While we’re on the subject of money…

Let AirForceDawg @ The Arch draw you a picture:

In Fiscal Year 2013, UGA’s Athletic Association realized $98.9M in revenues, $86M in operating expenses, and $9.6M in non-operating expenses (mainly debt payments). The $2.2M surplus was added to athletic association’s reserves (now $73.9M). Those reserves are offset by $109M in long-term construction debt.

Of the $98.9M, UGA Football raised $77,594,300 (~78.5%) while spending $26,325,257 (33.9%) of it on the program, making it the third most profitable program in FBS and the most profitable in the SEC (no trophy for that!). In comparison, Alabama was the fifth most profitable program in FBS, yet they chose to spend $14.2M more on their program that year than UGA did. Part of that money goes to pay their coaching staff ($5,635,803 more than UGA pays their staff). While Saban is the #1 paid Head Coach in FBS, Richt is tied for 18th. Similarly, Alabama’s assistants are the 2nd highest paid (LSU bested them by ~$285K) in FBS while UGA’s assistants are the 13th highest paid.

In other words, money should be no object.

This isn’t to advocate turning Athens into the next Knoxville.  I don’t think anybody believes that would be a healthy development.  But there shouldn’t be an ingrained reluctance to spend money on the football program in areas that would strengthen it.  Even if that’s merely for perception purposes on the recruiting trail.

28 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football, It's Just Bidness

28 responses to “While we’re on the subject of money…

  1. Hogbody Spradlin

    Is there a link in that post, or are the conference wide results available anywhere? I’d like to see Bama’s overall athletic department P&L.

    Like

  2. Macallanlover

    Well stated, Senator. People are not suggesting spending more just because the money is available to UGA, but if you don’t invest to strengthen your product you might as well be milking it because a plan to stay neutral is destined to cause your decline. In CFB these days, if you are treading water in an attempt to maintain the status quo, you are losing ground to your competitors and give them the momentum. The message our overmatched ad is sending is UGA will react when forced to but prefers to give our staff, players, and fans as little as we can get by with.

    Like

    • Chi-town Dawg

      +1. I previously included a link in a similar post 2-3 weeks and will look for it again. The thing that jumped out at me in the previous post/data was that while posting a surplus and growing revenue, our 5 year total revenue was growing at a MUCH slower rate than everyone else in the SEC to the point where even Ole Miss and MSU were now equal or ahead of us. In other words we’re falling farther and farther behind other top teams regionally and nationally by not re-investing in our brand. The BM crowd treats this business as a cash cow as opposed to a growth opportunity and the on field results in ALL sports reflect this methodology.

      Like

  3. This means McGarity is about to release another one of his statements. As much as we talked about comrades Muschamp and Dooley… agent McGarity might be the biggest weapon of all. I think the joke is on us.

    Like

  4. doofusdawg

    So the football program made a profit of $51,269,043.00 … which was used to cover the entire cost of the athletic department, all of the other sports programs and however much was given directly to the president’s office to support other non sports related expenditures for the university. I would like to know what that last number is.

    But what is abundantly clear is that Athen’s is still very much a football town… with an administrative problem. It looks like a constant battle between the football program and the administrative tax men to keep the lid on the program both cost wise and perception/success wise.

    Must be quite a balancing act to try not to kill the goose that lays the golden egg… while providing the minimum sustenance to keep those eggs a comin.

    Like

  5. Bright Idea

    UGA is trying to have its cake and eat it too. Coaches are taking less $$$ for the security and comfort of working for Richt. Whenever Richt has meekly rocked the boat about Jax. or the indoor facility he quickly climbs back into his shell. His contentment matched with winning just enough keeps the internal pressure off him and the AD. This whole mindset prevents UGA from having the edge it needs to win really big.

    Like

  6. joe

    Why do we have $109 million in construction debt? I would be curious to see what Alabama and lsu have for construction debt, as they both have recently made huge upgrades to their stadiums while we haven’t in 10 years.

    Perhaps the other schools charge facilities upgrades to the entire school rather than just to the athletic department?

    I also wonder if some boosters who own construction firms haven’t been bending us over on bids to build these post-modern eyesores that will need to be redone again in another 20 years or risk looking like a future vision of 2025 that was conceived by an architect’s 2010 eyes.

    What’s wrong with classic aesthetics? This theme that they appear to be leaning on at stegeman, the railroad side of sanford and Foley field looks ridiculous.

    Like

  7. Mark

    How much of that 98 mil includes the SEC network payout? I’m thinking that gross revenue number is going way up this year compared to the last few years.

    Like

    • Gaskilldawg

      None

      Like

      • Chi-town Dawg

        That figure should increase significantly in the next 2-3 years from the SEC network, new CFP playoff payouts which are skewed towards the SEC and the UGA 10% to 15% increase in ticket prices. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the above changes generate an additional an additional $12M to $15M a year for the school.

        Like

  8. JP

    I’m not a finance guy, but $2.2M doesn’t seem like a ton of wiggle room.

    Like

    • I’d like to see how they actually arrive at the $2.2M. My suspicion is that this is another form of Hollywood accounting. Without more details on what actually comprises the expense side of that P&L, I call complete bulshit. Hell, a few years ago the NFL owners presented financials to the players during their CBA negotiations that showed they were losing money. We all know that was bullshit, too.

      Like

      • Brandon

        That little thing called depreciation can make anything look as if your losing money when in reality you are swimming in it

        Like

        • Ding! Ding! DIng! Admittedly, fund accounting is not my strength so I’m curious whether the $2.2M surplus is what would be considered net income when looking at a company that uses standard financial accounting principles.

          Net income is not completely irrelevant, but it’s not a good barometer for making strategic capital allocations. Especially being a non-profit (i.e. I don’t have stock prices or EPS to worry about) I would want to know what cash expenses are, not non-cash expenses when it comes to making a decision about how to (or how not to) spend my cash.

          Like

  9. “I think we want to make sure the athletic department spends its resources wisely and remains in the black,” said Morehead

    Like

  10. So Georgia only spends 1/3 of the money that comes in from football on football.

    WTF? People spending money on football stuff and donating to football aren’t doing that because they want 2/3rds of it to go to the ballet program.

    That number should be closer to at least 1/2.

    Like

    • joe

      I guess when the head string-puller is carrying on an adulterous affair with the gymnastics coach, we decide that the pre-match pyrotechnics are more important than an ipf?

      Like