Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

csu Could Be In Financial Trouble

I think we can stop wondering if Mike Bobo's seat is hot-it isn't. They can't afford to fire him. Too bad we have to wait two years to go up there and put 60 on them on that field.
 
ahoelsken said:
I think we can stop wondering if Mike Bobo's seat is hot-it isn't. They can't afford to fire him. Too bad we have to wait two years to go up there and put 60 on them on that field.
Click to expand...
They will be recycling Gatorade by November.
 
bigbang2 said:
It shouldn't be a problem for CSU to pay back the bonds.
Click to expand...
Without going beyond AD and student fee revenues? Sure, the university won't default. But that money has to be taken from somewhere and the athletic department doesn't have it.
 
SuperiorBuff said:
CSU will be on the FCS within the decade. It will be very cool watching them dominate there.
Click to expand...

I have advocated this for years.

Before they did the stadium they were subsidizing the athletic program from student fees and school funds at a rate of close to $15 million a year. Now the total subsidy is closer to $23 million a year from all sources.

They have lived on fantasies and false projections for decades. The new stadium was supposed to be the miracle cure. Suddenly they would have close to twice as many fans show up for games and a P5 conference would come in and invite them to collect a whole bunch of money. It isn't going to happen.

At their height when Sonny was winning big games and they were at or near the strongest program in the nation from a mid-major conference they were barely at or more often below 30k a game in home attendance. In recent years they have had trouble averaging 20k and have had some individual games were the actual number of fans in the stadium (not tickets sold) was probably much closer to 10k.

This all with a ticket pricing structure that is significantly lower than any of the P5 schools I have looked at. The revenues aren't there and even if they were to have a much better product on the field the revenues won't be there.

FCS for them would mean accepting that they aren't big time which is far and away the biggest obstacle they have. It would probably result in a school president getting fired and half the board of agriculture (their governing body) needing body guards.

It though would also mean that they could do away with throwing good money after bad. The entire athletic budget for UNC in Greeley is about $15 million a year. CSU has the resources to go well above this and still cut huge amounts out of their yearly budget simply by competing at a more realistic level for them.

https://www.coloradoan.com/story/sp...letics-among-highest-mountain-west/746945002/
 
MtnBuff said:
I have advocated this for years.

Before they did the stadium they were subsidizing the athletic program from student fees and school funds at a rate of close to $15 million a year. Now the total subsidy is closer to $23 million a year from all sources.

They have lived on fantasies and false projections for decades. The new stadium was supposed to be the miracle cure. Suddenly they would have close to twice as many fans show up for games and a P5 conference would come in and invite them to collect a whole bunch of money. It isn't going to happen.

At their height when Sonny was winning big games and they were at or near the strongest program in the nation from a mid-major conference they were barely at or more often below 30k a game in home attendance. In recent years they have had trouble averaging 20k and have had some individual games were the actual number of fans in the stadium (not tickets sold) was probably much closer to 10k.

This all with a ticket pricing structure that is significantly lower than any of the P5 schools I have looked at. The revenues aren't there and even if they were to have a much better product on the field the revenues won't be there.

FCS for them would mean accepting that they aren't big time which is far and away the biggest obstacle they have. It would probably result in a school president getting fired and half the board of agriculture (their governing body) needing body guards.

It though would also mean that they could do away with throwing good money after bad. The entire athletic budget for UNC in Greeley is about $15 million a year. CSU has the resources to go well above this and still cut huge amounts out of their yearly budget simply by competing at a more realistic level for them.

https://www.coloradoan.com/story/sp...letics-among-highest-mountain-west/746945002/
Click to expand...

CSU can be a competitive G-5 program. Just because they suck now doesn't mean they will always suck.
 
By the way my biggest concern about the financial issues at CSU is how they could impact CU.

The financial structures are completely different between the two schools. CU athletics officially pays it own way and actually due to some interesting accounting methods the school makes money from athletics. As stated above CSU is the opposite.

My concern is that if eventually CSU is unable to pay the bonds on the stadium without taking large amounts of funds from the schools general funds. This could create a backlash that would make it much harder for all schools in Colorado to use debt based funding for major projects despite the fact that CU has done many of them and managed them well with little risk to the schools general funds or the taxpayers.
 
BuffsNYC said:
CSU can be a competitive G-5 program. Just because they suck now doesn't mean they will always suck.
Click to expand...

I have never said anything different than that.

What I am saying though is that they do not have the support that will ever make them financially viable without significant subsidies. In times when funding is tight everywhere it doesn't make sense for them to continue to try to compete in at a level where they will only continue to fall further behind.
 
Ordinarily, I’d take this opportunity to say “I told you so”. Problem is, this kind of fiasco can have a ripple effect on operations in Boulder, too. A colossal failure in Ft Collins makes people wonder if the same thing could happen in Boulder when it comes time to renovate Balch and the West/ Northwest side of Folsom.
 
“The stoners in Boulder and the single-cell organisms in Laramie must be laughing their "GDFAO" at us.”

I literally fell off of my couch laughing at this statement. It’s the first thing that csu is right about.
 
Not Sure said:
Ordinarily, I’d take this opportunity to say “I told you so”. Problem is, this kind of fiasco can have a ripple effect on operations in Boulder, too. A colossal failure in Ft Collins makes people wonder if the same thing could happen in Boulder when it comes time to renovate Balch and the West/ Northwest side of Folsom.
Click to expand...
No.
 
FAKE NEWS.

Those articles do not mention the $50 million that CSU has on hand for the stadium. Those are being kept in reserve in case CSU can't meet the bond payment for the year. CSU made more than enough last season that they did not have to tap into that $50 million. CSU did some very conservative projections before deciding to go ahead with the stadium. CSU had no choice but to build the stadium because they were facing $30-$50 million in deferred maintenance that no one was willing to fund along with the necessary renovations to get the stadium up to date which would have cost at least half of the cost of the new stadium itself.

CU has collected at least $65 million in capital funds (not the endowment) for the Champions Center and I imagine CU is treating that fund the same way. If CU at least breaks even with the AD, CU doesn't have to tap into that $65+ million. Who knows about CU & CSU putting that $ in a bank and letting interest accumulate which could help speed up the timetable to pay off the bonds.

Also people always forget that athletics pays the cost of the scholarships of the players which goes to the school. Suppose the school gives $10 million and the AD pays the $5 million scholarship bill, the school is actually only investing $5 million not $10 million. The average fan does not necessarily have access to the financial flow charts of the athletic department and it's possible that according to the law, the athletic departments do not have to release those figures. I am an accountant with the federal government and there are things that have to be disclosed to the public and things that do not have to be disclosed to the public (blame your congress leaders) and the school and its athletic departments could be subject to similar regulations.

I have talked to CSU fans on the MWC board and they are reasonably aware about what is going on. They have mentioned that there are still factions of the Save Our Stadium group still bitter about having a new stadium on campus and they have been spreading misinformation such as costs that the campus not the athletic department has to cover when it comes to the stadium and the new parking structures were long planned plus many other things independent from the athletic department.

I would dismiss those articles mentioned in this thread as reactionary to CSU's poor start. Those morons probably don't understand how the money flows and they don't understand that CSU has already collected money for the season on those premium seating sections at the new stadium pays a significant portion of the bills for the bonds.
 
They need to go heavy into the flea market business. Partner that with stock shows and they can finance the payment on the 70 yard indoor facility.
 
Jalapeno said:
FAKE NEWS.

Those articles do not mention the $50 million that CSU has on hand for the stadium. Those are being kept in reserve in case CSU can't meet the bond payment for the year. CSU made more than enough last season that they did not have to tap into that $50 million. CSU did some very conservative projections before deciding to go ahead with the stadium. CSU had no choice but to build the stadium because they were facing $30-$50 million in deferred maintenance that no one was willing to fund along with the necessary renovations to get the stadium up to date which would have cost at least half of the cost of the new stadium itself.

CU has collected at least $65 million in capital funds (not the endowment) for the Champions Center and I imagine CU is treating that fund the same way. If CU at least breaks even with the AD, CU doesn't have to tap into that $65+ million. Who knows about CU & CSU putting that $ in a bank and letting interest accumulate which could help speed up the timetable to pay off the bonds.

Also people always forget that athletics pays the cost of the scholarships of the players which goes to the school. Suppose the school gives $10 million and the AD pays the $5 million scholarship bill, the school is actually only investing $5 million not $10 million. The average fan does not necessarily have access to the financial flow charts of the athletic department and it's possible that according to the law, the athletic departments do not have to release those figures. I am an accountant with the federal government and there are things that have to be disclosed to the public and things that do not have to be disclosed to the public (blame your congress leaders) and the school and its athletic departments could be subject to similar regulations.

I have talked to CSU fans on the MWC board and they are reasonably aware about what is going on. They have mentioned that there are still factions of the Save Our Stadium group still bitter about having a new stadium on campus and they have been spreading misinformation such as costs that the campus not the athletic department has to cover when it comes to the stadium and the new parking structures were long planned plus many other things independent from the athletic department.

I would dismiss those articles mentioned in this thread as reactionary to CSU's poor start. Those morons probably don't understand how the money flows and they don't understand that CSU has already collected money for the season on those premium seating sections at the new stadium pays a significant portion of the bills for the bonds.
Click to expand...

This makes me happy since Coloradoans bailing out the lamb chops would be an utter debacle.

Seeing general dismay and anger from ram nation is a net positive independent of their attempts to spread misinformation.

Win + win
 
manhattanbuf said:
This makes me happy since Coloradoans bailing out the lamb chops would be an utter debacle.

Seeing general dismay and anger from ram nation is a net positive independent of their attempts to spread misinformation.

Win + win
Click to expand...
There was a never a risk of CSU defaulting on the bonds or CO tax payers having to bail them out.

The risk, which I believe is real, is that the facility does not provide revenues in excess of what it costs to build, finance and manage the property. That would cause more money from the CSU general university fund to go to the athletic department than they already spend to keep it running.
 
I don’t take any pleasure in this if it is true.

Yeah, I’m done playing the Rams every year. Yeah, their fans tend to be delusional and green with envy.

But, CSU is still a state school in the state I love and call home. Not my school obviously, but still part of our state. I don’t wish them any ill will.
 
Buffnik said:
There was a never a risk of CSU defaulting on the bonds or CO tax payers having to bail them out.

The risk, which I believe is real, is that the facility does not provide revenues in excess of what it costs to build, finance and manage the property. That would cause more money from the CSU general university fund to go to the athletic department than they already spend to keep it running.
Click to expand...

That risk is mitigated by that $50 million cash on hand that the Rams have. Bonds are generally paid off in 30 years and CSU has successfully paid off three years of those bonds so far (they paid the first two years of construction hence the extra bond money). The nice thing is that the bond payments at the time of the sale had very low interest rates.

Notice CU's $90M+ athletic budget from the most recent fiscal year available? The bond payments on the Champions Center is part of that. If CU at least breaks even without having to tap into that $65M+ cash on hand, that's great news. Same thing for CSU. The MWC's media rights will be under a new contract starting in 2020 and chances are good that money is going up anyway...it's not like the MWC schools make a lot of money off media rights anyway. The cost of the premium seats will keep going up no matter what.

And don't forget they have people like Stryker who could write another check but it doesn't have to equal the amount remaining on the bonds as long as CSU can reasonably meet the bond payments for the remainder of the time it takes to retire the bonds. There's also the possibility that CSU gets a P5 invite even if it seems unlikely at this point because CSU is currently only one of three schools in the MWC who meet the tier one VHRU status as a school and the other two are Hawaii and New Mexico so CSU is the most obvious school who would make that move. The P5 media revenue would get those bonds retired quickly and CSU can sell bonds again to expand the capacity of the stadium and add more premium seating options which alone would be enough to pay off the bonds on their own.

And speaking of taxpayers, both CU & CSU's money from the state might not even hit 5% of the total budget so what's the point of bringing up taxpayers into the equation?
 
Jalapeno said:
FAKE NEWS.

Those articles do not mention the $50 million that CSU has on hand for the stadium. Those are being kept in reserve in case CSU can't meet the bond payment for the year. CSU made more than enough last season that they did not have to tap into that $50 million. CSU did some very conservative projections before deciding to go ahead with the stadium. CSU had no choice but to build the stadium because they were facing $30-$50 million in deferred maintenance that no one was willing to fund along with the necessary renovations to get the stadium up to date which would have cost at least half of the cost of the new stadium itself.

CU has collected at least $65 million in capital funds (not the endowment) for the Champions Center and I imagine CU is treating that fund the same way. If CU at least breaks even with the AD, CU doesn't have to tap into that $65+ million. Who knows about CU & CSU putting that $ in a bank and letting interest accumulate which could help speed up the timetable to pay off the bonds.

Also people always forget that athletics pays the cost of the scholarships of the players which goes to the school. Suppose the school gives $10 million and the AD pays the $5 million scholarship bill, the school is actually only investing $5 million not $10 million. The average fan does not necessarily have access to the financial flow charts of the athletic department and it's possible that according to the law, the athletic departments do not have to release those figures. I am an accountant with the federal government and there are things that have to be disclosed to the public and things that do not have to be disclosed to the public (blame your congress leaders) and the school and its athletic departments could be subject to similar regulations.

I have talked to CSU fans on the MWC board and they are reasonably aware about what is going on. They have mentioned that there are still factions of the Save Our Stadium group still bitter about having a new stadium on campus and they have been spreading misinformation such as costs that the campus not the athletic department has to cover when it comes to the stadium and the new parking structures were long planned plus many other things independent from the athletic department.

I would dismiss those articles mentioned in this thread as reactionary to CSU's poor start. Those morons probably don't understand how the money flows and they don't understand that CSU has already collected money for the season on those premium seating sections at the new stadium pays a significant portion of the bills for the bonds.
Click to expand...

Am I the only one who is concerned about them going off half cocked and pulling money out of there to buy out this staff when they win 2 games this year?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top