Financial Impact of no football in Missoula? No Fans in stands?

[sdk.catfish]

grizghost

..sorry I must have miss it? ...did catfish ask me a question

Actually I didn't but I will now? Did you cash your $1200 socialist (whoops "stimulus") check?
:lol:

 

[grizghost]

grizghost

..sorry I must have miss it? ...did catfish ask me a question

Actually I didn't but I will now? Did you cash your $1200 socialist (whoops "stimulus") check?
:lol:

..nope try again!.. I really don't need the money...I've done quite well for myself...this is a great country!

 

[indian-outlaw]

FROM KEM

Ok Kem, here is one definition of socialism "a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."

So if you are saying that Government reimbursing UM for playing no football because that would be the death blow for UM football isn't using taxpayer dollars for "regulating the economy for the community as a whole", then just what would it be? Please provide your (documented) definition of socialism. By the way do you collect social security, use medicare, drive on government maintained roads, depend on government provided law enforcement, etc? All socialism - and it aint so bad.

Having social components within capitalism is not unusual and certainly does not constitute socialism. The Green New Deal would.

What? A green new deal would be exactly that, a social component within capitalism. Just like the new deal was, just like the wall street bailout of 2008 and the recent bailout. The only difference is the green new deal has better priorities for working people. Got it kids?

 

[PlayerRep]

Having social components within capitalism is not unusual and certainly does not constitute socialism. The Green New Deal would.

What? A green new deal would be exactly that, a social component within capitalism. Just like the new deal was, just like the wall street bailout of 2008 and the recent bailout. The only difference is the green new deal has better priorities for working people. Got it kids?

Nope. Green New Deal has nothing to do with capitalism. Please get some education before you say dumb stuff like that again.  

 

[kemajic]

What? A green new deal would be exactly that, a social component within capitalism. Just like the new deal was, just like the wall street bailout of 2008 and the recent bailout. The only difference is the green new deal has better priorities for working people. Got it kids?

Nope. Green New Deal has nothing to do with capitalism. Please get some education before you say dumb stuff like that again.  

Education is different in Portland.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Having social components within capitalism is not unusual and certainly does not constitute socialism. The Green New Deal would.

What? A green new deal would be exactly that, a social component within capitalism. Just like the new deal was, just like the wall street bailout of 2008 and the recent bailout. The only difference is the green new deal has better priorities for working people. Got it kids?

Is that the new spin they’re telling you to put on the GND? To attempt to make it palatable? :roll: :lol:

don’t worry folks, it’s just a “social component” WITHIN capitalism!

 

[PlayerRep]

"The worst-case scenario from a budget standpoint is if we had a fall where we played football but couldn't have any fans in the stadium," said Martin. "So you have all the expenses associated with football, the travel, the cost to bring teams in here in non-conference games, but still have those expenses but not have any revenue to make up." According to Martin, if the Griz went that route they would be staring at a $6.5-7 million loss in revenue. Not only would that majorly affect the football program but other athletic programs at UM, as well.

https://www.montanasports.com/sports/big-sky-conference/montana-grizzlies/altered-or-canceled-football-season-would-have-ripple-effect-on-montana-griz-athletics

What is at stake for the city of Missoula? According to a study by the Bureau of Business and Economic Research at Montana that was conducted in 2016, Griz football alone is responsible for bringing in an estimated $2.53 million worth of spending from out-of-area attendees per each home game. With inflation rates over the past few years, it's possible that number has gone up slightly, and Montana is scheduled to have six home games in the 2020 season.

https://www.montanasports.com/sports/big-sky-conference/montana-grizzlies/if-montana-griz-football-is-canceled-heres-whats-at-stake-for-missoulas-economy

2016 Study can be found here:
http://www.bber.umt.edu/pubs/econ/UMAthleticImpact2016.pdf

------------------------
Sportico's Coffey gets insights from Wall Street on how the near-term trajectory of college athletics is being received in the municipal bond market. Straight to the point from one unnamed trader, "Bonds used for athletic improvements will fall apart if there’s a second wave of COVID-19 and no TV or attendance revenue from college sports." FitchRatings Senior Director Lewis: "There is the incentive on the university side to step in. The university either recognizes or doesn’t recognize the sports program is instrumental to their livelihood." DPC Data executive & longtime trader Nguyen: "The irony is they’re used to being highly rated credits—the larger schools with the larger football programs. This changes the game. My sense is we’ll probably see some downgrades."

https://www.sportico.com/2020/business/finance/debt-laden-college-football-programs-making-muni-market-nervous-1234608360/

I heard that having only 30%-40% of fans in stands would result in a loss of just over $2.5 million of revenue, or a loss of that much. I suppose this could be calculated with assumptions on tickets prices and attendance.

While this would be a tough financial situation for UM, I can't imagine that no fans in stands would be financially feasible. I assume there just couldn't be enough tv or streaming revenue, but don't know anything about that.

 

[indian-outlaw]

What? A green new deal would be exactly that, a social component within capitalism. Just like the new deal was, just like the wall street bailout of 2008 and the recent bailout. The only difference is the green new deal has better priorities for working people. Got it kids?

Nope. Green New Deal has nothing to do with capitalism. Please get some education before you say dumb stuff like that again.  

Dumb stuff like that? Geezus dude, do you really think you have any room to talk?

 

[indian-outlaw]

What? A green new deal would be exactly that, a social component within capitalism. Just like the new deal was, just like the wall street bailout of 2008 and the recent bailout. The only difference is the green new deal has better priorities for working people. Got it kids?

Is that the new spin they’re telling you to put on the GND? To attempt to make it palatable? :roll: :lol:

don’t worry folks, it’s just a “social component” WITHIN capitalism!

Keep telling yourself that the 5 trillion dollars that was given to the multi nationalists wasn't socialism. The GND will at least put a few working people on the job.

 

[PlayerRep]

Nope. Green New Deal has nothing to do with capitalism. Please get some education before you say dumb stuff like that again.  

Dumb stuff like that? Geezus dude, do you really think you have any room to talk?

Okay, if you think you are so smart, lay it out so the whole board can see what you are seeing.

 

[PlayerRep]

Is that the new spin they’re telling you to put on the GND? To attempt to make it palatable? :roll: :lol:

don’t worry folks, it’s just a “social component” WITHIN capitalism!

Keep telling yourself that the 5 trillion dollars that was given to the multi nationalists wasn't socialism. The GND will at least put a few working people on the job.

Again, smart guy, lay it out for all of us. Explain the 5 trillion dollars as socialism.

 

[indian-outlaw]

Keep telling yourself that the 5 trillion dollars that was given to the multi nationalists wasn't socialism. The GND will at least put a few working people on the job.

Again, smart guy, lay it out for all of us. Explain the 5 trillion dollars as socialism.

You're hilarious.

 

[PlayerRep]

Again, smart guy, lay it out for all of us. Explain the 5 trillion dollars as socialism.

You're hilarious.

Where's your explanation?

I know you don't have any. No substance. Don't know what you're talking about.

You've always been an occasionally big mouth, with no substance.

 

[indian-outlaw]

You're hilarious.

Where's your explanation?

I know you don't have any. No substance. Don't know what you're talking about.

You've always been an occasionally big mouth, with no substance.

If you can't understand how printing and handing over 5 trillion dollars to multinational corporations by the federal reserve is a form of socializing the losses of business I cannot help you. I think you need a remedial HS class on government. For a lawyer you sure are stupid.

 

[PlayerRep]

Where's your explanation?

I know you don't have any. No substance. Don't know what you're talking about.

You've always been an occasionally big mouth, with no substance.

If you can't understand how printing and handing over 5 trillion dollars to multinational corporations by the federal reserve is a form of socializing the losses of business I cannot help you. I think you need a remedial HS class on government. For a lawyer you sure are stupid.

If you can't explain it, that probably means that you don't know what you're talking about.

What 5 trillion was printed and handed over?

I majored in government.

 

[argh!]

If you can't understand how printing and handing over 5 trillion dollars to multinational corporations by the federal reserve is a form of socializing the losses of business I cannot help you. I think you need a remedial HS class on government. For a lawyer you sure are stupid.

If you can't explain it, that probably means that you don't know what you're talking about.

What 5 trillion was printed and handed over?

I majored in government.

this guy majored in government at dartmouth, too. hmmm. might explain some things?

https://dartmouthalumnimagazine.com/blake-neff-tucker-carlson

 

[CatGrad-UMGradStu]

If you can't explain it, that probably means that you don't know what you're talking about.

What 5 trillion was printed and handed over?

I majored in government.

this guy majored in government at dartmouth, too. hmmm. might explain some things?

https://dartmouthalumnimagazine.com/blake-neff-tucker-carlson

Same guy writes here too!

https://www.theonion.com/

...glad PR finally went back to work...

 

[indian-outlaw]

If you can't understand how printing and handing over 5 trillion dollars to multinational corporations by the federal reserve is a form of socializing the losses of business I cannot help you. I think you need a remedial HS class on government. For a lawyer you sure are stupid.

If you can't explain it, that probably means that you don't know what you're talking about.

What 5 trillion was printed and handed over?

I majored in government.

Well dude, while you were busy dropping names and bragging about yourself at some party of jock sniffing donors your government ponied up $4.5 trillion in tax payer money that they didn't have. Which means the federal reserve just printed it. I rounded up to $5 trillion because the week prior they had handed over $500 million in emergency funding. This is not to mention the trillions in quantitative easing that has been going on for years. So we can very conservatively say that it was $5 trillion. It was actually probably twice that or more.
I suppose you could argue that just handing over public/taxpayer money to multinational corporations to keep them from going broke is not socialism in the strictest sense which is sure to be your argument/justification but quantitative easing certainly is. It is the government holding financial securities of corporations. I'm not sure how you can define that in any other way than socialism.
Oh and here is another example but you may have to do a bit of your own googling. If you really need help with it I can hold your hand if you want. But here is the concept. The taxpayers have publicly funded the research of many drugs. Then once a drug is developed the pharmaceutical companies turn around and gouge the public to purchase the drug with the excuse of how much it costs to develop. It's called privatize the profits and socialize the losses or development costs. See how that works? It's a really nifty republican trick.

 

[CatGrad-UMGradStu]

I don't know if one ought to post anything relevant such as this one. Evidently piling on the efforts of MIT and Harvard works. Who would have thought? Those are what, tier 2 or 3 schools?
https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/judge-to-hear-arguments-in-challenge-to-foreign-student-rule/

 

[grizindabox]

Robert Reich
@RBReich
The coronavirus stimulus package carved out $135,000,000,000 in tax breaks for millionaires.

That's *three times* as much money as was included for emergency housing and food relief.

When I say we have socialism for the rich, harsh capitalism for the rest, this is what I mean.