There are all kinds of ways we could go. I can see not cutting the faculty that we have but expanding the number of people they can reach. You need a certain mass of faculty to keep ideas churning. And of course the development of people and content is an expensive investment. It has the characteristics of largely fixed cost, which means you only have to do it once.
Delivery is a different question.
The danger to a place like Stanford would be if we took on the cost of the development of the people from PhD to junior faculty and supported their research and course development, and then other entities contracted with them, not us, to deliver the content elsewhere. That would leave us short of the resources we need to continue developing both faculty and research. So one of the reasons for being a participant in the delivery of content on a larger front, however those channels develop, is not to get rich. It's just to have enough resources to be a high-quality investor in people and innovative research in the future. The models we have today aren't particularly well adapted to this.