Is a private equity venture something Bama could or should explore?

[Bamanooga]

Sources: University of Utah nearing landmark private equity deal expected to generate $500 million

This area is so not my area of expertise. For those whose area it is, what are your thoughts? What are the drawbacks? Will big donors (think Yellowwood) end up controlling sports programs to the ultimate end of decision-making on coaches, players, and even plays? An infusion of money to our sports programs would be welcomed and keep us competitive. Is this the way we get it?

 

[El Duderino]

I can only imagine all the couch coaches if they had a financial interest in the team. God help us all.

 

[JDCrimson]

No!

 

[TideMan09]

Noooooo way down I want a bunch of Jerry Jones on our sidelines..Nope..

 

[The Ols]

If we don’t we’ll get left behind.
Guessing that ball started rolling a while ago, at least I’d hope so, or we’re in trouble. It’s all about money now, and that’s gobs of it…ftr…I really don’t like what our game has become and is evolving into…but if we want to keep up with the joneses…
lol…I wrote my response before reading Tidemans…

 

[CrimsonTitles]

At a place like Utah, I get it. They desperately need money to be able to compete these days, and their main rival has extremely deep pockets. At Utah, the good will probably outweigh the bad. That definitely wouldn't be the case at Bama, who already has the money they need to compete in football.. While it's always great to have more money, I don't feel like that is enough of an issue to justify something like this. That would essentially recreate the pre Saban days where we had too many chefs in the kitchen before Saban told them all to get out.

 

[CrimsonTitles]

If we don’t we’ll get left behind.
Guessing that ball started rolling a while ago, at least I’d hope so, or we’re in trouble. It’s all about money now, and that’s gobs of it…ftr…I really don’t like what our game has become and is evolving into…but if we want to keep up with the joneses…
lol…I wrote my response before reading Tidemans…

I honestly don't think that's as important as we're led to believe. You have to have some amount of money to make a competitive offer, but the majority of these guys are not simply going to the highest bidder. Your offer simply needs to be competitive, and then after that, it's all about recruiting. Oregon and Texas have unlimited money, but neither of them has the top class on any service. I think 247 is the only site with updated player evaluations after this current HS season, and we are 2nd behind USC, NOT Oregon and NOT Texas..

On top of that, everyone has no more than $20M to spend on rev share. I think it was Cole Cubelic who said this (could be wrong but I think it was Cole), but the enforcement committee that was created with the house settlement has apparently been turning down like 75% of these extra NIL deals for non compliance, so having all this extra money may not be as beneficial as we're led to believe. If it gets denied by the enforcement committee, then it reverts to rev share. I suspect we will see some of these schools lose players they had already signed because of this.

 

[The Ols]

At a place like Utah, I get it. They desperately need money to be able to compete these days, and their main rival has extremely deep pockets. At Utah, the good will probably outweigh the bad. That definitely wouldn't be the case at Bama, who already has the money they need to compete in football.. While it's always great to have more money, I don't feel like that is enough of an issue to justify something like this. That would essentially recreate the pre Saban days where we had too many chefs in the kitchen before Saban told them all to get out.

We desperately need money to compete these days!!!

I honestly don't think that's as important as we're led to believe. You have to have some amount of money to make a competitive offer, but the majority of these guys are not simply going to the highest bidder. Your offer simply needs to be competitive, and then after that, it's all about recruiting. Oregon and Texas have unlimited money, but neither of them has the top class on any service. I think 247 is the only site with updated player evaluations after this current HS season, and we are 2nd behind USC, NOT Oregon and NOT Texas..

On top of that, everyone has no more than $20M to spend on rev share. I think it was Cole Cubelic who said this (could be wrong but I think it was Cole), but the enforcement committee that was created with the house settlement has apparently been turning down like 75% of these extra NIL deals for non compliance, so having all this extra money may not be as beneficial as we're led to believe. If it gets denied by the enforcement committee, then it reverts to rev share.

Right out of the gate…Lane was “promised” 25 mil a year…and that’s only what we’ll see above the table.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Sources: University of Utah nearing landmark private equity deal expected to generate $500 million

This area is so not my area of expertise. For those whose area it is, what are your thoughts? What are the drawbacks? Will big donors (think Yellowwood) end up controlling sports programs to the ultimate end of decision-making on coaches, players, and even plays? An infusion of money to our sports programs would be welcomed and keep us competitive. Is this the way we get it?

It's coming, sooner or later it will happen.

TPTB have already shown that money rules every decision.

It's coming.

 

[CrimsonTitles]

We desperately need money to compete these days!!!
Right out of the gate…Lane was “promised” 25 mil a year…and that’s only what we’ll see above the table.

I'm very curious what's going to happen to that money, because they can only use it on deals that the enforcement committee approves. If they're turning down 75% of these deals, then that's not gonna be as beneficial as it sounds. We'll end up seeing players transferring out because they couldn't get the deal they were promised. As long as we continue to out recruit schools with supposedly a lot more money than us, then I'm not worried at all.

 

[Power Eye]

I work in public accounting, and over the last several years, many accounting firms have partnered with private equity investment firms. I never thought I would see that, and my firm has, at least for now, passed on several opportunities. Colleagues of mine who work in firms that have gone the PE route have very mixed feelings about it. The money is very appealing, but all other aspects of it are mostly not. For the lack of a better term, or maybe not, you are selling your soul to the devil.

I would anticipate that most aspects of the fan experience would have a slightly different feel, with the big change being increased costs of game experience; tickets, concessions, parking, tailgating, etc. Anything that is generating revenue as part of the game, they will want involvement. Though that will probably pale in comparison to going after the large corporate sponsorships. The MDB presented by Dr. Pepper, etc.

The PEs are all about generating profits for their investors. They have no interest in traditions or what makes any of these schools unique, or probably if they even win lose, just are you turning us a profit. There would probably be slight uniform changes periodically so that people aren't still wearing a Bobby Humphrey jersey to the game and it doubling forty years later as a Jam Miller jersey.

I know nothing about how it would work or look like, but I have my reservations. With that said, I'm afraid that if we want to keep up, that it will become a requirement sooner rather than later. Plus, it might be better to do so early and set the terms as much in your favor as possible rather than waiting until everyone else does it and then the market standard is set.