USD Learfield Deal

[JACKGUYII]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

It isn't just according to me, the article in the AL stated that Herbster had started this process with Learfield 3 years ago when we started our transition.

I agree it is good for both schools and for sports in South Dakota.

The Sioux City market is ripe as there are plenty of USD grads there and across NW Iowa. UNI (also with Learfield) gets good run in Sioux City and I believe USD could push them out and become the FCS school for Sioux City. A good local option. Iowa, Nebraska, and to a lesser extent Iowa St will always get good run in Sioux City, but those towns are far away and tickets can be hard to come by. Throw in the hotel and food costs and it gets expensive to go to one of their games. I know, I go to Kinnick once a year. USD is a quality, affordable, local option to those schools.

USD has never been able to convert the Sioux City market and don't see that changing simply because they have joined a new conference and raised the profile by going DI.

[Coyote_Fan]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

USD has never been able to convert the Sioux City market and don't see that changing simply because they have joined a new conference and raised the profile by going DI.

I have to respectfully disagree. It won't be a slam dunk but through time I can see USD having a shot at the Sioux City market. UNI comes to Vermillion for football so even if the Sioux City fans are cheering for the Panthers it's still extra revenue created if nothing else. I do think going to D1, getting into the MVFC and Summit plus a seemingly better marketing situation and product will make a difference to some people. If for whatever reason Sioux City were to get the Summit tourney that would only enhance USD's influence over the mini-metro area. USD might have to up the ante on the field of play first. They will need to be a serious playoff threat in football or maybe play the role of cinderella and make it to the dance and maybe pull off a huge upset in mens hoops.

I believe USD can make their mark in mens basketball if the fan base and admininstration bought into it or kind of fell into it with success. If USD were to get a new arena they could raise the entire profile of the basketball program. They would have the potential to raise mens basketball to the "go to" sport of the school which would be very smart IMO. No other mid majors around the area are making in push in the sport to be extremely good. Just look at Gonzaga, VCU, George Mason etc. Not that USD is going to turn into a juggernaut but there is potential to make a splash there. I have always felt that USD has been absent a sport that everyone can hang their hat on. OK I am going off topic so I will put an abrupt end to this and just say that the Sioux City market is not out of reach.

[JackFlash]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

Yote53 - what debt is Learfield servicing for SDSU? And even if they are - given your math, that is still $3M that SDSU is not paying. Not sure how you make it out to be the same deal - I would be interested to know the details though. Either way, still a good thing for you all.

[JackJD]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

On the Coyote Board, Yote53 made the same assertion about debt service, and uses that assertion to conclude that the deals are basically the same. I have never read anything about debt service so I asked for some citation to a source -- was that in an article? Press release? Information disclosed by Learfield or SDSU? No support offered. That doesn't mean it's not true but it doesn't mean the assertion is true, either. And, as JackFlash noted in the previous post, if there is a component of debt service, what exactly is meant by that? Sounds like a net benefit worth $3 million to me.

I wonder what the FACTS are (oh no! facts on a message board! )

[Nidaros]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

On the Coyote Board, Yote53 made the same assertion about debt service, and uses that assertion to conclude that the deals are basically the same. I have never read anything about debt service so I asked for some citation to a source -- was that in an article? Press release? Information disclosed by Learfield or SDSU? No support offered. That doesn't mean it's not true but it doesn't mean the assertion is true, either. And, as JackFlash noted in the previous post, if there is a component of debt service, what exactly is meant by that? Sounds like a net benefit worth $3 million to me.

I wonder what the FACTS are (oh no! facts on a message board! )

Now you got my curiosity going Yote 53. Servicing debt? Are we that cash poor that we had to borrow money? It could not be for a new facility or could it? Dont ignore us Yote 53 put up or shut up.

[Yote53]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

Not going to find a link. Not everything is released to newspapers. It is something I heard months ago, before either of these deals were inked and it was from somebody with knowledge of the situation.

Do any of you talk to people in the administration or inside the athletic dept at SDSU? I'm sure you do. Down here I live, work, and socialize with people at the U. Kids on the same teams, going to school concerts, etc. We talk about stuff, stuff that is factual but is not going to be published in some paper. Call it a rumor, call it whatever you want. The point I was making, if you read my post over at GoYotes, is that we knew that when these announcements were made that SDSU fans would say that SDSU was first and their deal was bigger, when in reality neither is entirely true. It is stated in the AL and the Brookings Register that USD started this process 3 years ago, 2008, and that SDSU was approached by Learfield in 2009 and the final negotiations took about 5 months. I was told that SDSU's deal was closer to 10 years $10 million, similar to USD's, but that Learfield would be taking over some existing contracts as part of the deal which bumped up the figure.

The bottom line, which I think we can agree, is that it is a good development for both schools.

[yoteforever]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

How the Learfield deal was structured at both schools is totally different. I know your fan base wants to cry out "we got a better deal" and although it may be true, depending upon what some of the numbers were to get to the final deal, it might not be true.

Let me start with USD. Our deal is "turn key". In other words, Learfield now takes over all expenses that USD previously had. The marketing person and support staff that were on USD's payroll will now be shuffled to Learfield. Any expenses in running that department (postage, phone, advertising, blah blah blah) will now be taken over by Learfield. In order for us to cut the deal, we had to go back and negotiate with Daktronics on the signage, contracts, etc. We couldn't do the Learfield deal until that was handled.

SDSU's deal is not "turn key". Your administration elected to maintain the costs associtaed with running the marketing and all costs Learfield will have in lieu of a larger annual payment. I believe the strategy there (and might be a good one, who knows) was people would see a larger revenue stream coming in annually and maybe the fans would see "outside revenues" on the increase which would maybe motivate the average fan to give more. That is a startegy SDSU took in their negotiations that is different than most Learfield deals structured.

I don't know that there was debt to retire, in fact I beleieve there wasn't. But maybe the fact that SDSU kept all the expenses in house and they have to pay those staffers and expense related to them as some form of "debt servicing". In either case, it is cash flow out in exchange for larger cash flow in. The strategy has already been discussed. Might be a great move, might be dumb, might be revenue neutral.

The Learfield deal for both schools is awesome. It provides much greater revenue than before, plus you now have the marketing expertise of a company extremely knowledgable in the business they are in. I also have to believe it will result in both schools, especially in basketball, being able to play D-1 BCS schools that have Learfield contracts. That pressure will be there also.

Lastly, I know that Sioux City is ripe to be taken by USD. It will never be more than Iowa, Iowa State, or Nebraska, but I do think you'll see more fans created from that market, and all of northwest Iowa. I think you will see the results of that beginning when we get in (2) legitmate conferences.

[jackrabit1]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

So does this mean that you're going to concentrate more on Sioux City and not so much Sioux Falls?

[zooropa]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

Here's the deal:

Those dollar amounts are guaranteed minimums. SDSU raised $1M last year without Learfield's help. I'm pretty sure that they have and will continue to raise significantly more money than USD. Period.

[Yote53]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

Thank you for expanding on my post Yoteforever.

Sometimes when you hear things you hesitate and are conflicted on just how much you should put out on a message board. I was having one of those moments and was starting to feel my cred being attacked. I know, it's the internet, who cares, but I feel there is a sort of "street cred" in this internet universe of ours.

[yoteforever]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

Here's the deal:

Those dollar amounts are guaranteed minimums. SDSU raised $1M last year without Learfield's help. I'm pretty sure that they have and will continue to raise significantly more money than USD. Period.

I assure you that myself, and ALL USD fans are excited for you.

[yoteforever]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

Thank you for expanding on my post Yoteforever.

Sometimes when you hear things you hesitate and are conflicted on just how much you should put out on a message board. I was having one of those moments and was starting to feel my cred being attacked. I know, it's the internet, who cares, but I feel there is a sort of "street cred" in this internet universe of ours.

I know one of the guys at learfield who handles this region and he said to me that at the end of the day, although both contracts were written so differently, that there wasn't "10 cents difference" between them at the end of the day.

[yoteforever]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

So does this mean that you're going to concentrate more on Sioux City and not so much Sioux Falls?

To be honest with you, if I was the AD at USD, I would focus alot more time in Sioux City than I would in Sioux Falls. The SF market is full of USD grads that are somewhat apathetic towards coming to games in Vermillion. Sioux City in the 70's was a strong and ardent supporter of Coyote athletics, and I would attempt to renew that relationship. Sioux City is a good sports town, and they are hungry for college sports, more than NAIA that is offered there now.

Would I ignore SF? Of course not. But if the fan base doesn't want to get excited about D-1 sports, then as the old saying goes..."you can lead a horse to water................."

[propar80]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

I know one of the guys at learfield who handles this region and he said to me that at the end of the day, although both contracts were written so differently, that there wasn't "10 cents difference" between them at the end of the day.

You think that maybe by telling you and the USD administration that, that it may have saved Leerfield $3M, because they knew that would be a concerned of the USD administration that SDSU is getting a better deal?? And btw...why should USD get the same deal as SDSU?? Because USD has had multiple teams and participants in D-1 NCAA tournaments?? As a Jackrabbit fan I'm acutally a bit upset at our ADmin that we didn't get more after seeing what USD got.

Just keep believeing what you want to believe...I'm sure the longer you do this, it will eventually come true.

I too, agree that it really doesn't matter who got the "better" deal, but the two of you seem to care as you keep coming up with "people in the know" that are sure the deals are..."exactly the same...except different".

Go Jacks!!

[yoteforever]

Re: USD Learfield Deal

You think that maybe by telling you and the USD administration that, that it may have saved Leerfield $3M, because they knew that would be a concerned of the USD administration that SDSU is getting a better deal?? And btw...why should USD get the same deal as SDSU?? Because USD has had multiple teams and participants in D-1 NCAA tournaments?? As a Jackrabbit fan I'm acutally a bit upset at our ADmin that we didn't get more after seeing what USD got.

Just keep believeing what you want to believe...I'm sure the longer you do this, it will eventually come true.

I too, agree that it really doesn't matter who got the "better" deal, but the two of you seem to care as you keep coming up with "people in the know" that are sure the deals are..."exactly the same...except different".

Go Jacks!!

Are you always so bitter and condescending? I believe that you are an impassioned fan, I have no doubt about that. And I know that anytime I post on here, you are one of the first to attack me. It's your board, and I am a big boy, so have at it.

But in trying to destroy the credibility Yote 53 and I have, all you do is insinuate. The one man on here I have a great deal of respect for is JackJD. Maybe we both should write a check to him to hold, say for $1000 each, and if I produce evidence from my so called questionable source that what I posted is accurate, then the check you wrote goes to USD athletics, and I get my check back (because I am already a booster and give annually). If I can't produce evidence to the fact, then my check goes to SDSU's athletic department, and you get yours back.