Stipends

[TopHook]

Kind of sounds like a reason to stay around.

 

[Mr.Fitzwell]

Kind of sounds like a reason to stay around.

The ONLY sports that should get any stipend money should be ONLY the ones that generate revenue. They should ONLY get a percentage of the revenue by THEIR sport.

Dan Staley and his Lady Cocks would generate their own money, but men's sports should NEVER pay a SINGLE DIME to support wimminz...

In fact, make players/participants of non revenue generating sports pay their own way through school...socialism fails 100%of the time...

 

[ChicagoFats]

The ONLY sports that should get any stipend money should be ONLY the ones that generate revenue. They should ONLY get a percentage of the revenue by THEIR sport.

Dan Staley and his Lady Cocks would generate their own money, but men's sports should NEVER pay a SINGLE DIME to support wimminz...

In fact, make players/participants of non revenue generating sports pay their own way through school...socialism fails 100%of the time...

I disagree some what.

I don't think its a bad idea for a school, or corporation, to run loss leaders. Loss leaders are products that don't necessarily make money, but add value to your brand or help you increase sales of another product.

For example, Wal-Mart may sell bread at below cost in order to get you into the store to buy milk, eggs, cheese etc where their profit margins are higher.

I think a point of contention is when things are mandated by law. It only turns into socialism when it is mandated by law and not by the market. Being forced to have Wimmins sports is socialst. Opting to have wimmins sports to support your brand seems capitalist to me.

 

[quickfeet]

This just seems like another escalation of the Arms race in NIL. State governments starting to provide direct benefits to athletes seems like a slippery slope

 

[BurntJ]

I disagree some what.

I don't think its a bad idea for a school, or corporation, to run loss leaders. Loss leaders are products that don't necessarily make money, but add value to your brand or help you increase sales of another product.

For example, Wal-Mart may sell bread at below cost in order to get you into the store to buy milk, eggs, cheese etc where their profit margins are higher.

I think a point of contention is when things are mandated by law. It only turns into socialism when it is mandated by law and not by the market. Being forced to have Wimmins sports is socialst. Opting to have wimmins sports to support your brand seems capitalist to me.

Mandating is THE BULLSHIT. I have girls and wont every opportunity for them BUT am torn as you don't get it off someone else's back. It funny b/c in a way it a new modern form of slavery. Forcing anyone to supplement others off your labor.