“more than a game” campaign fundraiser

[Boiler Addict]

The initiative was announced yesterday before the fall season was cancelled.

https://purduesports.com/news/2020/8/11/more-than-a-game-campaign.aspx

In summary, Bobinski reminds everyone Purdue sports is self sustaining and there is a projected ~$50M shortfall and asking for donations. Sport elimination, job losses, facility upgrade delays and debt servicing, etc could occur.

I thought the video was well done. 4+ minutes.

 

[nat100]

The initiative was announced yesterday before the fall season was cancelled.

Quite the coincidence.

 

[Purdue85]

Quite the coincidence.

For months there have been reports about the substantial financial impact of COVID-19 on college athletics.

What's more, for quite a few years, we've also seen/read/heard people ripping on leadership within Purdue athletics, for not being more pro-active.

This campaign should be viewed as a very good thing, IMHO.

 

[DAG10]

For months there have been reports about the substantial financial impact of COVID-19 on college athletics.

What's more, for quite a few years, we've also seen/read/heard people ripping on leadership within Purdue athletics, for not being more pro-active.

This campaign should be viewed as a very good thing, IMHO.

I am sure that I am in the minority, but, I see the campaign differently.

Personally, reaching out to former Purdue athletes first would have been a much better look...maybe some like himself (and coaches) that are actually not doing anything due to the lack of sports would contribute significant portions of their (significant) salaries as a means by which to help the cause before turning to those that have already supported the University...again, that would have been a much better look to me.

I found his comment about essentially furloughing athletic department employees "not being realistic" to be tone deaf given the fact that is literally what is happening all around the country despite it not being the desired choice by those having to make such a decision.

I like him a great deal and am very happy about so many things that have happened under his direction, but, I think he missed on this one, and, missed big...like say, I am sure that others will not agree (it would seem that the first three people here that have posted do/will not), and that is fine, but, those are my thoughts (or at least some of them).

 

[njm8845]

The initiative was announced yesterday before the fall season was cancelled.

https://purduesports.com/news/2020/8/11/more-than-a-game-campaign.aspx

In summary, Bobinski reminds everyone Purdue sports is self sustaining and there is a projected ~$50M shortfall and asking for donations. Sport elimination, job losses, facility upgrade delays and debt servicing, etc could occur.

I thought the video was well done. 4+ minutes.

View embedded media

Hopefully this puts an end to athletes wanting a type of revenue sharing agreement.

doesn’t Purdue already have the fewest sports allowed by D1?

 

[Boiler Addict]

...maybe some like himself (and coaches) that are actually not doing anything due to the lack of sports would contribute significant portions of their (significant) salaries as a means by which to help the cause before turning to those that have already supported the University...again, that would have been a much better look to me.

I think you're referencing how other universities, coaches and other personnel announced they had taken a 10%, 15%, etc pay cut. Bobinski was asked about that awhile back (at least a month ago) and he said that he was going to ask everyone, but was waiting because he wanted to "only go to the well once"

What he meant by that, was not asking these coaches to take multiple cuts if the season was altered, cancelled, etc and was waiting to know how much to ask everyone to take. Purdue's fiscal calendar is July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, hence why no rush to do that.

Frankly, we don't know if they have already implemented something already for coaches salaries, Purdue (especially Brohm) doesn't always announce things, but its coming, Bobinski already has said that. They've also cut other types of expenses (non-salary) heavily as well from what I understand.

Regardless of cutting salaries and expenses, there's still a major deficit, similar to all these other BIG10 schools. Wisconsin was saying ~$100M, Nebraska I think ~$80M, I had forgotten the others, but again Purdue's was projecting ~$50M.

 

[DAG10]

I think you're referencing how other universities, coaches and other personnel announced they had taken a 10%, 15%, etc pay cut. Bobinski was asked about that awhile back (at least a month ago) and he said that he was going to ask everyone, but was waiting because he wanted to "only go to the well once"

What he meant by that, was not asking these coaches to take multiple cuts if the season was altered, cancelled, etc and was waiting to know how much to ask everyone to take. Purdue's fiscal calendar is July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, hence why no rush to do that.

Frankly, we don't know if they have already implemented something already for coaches salaries, Purdue (especially Brohm) doesn't always announce things, but its coming, Bobinski already has said that. They've also cut other types of expenses (non-salary) heavily as well from what I understand.

Regardless of cutting salaries and expenses, there's still a major deficit, similar to all these other BIG10 schools. Wisconsin was saying ~$100M, Nebraska I think ~$80M, I had forgotten the others, but again Purdue's was projecting ~$50M.

Just some real quick math would seem that contributing just the salaries of the football HC, men's basketball HC and AD would reduce that projected shortfall by 20%...seems to me at least that starting there would be a nice way to have kicked off the campaign.

Again, why not aim the campaign as well at former student-athletes who benefited directly from the contributions already made by many to the JPC? Hard to imagine that the former student-athletes could not address that anticipated potential shortfall significantly, and, what better way to support the cause than those individuals leading the way, if not just collectively doing it?

Just a thought...maybe in conjunction with the campaign at hand, why not make it broader in terms of helping the local community that is going to suffer as much, if not more, by the decision(s) made?

 

[Boiler Addict]

Just some real quick math would seem that contributing just the salaries of the football HC, men's basketball HC and AD would reduce that projected shortfall by 20%...seems to me at least that starting there would be a nice way to have kicked off the campaign.

You bring up very valid things, from the community impacts, salary reductions, support from former athletes, to exact deficits.

While things can always be done differently and potentially better, I give credit to the campaign for getting started. I look at it as similar to Brohm’s plan for spring football, it’s not perfect, but the point got across.

I would also think they have already priced in reductions of salary when doing the potential deficit math of ~$50M, but we just don’t know at this time. Whenever projections are made, best guesses are thrown in, I’m frankly just guessing 20-25% salary for the big earners.

In the end, any funding shortfalls will be financed and/or cause other repercussions. That’s the main point to get across.

Another poster asked how many D1 sports we have, without looking it up, I think Purdue has 18 and 15 is the D1 minimum.

 

[cautiouslyoptimistic]

You are All In or you are not! I am All In. And I did not graduate from Purdue.

 

[Woodsa]

If there was a shortfall then Purdue should have thought about that prior to voting "no" to playing the season, which could have been done in a manner where players could be safe.

 

[nat100]

Hopefully this puts an end to athletes wanting a type of revenue sharing agreement.

doesn’t Purdue already have the fewest sports allowed by D1?

Fewest sports allowed by the big ten

 

[njm8845]

Fewest sports allowed by the big ten

gotcha, thanks for the clarification

 

[njm8845]

If there was a shortfall then Purdue should have thought about that prior to voting "no" to playing the season, which could have been done in a manner where players could be safe.

Agreed. This is a self imposed issue. I’m assuming Daniels is good enough to plan for this anticipated shortfall

 

[ThreatLevelMidnight1]

Agreed. This is a self imposed issue. I’m assuming Daniels is good enough to plan for this anticipated shortfall

Purdue Athletics receives zero funding from the university and it wasn’t Mike Bobinski’s call to cancel football. Hence the need for a fundraising campaign.

 

[njm8845]

Purdue Athletics receives zero funding from the university and it wasn’t Mike Bobinski’s call to cancel football. Hence the need for a fundraising campaign.

where’s the buck stop? Daniels ultimately Controls every budget at the university. If he thought it was prudent to cancel sports, then hopefully he thought about how to cover salaries etc. It seems like a slap in the face to just go ask your fans for more money

 

[clbndgm]

I don't mean this question as second guessing what the B1G is doing or Purdue. I just am making sure I am understanding the issue.

I have assumed all along that the $50M shortfall is due to loss of funds from the BTN primarily, then game day losses for football (ticket sales, parking, concessions, etc). Cancelling the other fall sports from a financial point of view is likely a net positive. Granted there are fixed expenses (staff and scholarships, ie) but ticket sales are usually pretty close to nothing for those sports and eliminating travel expenses, etc would still likely lead to a net gain from a dollars and cents pot.

If this is true, and there is a spring football season (even if abbreviated to 6-8 games)- would that not result in recouping at least half of that loss? Obviously at this point we cannot say for s are there will be a spring slate of games in the B1G, BUT if there is, would it not alleviate the loss greatly?

I just want to be sure I am seeing this correctly as I decide how I am going to respond to this fundraising appeal. I am a loooong time season ticket holder and contributor to the JPC and my intent is to help out- it is the level I am seeking to clarify at this point.

 

[Boiler Addict]

I don't mean this question as second guessing what the B1G is doing or Purdue. I just am making sure I am understanding the issue.

I have assumed all along that the $50M shortfall is due to loss of funds from the BTN primarily, then game day losses for football (ticket sales, parking, concessions, etc). Cancelling the other fall sports from a financial point of view is likely a net positive. Granted there are fixed expenses (staff and scholarships, ie) but ticket sales are usually pretty close to nothing for those sports and eliminating travel expenses, etc would still likely lead to a net gain from a dollars and cents pot.

If this is true, and there is a spring football season (even if abbreviated to 6-8 games)- would that not result in recouping at least half of that loss? Obviously at this point we cannot say for s are there will be a spring slate of games in the B1G, BUT if there is, would it not alleviate the loss greatly?

I just want to be sure I am seeing this correctly as I decide how I am going to respond to this fundraising appeal. I am a loooong time season ticket holder and contributor to the JPC and my intent is to help out- it is the level I am seeking to clarify at this point.

In the video he says “potentially up to $50M” and it was released after conference only football scheduling but hours before they cancelled the football fall season. Did they know football season was cancelled? That’s the crux of the unknown.

I do not believe Purdue has published any details to their deficit analysis, or at least I haven’t seen it, so I don’t know the exact answers to your questions.

Purely speculating, but they probably already factored in:
- 25% limited capacity for fans for football and basketball,
- big reductions to football and basketball staffs salaries,
- most of the TV money,
- COVID costs (for fall football, not winter/spring), - missed 2020 March Madness payment in this current fiscal year (starting July 1, 2020)

I would agree cancellation of all other fall sports would seem to be close to a net $0 or positive, except for fixed costs such as salaries, scholarships/housing and financing costs (there’s several bonds Purdue athletics take out for renovations, upgrades, etc and pay down over time).

As for if winter/spring football happens, yes I believe that would change the deficit outlook but not as much one might think.

- Don’t forget additional costs for all COVID accommodations, from IT, testing, treating, cleaning, extension of time and frequency to spring now.
- but maybe an all BIG10 schedule would bring in more TV money?
- the conference bowl money is gone
- if winter football, do we rent domes to play in?

With what we know today, assuming a winter season, Purdue is still probably $30M-$50M in the hole. But that’s my throw something on the wall guess, your guess is as good as mine.

FYI - in addition to the program announcements I mentioned previously, new announcements have come. Iowa permanently cancelled 4 sports and projected a deficit of $60-75M, Nebraska has furloughed 51 employees until Jan 1, 2021 while others took 10% pay cuts.

 

[clbndgm]

In the video he says “potentially up to $50M” and it was released after conference only football scheduling but hours before they cancelled the football fall season. Did they know football season was cancelled? That’s the crux of the unknown.

I do not believe Purdue has published any details to their deficit analysis, or at least I haven’t seen it, so I don’t know the exact answers to your questions.

Purely speculating, but they probably already factored in:
- 25% limited capacity for fans for football and basketball,
- big reductions to football and basketball staffs salaries,
- most of the TV money,
- COVID costs (for fall football, not winter/spring), - missed 2020 March Madness payment in this current fiscal year (starting July 1, 2020)

I would agree cancellation of all other fall sports would seem to be close to a net $0 or positive, except for fixed costs such as salaries, scholarships/housing and financing costs (there’s several bonds Purdue athletics take out for renovations, upgrades, etc and pay down over time).

As for if winter/spring football happens, yes I believe that would change the deficit outlook but not as much one might think.

- Don’t forget additional costs for all COVID accommodations, from IT, testing, treating, cleaning, extension of time and frequency to spring now.
- but maybe an all BIG10 schedule would bring in more TV money?
- the conference bowl money is gone
- if winter football, do we rent domes to play in?

With what we know today, assuming a winter season, Purdue is still probably $30M-$50M in the hole. But that’s my throw something on the wall guess, your guess is as good as mine.

FYI - in addition to the program announcements I mentioned previously, new announcements have come. Iowa permanently cancelled 4 sports and projected a deficit of $60-75M, Nebraska has furloughed 51 employees until Jan 1, 2021 while others took 10% pay cuts.

Thanks. Some good points there I hadn't thought of.

Bowls, if played, will not be feeding B1G coffers this year. Nor did I consider if a winter season is played we would need to access a dome (probably the Luke?) which would be a big up front cost, no doubt paid by the conference but that would be coming out of money some of which would have found it's way into Purdue's pocket eventually. A lot of factors here.

 

[Boiler Addict]

Purdue announcement made today 08/25/2020.

https://purduesports.com/news/2020/...st-saving-measures-head-coaches-donation.aspx

"These salary adjustments, along with other personnel measures we've taken, such as limited reductions in force and an extended hold on certain unfilled positions, will result in savings of nearly $5 million dollars over the next 12 months,"

Part 1
Head Coach's (Brohm/Painter/Versyp) and Bobinski 20% Salary Reductions; along with incentive eliminations for next 12 months starting 09/01/20.

Part 2
As part of their salary reduction, these four, along with other coaches and senior administrators, have announced their collective intent to pledge $1 million to the More Than A Game campaign on Purdue Day of Giving on Wednesday, Sept. 9.

Part 3
Other contract head and assistant coaches have each voluntarily agreed to 15% salary reductions

Part 4
All other Purdue Athletics staff will be impacted by either reductions in force, furloughs, reduced work schedules or salary reductions ranging from 5% up to 50% based upon a combination of pay range and the projected individual workload impact during the 2020-21 academic year.

How to contribute
Boilermakers and friends can make a contribution to the More Than A Game campaign by contacting their Boilermaker Athletics Representative or by visiting JPCMoreThanAGame.com. The More Than A Game campaign will also be a giving option during Purdue Day of Giving on Sept. 9, 2020. Save the date to help Purdue Athletics meet the challenge by winning hourly challenges and rising to the top of the donation and participation leaderboards.

Purdue Athletics is one of only a handful of Division I athletics departments that is entirely self-sustaining: it does not receive any taxpayer dollars, general fund support from Purdue University, or student fees. John Purdue Club memberships are directed to funding the $12 million scholarship cost for student-athletes and this separate fund will help offset a 2020-21 Purdue Athletics budget shortfall that could approach or exceed $50 million.

Brian Neubert's Article On GoldandBlack Addresses a Previous Question. Unsure if Brian Neubert has confirmed the information or interpreting.
Purdue's athletic department operating budget topped $100 million in 2018-19. Bobinski has said he anticipates a shortfall of around $50 million without media rights payouts tied to football, game-day revenue and such.

 

[lbodel]

I don't mean this question as second guessing what the B1G is doing or Purdue. I just am making sure I am understanding the issue.

I have assumed all along that the $50M shortfall is due to loss of funds from the BTN primarily, then game day losses for football (ticket sales, parking, concessions, etc). Cancelling the other fall sports from a financial point of view is likely a net positive. Granted there are fixed expenses (staff and scholarships, ie) but ticket sales are usually pretty close to nothing for those sports and eliminating travel expenses, etc would still likely lead to a net gain from a dollars and cents pot.

If this is true, and there is a spring football season (even if abbreviated to 6-8 games)- would that not result in recouping at least half of that loss? Obviously at this point we cannot say for s are there will be a spring slate of games in the B1G, BUT if there is, would it not alleviate the loss greatly?

I just want to be sure I am seeing this correctly as I decide how I am going to respond to this fundraising appeal. I am a loooong time season ticket holder and contributor to the JPC and my intent is to help out- it is the level I am seeking to clarify at this point.

Even if Purdue played football in the fall, there was still going to be a big hit on the budget -- not only from ticket/parking revenue, but testing is still very expensive as cheaper tests are still being developed in this country.

But yes, you're correct there's also "net" gains - travel is the biggest financial burden when it comes to playing a season.

There will still be a significant financial hit even if a winter season is played, but the Big Ten is the strongest conference financially with $55 million distributed in the previous fiscal year (I think Purdue's last budget they had $10M+ unspent and it's not like we were maxing out our revenue with football). You'll see schools take out loans similar to Iowa - the interest rates are low.

As for this campaign, I've now received mail, multiple emails and now a phone call. I have a recurring gift set up quarterly that's not small - none of these communications have even acknowledged it.

 

[Boiler Addict]

As a reminder to everyone, Purdue Day of Giving is tomorrow on Wednesday, Sept. 9.

How to contribute
Boilermakers and friends can make a contribution to the More Than A Game campaign by contacting their Boilermaker Athletics Representative or by visiting JPCMoreThanAGame.com. The More Than A Game campaign will also be a giving option during Purdue Day of Giving on Sept. 9, 2020. Save the date to help Purdue Athletics meet the challenge by winning hourly challenges and rising to the top of the donation and participation leaderboards.


Update article from 9/7/2020.

More Than A Game Campaign Update, Additional Leadership Gift - Purdue Boilermakers

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. – A leadership gift from Mike and Paula Klipsch has pushed the total commitment to the More Than A Game campaign to over $3 million ...

purduesports.com

A leadership gift from Mike and Paula Klipsch has pushed the total commitment to the More Than A Game campaign to over $3 million since its launch on August 11. These funds will help offset the $50 million deficit faced by the department.

 

[lbodel]

As a reminder to everyone, Purdue Day of Giving is tomorrow on Wednesday, Sept. 9.

How to contribute
Boilermakers and friends can make a contribution to the More Than A Game campaign by contacting their Boilermaker Athletics Representative or by visiting JPCMoreThanAGame.com. The More Than A Game campaign will also be a giving option during Purdue Day of Giving on Sept. 9, 2020. Save the date to help Purdue Athletics meet the challenge by winning hourly challenges and rising to the top of the donation and participation leaderboards.


Update article from 9/7/2020.

More Than A Game Campaign Update, Additional Leadership Gift - Purdue Boilermakers

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. – A leadership gift from Mike and Paula Klipsch has pushed the total commitment to the More Than A Game campaign to over $3 million ...

purduesports.com

A leadership gift from Mike and Paula Klipsch has pushed the total commitment to the More Than A Game campaign to over $3 million since its launch on August 11. These funds will help offset the $50 million deficit faced by the department.

Given interest rates right now, I'm surprised they have not taken out a loan. Purdue operates the smallest athletic department in the Big Ten - and with the Big Ten revenues skyrocketing over the past few years, Purdue's had more money than it knows what to do with (in a normal year).

I'm not sure shifting focus of large gifts to sports to simply offset budget losses is a great idea longterm -- and once this is over you'll probably be looking for people to give to specific projects (and put their name on things).

But people should absolutely still be giving to support scholarship money for the athletes which normally come from gifts to the JPC regarding ticket purchases and is critical to keep up, and you want to hopefully see people not be laid off. However, it's unclear to me on this $50M number - is that also assuming football isn't played? I.e. TV money? And obviously there's millions less in expenses without teams traveling all over (unclear if these other fall sports like soccer will then play in the spring).

Of course, it's a difficult situation to really explain what's going on given how often it changes and not knowing what will happen - i.e. the fall sports will either miss a season (which would save a lot of money) or could play in the spring (not really saving much then).

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Fewest sports allowed by the big ten

Have there been any discussions about reducing the minimum number of varsity sports?

 

[Boiler Addict]

Given interest rates right now, I'm surprised they have not taken out a loan. Purdue operates the smallest athletic department in the Big Ten - and with the Big Ten revenues skyrocketing over the past few years, Purdue's had more money than it knows what to do with (in a normal year).

I'm not sure shifting focus of large gifts to sports to simply offset budget losses is a great idea longterm -- and once this is over you'll probably be looking for people to give to specific projects (and put their name on things).

The quote is from Bobinski:
"It's taken considerable cost-cutting measures by implementing pay reductions, furloughs and even layoffs around the athletic department — and freezing purchasing and such things — and has raised $3-million and counting from its More Than A Game campaign heading into Wednesday's Purdue Day of Giving. But the pain of tens of millions lost won't easily be remedied, and still may require some form of third-party financing help.

"We're going to do everything we can to contain this without long-term, multi-year financing, because that just creates issues down the road that would also need answers. ... But that's clearly on the table if we don't raise enough money or if circumstances are wholly unfavorable as the year rolls on."


Debt on a program, just like in your personal life has an effect. Debt servicing would occur before being able to take on new things, such as increasing # of sports, hiring more high end coaches and staffs, providing facilities, projects, fan amenities, and ultimately recruits. I'm sure you are correct that after this is over, there will be another campaign at some point to raise money for a new project.

Consider if there was too much debt, Purdue wouldn't be able to compete with other schools trying to poach Brohm, etc. I personally would not like to see a repeat of the 2010 decade of Purdue football, or the basketball program lose its ability to compete in the second weekend and beyond of the NCAA tournament, among other things.

As for the $50M number, agree it is ambiguous and unclear how it is calculated, I have not seen a detailed breakdown yet either. There's a lot of unknowns. But if they raise more money than needed, then that next fundraiser for a new project would be smaller, right?

I'm not sure exactly your basis for your other comments, so I can't respond.

Have there been any discussions about reducing the minimum number of varsity sports?

I haven't seen any announcements from the NCAA or BIG10, except for other programs cutting sports.

 

[MilwaukeeBoilerFan]

B1G plays and money flows from individuals and donors.

 

[Tommaker]

"But people should absolutely still be giving to support scholarship money for the athletes which normally come from gifts to the JPC regarding ticket purchases and is critical to keep up"

I wouldn't bet the house on it, but I think all of the schollies (at least for the major sports, if not all of them) may be endowed now. Back in late nineties, the one JPC gal was focused on this because at the time the "big Boys" (Michigan, OSU, PSU) had endowments for all of their schollies (I think I remember her saying we were at something like 20-25 percent of players in FB and BB?) assuming that's the case, the $$$ being raised would be for other shortages.

 

[lbodel]

"But people should absolutely still be giving to support scholarship money for the athletes which normally come from gifts to the JPC regarding ticket purchases and is critical to keep up"

I wouldn't bet the house on it, but I think all of the schollies (at least for the major sports, if not all of them) may be endowed now. Back in late nineties, the one JPC gal was focused on this because at the time the "big Boys" (Michigan, OSU, PSU) had endowments for all of their schollies (I think I remember her saying we were at something like 20-25 percent of players in FB and BB?) assuming that's the case, the $$$ being raised would be for other shortages.

JPC gifts go to the scholarship bill. It's not endowed. There are individual scholarships that are endowed - but not 500 worth.

 

[lbodel]

The quote is from Bobinski:
"It's taken considerable cost-cutting measures by implementing pay reductions, furloughs and even layoffs around the athletic department — and freezing purchasing and such things — and has raised $3-million and counting from its More Than A Game campaign heading into Wednesday's Purdue Day of Giving. But the pain of tens of millions lost won't easily be remedied, and still may require some form of third-party financing help.

"We're going to do everything we can to contain this without long-term, multi-year financing, because that just creates issues down the road that would also need answers. ... But that's clearly on the table if we don't raise enough money or if circumstances are wholly unfavorable as the year rolls on."


Debt on a program, just like in your personal life has an effect. Debt servicing would occur before being able to take on new things, such as increasing # of sports, hiring more high end coaches and staffs, providing facilities, projects, fan amenities, and ultimately recruits. I'm sure you are correct that after this is over, there will be another campaign at some point to raise money for a new project.

Consider if there was too much debt, Purdue wouldn't be able to compete with other schools trying to poach Brohm, etc. I personally would not like to see a repeat of the 2010 decade of Purdue football, or the basketball program lose its ability to compete in the second weekend and beyond of the NCAA tournament, among other things.

As for the $50M number, agree it is ambiguous and unclear how it is calculated, I have not seen a detailed breakdown yet either. There's a lot of unknowns. But if they raise more money than needed, then that next fundraiser for a new project would be smaller, right?

I'm not sure exactly your basis for your other comments, so I can't respond.




I haven't seen any announcements from the NCAA or BIG10, except for other programs cutting sports.

Purdue's taken on debt-servicing before and kept plugging away at other things (i.e. the Football Performance Building was largely financed, Mackey/baseball, etc.).

The interest rates are just so low right now that it seems like a worthwhile investment. But that's also why I asked what the "$50 million" actually represents. Is that without football? Is it no ticket revenue, but including TV revenue? etc. Bobinski said a football game is a $1.6M revenue day - so that's under $10 million with parking, tickets, concessions, etc. So I'm assuming the $50M doesn't count any TV revenue either? Obviously if the Big Ten plays an 8 game season, they will get a good chunk of that TV revenue.

Obviously taking out a $50 million loan isn't what you want to do, but a $10-15M is reasonable (I've seen many other athletic departments and universities do this).

Again, Purdue is running a small operation in the richest conference in America. Even with no giving day last year, no Big 10 Tournament, the NCAA Tournament canceled and not receiving any revenue from that, Purdue still operated with a net surplus.

The normal Big Ten distribution to schools is $57 million. Go back 10 years - that was almost Purdue's entire athletics budget! That's how astronomical the Big Ten revenues have gotten in a very short period of time.

The Purdue Athletic Department has changed significantly over the last several years primarily because of the increase of Big Ten revenue. It's almost doubled in revenue in less than 10 years. Not because of anything Purdue specifically is doing, but the conference distribution has just blown up.

 

[Boiler Addict]

Purdue’s Day of Giving for 2020 looks like it set the 6th straight record for a 24-hour higher education fundraising campaign.

Congratulations everyone on the accomplishment!

The 2020 total is $42.2M as of right now. The cumulative day of giving total through 7 years is really close to $190M in gifts for Purdue University.

 

[Boiler Addict]

The Purdue Exponent published the 2019-2020 athletics budget and actuals.

Specifically looking at:

“Operating Income” $110M but it appears “contributions” included the one-time $10M video board fundraiser (see scoreboard expense offset). So really $100M revenue is the right number to use.

2020-2021 revenue projections, assuming a condensed season, total revenue [66M]:
- 100% of $17M contributions, $2.6M investment (total $20M)
- 75% of BIG10 distributions [TV, bowls] ($54M x .75 = $40M)
- 25% all other revenue, contingent of game day ($26M x .25 = $6M)


2020-2021 Expenses [$95M]

Obviously there’s reductions in several categories, such as salaries, event expenses, recruiting, travel and “other operating expenses”. However, those savings probably offset additional COVID-19 testing, dome costs, etc. I’d net savings of $5M from the $85M.
Total operating expense = $80M
Other expenses: debt & repairs $15M.

Revenue ($66M) - total expenses ($95M) shows a total of potentially ~$30M deficit.

The big factor there is 75% BIG10 distributions. If it’s 50%, then that gets close to $43M in the hole, which is close to Bobinski’s $50M number.

Hopefully that provides some clarity to how Bobinski potentially arrived to the $50M deficit.

Purdue Athletics falls short of projected 2019-2020 budget

Editor's Note: The Exponent published a story on Thursday in print about the athletics budget based on a budget sheet earlier provided by Purdue Athletics. That information was not accurate

www.purdueexponent.org

 

[lbodel]

The Purdue Exponent published the 2019-2020 athletics budget and actuals.

Specifically looking at:

“Operating Income” $110M but it appears “contributions” included the one-time $10M video board fundraiser (see scoreboard expense offset). So really $100M revenue is the right number to use.

2020-2021 revenue projections, assuming a condensed season, total revenue [66M]:
- 100% of $17M contributions, $2.6M investment (total $20M)
- 75% of BIG10 distributions [TV, bowls] ($54M x .75 = $40M)
- 25% all other revenue, contingent of game day ($26M x .25 = $6M)


2020-2021 Expenses [$95M]

Obviously there’s reductions in several categories, such as salaries, event expenses, recruiting, travel and “other operating expenses”. However, those savings probably offset additional COVID-19 testing, dome costs, etc. I’d net savings of $5M from the $85M.
Total operating expense = $80M
Other expenses: debt & repairs $15M.

Revenue ($66M) - total expenses ($95M) shows a total of potentially ~$30M deficit.

The big factor there is 75% BIG10 distributions. If it’s 50%, then that gets close to $43M in the hole, which is close to Bobinski’s $50M number.

Hopefully that provides some clarity to how Bobinski potentially arrived to the $50M deficit.

Purdue Athletics falls short of projected 2019-2020 budget

Editor's Note: The Exponent published a story on Thursday in print about the athletics budget based on a budget sheet earlier provided by Purdue Athletics. That information was not accurate

www.purdueexponent.org

Thank you for sharing this. Like you point out, there can be big swings in this based on how things pan out.

Obviously the NCAA Basketball tournament is heavily a part of the NCAA's $2M. Recruiting and team travel is dependent on what happens with the winter/spring - do fall sports then compete in the spring? Travel I'd imagine will still be reduced, and obviously coaches are not traveling for recruiting through the end of the fall semester.

But this also goes to show what I'm saying about Purdue being in a good situation overall. In a typical year, even spending normally they are operating a $15-20M surplus -- in what used to be barely break even. This is almost solely due to the Big Ten distribution.

Not sure how much of the Football Performance Center is left to pay on - but a $15 million low interest loan could be paid off rather quickly, for example.

 

[Boiler Addict]

But this also goes to show what I'm saying about Purdue being in a good situation overall. In a typical year... operating a $15-20M surplus...

Not sure how much of the Football Performance Center is left to pay on - but a $15 million low interest loan could be paid off rather quickly, for example.

I see it differently than you do. Purdue’s debt is pretty substantial and burdensome.

There’s multiple bonds outstanding with different maturity dates. For a summary only, see Page 73 of the document I link at the bottom of this post (Page 72 as listed on the actual PDF). The page is titled “Note 10 - Component Units”

What you will find with the Ross-Ade Foundation is outstanding bonds through June 30, 2019 of $207,343,000. (All numbers on the PDF are in thousands, see note on top left next to the header)

The comment regarding running a surplus on a normal year seems appropriate, but I would stay closer to $15M before debt servicing and repairs for the sports complexes.

If we take that surplus and apply it towards debt servicing only, average $15M/YR (assuming football is good for a long time) that’s 14 years to pay off existing bond debt principal balance only. It’ll take even longer since interest is not factored in. For fiscal year ending June 30, 2019 alone, Ross-Ade Foundation paid $6,473,000 in interest [PDF Page 74)]

So only $9M of that $15M/YR debt servicing would go towards the $207M outstanding principal. That’s 20+ years to pay off the bonds depending on exact interest charges.

Now throw on another $15M bond (as you are suggesting) at say 4% that matures in 20 years, you’re looking at $33M repayment (with interest). So essentially another 2.25 years of debt repayment. Keep in mind, the $15M number you mentioned is optimistic. What if it is indeed closer to $30M or $45M? Double and triple what I said about that $15M bond... wow that’s a big impact.

That’s a lot of debt to me. We all want Purdue to thrive in sports. Lowering this debt, while continuing to update facilities and keep them current will be hard. Let alone build new expensive facilities.

https://www.purdue.edu/bot/meeting-documents/2019/dec/arm/FY19%20financial%20report.pdf

 

[lbodel]

I see it differently than you do. Purdue’s debt is pretty substantial and burdensome.

There’s multiple bonds outstanding with different maturity dates. For a summary only, see Page 73 of the document I link at the bottom of this post (Page 72 as listed on the actual PDF). The page is titled “Note 10 - Component Units”

What you will find with the Ross-Ade Foundation is outstanding bonds through June 30, 2019 of $207,343,000. (All numbers on the PDF are in thousands, see note on top left next to the header)

The comment regarding running a surplus on a normal year seems appropriate, but I would stay closer to $15M before debt servicing and repairs for the sports complexes.

If we take that surplus and apply it towards debt servicing only, average $15M/YR (assuming football is good for a long time) that’s 14 years to pay off existing bond debt principal balance only. It’ll take even longer since interest is not factored in. For fiscal year ending June 30, 2019 alone, Ross-Ade Foundation paid $6,473,000 in interest [PDF Page 74)]

So only $9M of that $15M/YR debt servicing would go towards the $207M outstanding principal. That’s 20+ years to pay off the bonds depending on exact interest charges.

Now throw on another $15M bond (as you are suggesting) at say 4% that matures in 20 years, you’re looking at $33M repayment (with interest). So essentially another 2.25 years of debt repayment. Keep in mind, the $15M number you mentioned is optimistic. What if it is indeed closer to $30M or $45M? Double and triple what I said about that $15M bond... wow that’s a big impact.

That’s a lot of debt to me. We all want Purdue to thrive in sports. Lowering this debt, while continuing to update facilities and keep them current will be hard. Let alone build new expensive facilities.

https://www.purdue.edu/bot/meeting-documents/2019/dec/arm/FY19%20financial%20report.pdf

This is also not factoring in any changes in revenues. Obviously Ross-Ade debt is planned out be paid over a decent amount of time - Purdue isn't unique in taking on debt to build facilities. It's not like these other schools aren't doing the same thing.

Overall, Purdue's expenses are not going to be drastically going up higher unless they make the decisions to. We have the smallest number of sports and with a huge increase in conference revenues, the spending is only going to go so high - I mean, we're paying our football coach one of the highest salaries in the country and we aren't "cash strapped". This is what I'm saying - Purdue is well of because it has a tiny athletic department operating in the richest conference.

For example, in 2010 the Big Ten and NCAA distributions were $19M. Last year? $56M. That's a $37M increase in 10 years! Just for reference, the ACC's distribution last year was $29M.

Our budget in 2010 was in the $60M range. So today's Big Ten/NCAA distribution could almost cover our entire 2010 budget - no other revenue included.

It'll be interesting to see how the year shakes out - the plan for basketball seems to be a similar number of games, and football will probably see at least an 8 game season. I don't see there being a 50% drop in TV revenue.

That's all I was pointing out - the $50M seems to be really worst case scenario. Which you should always plan, but I'm just saying you have people making 7 figure commitments to pay an operating bill vs. they'd probably be more motivated to support something a bit more tangible (when you have record low interest rates). It's not that big of a critique - we don't have a lot else to talk about obviously!

 

[Boiler Addict]

Following up our discussions on this thread with an article published 10/20/20, looks like the projected deficit is now $18M.

Purdue Athletics Sets "More Than A Game" Campaign Goal
To date, the campaign has raised over $5 million of an $18 million goal.

https://purduesports.com/news/2020/10/20/general-purdue-sets-more-than-a-game-campaign-goal.aspx

more details in the article.