Printable View
I understand the point he was trying to make, but it was a fail.Quote:
Originally Posted by CloneIce
If you don't want to 'subsidize' Iowa athletics, you have a choice. Drop Medicom or the dish providers. Yes, if you are a TVaholic, that might be a tough choice, but you won't go to prison for it.
If you don't want to subsidize ISU athletics - do you ask your employer to stop withholding taxes?
Actually he's correct. I subisidize the Big 10 every month when I pay my cable bill. I'd love Ala Carte Cable where I can pick my channels.Quote:
Originally Posted by CyPride
oh yeah drop your tv!!!! dumb dumb....Quote:
Originally Posted by CyPride
Indeed, but it's more realistic than asking your employer to withhold state taxes.Quote:
Originally Posted by nye4cy
Plus, now ESPN3 is available thru the Xbox. With rumors of Hulu coming soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by colbycheese
I'll just say i couldnt give a crap about being 'self sufficient'. The university gets far more in return for that 1.6 mil through the marketing value of athletics, in increasing enrollment, alumni retention, building of goodwill, and cultivating potential donors (to the university as a whole as well, alumni who stay connected to the university, even if via athletics, are probably more likely to donate to the school as well.) Id say the university\state gets more than a fair ROI.
What this boils down to is the fact that the hawks are one of the rare programs that are self sufficient, partially thanks to big 10 money, and the state is fine with giving us the short end of the stick again. If the state wants us to set up a plan to be self sufficient, fine, but lets drag that out as long as possible and get what money out of it we can. The state govt really doesnt show it cares about ISU, so i guess i dont care if it takes 80 years to become 'self sufficient'
Quote:
Originally Posted by alarson
let's put Iowa back on the payroll then. of course, we'd have fans complaining about that.
time to stand on our own feet and make our own way instead of sitting back and crying, blaming, pointing fingers when adverse things happen to us.
And the state doesn't care about us? Heck, butterburger had a sit-down with mason and barta asking them to have iowa take us to the big ten. what do you mean the state doesn't care about us!
Why should all mediacom subscribers subsidize the Big 10 network? Your statement that I have a choice really isn't valid as whether I have cable or a dish- I pay $.70 every month for the Big 10. The same will be true for Iowa fans, they will subsidize the Big 12 through their ABC/ESPN fees to the provider. However, it is a bit different in there is more diverse programming on the networks.Quote:
Originally Posted by CyPride
I agree with other posters, customers should be able to ala carte their cable channels, with discounts equal to the actual payments back to the network. I could give a rip that mediacom or DirecTV have 200 channels- give me the opportunity to get the 10-15 channels I want & I'd be satisfied.
It would be interesting to see if the Big 10 TV network model would work if subscribers had to pay $40-$50 annually for the Big 10 network.
Grassley/Harkin - I want ala carte pricing!!!
The cable company's argument is they won't be able to provide all those extra channels if you get rid of ESPN and Big 10 network etc. I say who cares.:skeptical:Quote:
Originally Posted by isucy86
Listen to your customers!
Actually I think that a majority of Iowa's Big 10 TV contract money comes from out of state. The state of Iowa has 4.4% of the Big 10 population base, U of I gets 9.1% of the Big 10 TV money.
i'd bet that they did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobber
No I think they are looking at the bottom line(which is what they should do as a private business).Quote:
Originally Posted by CyPride
They know revenue will go way down if they put that on the table.
Are you sure that was his point? I thought there was some money (~200K I think) that was somehow related to scholarships or something. I don't think it is part of the athletic budget but since it wouldn't be there if you didn't have athletics it sort of counts. I believe ISU would have the same thing which is in addition to the 1.6M.Quote:
Originally Posted by CloneIce
Can't the University just say they are going to continue to fund the AD, but not use tax payer money to do so. Which could already be the case since the state government is now providing less than 50% of the general fund.
Without question, the SEC is a superior conference to the Big 10 on the field/court of play already (as is the Big 12)...I am talking about financially...where the Big 10 still has a slight lead on the SEC...but not for long.Quote:
Originally Posted by cygrads