I don't mean to be particularly snarky, but what credentials to you bring to the table on this? You seem to be taking a stand 180-degrees opposite the majority of posters.
Biffhammer - bashes ISU
- Thread starter ISC
- Start date
I don't mean to be particularly snarky, but what credentials to you bring to the table on this? You seem to be taking a stand 180-degrees opposite the majority of posters.
No, it isn't valid. The legal case is debatable, borrowing agaisnt future and probable income streams is not. Municipalities borrow against future income streams all the time as does pretty much any other business. This is commonplace, they are called municipal bonds. Say for instance the City of Des Moines borrowed money to build a Monorail. Those bonds would be guaranteed by the income stream and the monorail assets. Being a risky project investors would require a higher yield and the bond would be appropriately priced. Let's then assume, no one used the monorail and there was no income stream. Those bonds would be worthless and the investors would lose their money. In that case there is no one to cause damage, the public chose not to ride the monorail, it is the investors own fault for investing in a stupid project. In Iowa State's case, there is someone at fault if that contract is not delivered upon, and it is the other universities.
Now you can argue all you want about the legalites of if ISU could win that arguement. What cannot be argued rationally is that Iowa State is in the wrong by borrowing against future income streams that at the time were highly probable. It is done everyday, thousands of times by businesses and organizations everywhere in the world. Nothing would ever be constructed or financed otherwise.
This is the main point.
Jizzhammer's article is written from the perspective of someone who does not Iowa State to improve and move up the ladder of college sports.
We need to be aggressive, that's why we have an AD like Pollard. Now is the time, more than ever, that ISU should be doing everything possible to create a big time atmosphere and big time results.
CPR, Hoiberg, Fennelly, Jackson, Christy Johnson. We have the coaches in place. Things like the new video board and sirens do add a lot to attendance and gameday atmosphere. I really think we make a big splash this basketball season and have ISU headed in the right direction at the right time.
Or we could listen to Pi$$hammer and sit around and hope to be relegated to total obscurity.
Exactly. I'm not going to pretend (like others do) to know the details of the contract under discussion, but this alone is enough evidence to validate the risk that ISU took by investing with the projected income. End of story.
Had to do it
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jF_yLodI1CQ"]The Simpsons Monorail song (High Quality) - YouTube[/ame]
This sounds like a very eloquent explanation and makes perfect sense. But I'm sure a guy named Biff would know more about it.
First of all: Who is this tool?
Secondly: Sweet Jesus! It's called capitalism. People borrow money. Get over it.
Secondly: Sweet Jesus! It's called capitalism. People borrow money. Get over it.
Yet, it only took 5 pages for someone to raise a counter point to Biff's article without resorting to name calling.
The lawsuit stuff was discussed at length the week of the sabre rattling by Baylor and then the remaining schools.
Many legal experts weighed in and the sense I got was that a lawsuit wasn't helpful except to tie up some money of A&M or SEC in defending but in the end no damages would be awarded.
Many legal experts weighed in and the sense I got was that a lawsuit wasn't helpful except to tie up some money of A&M or SEC in defending but in the end no damages would be awarded.
BigBake: I'm just going to come out and say it. The only way you could agree with Biffhammer on this is if you ARE Biffhammer.
PS: Did you put a double coat of wax on my car?
So why then hasn't the SEC dropped the stipulations and accepted A&M unconditionally?
I think this person failed to consider is the amount of money he/she could be making by taking out a mortgage and investing the rest. Plus mortgage interest is tax deductible. There is noting wrong with owing the bank on mortgage for a house that you can afford. I agree that people run into problems when they take out debt for items they cannot afford even in the long run.
I don't think that Biff realizes anything about government accounting. Things like buildings or schools last for several years and can be used by a lot of people over these years, therefore the taxpayers in year 1 should not have to pay for the entire cost of the building when future generations will benefit from the building in year 25. This is why governments and schools have bonds.
What I really took offense to was the whiny posters who got their undies in a wad over what he wrote. (We sounded like a bunch of Hawkeyes)
From an unbiased (non Cyclone perspective) it was a decent article. It's not that ISU is spending money like we normally do but we vastly increased our spending based on a revenue stream that wasn't solid (we had just saw NU and CU leave the conf) and witnessed MU trying to.
I'm sure Deace had some nice points about why we should spend money. But I also think the discussion can be had without us lynch mobbing someone for having a different viewpoint.
Do I agree with either 100% at this point...no. Yes, spending money to keep up is a good thing., but so is being fiscally responsible. I don't know how you balance those two. (and that's why I'm not an AD)
From an unbiased (non Cyclone perspective) it was a decent article. It's not that ISU is spending money like we normally do but we vastly increased our spending based on a revenue stream that wasn't solid (we had just saw NU and CU leave the conf) and witnessed MU trying to.
I'm sure Deace had some nice points about why we should spend money. But I also think the discussion can be had without us lynch mobbing someone for having a different viewpoint.
Do I agree with either 100% at this point...no. Yes, spending money to keep up is a good thing., but so is being fiscally responsible. I don't know how you balance those two. (and that's why I'm not an AD)
NCAASportsGuy CollegeSportsGuy
Media sources: #Fox Sports Media wants rebuilt #Big12 presence in Dallas, Houston, KC, STL as well as extended footprint in Lou, Cinc, & Ut.
Correct, borrowing money is not bad. I was just pointing out that there are people who are in face fiercely against borrowing money.
Actually it wasn't a decent article because it lacks common sense. Basically, he says that it wasn't okay for ISU to do something that every single other major university, not to mention every single business, in the United States does - take out loans on projected future earnings. You must have missed the part where Texas has in excess of $200 million in debt. So it's okay for them to have debt, and significant amounts, but not ISU?
The guy clearly knows nothing about business yet tries to make himself out to be an expert.
What you are saying is happening in the economy today - all the rule changes, all the new regs, all the uncertainity means that you never build a small project at all because you cannot trust what will happen. That is why we should sue the butts off Tam if she walks in the end. Butthammer brings up points but he doth protest too much. if he had looked at all the athletic budgets, he would see they were in the hole based on anticipated future earnings. Tam, UT and CU come to mind.
