Logistically, 20 would certainly be better than 18. It really is about Fox having a fixed media payout and no one wanting to make their own shares smaller.
But if Stanford and Cal really are offering a highly reduced payout package for the initial years (which they will fund through their own donors) then that might change the calculation.
Logistically, 20 would certainly be better than 18. It really is about Fox having a fixed media payout and no one wanting to make their own shares smaller.
But if Stanford and Cal really are offering a highly reduced payout package for the initial years (which they will fund through their own donors) then that might change the calculation.
Logistically, 20 would certainly be better than 18. It really is about Fox having a fixed media payout and no one wanting to make their own shares smaller.
But if Stanford and Cal really are offering a highly reduced payout package for the initial years (which they will fund through their own donors) then that might change the calculation.