It's time to go on the record .... (OT drivel from our Kanigit friends)

[Meeps]

9 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Also because if you build a $250,000,000 stadium and have a 5.99% apr you would have to pay $17,967,232.68 a year to pay it off in 30 years which would be a net loss of $6.3 Million a year after debt service. 

Actually, it wouldn't be a net loss of $6.3 Million for 30 years. The interest goes down as the principal goes down. FAU has a VERY respectable stadium that cost them $70 million. You guys could do something like theirs but with increased capacity for around $90 million. The interest on that is $5,391,000 leaving you with a NET profit of $6,309,000. You could kill two birds with one stone. You get to flaunt that your stadium is better and you could make money your program sorely needs.

[puc86]

Just now, Meeps said:

Nah, in my mind - I would buy a house I could afford, build equity and upgrade as it made financial sense. You on the other hand seem to think renting at the top end of your budget makes sense. One scenario ends up with someone retiring early, the other one works till they die.

Show me how the quality of Spectrum is 5x less than Colorado State's stadium. Do they have leather recliners instead of bleechers? From a fan standpoint, there isn't going to be a dramatic difference that warrants the massively inflated price tag. You guys are honestly just spoiled and want to move the goal posts whenever someone shows you evidence of it.

My entire argument has been entirely fiscal and I have not moved the goal post once. We are in the minor leagues and I do not think in the current college football landscape the AAC can survive in its current form. Taking on massive debt with absolutely no exit strategy wouldn't be prudent and not something we should do since we have options. Should your options not have dried up your institution would also be continuing to rent. I also believe that should expansion present itself again our current stadium situation will be viewed preferable to yours. As for Colorado State's stadium being superior it didn't need millions in required repairs within its first decade. Perhaps your stadium will hold up long enough for your to realize its financial benefit but the start has not gone particularly swimmingly. 

[puc86]

4 minutes ago, Meeps said:

Actually, it wouldn't be a net loss of $6.3 Million for 30 years. The interest goes down as the principal goes down. FAU has a VERY respectable stadium that cost them $70 million. You guys could do something like theirs but with increased capacity for around $90 million. The interest on that is $5,391,000 leaving you with a NET profit of $6,309,000. You could kill two birds with one stone. You get to flaunt that your stadium is better and you could make money your program sorely needs.

My math was working backwards to how much you would have to pay every single month for you to pay the stadium off in 30 years so while yes less would be going to principal at the beginning the payments and net loss would be the same. Also there are more expenses to ownership that are not being captured and expenses are always more than estimates. Once again if the stadium was an obviously profitable idea it would have been built hundreds of times over yet for some strange reason it hasn't. We don't need to downgrade to a ****** stadium and take debt just to make you be able to sleep better with the choice your program was forced into.   

[Meeps]

1 minute ago, puc86 said:

My entire argument has been entirely fiscal and I have not moved the goal post once. We are in the minor leagues and I do not think in the current college football landscape the AAC can survive in its current form. Taking on massive debt with absolutely no exit strategy wouldn't be prudent and not something we should do since we have options. Should your options not have dried up your institution would also be continuing to rent. I also believe that should expansion present itself again our current stadium situation will be viewed preferable to yours. As for Colorado State's stadium being superior it didn't need millions in required repairs within its first decade. Perhaps your stadium will hold up long enough for your to realize its financial benefit but the start has not gone particularly swimmingly. 

Please elaborate how it can't survive. The AAC has done fine on $2 million annually. But it can't sustain itself after getting a 3x+ raise at $7 million on average? More than any other G5 conference by far? How do any of the other G5's survive in these apocalyptic conditions?  I don't see any other program closing its doors other than UConn but that's because their administration is completely inept.

You're right - taking on massive debt in the AAC is dumb. That's why building something that GENERATES money makes even more sense from both a short and long term perspective. Should expansion present itself, boom - now you can offset a massive stadium capacity upgrade through increased conference revenue.

As far as repairs are concerned, UCF didn't pay those millions of dollars in repairs.  In September, the school sued contractors and architects who built the stadium during an 18-month period. While its unfortunate that there was structural issues, it didn't cost UCF more money to have the issue rectified, so the point is moot.

[puc86]

4 minutes ago, Meeps said:

Please elaborate how it can't survive. The AAC has done fine on $2 million annually. But it can't sustain itself after getting a 3x+ raise at $7 million on average? More than any other G5 conference by far? How do any of the other G5's survive in these apocalyptic conditions?  I don't see any other program closing its doors other than UConn but that's because their administration is completely inept.

You're right - taking on massive debt in the AAC is dumb. That's why building something that GENERATES money makes even more sense from both a short and long term perspective. Should expansion present itself, boom - now you can offset a massive stadium capacity upgrade through increased conference revenue.

As far as repairs are concerned, UCF didn't pay those millions of dollars in repairs.  In September, the school sued contractors and architects who built the stadium during an 18-month period. While its unfortunate that there was structural issues, it didn't cost UCF more money to have the issue rectified, so the point is moot.

Because that is a tenth of what the teams we are trying to compete with are bringing in, at some point something has to give. Maybe there will be a luxury tax that allows us to play small ball but more than likely the P5 will continue the move they have already started in separation that will continue to grow the wealth disparity and g5 schism until its no longer sustainable. Let me take you at your word that you spent zero extra dollars on the first wave of repairs but the question still remains do you think that is the end of it and that it will get better over time or that the contractor will be responsible for life just because you tried to build something out of tinker toys that holds 45k people?

Edited August 6, 2019 by puc86

[Meeps]

4 minutes ago, puc86 said:

My math was working backwards to how much you would have to pay every single month for you to pay the stadium off in 30 years so while yes less would be going to principal at the beginning the payments and net loss would be the same. Also there are more expenses to ownership that are not being captured and expenses are always more than estimates. Once again if the stadium was an obviously profitable idea it would have been built hundreds of times over yet for some strange reason it hasn't. We don't need to downgrade to a ****** stadium and take debt just to make you be able to sleep better with the choice your program was forced into.   

This is EXACTLY what i'm talking about. It is and CAN be profitable. You guys are just trying to build something that doesn't make any financial sense and so you sit there doing nothing. At the end of the day, as a fan - we have no say in what either administration does. I just find it laughable how you think the powers that be automatically always make the right decisions. 

I could argue that the profits might be higher, donations might be more. The bottom line is, it can be done and is being done. There is precedent. It doesn't make me sleep better or worse watching your program flounder. But it does bring my significant joy watching your team get beat. Speaking of which, we you owe you all another one for taking out our QB. I saw a comment how you guys think you're going to topple GT/Wiscy and UCF this season. It always amazes me how little information there is to base this off like your going to be world beaters every year and then like always - come up short.

[puc86]

2 minutes ago, Meeps said:

This is EXACTLY what i'm talking about. It is and CAN be profitable. You guys are just trying to build something that doesn't make any financial sense and so you sit there doing nothing. At the end of the day, as a fan - we have no say in what either administration does. I just find it laughable how you think the powers that be automatically always make the right decisions. 

I could argue that the profits might be higher, donations might be more. The bottom line is, it can be done and is being done. There is precedent. It doesn't make me sleep better or worse watching your program flounder. But it does bring my significant joy watching your team get beat. Speaking of which, we you owe you all another one for taking out our QB. I saw a comment how you guys think you're going to topple GT/Wiscy and UCF this season. It always amazes me how little information there is to base this off like your going to be world beaters every year and then like always - come up short.

And yet somehow we beat you more often than not. 

[Meeps]

3 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Because that is a tenth of what the teams we are trying to compete with are bringing in, at some point something has to give. Maybe there will be a luxury tax that allows us to play small ball but more than likely the P5 will continue the move they have already started in separation that will continue to grow the wealth disparity and g5 schism until its no longer sustainable. 

UCF beat Baylor and Auburn and almost LSU with a fraction of the resources they have. Money isn't synonymous with records. Look at Texas, they make more money than any other program and its a landslide. They haven't been relevant since the early 2000's. There are too many P5 programs to list that literally have ZERO to show for the massive amount of money they generate. If UCF didn't win in 2017, there is no doubt in my mind you guys would have had a great shot at downing Auburn.

[Meeps]

2 minutes ago, puc86 said:

And yet somehow we beat you more often than not. 

And yet in this decade we are 4-2 with a high probability of being 5-2. Enjoy the record while it lasts. We also have dominated you every War and I4 since it's inception. The pendulum has completely shifted and you're living in the past recalling the glory days.

[puc86]

11 minutes ago, Meeps said:

UCF beat Baylor and Auburn and almost LSU with a fraction of the resources they have. Money isn't synonymous with records. Look at Texas, they make more money than any other program and its a landslide. They haven't been relevant since the early 2000's. There are too many P5 programs to list that literally have ZERO to show for the massive amount of money they generate. If UCF didn't win in 2017, there is no doubt in my mind you guys would have had a great shot at downing Auburn.

Money may not be synonymous with records but it is synonymous with viability. As they continue to make more of it and more than likely continue to separate themselves from the NCAA and the G5 things will continue to look increasingly bleak for the P6 business model. There isn’t a team in the P5 that would trade their position for your recent success because time is on their side, while we are in the AAC it’s not on ours.