Author Archives: hbcumoney

Owning The Diamond: Why HBCU Women Entrepreneurs Should Buy a Women’s Pro Baseball Team

“Let us put our moneys together; let us use our moneys; let us put our moneys out at usury among ourselves, and reap the benefits ourselves.” – Maggie L. Walker, pioneering African American banker and businesswoman:

It is not enough to cheer from the stands.
IIt is not enough to cheer from the stands. If HBCU women entrepreneurs and the institutions that produced them are serious about building generational wealth, influence, and visibility in the global sports economy, then ownership, not participation, must be the goal. The emergence of the Women’s Pro Baseball League (WPBL) offers just such a moment. Four inaugural franchises in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, and Boston mark the first professional women’s baseball league in the United States since 1954. And yet, amid this historic announcement, one question should echo across the HBCU landscape: Who will own a piece of it?

Ownership in sports is about more than trophies it’s about capital, culture, and control. While athletes inspire, it is owners who shape the economic ecosystem: negotiating television contracts, setting standards for pay equity, deciding where teams are located, and determining which communities benefit from their presence. In American sports, Black ownership remains vanishingly rare. Fewer than a handful of African Americans have ever held majority stakes in professional teams across all major leagues. Among women, ownership representation is even smaller. Yet the HBCU ecosystem comprising over a hundred institutions, $4 billion in endowment capital (though still dwarfed by their PWI counterparts), and a growing class of wealthy and capable alumni possesses both the human and institutional capital to change that reality. Buying a WPBL franchise would be a powerful signal: that African American women are no longer content to merely play or support the game, but to own the infrastructure of it.

The WPBL represents a once-in-a-century opportunity. The last women’s professional baseball league folded in 1954 when postwar America reverted to its gendered labor norms and refused to institutionalize women’s success on the field. Today, that same sport returns in a vastly different economy one defined by media fragmentation, digital storytelling, and institutional investing that rewards niche audiences and strong narratives. Women’s sports are on the rise. The WNBA just received a $75 million investment round from Nike, Condoleezza Rice, Laurene Powell Jobs, and others. Women’s college basketball ratings have exploded, drawing more viewers than some men’s sports. The National Women’s Soccer League has seen team valuations grow fivefold in the past five years. Investors are realizing what the data already shows: undervalued leagues often yield outsized returns once visibility and infrastructure catch up.

The WPBL sits at this exact inflection point. Early investors will not just shape the league they will define its culture, inclusivity, and profitability. This is why HBCU women entrepreneurs, backed by HBCU endowments and alumni capital, should move swiftly. Ownership here is not a vanity project it is a long-term equity position in the fastest-growing frontier of professional sports.

Start-up sports franchises are not the billion-dollar investments of the NFL or NBA. The WPBL’s initial teams are expected to sell for figures in the mid-seven to low-eight figures: expensive, yes, but feasible through a syndicate model combining entrepreneurial capital and institutional backing. A $15 million franchise, for instance, could be financed with $5 million in equity from HBCU women entrepreneurs, $3 million in matching commitments from HBCU endowments through a joint-venture investment arm, $5 million in debt financing via an African American–owned bank or credit union consortium, and $2 million in naming rights, sponsorship pre-sales, and city incentives.

Such a structure distributes risk while maximizing institutional leverage. It also allows for a reinvestment loop: returns from franchise appreciation, media deals, or merchandising could feed back into the endowments that helped fund the acquisition, growing HBCU wealth through private equity in sports. At a modest ten percent annualized return over fifteen years, a $3 million endowment investment could grow to more than $12.5 million, even before accounting for franchise appreciation. The social return of visibility, leadership, and influence would be immeasurable.

HBCU women entrepreneurs already lead some of the most innovative ventures in the country from fintech to fashion to wellness. They have built companies with leaner budgets, higher risk tolerance, and community-driven missions. That same acumen could translate seamlessly into sports ownership. A women-led ownership group rooted in HBCU culture would bring authenticity to a league whose audience is already primed for inclusive storytelling. They would not merely own a team they would shape its identity around empowerment, intellect, and cultural sophistication. Imagine a team whose executive suite reflects Spelman’s academic rigor, Howard’s creative dynamism, and FAMU’s entrepreneurial grit.

Moreover, the investment aligns with HBCU women’s long history of institution building. From Mary McLeod Bethune’s founding of Bethune-Cookman University to Maggie Lena Walker’s creation of the first Black woman–owned bank, African American women have always been at the forefront of merging mission with market. Buying a professional sports franchise is simply a modern continuation of that legacy.

Most HBCU endowments remain undercapitalized. Collectively, they total roughly $4 billion, compared to Harvard’s $50 billion alone. That gap underscores why traditional endowment investing centered on conservative asset classes may not close the wealth chasm. Sports equity, particularly in emerging women’s leagues, represents a hybrid investment: cultural capital meets growth asset. Endowments could carve out a modest allocation for strategic co-investment vehicles aimed at ownership in minority- or women-led sports ventures. Such a move would not only produce potential returns but reposition HBCU endowments as active agents in wealth creation, mirroring how elite universities use their endowments as venture capital arms. The same institutions that once nurtured the first generations of African American scholars could now nurture the first generation of African American women sports owners.

The path to ownership would unfold in phases: coalition building, institutional partnerships, financial structuring, branding, and media engagement. The first step would be forming an HBCU Women Sports Ownership Council an alliance of HBCU alumnae entrepreneurs, investors, attorneys, and sports professionals. Its mission would be to identify a WPBL franchise opportunity, conduct due diligence, and negotiate terms. Next, endowments, foundations, and alumni associations could serve as anchor investors via a pooled HBCU Sports Ownership Fund. African American–owned financial institutions would provide credit facilities, ensuring that capital circulation strengthens Black banking. The team’s branding could reflect HBCU values of intellect, resilience, and excellence. Annual “HBCU Heritage Games,” scholarships for women in sports management, and partnerships with K–12 baseball programs would ensure the franchise deepens institutional impact.

By the time Opening Day 2027 arrives, the vision becomes real. A stadium in Atlanta or Houston cities with deep HBCU roots roars with excitement. The team, perhaps named The Monarchs in tribute to the Negro Leagues, takes the field in uniforms stitched by a Black-owned apparel company. The owner’s suite is filled not with venture capitalists, but HBCU women—founders, engineers, bankers, educators—raising glasses to history. Every ticket sold funds scholarships. Every broadcast includes HBCU branding. Every victory multiplies across the ecosystem, from the university’s endowment statement to the little girl in the stands whispering, “She looks like me.” That is the multiplier effect of ownership.

A defining mark of this ownership group’s legacy should not only be who owns the team but who benefits from it. When an HBCU-led syndicate buys a women’s professional baseball team, it must ensure that every dollar of the fan experience circulates through Black and HBCU-centered businesses. Ownership without ecosystem-building simply recreates dependency; real power multiplies through participation.

An HBCU women’s ownership group has the chance to build an authentically circular sports economy, where concession stands, catering services, and retail vendors reflect the same entrepreneurial DNA as the team itself. The model for this begins with women like Pinky Cole, founder of Slutty Vegan, who transformed plant-based dining into a cultural and economic phenomenon through purpose-driven branding and community investment. Her ability to merge food, culture, and empowerment offers a blueprint for how HBCU women entrepreneurs could anchor the ballpark experience in ownership and identity.

Complementing this vision is the role of HBCU-owned service enterprises like Perkins Management Services Company, founded by Nicholas Perkins, a Fayetteville State University alumnus and owner of Fuddruckers. Perkins Management operates food services across HBCUs and federal institutions, combining operational scale with cultural competence. Partnering with Perkins Management to run stadium concessions or hospitality would ensure that the team’s operations mirror the ownership group’s values efficiency, reinvestment, and excellence.

Such an approach would transform the stadium into an economic hub for HBCU enterprise. Food vendors would come from HBCU alumni-owned companies. Uniform suppliers could source from HBCU textile programs. Merchandise stands could feature HBCU student designs. Hospitality contracts would prioritize HBCU-affiliated culinary programs. The music during games could feature HBCU marching bands or alumni artists. Even the stadium’s artwork could highlight HBCU painters and photographers, ensuring every sensory detail honors the ecosystem that made the ownership possible. A fan buying food or merchandise would not just be a consumer they’d be participating in a shared mission to strengthen African American institutions.

This reimagined sports environment would also offer internships, apprenticeships, and consulting opportunities for HBCU students and faculty. Business students could study operations. Communication majors could intern with the PR team. Engineering departments could advise on stadium energy efficiency. Each partnership would turn the franchise into a living classroom of applied HBCU excellence.

At a time when major leagues outsource globally, a women’s baseball franchise owned by HBCU women could reimagine localization and reinvestment as competitive advantage. Every game day would circulate dollars through a self-sustaining ecosystem that feeds back into HBCU entrepreneurship. Because when the ballpark itself is powered by HBCU women’s enterprise from boardroom to concession stand it ceases to be a venue. It becomes a living institution.

If the Women’s Pro Baseball League truly takes off, early ownership will be the golden ticket. African American investors have often entered markets too late once valuations skyrocket and access narrows. Now, before the WPBL matures, is the time for HBCU institutions and their entrepreneurial alumnae to act collectively. The call is not for charity but for strategy. Pooling even a fraction of the capital that circulates annually among HBCU alumni could change the power dynamic in sports forever. Endowments could stake equity. Alumni could invest through private funds. Students could study the economics of their own institution’s franchise. The result would be a feedback loop of wealth, wisdom, and visibility.

The first women’s professional baseball league in seventy years deserves first-of-its-kind ownership and no community is more qualified to deliver it than HBCU women. Because when HBCU women own the field, the entire game changes.

Disclaimer: This article was assisted by ChatGPT.

When the Gift Isn’t the Power: Prairie View’s Historic Donations and the Quiet Reality of UTIMCO Control

“A gift can open a door, but only ownership lets you walk through it on your own terms.”

When Prairie View A&M University announced that it had received a historic $63 million unrestricted gift from philanthropist MacKenzie Scott, headlines celebrated the moment as a watershed for the institution, the Texas A&M University System, and the broader HBCU sector. It was framed as both a moral recognition of PVAMU’s legacy and a financial turning point that would catalyze new academic, cultural, and research frontiers.

And yet, behind the applause and the very real gratitude there remains a more sobering, structural reality: Prairie View does not actually control its capital. The university’s endowment, like that of all Texas A&M System schools, is controlled and managed by UTIMCO, the University of Texas/Texas A&M Investment Management Company. UTIMCO is one of the largest public endowment management entities in the United States, overseeing well over $70 billion in assets. It is powerful, sophisticated, and critically not directly accountable to Prairie View’s leadership or the African American community whose future PVAMU represents.

This is the overlooked truth in the philanthropic triumph narrative: historic gifts do not necessarily translate into historic power. And power, not simply capital, is the currency African American institutions have always lacked most in the American economic order. Prairie View A&M University’s situation is a case study in the difference.

This article explores:

  • Why Prairie View’s record-setting gift still leaves it structurally dependent
  • How UTIMCO’s control restricts the institution’s long-term sovereignty
  • What this tells us about HBCU philanthropy and institutional design
  • Why African American institutional power requires ownership, not just funding
  • What steps Prairie View, other public HBCUs, and African American philanthropists can take to change the paradigm

This is not about questioning the value or impact of MacKenzie Scott’s generosity. It is about ensuring that gifts to African American institutions actually translate into durable, compounding power not momentary uplift that still sits under someone else’s governance.

The Gift Was Unprecedented—But the Structure Wasn’t

MacKenzie Scott’s philanthropic investments in Prairie View were transformational by any measure. Unrestricted capital is rare. Unrestricted capital at that scale is almost unheard of for HBCUs. Prairie View announced bold plans: initiatives in student success, research expansion, recruitment of top scholars, and community-facing programs that would have immediate impact.

However, beneath these aspirational goals lies a structural constraint. As a member of the Texas A&M University System, Prairie View’s endowment assets are not independently managed. Instead, they are placed under UTIMCO stewardship.

This means:

  • Prairie View cannot choose its own investment strategy
  • Prairie View cannot decide its own risk profile
  • Prairie View cannot determine long-term reinvestment philosophies
  • Prairie View cannot directly leverage its endowment as collateral or strategic capital
  • Prairie View has limited input into how its own financial future is shaped

Prairie View is wealthy in name, but not in governance. This is the difference between having money and having power.

Why UTIMCO Control Matters

UTIMCO is a financial powerhouse. It runs an endowment strategy modeled on the “Yale model” of diversified, high-yield, alternative-asset heavy investing. Its size gives it access to premier private equity, hedge funds, venture capital, and global asset vehicles that smaller endowments could never reach. But Prairie View is not UTIMCO’s strategic priority. And Prairie View does not have representation proportionate to its needs, mission, or history on the governance side of the investment enterprise.

The problems with this arrangement are structural, not personal:

1. Prairie View’s capital becomes part of a system that does not share its cultural mission.

UTIMCO’s fiduciary responsibility is to the entire system—primarily UT Austin and Texas A&M University, the two flagship institutions with the largest political influence and endowment weight.

2. Prairie View does not benefit proportionately from its own growth.

When UTIMCO’s investments outperform, the rising tide lifts the entire system but Prairie View’s small allocation does not allow it to meaningfully influence direction or capture outsized opportunity.

3. Prairie View is locked out of using its endowment to build independent institutional leverage.

For example:

  • Launching Prairie View–controlled venture funds
  • Building independent real-estate portfolios
  • Creating sovereign partnerships with African universities
  • Developing major research parks or revenue-producing assets
  • Issuing bonds based on endowment performance
  • Using the endowment to create a Prairie View Development Corporation
  • Deposit into African American Owned Banks

These are the exact strategies that allow elite institutions to become global players. Without endowment control, Prairie View cannot follow the same playbook.

4. African American institutional power remains externally governed.

Even when philanthropy flows to us, governance does not.
This is the core dilemma.

The Limits of Public-Sector HBCU Philanthropy

Public HBCUs occupy an uncomfortable position in American philanthropy. They exist inside systems created by and for institutions that do not share their origin story, demographic composition, or cultural mission. As a result, public HBCUs rarely benefit from the full compounding power that large donations should create. A $63 million donation to a private HBCU with full endowment control is a generational shift. A $63 million donation to a public HBCU inside a state-controlled investment empire is uplift but not sovereignty. The structure, not the gift itself, limits the long-term multiplier effect.

The True Power of an Endowment Is Governance, Not Size

The most elite universities such as Harvard, Yale, Stanford understand that the endowment is not merely a pot of money. It is the engine of independence, the foundation of strategic risk-taking, and the vault that allows them to pursue multi-century planning horizons. Prairie View’s endowment, while larger than before, becomes one more line item inside a massive investment entity whose priorities were never designed around the empowerment of African American institutions.

This raises fundamental questions:

  • If Prairie View doubled or tripled its endowment, would it gain any more control?
  • If Prairie View received a $500 million gift tomorrow, would it govern that capital?
  • What does “wealth” mean if the institution cannot direct it?

These questions get at the heart of African American philanthropic strategy:
Power is not the receipt of capital it is the control of capital.

Why This Matters for African American Philanthropy

The African American community is entering a new era of giving. Donors both internal and external to the community are showing increased willingness to fund African American institutions, particularly HBCUs. But if those donations sit inside structures that we do not control, then the long-term compounding advantage is lost. Philanthropy that uplifts without empowering is charity. Philanthropy that transfers capital and governance is institution-building. Prairie View deserves the latter. All HBCUs deserve the latter. African America deserves the latter.

What Would It Look Like for Prairie View to Have Full Capital Control?

If Prairie View controlled its own endowment strategy, several catalytic changes could occur:

1. PVAMU could launch its own independent investment office.

This would allow:

  • Hiring Black fund managers
  • Building partnerships with African investment firms
  • Investing directly in Prairie View–based startups
  • Growing an internal investment culture among alumni and students

2. PVAMU could build a multibillion-dollar research and development ecosystem.

The endowment could seed:

  • A Prairie View Innovation Corridor
  • A Black-owned semiconductor research consortium
  • Autonomous vehicle labs
  • Agricultural technology incubators
  • An African Diaspora science and engineering exchange
  • A rural Texas innovation hub exporting expertise globally

3. PVAMU could pursue independent financial engineering strategies.

Including:

  • Issuing bonds based on endowment earnings
  • Creating a real estate trust
  • Launching a PVAMU-controlled venture fund
  • Building a revenue-producing hospital network
  • Constructing Prairie View–owned student housing developments

4. PVAMU could fundamentally reshape African American institutional futures.

With full investment autonomy, Prairie View could become:

  • A national model for Black endowment governance
  • A financial anchor for African American rural communities
  • A bridge between Texas and the global African Diaspora
  • A site of intergenerational wealth-creation for African American students
  • An institution that attracts not only students but developers, scientists, and investors

This is the scale of possibility currently constrained by UTIMCO governance.

What Needs to Change—A Philanthropic and Policy Framework

To transition from uplift to sovereignty, African American leaders, donors, and policymakers must pursue concrete reforms:

1. Public HBCUs must secure special provisions for independent endowment management.

This could include:

  • Carve-outs from state systems
  • Special legislative exemptions
  • Hybrid governance models where system oversight continues but investment control shifts with the ultimate goal of full sovereignty

2. Large donors should explicitly require endowment autonomy as part of major gifts.

Imagine if MacKenzie Scott had stipulated:

“This gift must be placed in a separately managed fund controlled solely by Prairie View A&M University and its own designated board of trustees.”

That single sentence would have changed the institution’s next 100 years.

3. Prairie View alumni must build parallel philanthropic capital pools.

This includes:

  • Alumni-controlled investment funds
  • Prairie View-specific donor-advised funds
  • Community investment vehicles
  • A Prairie View Cooperative Endowment Fund

These independent vehicles can partner with but not be controlled by state systems.

4. National African American institutions must lobby for HBCU endowment independence.

A single policy shift could alter the landscape for every public HBCU:

Public HBCUs must have governance authority over capital donated specifically to them.

A Moment of Truth for HBCU Philanthropy

Prairie View’s historic gift was a moment of celebration—but also a moment of clarity. If African American institutions cannot control the endowments gifted to them, then the path to sovereignty remains blocked.

The philanthropic sector must confront this truth:

We cannot build African American power without African American control of African American capital.

Prairie View A&M University has always carried a dual identity, an HBCU of national importance inside a system not built for it. The generosity of donors like MacKenzie Scott can change the scale of Prairie View’s work, but only structural reform can change the nature of Prairie View’s power. The next era of HBCU philanthropy cannot simply be about larger gifts. It must be about gifts that come with governance, strategy, and autonomy.

Because endowments don’t build institutions.
Endowment sovereignty does.

Disclaimer: This article was assisted by ChatGPT.

What Berkshire Buys Next: The Five Giants That Fit Buffett’s Playbook

In Omaha, Berkshire Hathaway’s cash pile has grown so large that even Wall Street marvels at its inertia. With over $380 billion in cash and short-term Treasuries, the conglomerate is sitting on more dry powder than most central banks. Yet Warren Buffett and his successor, Greg Abel, have long maintained that capital must only move when the odds of permanent capital loss are near zero.

Now, with global markets resetting post-2020 stimulus and inflation anchoring valuations, the question becomes: what could Berkshire buy next that would be both large enough to matter and philosophically sound enough to pass Buffett’s test of simplicity, durability, and trust?

The five most plausible candidates — Costco, McDonald’s, Home Depot, Royal Bank of Canada, and Toyota — each satisfy that mix of prudence, predictability, and permanence that defines Berkshire’s century-long strategy of buying “businesses, not tickers.”

Buffett’s philosophy has been remarkably consistent for over six decades: buy simple, cash-rich, moated businesses led by trustworthy managers. Berkshire’s model of quasi-permanent ownership, decentralized operations, and disciplined capital allocation has made it the corporate equivalent of a sovereign wealth fund — except its sovereign is capitalism itself.

Greg Abel, the man expected to succeed Buffett, has only reinforced this model. Coming from Berkshire Energy, Abel represents the “real economy” side of the house preferring tangible assets, regulated returns, and predictable cash flow over the exuberance of speculative innovation.

Hence, the next Berkshire deal is not likely to be an AI startup or fintech disrupter. It will be a “forever asset” — a company that compounds quietly and defends its margins under any macro regime.

Given Berkshire’s sheer scale of over $1 trillion in market capitalization a target must have an enterprise value north of $200 billion to meaningfully “move the needle.” Anything smaller, and the math of compounding becomes negligible.

🧩 The Berkshire Universe: Themes and Tendencies

Berkshire’s portfolio reads like a map of the American and global economy’s most reliable arteries:

CategoryCore HoldingsTraits
FinancialsAmEx, Bank of America, Moody’s, ChubbHigh ROE, capital-light, recurring revenue
Consumer StaplesCoca-Cola, Kraft Heinz, DiageoGlobal brands, predictable demand
Energy / IndustrialsChevron, Occidental, MitsubishiReal assets, inflation hedge
TechnologyApple, Amazon (small), VeriSignCash-rich ecosystems
Infrastructure / InsuranceBNSF Railway, BH ReinsuranceTangible durability, “float” generation

This structure provides a blueprint for what comes next: reinforcement, not reinvention. Berkshire rarely pivots; it doubles down on what works. It will seek businesses that (1) resemble what it already understands, and (2) offer inflation-protected earnings streams in a world of higher nominal rates.

From the universe of firms valued between $200 billion and $450 billion, only a handful exhibit the balance of predictability, management integrity, and strategic fit Berkshire demands.

A closer look through Buffett’s filters narrows the field to Costco, McDonald’s, Home Depot, Royal Bank of Canada, and Toyota. Each operates in a sector Berkshire already knows and each represents a bridge between the company’s past and its post-Buffett future.

1. Costco Wholesale (Ticker: COST)

The Cult of Value Meets the Culture of Discipline

Buffett has long admired Costco’s operating model. It is a retailer that sells everything from fresh salmon to fine jewelry but in truth, it sells trust. Its membership model generates annuity-like revenue, while its relentless efficiency and scale provide a durable moat against both inflation and digital disruption.

Charlie Munger, Buffett’s late partner, once served on Costco’s board and famously said, “Costco is one of the most admirable capitalistic institutions in the world.” That legacy alone makes a partial acquisition symbolically powerful.

While a full buyout (market cap ≈ $405 billion) may be too expensive, a 20–30% stake would make sense. It would give Berkshire exposure to global consumer spending and provide a stabilizing counterpart to its stake in Apple, a brand built on loyalty, not leverage.

In the age of shrinking retail margins, Costco remains an inflation hedge, its pricing power born from scale, not greed. Buffett has always preferred such quiet dominance.

2. McDonald’s (Ticker: MCD)

Fast Food, Slow Capital

If there were ever a brand that personifies Buffett’s doctrine of “durable competitive advantage,” it is McDonald’s. With over 40,000 locations in 100+ countries and a business model centered on franchised cash flow, McDonald’s is the quintessential predictable earner.

Its asset-light structure means free cash flow margins north of 25%, while its real-estate footprint functions as an embedded REIT. In a world of digital payments, delivery, and global inflation, McDonald’s pricing agility is unmatched. It can raise prices by 5% globally without denting demand, a privilege of brand addiction.

Moreover, McDonald’s cultural synergy with Coca-Cola (another Berkshire cornerstone) cannot be overstated. Both are global empires built on ubiquity, habit, and nostalgia. A merger of ownership philosophy, if not of products, would anchor Berkshire’s consumer-staples dynasty for another half-century.

At ~$218 billion market cap, McDonald’s is one of the few full-scale acquisitions Berkshire could realistically afford outright.

3. Home Depot (Ticker: HD)

Owning the American Rebuild

Buffett once said that he bets on the “resilience of the American homeowner.” Home Depot, valued around $372 billion, is the most efficient expression of that belief.

As infrastructure spending rises and housing shortages intensify, Home Depot sits at the crossroads of construction, repair, and consumer credit. Its business model converts cyclical demand into steady dividend growth. For Berkshire, already owning materials firms and insulation producers, a significant stake in Home Depot would complete a “vertical household economy” from supply chain to consumer.

Its store footprint and brand loyalty parallel BNSF’s railroad network: both are national arteries essential to the domestic economy. Buffett loves owning irreplaceable distribution infrastructure and Home Depot’s logistics system is precisely that.

4. Royal Bank of Canada (Ticker: RY)

The Conservative Bank That Would Make Carnegie Smile

Berkshire’s financial core is deep, but largely American. A Royal Bank of Canada acquisition would expand its footprint across North America’s second-largest and most stable financial system.

RBC’s strengths are conservative underwriting, dominant market share in wealth management, and a culture of steady, compounding profitability which mirror Buffett’s historical love of American Express and Bank of America.

Moreover, Canada’s heavily regulated banking environment protects incumbents from competition. Berkshire thrives in such “wide-moat oligopolies.”

At a market cap of $208 billion, the bank is small enough for a full acquisition but large enough to deploy Berkshire’s idle cash meaningfully. It would also diversify currency exposure and hedge U.S. economic concentration, a quiet, Abel-style move.

5. Toyota Motor Corp. (Ticker: TM)

Japan’s Crown Jewel of Industrial Resilience

Berkshire already owns minority stakes in five major Japanese trading houses, a calculated bet on the nation’s industrial discipline. Extending that strategy into Toyota would be the logical next step.

Toyota’s balance sheet, manufacturing excellence, and hybrid-vehicle leadership make it a quintessential “Buffett business” hidden inside an automaker. Unlike the tech-saturated EV startups, Toyota’s philosophy of gradual innovation, prudence, and reliability mirrors Berkshire’s own.

The two even share a cultural ethos: long-termism over trend-chasing.

At roughly $268 billion market cap, a 10–20% strategic stake would echo Buffett’s Japanese diversification theme without the regulatory complexity of a full acquisition. It would also position Berkshire for the eventual rise of hybrid and hydrogen vehicles in emerging markets, aligning with its energy portfolio’s shift toward renewables.

💰 Financial Feasibility: Deploying $250 Billion Wisely

Even Berkshire’s cash hoard has limits. Deploying $150–$250 billion must pass both the Buffett test (certainty of cash flow) and the Abel test (inflation resilience).

A possible portfolio of acquisitions could look like this:

TargetMarket Cap (USD)Likely ApproachStrategic Rationale
Costco$405B20–30% stakeGlobal retail + subscription revenue
McDonald’s$218BFull acquisitionCash flow, brand power, inflation hedge
Home Depot$372B20–30% stakeU.S. infrastructure exposure
Royal Bank of Canada$208BFull acquisitionNorth American financial expansion
Toyota$268B10–20% stakeJapan industrial diversification

In total, such a deployment would utilize around $200 billion, leaving liquidity for buybacks and opportunistic purchases.

This mirrors Berkshire’s historical pattern: buying large minority stakes in global champions, then waiting for market corrections to accumulate more — the “silent control” strategy that has defined its rise.

Strategic Summary: The Post-Buffett Blueprint

The post-Buffett Berkshire era will be one of institutional continuity, not radical change. Greg Abel’s likely leadership ensures that the company remains disciplined, risk-averse, and industrially grounded.

These five potential acquisitions — Costco, McDonald’s, Home Depot, Royal Bank of Canada, and Toyota — collectively represent Berkshire’s five pillars of permanence:

  1. Consumer Trust (Costco) – Loyalty as an economic moat.
  2. Everyday Habit (McDonald’s) – Cash flow as culture.
  3. Infrastructure (Home Depot) – Building the backbone of America.
  4. Finance (RBC) – Conservative capital compounding.
  5. Industry (Toyota) – Global operational excellence.

Each adds a layer of diversification without diluting Berkshire’s DNA. Together, they form a defensive fortress against inflation, technological disruption, and economic cycles — precisely the environment Berkshire was built to survive.

For HBCU endowments and African American institutional investors, Berkshire’s approach holds a powerful parallel. The key lesson is patience married to scale. Berkshire’s compounding model demonstrates how disciplined reinvestment — not speculative churn — builds generational wealth.

Like Berkshire, HBCU financial ecosystems can create “institutional compounding engines” by investing in enterprises that share cultural familiarity, operational durability, and intergenerational value. Buffett calls it “the joy of owning good businesses forever.”

For African American institutions, that translates to owning — not merely funding — the infrastructure of our own economies.

Berkshire Hathaway stands at an inflection point. The post-Buffett era will not be about reinvention but reaffirmation — proving that its model of ethical capitalism can persist without its founding prophet.

The five plausible acquisitions ahead — Costco, McDonald’s, Home Depot, Royal Bank of Canada, and Toyota — are not just balance-sheet moves; they are philosophical statements.

Each embodies what Buffett has called the “virtue of patience in a speculative age.” And as markets oscillate between AI euphoria and geopolitical anxiety, Berkshire remains what it has always been: a monument to quiet power and compounding discipline.

For long-term investors — from sovereign funds to HBCU endowments — that discipline remains the truest asset class of all.

Disclaimer: This article was assisted by ChatGPT.

Are New Mexico, Maine, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands the Only Social, Economic, and Politically Safe Territories for African Americans?

“Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.” — Harriet Tubman

For African Americans, safety has never been an assumed part of citizenship. It has always been an earned condition won through vigilance, strategy, and often migration. Whether fleeing the violent collapse of Reconstruction or the economic despair of the Jim Crow South, Black Americans have long measured geography as a question of survival. Today, in an America increasingly polarized by race, ideology, and inequality, that calculation has returned. Many are quietly asking: where can African Americans live, work, and raise families with peace of mind? The answer, surprisingly, may not be in traditional Black strongholds like Atlanta, Washington, D.C., or Houston, but in four unlikely places—New Mexico, Maine, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands—where moderation, multicultural coexistence, and relative political calm offer something rare: a sense of safety that is not performative, but lived.

New Mexico’s reputation as a cultural crossroads has made it one of the few states where African Americans can exist without being framed entirely through America’s racial binary. Its tri-cultural balance among Native American, Hispanic, and White populations disperses dominance. Here, no single identity owns the political landscape. For African Americans who comprise about two percent of the population that means a degree of breathing room. Racial prejudice still exists, but it rarely defines every interaction. The social climate is cooperative, rooted in shared marginalization rather than supremacy. Albuquerque, Las Cruces, and Santa Fe have become quiet havens for African American educators, small-business owners, and retirees seeking both affordability and dignity.

Economically, New Mexico offers something most metropolitan centers have lost: a manageable cost of living and accessible capital. Housing remains attainable. Land ownership long denied to African Americans through discriminatory lending remains within reach for the working and middle class. The rise of renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, and technology hubs has also created new entry points for Black entrepreneurship. In Albuquerque’s South Valley or near Santa Fe’s art cooperatives, one can find a small but visible community of African Americans carving lives that are not merely about surviving but thriving without the constant defensive posture that characterizes so many other states. Safety here is less about walls and more about balance, a social equilibrium where race is a fact, not a fault line.

Maine, on the other hand, is proof that peace can coexist with isolation. Its African American population is minuscule, but its civic culture is built on moderation and integrity. The state’s “town meeting” governance style, where citizens vote directly on local issues, nurtures accountability rarely seen elsewhere. For African Americans who relocate to Portland, Bangor, or Augusta, that transparency matters. Racism in Maine exists, but it lacks institutional depth. More often, African Americans report curiosity over hostility, and when discrimination does occur, it tends to meet public rebuke rather than official silence.

Politically, Maine is refreshingly pragmatic. It elects moderates and independents, resists extremist rhetoric, and maintains a social compact where neighbors generally still speak to each other across ideological lines. For African Americans weary of coded politics, it feels like a return to something America once promised, a functioning democracy. The result is a form of safety rooted not in numbers, but in governance. A place where you can walk, vote, and live without fearing that tomorrow’s election will determine whether your humanity is negotiable.

But safety does not always mean the mainland. Beyond the continental U.S., Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands present another dimension of refuge one built on shared African lineage and the lived realities of Caribbean identity. For African Americans seeking both cultural familiarity and distance from America’s racial fatigue, these territories offer a paradoxical safety: not post-racial, but post-obsessive.

Puerto Rico, long a bridge between Latin America and the U.S., exists in an in-between space that defies racial simplification. Its majority Afro-Latino population gives race a different vocabulary one where color is noticed but hierarchy is more fluid. African Americans arriving there encounter both kinship and complexity. In cities like San Juan or Ponce, African American expatriates blend into an Afro-diasporic continuum that feels familiar yet distinct. The island’s economic struggles are real: bankruptcy, hurricanes, and colonial neglect have left deep scars but its community resilience and shared sense of oppression produce solidarity rather than hostility. For African Americans, that means an environment where “Blackness” is neither exoticized nor demonized, but part of the island’s social DNA.

Economically, Puerto Rico also provides opportunities for African Americans seeking new beginnings in real estate, tourism, or renewable energy sectors. The island’s special tax status and evolving investment laws have attracted mainland professionals and entrepreneurs, some of whom are African American innovators bringing capital and ideas into local partnerships. In this sense, Puerto Rico is not only a sanctuary but also a frontier, a place where the African Diaspora’s ingenuity can meet an economy in reinvention. For those seeking cultural reconnection, the island’s Afro-Boricua traditions like bomba music, Loíza’s festivals, and the rhythms of African pride create an echo of belonging that many African Americans have long been denied in the continental United States.

Then there is the U.S. Virgin Islands, a cluster of Caribbean jewels that quietly symbolize what safe, small-scale Black governance can look like. On St. Thomas, St. Croix, and St. John, African-descended people form the majority. That demographic fact changes everything. Here, African Americans are not minorities but members of a larger Black polity with its own traditions, institutions, and history. The islands’ governance, while tied to Washington, reflects local leadership rooted in Afro-Caribbean sensibilities. For African Americans relocating from the mainland, this translates into a rare psychological experience: existing in a majority-Black jurisdiction where public policy, education, and business life are not filtered through White validation. Safety here is political self-determination.

Economically, the U.S. Virgin Islands are not without challenge like high import costs, hurricane vulnerability, and limited diversification test resilience but they offer something profound in return: cultural sovereignty. African Americans who move there often describe an adjustment period followed by a deep sense of exhale. The smallness of scale fosters community accountability, and the absence of constant racial tension allows ambition to flow without invisible friction. One can walk into a bank, a classroom, or a government office and see reflections rather than reminders of marginalization.

Taken together, New Mexico, Maine, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands form a loose constellation of calm, a diaspora of safety within the larger storm of American contradiction. What unites them is not homogeneity, but a commitment to civility and shared humanity. Each location offers a different version of safety: political moderation in Maine, cultural equilibrium in New Mexico, diasporic kinship in Puerto Rico, and demographic sovereignty in the Virgin Islands. For African Americans navigating the exhaustion of a national identity under siege, these places suggest that peace might still be found without surrendering pride or progress.

The broader question, however, remains: why must African Americans still seek safety within the very nation they helped build? The resurgence of racial authoritarianism, book bans, and economic inequality reveals a hard truth that safety for African Americans is still conditional, still regional, still a choice rather than a guarantee. Yet, migration has always been the community’s answer to oppression. From the Underground Railroad to the Great Migration, movement has been both resistance and renaissance. Harriet Tubman’s words remain instructive: “Every great dream begins with a dreamer.” Migration, for African Americans, has always been dreaming in motion.

New Mexico and Maine show what governance without racial hysteria looks like. Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands show what culture looks like when Blackness is normalized rather than marginalized. Together, they present a vision of what the United States could be if its diversity were truly reconciled with its democracy. They remind African America that safety is not about retreating from the nation but reimagining its geography of belonging.

Still, each of these places carries limitations. In New Mexico and Maine, African Americans may find safety but also scarcity with few cultural institutions, churches, or schools designed with them in mind. In Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, economic instability and natural disaster risks complicate long-term security. Yet, in all four, there exists something invaluable: the absence of daily racial siege. That reprieve can be transformative. It gives space for creativity, family stability, and the rebuilding of wealth without the constant drag of social mistrust.

As the nation’s politics grow more volatile, African American institutions (HBCUs, banks, and foundations) should view these geographies not simply as refuges but as development frontiers. Instead of imagining new HBCU presences in the Caribbean, they can expand partnerships with the University of the Virgin Islands already a proud HBCU anchoring the region to create joint research programs, faculty exchanges, and diasporic economic initiatives that strengthen both the mainland and the islands or research partnerships with Puerto Rican universities. Imagine Black-owned renewable energy firms anchoring in New Mexico, or a cooperative investment network expanding into Maine’s emerging industries. Safety, after all, is not just the absence of harm it’s the presence of opportunity.

There is a growing possibility that the 21st-century African American migration will not be toward cities of hustle, but toward territories of harmony. Where one can walk into a classroom, café, or coastal market and not feel their presence as provocation. Where the conversation around “diversity” is not theoretical but lived. The call of these four places is subtle but powerful: build where you can breathe.

If history is cyclical, then the current search for safety is not retreat but renewal. Each of these geographies offers a mirror to what African America has always done transform uncertainty into community. From the deserts of the Southwest to the coasts of New England and the Caribbean, a new map of refuge is emerging. Whether the destination is the Sandia Mountains, Casco Bay, San Juan’s Old Town, or Charlotte Amalie’s harbor, the journey is the same: toward dignity.

In the end, the question may not be whether these are the only safe places, but whether they are the first to show what safety could mean in practice. For a people whose freedom has always been self-forged, safety is never static it is strategy. And in that strategy, migration remains both memory and mission.

Disclaimer: This article was assisted by ChatGPT.

Family Matters: Since A Different World, Fictional African American Families All Go PWI

“If you can control a man’s thinking you do not have to worry about his action. When you determine what a man shall think you do not have to concern yourself about what he will do. If you make a man feel that he is inferior, you do not have to compel him to accept an inferior status, for he will seek it himself. If you make a man think that he is justly an outcast, you do not have to order him to the back door. He will go without being told; and if there is no back door, his very nature will demand one.” – Carter Godwin WoodsonThe Mis-Education of the Negro

When Whitley Gilbert left Hillman College to marry Dwayne Wayne, a generation of Black America cried, laughed, and dreamed in unison. For six seasons, A Different World gave us a vision of what it meant to grow intellectually, emotionally, and culturally at a Historically Black College or University (HBCU). Hillman wasn’t just a fictional school — it was a cultural landmark, a stand-in for the pride, politics, and promise of Black higher education.

But somewhere along the way, the narrative shifted. Fast-forward thirty years, and the children of Cliff and Clair Huxtable, Uncle Phil and Aunt Viv, or Dre and Rainbow Johnson are not headed to Hillman or Howard — they’re off to Ivy League PWIs or West Coast elite universities that barely acknowledge the HBCU ecosystem. On screen, Black excellence has become synonymous with integration, not institution-building.

What happened?

The Fade of Hillman: Why Representation Matters

To understand the cultural loss, we must understand what was gained when A Different World aired. Created as a spin-off from The Cosby Show, the series debuted in 1987 and eventually found its voice under the direction of Debbie Allen, a real-life HBCU graduate from Howard University. Allen infused the series with storylines rooted in the authentic experiences of Black students at Black schools — tackling topics like apartheid, colorism, student activism, Black love, and the sacredness of community.

The result? A nationwide spike in interest and applications to HBCUs. According to a 1992 report from the National Center for Education Statistics, Black college enrollment rose dramatically in the years A Different World aired — and many credit the show directly. The series normalized Black educational excellence, not through assimilation, but through self-determination.

In contrast, today’s TV shows treat HBCUs like cultural relics or, worse, invisible.

Fictional Families, Real Cultural Drift

In the post-Different World era, shows featuring Black families are more likely to send their children to predominantly white institutions (PWIs). On Black-ish, Dre and Rainbow’s son, Junior, eventually enrolls at a PWI despite an entire episode wrestling with the idea of going to Howard. In Grown-ish, Zoey Johnson attends the fictional California University, an obvious PWI stand-in, where the HBCU experience is nearly absent except when stereotypically contrasted for “wokeness” or culture clashes.

Even the reboot of Bel-Air, which offered a chance to lean into the richness of Black institutions, leans hard into elite whiteness. The Banks children navigate high schools and social spaces that echo white privilege, and the specter of HBCUs exists only in passing remarks — not as anchors of identity or aspiration.

On-screen, Blackness now often arrives pre-approved, curated for corporate palatability. Gone is the unapologetic emphasis on Black space and self-definition. The message is subtle but clear: assimilation is the prize; institution-building is passé.

Where Are the HBCU Families?

It is not just that fictional African American families aren’t choosing HBCUs — it’s that HBCUs don’t seem to exist in their world at all. Despite the fact that over 100 HBCUs operate in the United States — from Morehouse and Spelman in Atlanta, to Prairie View in Texas, to North Carolina A&T and Virginia State — they rarely show up in the stories told to us about our own families.

This erasure is not accidental. It reflects the broader cultural currents in which HBCUs have been strategically underfunded, disrespected by mainstream rankings, and underrepresented in media. And when art imitates life — or vice versa — the omission becomes part of a feedback loop: if HBCUs aren’t shown on TV, they seem less relevant; if they seem less relevant, fewer students apply; fewer students mean less alumni giving, and the cycle of marginalization continues.

Consider this: how many Black TV writers, producers, and showrunners today are HBCU alumni? How many even mention their HBCU pride in interviews, bios, or creative work?

The cultural pipeline has cracked — and the representation on screen reflects that fracture.

Assimilation as a Storyline — And a Trap

There’s a reason The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air worked so well. Will’s Philadelphia-born charisma collided with Carlton’s prep-school privilege, creating a comedy of contrasts rooted in class, code-switching, and internalized white gaze. But even then, Will and Carlton both eventually attended the fictional ULA — another HBCU stand-in — and the show made space to honor Black institutions. In today’s remakes and reboots, the goalpost has moved. The tension no longer lies in navigating Blackness within Black spaces — it’s about achieving acceptance in white ones.

That’s dangerous.

When every fictional Black success story leads to a PWI, the message isn’t just one of educational preference — it’s a silent endorsement of the idea that Black excellence only matters when validated by white institutions. It undermines the legacy of HBCUs and implicitly suggests that the spaces Black people built for themselves are less worthy of screen time or societal investment.

The Stakes Are Real

This is more than a cultural critique. It’s an economic, social, and political issue. HBCUs graduate 80% of Black judges, 50% of Black lawyers, 40% of Black engineers, and 40% of Black Members of Congress. They are engines of Black leadership — and media has the power to either support or suppress that momentum.

Shows like A Different World didn’t just entertain — they built pipelines. They encouraged enrollment, boosted donations, and sparked policy conversations. At their best, they acted as visual endowments, depositing cultural capital into communities that needed it most.

When those narratives disappear, so does the incentive for viewers to value or invest in HBCUs. Worse, it renders the very idea of building Black institutions obsolete in the cultural imagination.

Why The Writers’ Room Needs HBCUs

The disappearance of HBCUs from fictional family life is also a commentary on who’s writing the stories. As Hollywood grapples with diversity, equity, and inclusion, it continues to rely heavily on Ivy League or top PWI talent pipelines. While some HBCU alumni are breaking through — such as Lena Waithe (Columbia College Chicago, but often a supporter of HBCUs) and Taraji P. Henson (Howard University) — there is still no wide-scale industry embrace of HBCU-trained writers, producers, or creatives.

This matters.

Representation isn’t just about who’s on screen — it’s about who decides what stories are told, who centers the cultural context, and who gets to be the architect of Black futures.

The Cultural Cost of Being “The Only One”

There’s a deep psychological tax in being “the only one” — a familiar theme in shows that send Black characters to elite PWIs. Whether it’s Zoey Johnson navigating white professors or Carlton Banks handling racial profiling by the police, these storylines, while real, often celebrate survival rather than thriving. They portray success as proximity to whiteness rather than mastery of one’s own.

Contrast this with Hillman, where students struggled, triumphed, fell in love, challenged politics, and made mistakes — all within a culturally affirming environment. The campus was Black. The professors were Black. The rules, norms, and traditions were Black.

That distinction is powerful.

In a world increasingly shaped by algorithms, streaming wars, and performative diversity, where we imagine Black life unfolding — especially for fictional families — is just as important as what happens.

Black-Owned Media: The New Front Line of Cultural Restoration

If the absence of HBCUs from our screens reflects a loss of cultural focus, then the solution lies not just in pleading for more representation — but in owning the means of production, distribution, and storytelling. For generations, Black-owned media has served as a counterbalance to the marginalization found in mainstream outlets. But today, especially in an era defined by digital platforms, there’s a new frontier of opportunity — and HBCUs are uniquely positioned to lead.

To change the narrative, we must also change the narrators.

HBCUs as Incubators for Black Media Ownership

HBCUs are not just educational institutions — they are cultural laboratories. Schools like Howard University, Florida A&M, and North Carolina A&T have produced a long lineage of journalists, filmmakers, producers, broadcasters, and business leaders in media. Cathy Hughes, the founder of Urban One (formerly Radio One), the largest African American-owned broadcasting company in the U.S., began her media career at Howard. Her success is not the exception — it’s the proof of concept.

What if more HBCUs developed cross-disciplinary media programs that fused journalism, film production, and business with a distinctly Afrocentric and institution-building ethos? Imagine an HBCU student graduating not just with a film degree, but with the rights to a series developed in a campus-run studio, ready to be licensed to a Black-owned distribution network. Imagine HBCUs running their own content incubators — writing rooms, studios, streaming apps — where the next A Different World is created by us, for us.

Building Our Own Pipelines: From Classroom to Platform

For too long, Black creatives have had to depend on mainstream networks or streaming services to greenlight their work. This gatekeeping often results in sanitized or stereotyped representations, with HBCUs either ignored or distorted. But what if HBCUs created their own media pipelines — complete with production houses, content libraries, and distribution partnerships?

Howard University already owns WHUR 96.3, a powerhouse urban radio station in Washington, D.C. Florida A&M operates WANM, its campus radio station. Spelman and Morehouse have nurtured partnerships with media production companies. These are the seeds of a broader media ecosystem.

Now imagine:

  • HBCU Streaming Networks: Think “HBCUflix,” operated by a consortium of HBCUs with a content catalog drawn from student filmmakers, professors, and alumni creatives.
  • Campus-Controlled Local TV Stations: Using FCC-designated low-power TV station licenses to broadcast HBCU sports, lectures, news, and entertainment to local communities.
  • Black-Owned Newsrooms: Reviving the tradition of the Chicago Defender or Pittsburgh Courier in digital form, anchored by HBCU journalism schools.

This isn’t hypothetical. It’s blueprint-ready. What’s required is a collective investment of time, capital, and institutional will — plus alumni and philanthropic backing — to scale these models.

In the evolving landscape of Black-owned media, DeShuna Spencer stands out as a visionary force. As the founder and CEO of kweliTV, Spencer has created a platform that not only amplifies Black voices but also serves as a blueprint for how Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) can reclaim and reshape cultural narratives through media ownership and innovation.

DeShuna Spencer and the Birth of kweliTV

DeShuna Spencer, a Memphis native and Jackson State University alumna, launched kweliTV out of a desire to see authentic Black stories represented in media. Frustrated by the lack of diverse and accurate portrayals of Black life on mainstream platforms, she envisioned a space where the global Black experience could be celebrated in its entirety. “Kweli” means “truth” in Swahili, reflecting the platform’s mission to present honest and multifaceted narratives of the African diaspora.

kweliTV curates a vast library of over 800 indie films, documentaries, web series, children’s programming, and more, sourced from North America, Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean, Europe, and Australia. The platform emphasizes content that has been recognized at film festivals, with 98% of its films having premiered at such events and 65% earning prestigious awards.

A Platform for Empowerment and Education

Beyond entertainment, kweliTV serves as an educational tool and a catalyst for social change. The platform’s mission is rooted in the belief that storytelling can drive activism, connect communities, and spark meaningful conversations . By showcasing content that delves into topics like racial equality, Black history, political activism, and wellness, kweliTV provides viewers with narratives that challenge stereotypes and promote understanding.

Recognizing the importance of education, Spencer has expanded kweliTV’s reach into academic institutions. The platform’s EDU component offers campus-wide subscriptions, delivering culturally rich content to schools and libraries. This initiative aims to shift the Black narrative, dismantle implicit bias, and address the erasure of Black history in education.

Supporting Black Creators

kweliTV is committed to economic inclusion and the empowerment of Black creatives. The platform collaborates with over 450 filmmakers worldwide, with 91% of them being of African descent and 50% women. Notably, 60% of subscription revenue is allocated to these creators, ensuring that they are compensated for their work and can continue producing impactful content.

In a move to further support its community, kweliTV launched kweliFUND, a crowdfunding platform designed exclusively for its creators. This initiative allows filmmakers to raise funds for their projects directly from the platform’s audience, fostering a sense of community and collaboration between creators and viewers.

A Model for HBCUs and Black-Owned Media

Spencer’s work with kweliTV offers a compelling model for how HBCUs can engage in media ownership and content creation. By establishing their own media platforms, HBCUs can provide students with hands-on experience in storytelling, production, and distribution, while also ensuring that Black narratives are told authentically and with nuance.

Furthermore, partnerships between HBCUs and platforms like kweliTV can facilitate the sharing of resources, expertise, and content, amplifying the reach and impact of Black stories. Such collaborations can also lead to the development of new media ventures, including streaming services, radio stations, and digital publications, all rooted in the rich cultural heritage of HBCUs.

Looking Ahead

DeShuna Spencer’s journey with kweliTV underscores the transformative power of media ownership in shaping cultural narratives. By prioritizing authenticity, education, and empowerment, Spencer has created a platform that not only entertains but also enlightens and inspires.

As HBCUs and Black-owned media entities look to the future, the example set by Spencer and kweliTV serves as a beacon, illustrating the profound impact that intentional storytelling and media ownership can have on communities and the broader cultural landscape.

For more information about kweliTV and its mission, visit kweli.tv.

Creating a Cultural Distribution Infrastructure

Ownership is not just about creating content; it’s about controlling how, when, and where that content reaches audiences. This is where distribution — the final, and often most powerful leg of the media supply chain — comes into play.

We’ve seen what happens when Black creators rely on platforms like Netflix, Amazon Prime, or Hulu: their content is subject to algorithmic bias, buried under trending categories that don’t serve Black audiences, or removed altogether without explanation.

The answer? HBCUs and Black-owned media must move to own the pipes — the literal and digital infrastructure of cultural delivery:

  • OTT Streaming Platforms: Develop Roku, Fire TV, and mobile app channels focused on HBCU-produced content, from sitcoms to documentaries to sports coverage.
  • Podcasting Networks: Establish campus-based podcast studios and national syndication pipelines, building on the success of Black podcasting voices in culture, politics, and mental health.
  • Media Training & Ownership Programs: Create degree and certificate programs focused specifically on media ownership, policy, and digital rights — the business side of the content coin.

These systems not only decentralize media control, but they also re-center HBCUs as hubs of cultural production and protection.

Reinforcing a Narrative of Sovereignty

This shift is not just about representation; it’s about sovereignty. Black-owned media — especially when powered by HBCUs — doesn’t just offer us better stories. It offers us control over how Black futures are imagined. It allows for stories where our children attend HBCUs not as exceptions but as norms, where our families are not defined by white validation but by Black institutions and Black love.

It also allows us to engage intergenerationally. Grandparents who once watched A Different World could stream its spiritual successor with their grandkids — not waiting on NBC, but logging into a platform built by us. The message? Black stories, Black education, and Black institutions still matter — and we’ll tell that truth ourselves.

A Call to Action: HBCUs, It’s Time

The time has come for HBCUs to formally declare themselves cultural content producers — not just pipelines to jobs in someone else’s newsroom, but architects of our own. This means:

  • Partnering with Black venture capitalists and philanthropists to fund media tech.
  • Creating cross-campus media alliances to pool talent and resources.
  • Reaching out to Black celebrities and alumni for licensing deals, co-productions, and endorsements.

We already have the minds. We have the stories. We have the history. Now we need to build the systems.

Because until we do, our children on screen will keep walking through Ivy-covered gates that never reflect the richness of the Black experience — and the cultural erasure will quietly continue.

But when we own the studio, the mic, and the means of distribution — Hillman will return, and this time, it won’t just be a different world.

Bringing Hillman Back: What’s Next?

It’s time for another renaissance.

There’s an opportunity here for Black creators, networks, and communities to reclaim HBCUs as vital to the cultural conversation. Imagine:

  • A new series that follows a multi-generational HBCU family through decades of change.
  • A young adult drama centered on students at Spelman, Morehouse, or Hampton navigating climate change, cancel culture, and campus love.
  • A sci-fi thriller set at a fictional HBCU where Black inventors and scientists are the last hope for humanity.

These aren’t pipe dreams. They are possible — and necessary.

Because culture moves policy. Culture shapes perception. And culture, at its best, reminds us of who we are and what we’re worth.

Final Word: Hillman Wasn’t Just a Show

Hillman was a blueprint. It showed us that we don’t need to ask permission to be excellent. That we can build institutions where our children are seen, heard, and nurtured. That we don’t have to shrink to fit someone else’s standard.

Today, as fictional African American families continue to send their children to PWIs — with barely a nod to the institutions that made their very existence possible — we must ask ourselves what kind of future we’re imagining.

Because if we don’t see HBCUs on our screens, in our scripts, and in our stories, we risk losing them in real life.

And that’s a different world we cannot afford.

Disclaimer: This article was assisted by ChatGPT.