your way. 

It's absolutely comical that you think I haven't proved my point and then some. But this is to be expected from someone like you where rationale and discourse is clearly above your capability. Now that i've exposed just how inept you are, i'm sure the next step for you is to remove me from the board. Then again, that would just prove my point.

31 minutes ago, puc86 said:

No one in authority was here for that, if it was an obvious profit center there would be no better way to make their mark then to take on a sexy project like building an OCS. That no one is clamoring to do so speaks more to my position than yours. If something makes more money and makes fans happy then it’s a no brainer but for some reason people looking at the numbers keep shelfing the idea, there is a reason for that.

According to the feasibility study, there is interest in an OCS, just not what was proposed. The study suggested building a lavish 30k seat stadium for a ridiculous amount of money. That doesn't satisfy two things, 1. 30k isn't large enough and 2. A $200+ million dollar stadium would be incredibly taxing on the athletics department.

It takes vision to see that having an OCS; one that is affordable has long term benefit. But your standards are through the roof of what you should build and thus the lack of any forward traction. As they say, a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. The longer your athletics procrastinates about building an OCS - the farther out of reach it will become.

Just now, puc86 said:

$3 million has nothing to do with football that’s all of Athletics  (well it 40% has to do with football). If an OCS is as obviously lucrative as you suggest and is a popular notion with the fans then why do you believe USF decides to leave money on the table and upset fans and you guys didn’t do it until your hand was forced?

Because your program was elevated to the Big East without a body of work that justified the move. You've tasted the finer things in life and are in denial that it's all going to come back. You play at an NFL stadium and swallowing the pill of a Spectrum stadium-like OCS would be like going from the CEO to a mid-level manager. The difference is, the ladder can be climbed back up but you're not ready or willing. Instead, you stay unemployed sending out your resume to CEO jobs but that phone is never going to ring.

Just now, puc86 said:

They are separate ideas. 1) you collect more student fees 2) you have a temporary attendance boom from success. Neither the fees nor the boom can be attributed to an OCS and both can exist sans an OCS. That you have had poor attendance in your OCS is further proof that an OCS is not the magic bullet that is suggested.

This is a false equivalence. There is a reason UCF has been one of the top schools in the AAC year in and year out for attendance. No matter how much both programs inflate their numbers, UCF is averaging far more actual fans in the stadium than usf is and i'm not just referring to 2017 and 2018. You guys were 7-0 with an abysmal fan turnout. Maybe just maybe there are several facets that bring people to games and having pride is a major factor.

5 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Because if I make $5 it’s implied that I have $5 to spend at the end ( also it hasn’t been shown even close that $3 million is grossed). If Usf games are netting $3 million but we have to give all the food money back and pay rental fees it’s not any different on a balance sheet than if you are paying out all but $1.3 million of the gross for the entire season. Top dollar only uses to matter if you were an internet company looking to sell but in the real world you are what your profits say you are. As I’ve pointed out the US government brings in trillions of dollars but at the end of the day ends up negative trillions in the hole, no one thinks that’s better than bringing in a trillion dollars and ending up billions in the black. Let’s pretend UCF brings in $3 million a game but their expenses were more than $3 million a game would it be beneficial to try to bring in more of the $3 million dollar days? No of course not, why? Because profit is all that matters.

I think you're spinning your tires on this. It's a fact that after all the gross revenue and expenses come in, UCF is still making $3 million in profit (not per game, but at the end of the year). That number would be much higher but we keep adding more things to the stadium that have to be paid off first (comes out of the total profits) plus we owe several million in interest each year. It's also a fact that at the end of the year, usf is losing several million dollars that has to be subsidized.

4 minutes ago, puc86 said:

You collect more student fees and your attendance is up on us across the board because your football and basketball teams are performing better than they had in the history of the programs. When you fall back to 0-12 the numbers will not be particularly favorable regardless of where you play the games. Not long ago your OCS was a ghost town and since no one blamed the OCS for your attendance woes I’m not exactly sure how it gets all the credit for your current boom. It’s kind of like g-d I guess. If something goes right it’s all because of them and if something goes wrong it’s the devil. But didn’t g-d make the the devil? So what who cares, not there fault.

You kind of just proved our point. You said the difference is between our programs is based on the increased athletic fee's collected due to having a larger student body. "When you fall back to 0-12 the numbers will not be particularly favorable regardless of where you play the games" Does our student body population fluctuate based on what the football team is doing? The fee's collected when the team is doing well shouldn't be a major factor based on everything you've been saying.

Why would anyone blame the OCS due to a significant drop in attendance? Our coach basically mailed it in and the team essentially gave up. People aren't keen on spending money when that situation occurs (see usf's bowl attendance last year).

On 8/1/2019 at 4:46 PM, Triple B said:

You may want to give him a hand then because he's botching up that part royally ...... Stunningly, you seem the "sharper" of the two.

Botching what part up? We've already established that $2-$3 million in revenue per game is being attained. Puc steered the conversation to net versus gross. We've also proven that UCF is coming ahead in the green with making $3+ million in profits after settling the debt from stadium corp. So not only is the stadium being paid off, we're also making money. USF on the other hand is losing several million each year and that's without an OCS that comes with interest and maintenance.

I've moved onto OCS > Renting because we've moved past the initial conversation. That probably went over your head because like most usf fans, living in denial is far more gratifying than facing reality.

On 8/1/2019 at 3:10 PM, puc86 said:

Close but not exactly the ins and outs from that account are more offsetting than you are presenting and the account seems to be directly related to a form of Big East severance, other than that test that’s the USF balance sheet, I knew you could do it. UCF’s balance sheet seems more stable going forward but it doesn’t seem to be a stadium that’s a huge difference maker. If I were looking at it I would say raise the fees to match and not take on debt. You seem convinced that at some point the stadium will be paid off and net positive I think the history of stadiums says they age more like bread than fine wine and will be in need of a constant stream of costly repairs.  

So if the difference in revenue is not directly attributed to having an OCS, how is UCF's revenue significantly more than USF? The 2018-2019 numbers are going to show a larger and larger gap. Ray Jay is simply giving you guys a deal where you don't make much if any at all on home games. The Big East war chest is running out and Strong's salary is no longer being subsidized. UCF is constantly adding more and more revenue generating premium seating and amenities. If/when they ever do decide to do stadium wide alcohol sales, that number is going to balloon. The stadium will be paid off sooner rather than later and the ensuing maintenance will be a drop in the bucket compared to the interest on the initial loan.

In your defense, I do understand that a stadium with 30k seats is a non-starter. Instead of pretending like usf deserves an NFL quality stadium, why not see the hand writing on the wall and compromise? If not, you guys are going to get lapped.

On 7/29/2019 at 10:37 PM, puc86 said:

Since none of you can google, do basic research or read a balance sheet; we made $5 trillion dollars last season. Now prove me wrong like I did when you guys made an absurd claim also I did prove you don’t even gross $4 million much less make a third of it in an entire season.

Looks like you didn't make $5 trillion. 

https://www.usf.edu/business-finance/resource-management-analysis/documents/operating-budget-17-18.pdf

https://www.usf.edu/business-finance/resource-management-analysis/documents/operating-budget-18-19.pdf

According to this information USF athletics is losing money each year. 

2016-2017 Football related expenses: $10,605,958
2018-2019 Football related expenses: $9,495,317 

https://www.usf.edu/business-finance/resource-management-analysis/documents/operating-budget-17-18.pdf

2016-2017
Total Revenue: $40,594,297
Total Expenditures: $45,727,464

USF had to transfer in $7,316,244 to cover the expenses + whatever.

Ending balance: $2,184,031

2017-2018
Total Revenue: $35,669,815
Total Expenditures: $47,420,315

USF had to transfer in $9,745,777 to cover the expenses + whatever.

Ending balance $203

In contrast:

https://flauditor.gov/pages/nonprofit_forprofit rpts/2017 ucf athletics association inc.pdf

UCF has the following:

2016 
Total revenue: $52,394,526
Total expenses: $47,117,670

2017
Total revenue: $57,476,374
Total expenses: $48,901,937

No matter how you slice it, UCF is making significantly more money than usf is. And you guys? You have to have usf academics bail our your athletics each  year by transferring in millions. The cost of your athletics is about to go way up. 2018 and onward are going to show an even larger and larger divide. But keep sticking your head in the sand about renting is a better position for you guys.
 

3 minutes ago, Justin C said:

Even if you add ticket sales of 3,678,481 to change in net position of 1,427,226 that totals roughly 5.1 million for 2018. Still far short of $4 million per home game. As Puc mentioned earlier, revenue does not equal profit. Many companies operate with positive revenue and negative profits. We can all agree that UCF does not profit 4 million per home game as insinuated by the article from the Sentinel (the original basis for the constructive argument)

Yes, apparently I have been schooled more rigorously than you and I suggest reading up on the differences between revenue and profit. You're spinning your wheels here and clearly incapable of having an intelligent conversation.

Profit is not synonymous with net. I never claimed nor did Bianchi claim that there is a net profit of 4 million per home game. Based on the original premise that home games make $3-$4 million (per Bianchi), we don't have data to prove or disprove that. However, we can take numbers from previous years and see how much is actually coming in. While it did not show the range quoted, it shows that there is a net positive after all is said and done. You can claim that those numbers are subsidized by the student athletic fee, but every G5's athletic budget is subsidized in that manner. What I am suggesting is that UCF is better off with the OCS due to the very nature that owning > renting. There isn't an itemized spreadsheet that breaks down exactly what was made with football only versus what the expenses were football only. Since the vast majority of income is football related, we have to assume the lion share of the income is directly attributed to football.

I've repeatedly asked for you guys to show me how solvent your program is by renting so we can have a real discussion of whether renting really is superior, but instead - it looks like name calling and assumptions trump reason.

1 hour ago, Mission9 said:

It seems to me, if UCF fan wants to say that the stadium gives them a boost of pride, school spirit, or a better gameday atmosphere, most here would have no problem with that  opinion.  On the other hand, to say that UCF is making money hand over fist, or better yet, that USF should build their own stadium so that we can reap the benefits of all of the cash than an "OCS"  would bring is a bogus opinion.  The numbers do not lie.  If getting to a so called Power Conference is the main goal, I would argue that Raymond James is more power conference worthy than any OCS that USF could build right now. There is a guy on the radio who pounds the statement "Debt is dumb" on a daily basis.  If USF is stuck in AAC purgatory, I would have to say debt on a mini , bleacher filled stadium would be dumb since we do not have to build one at this time. 

First and foremost, renting something means your money goes automatically goes to a net negative. The only benefit to playing at Ray Jay is IF you move to a P5 - then it works out in your favor. However, as it stands, having an OCS that you can afford is going to be superior in pretty much every facet while in the AAC.

1. Game Day atmosphere is better. (No tarping off swaths of seats, having other teams stuff such as a pirate ship in there that detracts from your team.)

2. Enhances team pride

3. Brings Alumni back to campus

4. Modifiable to needs (can increase stadium seating, make more premium seating, alcohol sales etc...)

5. Having a true home allows the fan base to create/engage in tradition

At the end of the day, having an OCS garnered $4,959,403 from Game tickets, $3,945,893 in sponsorship, and $808,164 (other) which I assume includes concessions for the 2017 season. That comes to $1,618,910 per home game (x6) excluding the AAC Champ game.

Puc wanted the bottomline, which is a net positive of $3,355,218 thats AFTER all expenses including paying the stadium loan principal + interest which is on track to be done and paid off excluding maintenance/major additions in approximately 20 years. Let's just say maintenance over that time costs several million, then we'll say 25 years max. Not only do we reap the above benefits, we have an investment that is on track to be paid off while also pocketing additional revenue per year after expenses. Meanwhile, the cost of building an OCS continues to rise each year. By the time USF pulls the trigger, the same OCS (not saying you're going to build what we did) would cost north of $70 million.

Can you show me how USF is breaking even or making money at Ray Jay after expenses? USF has been receiving money from former big east departures and your HC's salary has been subsidized by Texas. Both of those are drawing to a close. Strong's salary jumps to $2.5 million in 2019. At the end of the day, when the numbers come out for the 2019 season and onwards, I think it's safe to say UCF is going to naturally bring in more and more money as each year goes by and the debt load from the stadium is diminished.

7 hours ago, puc86 said:

Except you can turn around and sell your home and that’s where the profit comes from, who would UCF be able to sell their stadium to? Also if you could pay it off and do not have to upgrade or invest in repairs it could also conceivably be more profitable at that point but I don’t think anyone honestly believes that your stadium won’t need repair in 20 years because it took at less than a decade to need hefty repairs. There is obviously nonfiscal benefits to an OCS, no one debates that. The question is how valuable is it when compared to actual dollars? Your hand was forced and the dollars aligned to emotional argument, ours are at odds with one another so the answer isn’t necessarily the same.

The need to sell the stadium isn't where the profit would come from. Having little to no debt on a stadium means that the bulk of the revenue generated from the stadium goes straight to profit. While it's true there are going to be upgrades and maintenance along the way, they won't be nearly as much as the stadium itself unless there is something major like adding 15,000 seats. Then again, that would also expedite the loan payment process. In the end, instead of rent (throwing money away) they are reinvesting into themselves by paying off the stadium.

1 minute ago, puc86 said:

Except revenue isn’t profit, I have no doubt and haven’t I argued that UCF doesn’t bring in near that amount what I question is it’s drasticly larger and more profitable than renting if there is a viable option. When expenses are paid what is left for UCF is $1.5 million for the entire season  which is still profit so that’s nice but hardly the drastic numbers that make a long term commitment the no brainer that was being presented. Having games in a stadium that you have either already paid for, are paying for or are paying rent for is more valuable than paying to not use it, I don’t see how that would be controversial.

Agreed. 1.5 million in profit is not a game changer and it appears that the stadium won't be paid off for approximately 20 years. Then again, I suppose the same argument could be made with renting a home versus buying a home. In the end, owning the home is always going to be better. Does USF profit from Ray Jay at all minus expenses?

5 hours ago, puc86 said:

First off, that was a direct quote from the Orlando Sentinel. I didn't make that up. It is an editorial that has no citation, the columnist made it up.

Secondly, if you are getting hung up on the $4 million mark. Its the number you gave.

I stand corrected, the figure is not $3-$4 million per home game. This was my misinterpretation from the quote from Bianchi's column.

The document you included does not go into detail on a per game analysis, however - it is safe to assume that the $3.571 million figure in the report is not the total revenue UCF made through the fiscal year of 2018. Gross does not equal net, it is possible to gross trillions of dollars and still net negative trillions of dollars, see the US government. 

A simple calculation of 44,000 seats x $100 dollars per seat (this is a rough average if you combined both seats that sell for $30 and seats that sell for $1000 and averaged them. That would amount to $4.4million for ONE game. A large portion of your stadium is student tickets that bring in zero dollars, the number of seats that would even be over $100 for a game is in the low thousands(not one seat is over $1K for a game). Roughly 2/3's of your stadium is between $0 -$15 a game, a truer blended average would maybe be around $30 (I am being generous). 

Looks like we were both wrong. Here is a quote: "UCF Athletics reported that football made $3.3 million in revenue from ticket sales last year, according to financial documents. The documents state football accounts for about 79 percent of revenue made from overall ticket sale, which totaled just over $4.1 million in 2017." That's where Bianchi got the $3 to $4 million dollar quote for home games. But instead of it being per game, it's the total revenue generated in the season. While it is certainly disappointing, the bottom line is that we are net positive after all expenses are paid for and the principal is going down on the stadium.

That doesn't include food/beverage sales and naming right income etc etc. If you combine our premium seating, (Cabana Club, Roth Tower, Loge suites and playing field level suites) you most certainly can get to the figure he is quoted saying. I would love to see the data, but once again grossing and making are way different and can still lose you money.

Here is another direct quote: "It’s no wonder White doesn’t want to schedule two-for-ones and give up a home game and the $3 million in revenue that comes with it." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/mike-bianchi-commentary/os-sp-ucf-aac-scheduling-mike-bianchi-0519-20190518-ugmegu3u6raotgtuvzoq3br74u-story.html%3foutputType=amp This is once again an incited quote of a columnist and is no better than quoting a message-board.

This is false, see above.

So to answer your question, yes it is entirely possible that UCF makes $3-4 million per home game after all is said and done and yes it is a cash cow.It is possible to make $1.5 million as provided by an actual audit of the actual numbers

 

Why do you think most P5's covet home games so much? Because they have attendance that is 2x yours, in a stadium that they paid off decades ago, with a fan base paying 5x the amount and with boosters that write large checks that demand it. 

This can't be, you said having an OCS was a money pit. Hence why NFL teams have the cities pay for them. Now you are saying having an OCS is a benefit?

Because they are trying to break even or need the home game advantage? We rent and we still tried to have 7 home games, as does Pitt, as does Miami as does a quarter of all FBS teams so certainly it must factor into the equation. 

I'd love to see what usf makes on their 7 home games from Ray Jay. Surely there has to be data on it.

On 7/19/2019 at 6:11 PM, Meeps said:

Like I said previously, we honestly don't care what you all do one way or another. You including a picture of a WVU game almost a decade prior in your presentation shows the B12 what exactly? That you can only fill a stadium in the past playing in your eyes a big time program? That doesn't bode well for the present.

You're 2-0 for conference expansion? What exactly do you think your athletic department did that warranted an invite? From what I can see, you had an astute AD who made good decisions but you certainly didn't have a body of work that earned it. Just like Rutgers, you were gifted into the club. 

If you think we all suggest that an OCS is something you shouldn't do, cool. I've experienced time and time again the atmosphere of our "erector set" stadium and it blows the doors off Ray Jay. Why? Because it's ours, B. The aluminium reflects sound and makes it sound twice as loud as a concrete stadium thus enhancing the noise factor and home field advantage and lastly, we are both in the AAC for the foreseeable future. 45,000 is a good number of seats for this league and we can max it. Ray Jay on the other hand never comes remotely filled, it's not yours, the sound is nothing like it is at Spectrum. I recommend making the trip to Orlando come black Friday and experience what the atmosphere is like first hand. It will be sold out again and we will show you just what you're all missing without an OCS.

First off, that was a direct quote from the Orlando Sentinel. I didn't make that up. Secondly, if you are getting hung up on the $4 million mark. The document you included does not go into detail on a per game analysis, however - it is safe to assume that the $3.571 million figure in the report is not the total revenue UCF made through the fiscal year of 2018. A simple calculation of 44,000 seats x $100 dollars per seat (this is a rough average if you combined both seats that sell for $30 and seats that sell for $1000 and averaged them. That would amount to $4.4million for ONE game. That doesn't include food/beverage sales and naming right income etc etc. If you combine our premium seating, (Cabana Club, Roth Tower, Loge suites and playing field level suites) you most certainly can get to the figure he is quoted saying. Here is another direct quote: "It’s no wonder White doesn’t want to schedule two-for-ones and give up a home game and the $3 million in revenue that comes with it." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/mike-bianchi-commentary/os-sp-ucf-aac-scheduling-mike-bianchi-0519-20190518-ugmegu3u6raotgtuvzoq3br74u-story.html%3foutputType=amp

So to answer your question, yes it is entirely possible that UCF makes $3-4 million per home game after all is said and done and yes it is a cash cow. Why do you think most P5's covet home games so much? Because they are trying to break even or need the home game advantage?

12 hours ago, BrassBulls12 said:

I went to one in orlando, probably won't go back. I had to walk a million forevers to get the to game. Basically a glorified high school experience, capped off by the busch league play clock hidden in the bottom corner because it doesn't fit on the scoreboard. 

You mind sharing what year that was?