It is not an issue and is not correct. The Pac 12 has been reporting financial results. The is no real benefit to not report and I don't see what the material advantage would be.I'm not an accountant or financial attorney, but as I understand it there would be full public disclosure mandated for a conference if all members were public universities. With a private college in the mix, they have a right to keep their books confidential and that then extends to the conference of which they're a member.
I don't have a sub to the NYT, but according to Flugaur, the Wirtz article says:
just read this and it has some really interesting tidbits i hadn't seen before.
it seems ucla will have to pay a breakup fee to the big of 15mm if the deal doesn't go through. this is going to be fun.
This message was brought to you by Maggies Farm Dispensary. Come in on Sunday November 27th for the disappointment special. Nothing Prime on sale, but all the dregs that no one else wants will be available and cost more than they should.
Nothing personal. You both have just been very adamant that they aren’t getting blocked
More than 10 = less money for us. Why don’t people understand this. There is not once school in al of the US, not currently in a P5 conference, that adds to our media value. Not one.We would not stay at 10. Also, if we lost USC & Stanford we'd need to add a private school for financial disclosure protections. That likely means SMU.
Not if the "more than 10" adds media markets and, especially if those additions don't immediately get a full share.More than 10 = less money for us. Why don’t people understand this. There is not once school in al of the US, not currently in a P5 conference, that adds to our media value. Not one.