In Reply to: Re: Saw that, but wanted to see if UC Reg/Bob Myers asked them too* posted by TJJ on May 14, 2025 at 17:26:11
I was stunned at seeing that Cal had higher Athletic Revenues than us tho (barely, and it could be a rounding error, but I'm still gobsmacked):
Cal: — Cal booked $119.6 million in revenue against $149.3 million in expenses for a shortfall of $29.7 million. The revenue total includes $34.9 million in campus support. In the three post-COVID fiscal years, the Bears have received $96.5 million in student fees and direct transfers from campus. The first of at least three $10 million “Calimony” payments by UCLA, as directed by the UC regents, will be reflected in Cal’s financial report for FY2025.
UCLA: - — UCLA booked $119 million in revenue against $170.9 million in expenses for a shortfall of $51.9 million. The revenue total includes $31.6 million in campus support as the university, for the first time, provided direct cash transfers to athletics. Remove campus help, and the Bruins’ shortfall soars to $83.5 million, an unprecedented figure for Pac-12 athletic departments in non-COVID years. In advance of its inaugural season in the Big Ten, UCLA’s expenses jumped by $29 million. The school offered the following statement upon release of its financial data: “UCLA is proud of our student-athletes, and our investment recognizes the connection our programs create in bringing together the global Bruin family.”