FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Apr 25, 2005 16:11:38 GMT -5
Leaving out student ticket prices is actually a pretty huge omission from my analysis. If student ticket prices are the same as in '03 when I graduated, it's $10 a ticket. I would guess that, on average, students make up around 25% of the overall attendance figure. Student season tickets this year were $85. I graduated last year, but I got someone to buy them for me. Since my freshman year, 2000-1, student season tix have gone from 60 to 65 to 75 to 85 dollars if I recall correctly. Now me personally, I went to 12 home games this year (NOT counting the NIT games, which you had to pay separately for), so mine averaged to just over 7 bucks per game. However, b/c the GW calendar is a little off from GU's, I went to the UConn and Providence games that most students did not go to. So maybe 10 student home games is a good "average" number, so the ticket price would resemble something like $8.50 per game. And the 25% figure for student attendance...probably a bit high. I'd guess 15-20%, but somebody's got to have actual data on that.
|
|
|
Post by FromTheBeginning on Apr 25, 2005 17:33:09 GMT -5
Some random thoughts on the subject. 1) Don't forget to figure in the considerable cost of debt service on a new building into any equation. Also the cost of maintaining the facility 365 days a year. 2) I would hope a convocation center would be used 50 or 60 days out of the year what with games, concerts, graduations, assemblies, conferences, and any other type of event you can get into the place. Having a convocation center is the same as having a public arena - you have to generate enough revenue to make it a self-supporting venture. How far afield from university uses do you go to generate revenue? 3) The most impactful way to get the attention of university fund raisers is to dangle a donation in front of them but let them know it will only be forthcoming for the convocation center project. This will only be effective if used by major donors - the 1789 in DFW's plan of a few years ago. I plan to do that this week in a meeting I will have with a University fundraiser who is coming to my office to solicit funds for the University. This project can only be moved forward ahead of university plans by major donors putting on the pressure. It's the same as what did in Esh - fair or not - only donors above a certain level can rock the boat. I am not suggesting completely withholding donations from GU but letting them know that substantial additional funds are available but only for that project. 4) I don't know if GU has a minimum number of games it has to give MCI each year, but one way to decrease the deficit is to reduce the number of home games (the bad OOC games) and replace them with higher profile road games where we can make some money (or at least not lose money). It would mean signing contracts for road games with good $$ guarantees without a return home game in the contract in some cases. If we're losing 50K on bad home games it might be necessary to replace them with road games to save money. 5) The scheduling of games against local teams is essential to improving attendence at MCI and also presenting very low cost road games in the alternate years if both games are not played in MCI. A GU / GW game should hopefully be too well attended to fit it in either on campus arena (assuming GU would have one). Games with MD and UVA should be every other year events at worst. At some point the quality of games will have to overide the need for easy wins. 6) A return to prominence and excellence will lead to a return of the revenue stream from GU mechandise from the general public. It is unrealistic to think it will return to the level of the 80's, but at least it will get merchandise back in the stores nationwide. You can't buy what you can't find. 7) An on-campus arena with limited seating in essence lets the basketball program turn it's back on the DC community. Does GU basketball belong exclusively to the University or does it in part belong to the community that the University is supposed to serve. This is a central question not only to the basketball program but to the mission of the University as a whole. I'm starting to get philosphical now --- time to go home and watch the Mavericks.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 25, 2005 17:51:28 GMT -5
1) Don't forget to figure in the considerable cost of debt service on a new building into any equation. Also the cost of maintaining the facility 365 days a year.
It is my understanding that all projects are currently cash in hand -- 100% donations. Maintenance will cost money, but given our close to $2.0M paid in rent (85k plus parking, concessions, etc) minimum annually to MCI, I find it hard to believe operating maintenance would be so high.
2) I would hope a convocation center would be used 50 or 60 days out of the year what with games, concerts, graduations, assemblies, conferences, and any other type of event you can get into the place. Having a convocation center is the same as having a public arena - you have to generate enough revenue to make it a self-supporting venture. How far afield from university uses do you go to generate revenue?
We could draw a much higher level of performing acts as well as speakers, which adds onto the education product of GU. But your second question is valid; I know GU has had concerts with non-students before, but it seems our admin would shy from that.
3) The most impactful way to get the attention of university fund raisers is to dangle a donation in front of them but let them know it will only be forthcoming for the convocation center project.
So true.
4) I don't know if GU has a minimum number of games it has to give MCI each year, but one way to decrease the deficit is to reduce the number of home games (the bad OOC games) and replace them with higher profile road games where we can make some money (or at least not lose money).
Right now we are required to play all home games at MCI but I do not believe there is a minimum. I argued for your idea last year -- this University should be making some short term revenue-increasing decisions.
5) The scheduling of games against local teams is essential to improving attendence at MCI and also presenting very low cost road games in the alternate years if both games are not played in MCI.
While Maryland and Virginia would certainly draw and GW as well, other local programs (Howard, American, etc) don't. Local programs are nice; GOOD programs are better.
7) An on-campus arena with limited seating in essence lets the basketball program turn it's back on the DC community. Does GU basketball belong exclusively to the University or does it in part belong to the community that the University is supposed to serve.
Even after building the JTJCC, I imagine some portion of our games will be at MCI. I can't imagine us turning away 15,000 people for Cuse or 19,000 for Duke. A 7000+ center on campus will not exclude locals, but I would prefer it to be at least 8k.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 25, 2005 18:19:33 GMT -5
"Student season tickets this year were $85. I graduated last year, but I got someone to buy them for me."
That's not the way to increase revenue for the Hoyas.
|
|
|
Post by BurleithBeast on Apr 25, 2005 19:00:41 GMT -5
"Student season tickets this year were $85. I graduated last year, but I got someone to buy them for me." That's not the way to increase revenue for the Hoyas. Actually, I'd say it is. I did the same thing as John (a fellow '04 grad), and I don't think I've cheated the university out of anything. For a recent grad NOT starting at an investment bank, $85 is exactly what I was willing to pay. If a season package were much past three digits, I would have opted to buy single-game tix and gone to half as many games. This argument might not apply to John, who would probably pay a bigger portion of his income for Hoya tix than I would, but in my case GU would have gotten just as much revenue and had a butt in the seat only half as often. The economics of ticket purchasing is not hard to understand: a lot of young alums have less disposable income than they did in college, when mom and dad were paying for room, board, so $85 is bigger burden AFTER graduation. This, I know, was the impetus behind the young-alumni section, but it wasn't all that well publicized (I found out about it well into the season), and priced at the regular $120, I still wouldn't have gotten it. It's the same reason I don't feel guilty about taking student discounts still: My purchasing power is about the same, or lower, than a student's. And the whole point of the student discount is to rejigger economic decisionmaking among a specific class to increase profits. I'd probably go to one $10 movie a month; instead I go to two or three $7 movies. Loews is still coming out $4-11 ahead. When I can afford $240 for a pair of tickets (soon, I hope) or I get sick of standing during games, I will gladly pay for a "real seat." Until then, I'm going to continue to hit the student section. It's especially a no-brainer considering the university issued me a GOCard vaild through 2006.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Apr 25, 2005 22:02:15 GMT -5
Responding to FTB and SF's comments, I'd first like to wish FTB the best of luck in dangling that donation. Way to go man. The only other way I can think of to convince the adminstration to reorder its priorities is to have JTIII push for the convocation center. However, he's focused on winning games, and understandably so.
As far as getting use out of a Convocation Center goes, Georgetown would have the "problem" of already having an excellent venue for speaking guests: Gaston Hall. Even though there's a huge demand for seats when presidents come to speak, I doubt that type of speakers would prefer relocating to an arena. Plus, the ANC would freak if we tried to host public concerts there. So I don't know how much potential for revenue-generating non-sports use there would be.
Big home games are just as good as big road games. When UVA visited MCI in 2002 I'm pretty sure we sold it out. Hosting the Cavs again would be a pretty good start. As far as hosting other local teams goes, I think keeping Howard on the schedule is okay. This season we drew over 7000 for a game played December 30 (no students) between two teams on nobody's radar screen at that date. I think scheduling Philly teams like St. Joes is a decent idea too -- it's a relatively short drive, about the same distance as Charlottesville if I recall, and they have a good (and expanding) fan base.
One good sign I noticed when checking the attendance for the Howard game was that we drew over 11,000 for each of our last three home games against WVU, 'Nova, and PC. Let's hope the DC public is talking about GU before February next year and the school will see some ticket revenue.
I liked FTB's points primarily because they're pragmatic. If the Convocation Center is indeed going to be off the administration's radar screen, the athletic department and everyone else concerned should consider changing things like the schedule that make our MCI deal better. Of course, we should also continue to remind the administration that things would actually be better with an arena on campus.
|
|
|
Post by FromTheBeginning on Apr 26, 2005 7:29:08 GMT -5
I'm all for better quality home games - what I'm saying is there comes a time when an economic decision might have to be made between a 200+ RPI home game in December with no students in town and playing an away game (with no promise of a return home game) that will not only generate some small revenue from the guarantee we would get but would save us from losing many thousands of dollars with an actual 2500-3000 attendance at MCI.
|
|
YB
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,494
|
Post by YB on Apr 26, 2005 8:01:59 GMT -5
This point is less than relevant- we make very little/no money on roadies. At least not against big name opponents. For someone like Davidson, we can make a better case that we'll be a draw for them, so we can make money on that.
We do already host concerts at McD- that can be arranged as long as they don't go ape on it.
The amount we'd save in rent on home games and the amount we'll make on others, like WBB, not to mention other events like convocations and graduations.... Folks, financially this is a no-brainer.
If anybody has any misconceptions about this, they should talk to DFW, who is the preeminent expert on the topic. His main point, which I absolutely agree with, is that if we allow MCI to beat us about the head and neck with rent payments for 10 more years with no end in sight, D1 sports may soon go the way of D1 football at GU. And sooner rather than later.
Picture this: the New BE splits, and we play only the non-D1 football schools, plus perhaps a bettered OOC sched. This means no Yukon, no Cuse, and our profile and drawing power goes down. Less TV. 4000 fans/game. MCI bills piling up. JT3 leaves- we're not as big time anymore and can't pay him a decent coaches' salary.
How far-fetched is this scenario? Not very, and may begin in 5 years' time. We need to plan for our future, and that means the On-Campus Convocation Center.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2005 8:14:03 GMT -5
Maybe I missed something - but why is everyone so certain the Big East splits in 5 years?
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,303
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 26, 2005 8:49:20 GMT -5
This point is less than relevant- we make very little/no money on roadies. At least not against big name opponents. For someone like Davidson, we can make a better case that we'll be a draw for them, so we can make money on that. We do already host concerts at McD- that can be arranged as long as they don't go ape on it. The amount we'd save in rent on home games and the amount we'll make on others, like WBB, not to mention other events like convocations and graduations.... Folks, financially this is a no-brainer. If anybody has any misconceptions about this, they should talk to DFW, who is the preeminent expert on the topic. His main point, which I absolutely agree with, is that if we allow MCI to beat us about the head and neck with rent payments for 10 more years with no end in sight, D1 sports may soon go the way of D1 football at GU. And sooner rather than later. Picture this: the New BE splits, and we play only the non-D1 football schools, plus perhaps a bettered OOC sched. This means no Yukon, no Cuse, and our profile and drawing power goes down. Less TV. 4000 fans/game. MCI bills piling up. JT3 leaves- we're not as big time anymore and can't pay him a decent coaches' salary. How far-fetched is this scenario? Not very, and may begin in 5 years' time. We need to plan for our future, and that means the On-Campus Convocation Center. A couple thoughts: I agree with the need for an oncampus arena, but I don't think it's the holy grail that many say it is. For example, having a new arena isn't going to A) prevent the Big East from splitting B) get us included in the D-1 football schools half if it does split C) guarantee us games with UConn or Cuse if there is a split So my point is, if the Big East splits...we are irrelevant anyways. There will be no difference between our piddly non-football conference boasting St. Johns, Providence, DePaul, Nova and others and the A-10. Even if we have an on-campus arena, they'll be no difference between us and GW, Xavier, St. Joes...a mid-major. At that point, for arguments sake, what does it matter if we play in McDonough or a new arena? Not to burst anyone's bubble, but while I agree with building an oncampus arena, I don't think it prevents that sort of fall to midmajor status. I'll repeat, that I'm in favor of an oncampus arena and think it is an extremely urgent priority...fiscally and psychologically, however the only solution to our dilemna is to become relevant and desireable to the football schools, thereby preventing a definite split between football and basketball schools. That means winning now, quickly and decisively. We have to go the NCAA consistently starting next year. We have to go deep into the tournament consistently starting next year. We have to win a few Big East titles. But not only that, the non-football schools have to do the same. All of us must create a buzz and right the ship. We are doing this, St. John's appears to be doing this, but Providence? DePaul? that is the more desperate situation. I fear that if we do not return to the tournament regularly by the time the Big East "breaks up" we will not only loose our longtime rivals UConn and Syracuse but the name "Big East" itself.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 26, 2005 10:33:41 GMT -5
Buffalo - everyone thinks the BE will split because everyone has all but said it. Things can change, but...
Cambridge - What we need to build is a program like Gonzaga's. Built on great coaching and good but not always great recruiting. And a sparkling on-campus facility is a great step towards that.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,303
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 26, 2005 10:39:00 GMT -5
Buffalo - everyone thinks the BE will split because everyone has all but said it. Things can change, but... Cambridge - What we need to build is a program like Gonzaga's. Built on great coaching and good but not always great recruiting. And a sparkling on-campus facility is a great step towards that. I agree with that statement wholeheartedly. I think becoming more like Zaga is what we have to do. I just question what I perceive as some people's arguement -- and I could very well have misunderstood -- that an oncampus arena will somehow prevent the fallout that would occur from the split in the league. That split seems like the larger, more looming, immediate threat to the program...one that will hit us potentially within 5 years. Perhaps you are right, an oncampus arena is the first step towards becoming more like the Zagas of the world, as was hiring a coach of JTIII's caliber...
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 26, 2005 10:53:55 GMT -5
An on-campus arena will make our program stronger and more attractive to recruits.
When the split comes, we need our program to be as strong as possible. It won't prevent, but it will mitigate.
Isn't anyone else worried that III came here for the challenge? What happens if that challenge is gone?
|
|
nodak89
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Roy Roy Royyyyy!!!
Posts: 1,881
|
Post by nodak89 on Apr 26, 2005 11:24:14 GMT -5
"Paging Mr. HoyaLawya. Mr. HoyaLawya please pick up the blue and gray courtesy phone. Paging Mr. HoyaLawya."
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Apr 26, 2005 13:41:59 GMT -5
The amount we'd save in rent on home games and the amount we'll make on others, like WBB, not to mention other events like convocations and graduations.... Folks, financially this is a no-brainer. If anybody has any misconceptions about this, they should talk to DFW, who is the preeminent expert on the topic. His main point, which I absolutely agree with, is that if we allow MCI to beat us about the head and neck with rent payments for 10 more years with no end in sight, D1 sports may soon go the way of D1 football at GU. And sooner rather than later. Are you saying my above analysis stating we aren't "getting beat about the head" with rent payments is incorrect? If so could you (or the "preeminent expert") present better figures? Trust me, I'd love to be wrong: it would increase the need for an on-campus arena. I just worry we're back to speaking in generalities and possibly reinforcing the misconception that the University is losing barrels of money on this. Also, re: the concerts GPB puts on at McDonough: they're limited to two a year. If we tried to host Aerosmith, Motley Crue, and Van Halen on consecutive weekends, and everything was open to the public, I guarantee the ANC would flip.
|
|
YB
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,494
|
Post by YB on Apr 26, 2005 14:06:16 GMT -5
We are absolutely being beat about the neck and head by MCI in rent. We guarantee them the first $85000 from ticket sales for every game. Further, if we do not reach $85k, we pay them the difference so they get at least 85k every game. 85k means about 6-7k attendance.
This means we probably lose money- lose money- on 1/3-1/2 of our games at MCI every year. Further, since GU has to give away so many tickets, that decreases the number of paying customers compared to actual attendance. They sometimes give away up to 4k tickets.
Not to say this is the case this year or every year- but we are not the almost 9k/game draw we are believed to be. Paying, it's more like 6-7k/game, and those averages tend to be upped by 1-2 big games (Illinois, Duke, Cuse, Yukon), so we wind up losing money on more games.
So yes, we have very substantial rent problems at MCI.
While us getting a new arena does NOT prevent the breakup of the NBE, it DOES ensure if there is a breakup (or even if there is not), we will make MUCH more on every game we play than we do now, because we can move only the biggest games to MCI.
Sooner or later, it is likely MCI will impose on the program so much it will cause the U to rethink the program. That process gets aided and abetted if: the NBE breaks up and we are less than "big time" ball; or 3 leaves. These would continue our slide toward irrelevance in the grander scheme. We can combat this in several ways, but if TV and other income goes down, the MCI rents will look a lot less supportable. This will mean either finding a new home that's cheaper; or quitting the program entirely.
Which do YOU want? We need to take care of Hoya basketball now to give our program the resources it will need in the future, not just the ones it needs now.
Everything else is secondary.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Apr 26, 2005 14:41:13 GMT -5
We are absolutely being beat about the neck and head by MCI in rent. We guarantee them the first $85000 from ticket sales for every game. Further, if we do not reach $85k, we pay them the difference so they get at least 85k every game. 85k means about 6-7k attendance.
I analyzed all of this above in detail. I think it's on page 5. To give you the short version, on average we either come very close to getting MCI its 85K or we give them slightly over that depending on which way you cut it.
This means we probably lose money- lose money- on 1/3-1/2 of our games at MCI every year. Further, since GU has to give away so many tickets, that decreases the number of paying customers compared to actual attendance. They sometimes give away up to 4k tickets.
Also taken into account above.
Not to say this is the case this year or every year- but we are not the almost 9k/game draw we are believed to be. Paying, it's more like 6-7k/game, and those averages tend to be upped by 1-2 big games (Illinois, Duke, Cuse, Yukon), so we wind up losing money on more games.
I estimated "real" average attendance at even less and still found we're close to the break even point. The number of games we lose money on is only relevant in deciding the next year's schedule: if I were the administration I'd be concerned about the total made/lost for the season.
So yes, we have very substantial rent problems at MCI.
If my analysis on page 5 is correct, that's untrue unless your definition of "substantial" is very generous.
While us getting a new arena does NOT prevent the breakup of the NBE, it DOES ensure if there is a breakup (or even if there is not), we will make MUCH more on every game we play than we do now, because we can move only the biggest games to MCI.
Considering an on-campus arena would only seat around 7,000, I'm not sure that's true. Again, see analysis on page 5.
Sooner or later, it is likely MCI will impose on the program so much it will cause the U to rethink the program. That process gets aided and abetted if: the NBE breaks up and we are less than "big time" ball; or 3 leaves. These would continue our slide toward irrelevance in the grander scheme. We can combat this in several ways, but if TV and other income goes down, the MCI rents will look a lot less supportable. This will mean either finding a new home that's cheaper; or quitting the program entirely.
Which do YOU want? We need to take care of Hoya basketball now to give our program the resources it will need in the future, not just the ones it needs now.
I AGREE MCI is not a long term solution. I WANT an on campus arena. The phone booth CAN completely screw the University over when the current rent deal expires, whenever that is. However, my problem is that the general sentiment of "oh my god basketball is going down the tubes because of MCI and we're losing so much money at MCI and because of MCI the administration is going to get rid of basketball at Georgetown and oh my god then they'll have to get rid of the entire athletic program oh my god oh my god oh my god" seems to be completely unfounded if you do the math that I did on page 5. Look, the administration doesn't have $15M sitting around to spend on renovating our arena. If you know Mr. McDonough (the one with his name on the business school) or Mr. Trump, or Mr. Marriott, please call them up and ask them to write a check. The administration doesn't think there is a problem (probably because they've been looking at the same numbers as those I've presented on page 5) and WON'T build this arena, as FTB said, until major donors start asking for one to be built. The solution to the problem is out of your hands and mine unless you are a major donor. So let's stop patting each other on the back how we all want a new arena and realize we're going to be playing at MCI for a while and concentrate on we can do to make MCI a good arena for the program.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
|
Post by the_way on Apr 26, 2005 14:43:51 GMT -5
I AGREE MCI is not a long term solution. I WANT an on campus arena. The phone booth CAN completely screw the University over when the current rent deal expires, whenever that is. However, my problem is that the general sentiment of "oh my god basketball is going down the tubes because of MCI and we're losing so much money at MCI and because of MCI the administration is going to get rid of basketball at Georgetown and oh my god then they'll have to get rid of the entire athletic program oh my god oh my god oh my god" seems to be completely unfounded if you do the math that I did on page 5. Look, the administration doesn't have $15M sitting around to spend on renovating our arena. If you know Mr. McDonough (the one with his name on the business school) or Mr. Trump, or Mr. Marriott, please call them up and ask them to write a check. The administration doesn't think there is a problem (probably because they've been looking at the same numbers as those I've presented on page 5) and WON'T build this arena, as FTB said, until major donors start asking for one to be built. The solution to the problem is out of your hands and mine unless you are a major donor. So let's stop patting each other on the back how we all want a new arena and realize we're going to be playing at MCI for a while and concentrate on we can do to make MCI a good arena for the program. Amen.
|
|
YB
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,494
|
Post by YB on Apr 26, 2005 22:43:18 GMT -5
Sorry austin, I just look at it, and you have to understand that ticket sales are the overwhelming majority of revenue from any sport.
We get no revenue from ticket sales.
Does this not matter? Basically it means that NCAA shares and random revenue are our main sources of financing not only BBall costs, but other sports costs too. It's just not enough.
It's not an "ohmigodohmigod" argument. I guess I don't really accept your argument, because if you accept the numbers (MCI as a break even at best) than there is no way you should not be scared stiff for the program if it has to stay at MCI.
GU won't get the $40m for the new CC (and yes, that is what it would cost) by sitting on its tukkus and pleading for MCI to be nice to students and hang some more Hoya-friendly banners. Pleading unsuccessfully I might add.
I mean, of course I want MCI to be a better home for us- as long as it's a temporary home. mean, if the Nats were forced to play at RFK in perpetuity, they would never have come to DC. You cannot ignore sports economics, even in college.
If we do not make fundraising and planning the CC a priority- after the MSF, MSB and Science buildings- we are in deep muck as far as having a future for the Hoyas we can all rely on.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Apr 27, 2005 1:58:36 GMT -5
I'm not saying the current situation is ideal either. I'm saying the fact we're breaking even on a rent deal when we don't have our own stadium is not so bad.
Consider, for example, that the baseball team plays off campus and doesn't bring in any ticket revenue. I assume the folks in Bethesda or wherever the heck we play aren't letting us use their field for free. Is anyone clamoring for an on-campus baseball stadium? Has GU gotten rid of the baseball program?
If I walked up to someone on the street tomorrow and told them Georgetown basketball doesn't have its own stadium and rents MCI, they would naturally think (as I thought before breaking down the numbers) that the University was losing tons and tons of money in rent. The fact we have to rent, period, and the fact MCI can screw us at a time of its choosing are things that concern me. But a rent deal where we are currently breaking even and even stand to make money is a pretty damn good rent deal as far as rent deals go. Yes, I would prefer a stadium where GU keeps all the cash. But I can understand, as you do, why the administration sees the Science Center as a bigger priority. You can't rent a science center. There are too many priority projects for the arena to be on the administration's radar screen. You can't expect Jack DeGoia to post on this board tomorrow saying "Okay, y'all have been very convincing, we'll build the stadium in fifteen years." I, for one, wouldn't want that because then the administration creates potentially unrealistic expectations for all of us. It's a lose-lose for the administration. We'll all keep bitching about how the arena needs to be built sooner for those fifteen years and the University's hands would be tied if a bigger priority arose within the fifteen year span.
When I said we should make MCI a better place for us, I was speaking more about the financial side than hanging banners and being nice to students. For example, FTB suggested creating revenue by hosting bigger name area teams such as UVA. We have a rent deal where the team can potentially make money for the University, so as long as we're stuck in MCI, let's figure out how to do it and lobby the Athletic Department to implement those ideas through the HHC, Hoya Blue, petitions, etc. I am not, as you suggest, ignoring sports economics.
Theorizing that any administration is going to get rid of the Georgetown basketball program is an Oh My God argument. If that ever happens you can come over to my house and watch me burn my GU diploma while I encourage my children to attend Duke University. Wouldn't the University cut all the sports that stand NO chance of generating revenue (football, baseball, soccer, etc.) before cutting the basketball program? If we're breaking even on MCI, then basketball is no more of a financial drain on the University than, say, football. The current administration has already shown it will make investments in non-revenue-generating sports by starting the Multi-Sport Facility. It's not going to cut basketball, even if the BE breaks up. In fact, the BE breaking up could theoretically mean we move all home games back to McDonough Gym since we'd no longer have to follow the conference's minimum attendance rules. Floating conspiracy theories and telling everyone they should be "scared stiff" about the future of the program doesn't help the cause of getting a stadium built unless you can get the big donors, and not just the rabid fans on this board, to start believing in them. The rapture is not approaching, and even if it was, a new arena is not a savior.
By the way, the reason I've been checking this thread so often is that I've been waiting for someone to challenge my math. Nobody has, which is surprising given that before I posted my numbers people were implying left and right that we were losing the farm to MCI. YB, you posted that we needed to seat 9000 to break even. According to my math the break-even is much lower. Unless someone challenges the numbers, I'm going to assume they are good enough to use in making similar calculations over the course of next season. I think there's a decent chance we'll be in the black by the time conference play ends. Even if that's the case, MCI is still a financial drain on the program, and a drain which would be eliminated by renovating the on campus arena. But the situation could be much worse. Just remember: even if someone volunteers to pony up $40M tomorrow, GU is forced to have a rent deal for at least the next two years, and the current one isn't that bad.
|
|