Including this nugget...

Another player will enter the competition in a couple of years. The Atlantic Coast Conference, in conjunction with ESPN, will launch its network in 2019. One industry insider thinks that deal “will blow the Pac-12 away.”

It's an interesting read, especially being that I definitely leaned toward the ACC waiting out the contract and pursuing a 100% owned network model.

I still think it's too early to kick dirt on the PAC's model though. It was always a long play. What I still am intrigued about is the fact that being 100% owned, IF it works, the PAC is going to make more relative their demand than any other conference, as they won't split it. 100% of $25 is better than 50% of $40.

Given the PAC, like the ACC, has certain fundamental deficiencies compared to the B1G and the SEC, I'm intrigued by a model that potentially could offset that disadvantage. It's different in a lot of other ways as well that are mentioned but I think unconsidered in this piece, it would be interesting to see the value of all the expenses the PAC Networks take off the plate of their schools compared to other conferences.

Again...if it works out. I think five years is still too early to tell.

http://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/...910339.php

(02-07-2017 11:36 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  Including this nugget...

Another player will enter the competition in a couple of years. The Atlantic Coast Conference, in conjunction with ESPN, will launch its network in 2019. One industry insider thinks that deal “will blow the Pac-12 away.”

It's an interesting read, especially being that I definitely leaned toward the ACC waiting out the contract and pursuing a 100% owned network model.

I still think it's too early to kick dirt on the PAC's model though. It was always a long play. What I still am intrigued about is the fact that being 100% owned, IF it works, the PAC is going to make more relative their demand than any other conference, as they won't split it. 100% of $25 is better than 50% of $40.

Given the PAC, like the ACC, has certain fundamental deficiencies compared to the B1G and the SEC, I'm intrigued by a model that potentially could offset that disadvantage. It's different in a lot of other ways as well that are mentioned but I think unconsidered in this piece, it would be interesting to see the value of all the expenses the PAC Networks take off the plate of their schools compared to other conferences.

Again...if it works out. I think five years is still too early to tell.

Hey Lou, is there a link to the article? I would love to read the article, thanks.

Also, I don't know if the PAC Network will ever be successful. I grew-up in SF Bay Area and I can tell you that growing-up, everyone was either an Oakland Raiders fan or a SF 49ers fan. I didn't even know college football existed until I went to SJSU. I left the SF Bay Area in 2003, so things could have changed, but it was definitely a pro sports area when I lived there. I guess what all this boils down to is lack of demand for the product.

(02-07-2017 12:03 PM)JAE_VT Wrote:  

(02-07-2017 11:36 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  Including this nugget...

Another player will enter the competition in a couple of years. The Atlantic Coast Conference, in conjunction with ESPN, will launch its network in 2019. One industry insider thinks that deal “will blow the Pac-12 away.”

It's an interesting read, especially being that I definitely leaned toward the ACC waiting out the contract and pursuing a 100% owned network model.

I still think it's too early to kick dirt on the PAC's model though. It was always a long play. What I still am intrigued about is the fact that being 100% owned, IF it works, the PAC is going to make more relative their demand than any other conference, as they won't split it. 100% of $25 is better than 50% of $40.

Given the PAC, like the ACC, has certain fundamental deficiencies compared to the B1G and the SEC, I'm intrigued by a model that potentially could offset that disadvantage. It's different in a lot of other ways as well that are mentioned but I think unconsidered in this piece, it would be interesting to see the value of all the expenses the PAC Networks take off the plate of their schools compared to other conferences.

Again...if it works out. I think five years is still too early to tell.

Hey Lou, is there a link to the article? I would love to read the article, thanks.

Also, I don't know if the PAC Network will ever be successful. I grew-up in SF Bay Area and I can tell you that growing-up, everyone was either an Oakland Raiders fan or a SF 49ers fan. I didn't even know college football existed until I went to SJSU. I left the SF Bay Area in 2003, so things could have changed, but it was definitely a pro sports area when I lived there. I guess what all this boils down to is lack of demand for the product.

Ha, sorry to leave it out. Edited to add it to the original post.

And yeah, I agree the demand is what's killing them on the DirectTV front. If I was a PAC president/AD, that's the thing that would be bothering me most, how they miscalculated that play and got themselves into that position of not being able to make a DirectTV deal now because of the most favored status in previous deals.

To me, that comes off like an amateur mistake. Got to know your value...somewhere they didn't have the right pros in place.

Word Is Amazon is gonna make a Major Play for the AAC on the Next TV Deal coming up in a few years..Probably paying around 10 to 12 MM per team which is a HUGE start for them....Also that ESPN will try to Up the ante not to lose their money maker in the AAC which is why they stepped in and stopped the Big 12 expansion...Remember Twitter is doing quit well with NFL and Amazon to use AAC as a Guinea Pig making them a Solid P6 could open alot of New doors and bring the Future to the Forefront....Then the AAC befor ethe new deal would look at BYU, CSU, AF, SDSU and maybe UNM pushing the others down to true G4's setting up the Next stage of the Playoff if they do in fact expand...Things might be changing sooner than we think....

(02-07-2017 02:41 PM)tigerscane Wrote:  Word Is Amazon is gonna make a Major Play for the AAC on the Next TV Deal coming up in a few years..Probably paying around 10 to 12 MM per team which is a HUGE start for them....Also that ESPN will try to Up the ante not to lose their money maker in the AAC which is why they stepped in and stopped the Big 12 expansion...Remember Twitter is doing quit well with NFL and Amazon to use AAC as a Guinea Pig making them a Solid P6 could open alot of New doors and bring the Future to the Forefront....Then the AAC befor ethe new deal would look at BYU, CSU, AF, SDSU and maybe UNM pushing the others down to true G4's setting up the Next stage of the Playoff if they do in fact expand...Things might be changing sooner than we think....

I hope for the AAC that is correct, but I don't buy it at $10-$12M.

I don't know what you mean by Twitter doing "quite well" with the NFL. A lot of people watched it, but they almost certainly lost money on the deal. And I've seen no return on how many users they might have gained. And the NFL gave it to Twitter at a big discount.

I do think that Amazon is the best potential platform, but that valuation seems well out of line based on what the conference is currently making.

Plus, it would reduce the viewership by 95+% for AAC games, which makes is awfully unlikely that the conference would accept that. So the package would only be a supplementary package at most...Amazon isn't paying $10M per team for one or two games a week.

Amazon would have more than 1 or 2 games a week..They are about to launch a 24-7 live streaming channel platform and are wanting in the game with Live sports and want College programming....AAC contract is due up soon and Aresco has already been talking with Amazon for sometime on a deal...Also Espn will probably step in or up to some degree because they do not wanna Totally Lose their Money maker and Property in the AAC all together...Also Aresco knows and is also talking along with ESPn and Amazon guys at CBS-SN and could do a combo for tier 3 rights and some tier 2....But they are gonna get a Big Raise on their Next TV Deal and around the tune of 10-12MM per team putting them alot closer to P5 thus Espn Protecting along with Amazon their Investment and seperating from the G4's....#AmericanRising..#P6..#RiseUp....

(02-07-2017 03:47 PM)tigerscane Wrote:  Amazon would have more than 1 or 2 games a week..They are about to launch a 24-7 live streaming channel platform and are wanting in the game with Live sports and want College programming....AAC contract is due up soon and Aresco has already been talking with Amazon for sometime on a deal...Also Espn will probably step in or up to some degree because they do not wanna Totally Lose their Money maker and Property in the AAC all together...Also Aresco knows and is also talking along with ESPn and Amazon guys at CBS-SN and could do a combo for tier 3 rights and some tier 2....But they are gonna get a Big Raise on their Next TV Deal and around the tune of 10-12MM per team putting them alot closer to P5 thus Espn Protecting along with Amazon their Investment and seperating from the G4's....#AmericanRising..#P6..#RiseUp....

Yeah, I would not be surprised to see the AAC get a better TV deal in that range with programming on multiple providers, which could include Amazon.

I read this statement:

"Word Is Amazon is gonna make a Major Play for the AAC on the Next TV Deal coming up in a few years..Probably paying around 10 to 12 MM per team which is a HUGE start for them"

as if you were saying Amazon was paying $10-12M, but I guess you were saying the TV deal was paying that.

That sounds reasonable, the idea that the total package, of which Amazon had a piece, could be in that range. I hope it works out.

(02-07-2017 11:36 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  Including this nugget...

Another player will enter the competition in a couple of years. The Atlantic Coast Conference, in conjunction with ESPN, will launch its network in 2019. One industry insider thinks that deal “will blow the Pac-12 away.”

It's an interesting read, especially being that I definitely leaned toward the ACC waiting out the contract and pursuing a 100% owned network model.

I still think it's too early to kick dirt on the PAC's model though. It was always a long play. What I still am intrigued about is the fact that being 100% owned, IF it works, the PAC is going to make more relative their demand than any other conference, as they won't split it. 100% of $25 is better than 50% of $40.

Given the PAC, like the ACC, has certain fundamental deficiencies compared to the B1G and the SEC, I'm intrigued by a model that potentially could offset that disadvantage. It's different in a lot of other ways as well that are mentioned but I think unconsidered in this piece, it would be interesting to see the value of all the expenses the PAC Networks take off the plate of their schools compared to other conferences.

Again...if it works out. I think five years is still too early to tell.

http://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/...910339.php

Thanks for the link Lou_C.

One industry insider thinks that deal “will blow the Pac-12 away.”......I wonder what that really means.

(02-07-2017 04:00 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-07-2017 11:36 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  Including this nugget...

Another player will enter the competition in a couple of years. The Atlantic Coast Conference, in conjunction with ESPN, will launch its network in 2019. One industry insider thinks that deal “will blow the Pac-12 away.”

It's an interesting read, especially being that I definitely leaned toward the ACC waiting out the contract and pursuing a 100% owned network model.

I still think it's too early to kick dirt on the PAC's model though. It was always a long play. What I still am intrigued about is the fact that being 100% owned, IF it works, the PAC is going to make more relative their demand than any other conference, as they won't split it. 100% of $25 is better than 50% of $40.

Given the PAC, like the ACC, has certain fundamental deficiencies compared to the B1G and the SEC, I'm intrigued by a model that potentially could offset that disadvantage. It's different in a lot of other ways as well that are mentioned but I think unconsidered in this piece, it would be interesting to see the value of all the expenses the PAC Networks take off the plate of their schools compared to other conferences.

Again...if it works out. I think five years is still too early to tell.

http://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/...910339.php

Thanks for the link Lou_C.

One industry insider thinks that deal “will blow the Pac-12 away.”......I wonder what that really means.

I wonder as well.

The Pac 12 Network only brings in around $1 Million, so it could triple that at $3 Million and still be $5-$10 Million behind Big/SEC, so tough to take too much from it.

(02-07-2017 02:41 PM)tigerscane Wrote:  Word is

FANCIFUL

It would have to tie into Amazon Prime to get any traction. Can't see more than 2-300,000 subscribers if they charge a fee for AAC only content.

(02-07-2017 04:26 PM)nole Wrote:  

(02-07-2017 04:00 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-07-2017 11:36 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  Including this nugget...

Another player will enter the competition in a couple of years. The Atlantic Coast Conference, in conjunction with ESPN, will launch its network in 2019. One industry insider thinks that deal “will blow the Pac-12 away.”

It's an interesting read, especially being that I definitely leaned toward the ACC waiting out the contract and pursuing a 100% owned network model.

I still think it's too early to kick dirt on the PAC's model though. It was always a long play. What I still am intrigued about is the fact that being 100% owned, IF it works, the PAC is going to make more relative their demand than any other conference, as they won't split it. 100% of $25 is better than 50% of $40.

Given the PAC, like the ACC, has certain fundamental deficiencies compared to the B1G and the SEC, I'm intrigued by a model that potentially could offset that disadvantage. It's different in a lot of other ways as well that are mentioned but I think unconsidered in this piece, it would be interesting to see the value of all the expenses the PAC Networks take off the plate of their schools compared to other conferences.

Again...if it works out. I think five years is still too early to tell.

http://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/...910339.php

Thanks for the link Lou_C.

One industry insider thinks that deal “will blow the Pac-12 away.”......I wonder what that really means.

I wonder as well.

The Pac 12 Network only brings in around $1 Million, so it could triple that at $3 Million and still be $5-$10 Million behind Big/SEC, so tough to take too much from it.

Yep...plus, you're looking at probably 2020 before the ACC Network revenue is really showing...will it be "blowing away" what the PAC is delivering now, or what the PAC is delivering in 2020, which would presumably be more?

If the ACC Network in 2020 is "blowing away" what the PAC delivered in 2015...I'm not sure that is all that meaningful.

But you'd assume by 2020 the PAC is delivering at least $3-4M. If the ACC is blowing that away one year in...then maybe I'm listening.

Ultimately, without knowing what the source was, what they were really talking about, or even how much thought was behind the comment, it's tough to assume much about it.

If you assume that the source really is someone with some knowledge about things, you could take that comment as encouraging in the sense that inside the industry the ACC Network is considered to likely be a "success" and there isn't much concern about whether it will be viable. But how that success is defined...who knows.

I will go out on a limb and predict that the ACC Network will blow away what I am making in its first year.

(02-07-2017 12:09 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(02-07-2017 12:03 PM)JAE_VT Wrote:  

(02-07-2017 11:36 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  Including this nugget...

Another player will enter the competition in a couple of years. The Atlantic Coast Conference, in conjunction with ESPN, will launch its network in 2019. One industry insider thinks that deal “will blow the Pac-12 away.”

It's an interesting read, especially being that I definitely leaned toward the ACC waiting out the contract and pursuing a 100% owned network model.

I still think it's too early to kick dirt on the PAC's model though. It was always a long play. What I still am intrigued about is the fact that being 100% owned, IF it works, the PAC is going to make more relative their demand than any other conference, as they won't split it. 100% of $25 is better than 50% of $40.

Given the PAC, like the ACC, has certain fundamental deficiencies compared to the B1G and the SEC, I'm intrigued by a model that potentially could offset that disadvantage. It's different in a lot of other ways as well that are mentioned but I think unconsidered in this piece, it would be interesting to see the value of all the expenses the PAC Networks take off the plate of their schools compared to other conferences.

Again...if it works out. I think five years is still too early to tell.

Hey Lou, is there a link to the article? I would love to read the article, thanks.

Also, I don't know if the PAC Network will ever be successful. I grew-up in SF Bay Area and I can tell you that growing-up, everyone was either an Oakland Raiders fan or a SF 49ers fan. I didn't even know college football existed until I went to SJSU. I left the SF Bay Area in 2003, so things could have changed, but it was definitely a pro sports area when I lived there. I guess what all this boils down to is lack of demand for the product.

Ha, sorry to leave it out. Edited to add it to the original post.

And yeah, I agree the demand is what's killing them on the DirectTV front. If I was a PAC president/AD, that's the thing that would be bothering me most, how they miscalculated that play and got themselves into that position of not being able to make a DirectTV deal now because of the most favored status in previous deals.

To me, that comes off like an amateur mistake. Got to know your value...somewhere they didn't have the right pros in place.

Finally had a chance to read the article. Thanks for putting up the link Lou!

Still a Package of some type with ESPN, Amazon, Google and CBS-SN will still get the AAC somewhere between 10 to 12 MM per team on the next tv deal...Their Ratings are as high as it is..The ACC Network should be bigger than the failing Pac-12 Network though....Time will tell...

(02-08-2017 06:33 PM)tigerscane Wrote:  Still a Package of some type with ESPN, Amazon, Google and CBS-SN will still get the AAC somewhere between 10 to 12 MM per team on the next tv deal...Their Ratings are as high as it is..The ACC Network should be bigger than the failing Pac-12 Network though....Time will tell...

I think that makes sense, and hope it happens. Would be an exciting development.

Amazon is the magic piece, because they absolutely don't have to make a dime on sports, as long as it adds more prime subscribers. They could lose money on sports, and make money. Because even if buying sports rights means Amazon spends $100 or more for each $100 subscription to prime that someone buys, once someone has prime, they start buying more books, toothpaste, etc from Amazon.

I'm sure Amazon has some metrics on how much product any given prime subscriber buys from Amazon, and I know from experience, once you've got that free two day shipping...you use it.

That gives Amazon a lot more money to play with than someone like Netflix or Yahoo or Twitter, who might like to have the additional users, but can't monetize those users anywhere as much and as directly as Amazon can.

Plus, I'm not sure it will be a matter of Amazon as a new competitor to ESPN for directly acquiring sports rights. Starting to think it might be more of a partner, with an Amazon acting in the same way as a cable company, but maybe with some tweaks for Amazon "exclusive" content and so forth. So you could see Amazon with an "AAC from ESPN" channel, in addition to ESPN Networks, with a bunch of additional AAC content not available on ESPN3, and the only available through Amazon.

Thinking about it, besides Amazon, I could see XBox and Sony Playstation in play. Those are also players that stand to make plenty of side profit from any new user that goes out and buys one of their consoles to get the AAC content.

(02-09-2017 10:55 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 06:33 PM)tigerscane Wrote:  Still a Package of some type with ESPN, Amazon, Google and CBS-SN will still get the AAC somewhere between 10 to 12 MM per team on the next tv deal...Their Ratings are as high as it is..The ACC Network should be bigger than the failing Pac-12 Network though....Time will tell...

I think that makes sense, and hope it happens. Would be an exciting development.

Amazon is the magic piece, because they absolutely don't have to make a dime on sports, as long as it adds more prime subscribers. They could lose money on sports, and make money. Because even if buying sports rights means Amazon spends $100 or more for each $100 subscription to prime that someone buys, once someone has prime, they start buying more books, toothpaste, etc from Amazon.

I'm sure Amazon has some metrics on how much product any given prime subscriber buys from Amazon, and I know from experience, once you've got that free two day shipping...you use it.

That gives Amazon a lot more money to play with than someone like Netflix or Yahoo or Twitter, who might like to have the additional users, but can't monetize those users anywhere as much and as directly as Amazon can.

"Amazon...doesn't have to make a dime on sports..."

...or apparently anything else.
(Amazon is notorious for never making money)

But jokes aside, if a school/conference has a high number of casual fans vs. hard core fans, it makes sense from a TV perspective to put its games on a low tier (ESPN, FOX, ABC, etc.). If it's the other way around, it makes TV money sense to put it on a high tier (conference network, PPV, etc.).

But if a school is trying to grow its fan base then it will want to be on a low tier to get as much exposure as possible.

AAC content is generally niche content. TV networks and providers will want to put many AAC games on a high tier. However, AAC schools have relatively small fan bases (compared to P5 schools + ND <-- on the average), so there's probably a strong desire to grow the fan base amongst the schools. I think that's why the current AAC deal pays very little, but has great exposure. AAC AD's are convincing Disney and the cable companies (indirectly) to put their content on a low tier, and they're doing it by effectively subsidizing their current media deal w/ future merch/concessions/ticket/etc sales, university marketing costs, and future TV revenue. If they look to continue that trend, they'll look to put their content on the most accessible platform possible. If they look to maximize current TV revenues, they'll start putting significant content on platforms like AMZN, Hulu, etc.

That's my $0.02.

Just a little ACC Network tidbit from an interview with FSU's President. Certainly nothing worthy of it's own thread. Basically just confirms what we all knew that the reason for the 2019 start date is many of the contracts coming up with the distributors, and that's to the ACC's advantage I guess. I assume that's the contracts he's talking about...the phrasing is a bit confusing.

Q: When it comes to the revenue side, there was a lot of excitement last summer when the ACC and ESPN finally announced the new network and a planned cable channel. Are the presidents being updated on how that’s progressing?

A: Yeah, things are coming along. I think ESPN really is going to be a great partner. I think we’re all optimistic that everything they said they were going to do is gonna happen. We’ve got opportunities, right about when we come on [in 2019], to renegotiate some of their contractual relationships with some of the distributors. So I’m very optimistic about it, and for it being a good deal for all the ACC schools.

https://floridastate.rivals.com/news/q-a...ccess-more