OT; our endowmwent
- Thread starter Las Panteras
- Start date
Pitt should take all $3.5 Billion from the endowment and build the best stadium in history with it. It is a win-win.
Paco - Interesting stats. Isn’t the type of investment limited with these funds? Why huge differences on the % between schools?
Only the prudent man rule applies, and the fund must spend a specified amount each year....around 4.5% these days? Some endowments make use of more aggressive investments than others. Typically, there's an Investment Committee of the Board given the responsibility, with some full-time staffers and outside managers.
Headline:
Connecticut Politicians Want to Tax Yale Endowment
States spend, spend, spend, so watch out nothings safe although this was dropped.
Deemed not to be one of the politicians better ideas.
Connecticut Politicians Want to Tax Yale Endowment
States spend, spend, spend, so watch out nothings safe although this was dropped.
Deemed not to be one of the politicians better ideas.
The art of politics is raising money from the rich to keep the poor people away from them and soliciting votes from poor people by telling them they will tax the rich to help them!
There are all sorts of statutes governing charitable endowments, but the type of investments these pooled endowment funds are invested into are generally limited by a university's policies (e.g. schools can have internal policies against investing in fossil fuels, etc). The reason there is a difference in returns between schools is the same reason you have different returns between different mutual funds (or any other investment funds). Some funds do better than others, and Pitt's endowment pool fund has outperformed most because it has been managed better than most.
Pennsylvania law governs the minimum and maximum percentage of the principal that can be distributed each year (between 2% and 7%) and how things are pooled and what the principal can be distributed for (i.e. donor's intent/wishes), but as far as I know, not so much how it is invested (other than general fiduciary requirements that investments be consistent with the long-term preservation of the real value of the endowment fund's principal.)
Sounds like Hillary's ability to completly bs people even when Bernie is pointing out her Wall Street contributions on the national stage.
He and one other- you're deluded if you think that opinion on this board is representative of the general views of this bum's record.
What power 5 conference schools are scaling back their investment in athletics generally and FB in particular?
Makes no difference. I'm an acknowledged genius by everyone who knows me. Think I care what the assistant RA in Tower B thinks....about anything?
What P5 schools are emphasizing athletics above and beyond the lucrative amounts of cash they get from their TV deals?
Schools are spending in lockstep with the TV money they bring in.
Look no further than Pitt. They spent more money this year than they have in years, despite Gallagher allocating less money to the athletic department than Nordenberg did.
Why?
ACC TV revenue. Nothing more, nothing less.
The schools who spend above and beyond their TV money aren't dipping into the school's general fund to do it. They're using money from boosters and donors.
And if a school doesn't have a big TV deal? Well, more schools than ever are considering cutting football. And it's because sports aren't ACTUALLY that important to a University and its operations.
So, you're just a different brand of blowhard??
Must agree with Del. The fact that only 3% of our alumni donate to the athletic department speaks volumes. If that isn't an indictment of the long-term incompetence of our University's athletic department I'm not sure what is.
I think that also speaks volumes of how crappy the fan base is.
If you're the judge.....I'm a genius. All you do is brag about yourself and complain because 2 guys who don't do what you think is right....are more successful. Did Pitt interview for Gallagher's job??
Big hat, no cattle.
I have spoken to too many PITT alumni over the years who have moved on without any involvement with PITT athletics. Sorry but the athletic department has turned off more than one generation of PITT fans. Hopefully the new regime can finally get it right.
I didn't think you would give me your credentials......that is ok Del I believe you, I mean every genius uses "dummy" and other buzzwords when they speak
Hey, three grad degrees, phi beta kappa, summa cum laude and full paid fellowship to grad school- yours idiot?
Idiot is another one, I also forgot dope....Your vocabulary is incredible for a "genius"
This is pushing a very false narrative. Schools in power conferences aren't even thinking about thinking about cutting football. Not only are they huge money makers, they provide fantastic marketing, even if the school sucks at football and basketball. Ridiculous to compare that to lower division schools (certainly in athletics, but almost universally in academics, as well) thinking about cutting football because they can't afford not to cut it.
Watch that TV money dry up, and other than the SEC schools and some select B1G/B12/ACC schools, they'll cut football. P5 schools are funding their athletics with TV money and donations. They aren't footing the bill with University resources.
Profound as always.
About time to start a thread about trimming the fat off the rosters among the redshirt freshmen, isn't it?
You're the guy who started the name calling - that's an incontrovertible fact. You are representative of the folks on this board who assail people personally when you disagree with them. And I knew you'd change the subject because you'd be embarrassed. I tried to warn you, Clarence.
You think schools, who are bringing in tens of millions of dollars, are going to see money dry up so much that they cut football. I don't need to be profound. Your argument is ludicrous.
