Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Forgive me,  I am just trying to understand.  Doesn't giving up a 5% stake usually mean the PE firm gets 5% of the "profits" every year forever?

The profits off football can only be from advertising.

What about TV rights?

That’s the biggest one- and the majority reason why a PE firm thinks they can improve revenue. 

Private Equity is terrible for the consumer in general and will be terrible for the fans of college football specifically. Private Equity will seek to maximize every last dollar opportunity at the expense of fan service and consumer experience.

I am tied in a lot to PE aggressively taking over the two largest empires on the Las Vegas Strip - MGM & Caesars. You ever wonder why there's no more free parking? Free drink services are cut back to almost nothing at the tables and slots? Blackjack odds were raised in favor of the house from 3:2 to 6:5? And the prices on absolutely everything are nearly doubled in the last four years? Private Equity stepped in and forced these changes for the sake of short term profit. Lost is any sense of courting the customer loyalty that Vegas was famous for and well tipped for - like with free drink service and gambling comps.

Private Equity is more invasive than standard shareholding. A third party shareholder (like myself) purchases a portion of the business with the trust that the business themselves will keep bettering themselves. A Private Equity arrangement is an agreement to take over a business for the sake of controlling the strategy to maximize the company at all costs. On paper, Private Equity looks beneficial, but everybody else (consumer, fans, loyalty programs, etc) suffers the unintended consequences.

How would a PE takeover play out for the Big Ten? Off the top of my head, advertising will be maximized in every way possible. More corporate logos on the field and corporate logos covering the uniforms. Probably strange neutral site games in places like Brazil, like the NFL does to promote their league. A study into whether the Big Ten can become a publicly traded brand with an IPO and ESG score.

An unintended consequence of this would be the formation of a players union that would A) demand a certain percentage of League profits and B) would seek to be disassociated from Student Athlete expectations in a way that would make them professional representatives of a university rather than students of a university.

Yes, thats all it is.

They don't want to give up their power, and if this money is distributed equally, they lose their financial advantage. if the deal includes a guaranteed seat at the table for the two of them, and that the money is distributed proportionally based on existing revenue streams, they would sign off in a heartbeat

Shouldn't they rightfully do that? If you're a business that brings in a higher revenue, which results in a larger bottom line for yourself, why would you take on partnerships that require equal distribution if the partners bring less to the table?