With regard to UCLA and USC leaving the Pac-10, I say 'May the Door Hit Ya Where the Lord Split Ya...'. Just don't come crawling back to Pac-10 Conference if it doesn't work out, finanancially or otherwise. By the way, UCLA at least, is by charter supposed to be Non-Profit, as 'Student Fees' run through the State of California General…
With regard to UCLA and USC leaving the Pac-10, I say 'May the Door Hit Ya Where the Lord Split Ya...'. Just don't come crawling back to Pac-10 Conference if it doesn't work out, finanancially or otherwise. By the way, UCLA at least, is by charter supposed to be Non-Profit, as 'Student Fees' run through the State of California General Fund. If revenues were to go up for UCLA, all that revenue must still flow through the State and if the UC Regents allow UCLA to pocket any increased revenues, without at least offsetting the State for increased OTR costs associated with away games being further away, it could lead to Accounting Irregularities, in my oppinion. Cal '89.
Just an FYI - you are repeating a common misunderstanding about non-profit entities (btw - USC is a non-profit org.; UCLA is actually part of the state, also non-profit) --- that somehow they can't earn profits. Not true. The ONLY difference between for-profits and non-profits is that profits earned by the former inure to the owners or shareholders. Whereas profits earned by non-profits do not belong to anyone and must be used for the entity because non-profits are not owned by anyone (staff and directors cannot simply take the profit, though they can be paid) and there are no shareholders.
Hi L.A. Bear, I am not repeating a common misunderstanding. Either you did not fully read what I wrote or your understanding of GAAP as it applies to Non-Profit organizations may be lacking. I never said UCLA could not have revenues. It is the Accounting for said revenues that I was speaking to. Let's leave it there, shall we?
John, thanks for the clarification. When I reread your comment, you are right...I didn't get the main point, that somehow it would create accounting irregularities. I don't think, however, that would be the case. While it's true that each UC is part of the state, the system and each campus has its own budget and allocation, that are not part of the general fund. So as long as they reconcile their income and expenses, they'll be fine. Not only do they follow GAAP, but also stricter government accounting standards without any issues in the past.
With regard to UCLA and USC leaving the Pac-10, I say 'May the Door Hit Ya Where the Lord Split Ya...'. Just don't come crawling back to Pac-10 Conference if it doesn't work out, finanancially or otherwise. By the way, UCLA at least, is by charter supposed to be Non-Profit, as 'Student Fees' run through the State of California General Fund. If revenues were to go up for UCLA, all that revenue must still flow through the State and if the UC Regents allow UCLA to pocket any increased revenues, without at least offsetting the State for increased OTR costs associated with away games being further away, it could lead to Accounting Irregularities, in my oppinion. Cal '89.
It is a fantasy to think either school will come crawling back to anywhere.
Just an FYI - you are repeating a common misunderstanding about non-profit entities (btw - USC is a non-profit org.; UCLA is actually part of the state, also non-profit) --- that somehow they can't earn profits. Not true. The ONLY difference between for-profits and non-profits is that profits earned by the former inure to the owners or shareholders. Whereas profits earned by non-profits do not belong to anyone and must be used for the entity because non-profits are not owned by anyone (staff and directors cannot simply take the profit, though they can be paid) and there are no shareholders.
Hi L.A. Bear, I am not repeating a common misunderstanding. Either you did not fully read what I wrote or your understanding of GAAP as it applies to Non-Profit organizations may be lacking. I never said UCLA could not have revenues. It is the Accounting for said revenues that I was speaking to. Let's leave it there, shall we?
John, thanks for the clarification. When I reread your comment, you are right...I didn't get the main point, that somehow it would create accounting irregularities. I don't think, however, that would be the case. While it's true that each UC is part of the state, the system and each campus has its own budget and allocation, that are not part of the general fund. So as long as they reconcile their income and expenses, they'll be fine. Not only do they follow GAAP, but also stricter government accounting standards without any issues in the past.