Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

CU has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues

MtnBuff said:
It isn't a question of what we want, they are the ones who decide if they want to extend the invitation. I don't see the SEC having any intention of expanding their footprint.

The B1G on the other hand has already stretched themselves to both coast. I could see them having an interest in adding 2-4 more schools to balance the scheduling and allow them to dominate the later TV time slots. In that case Washington would be a given for 1st pick (Seattle/Pacific Northwest market.) From there you look at Oregon (recent years top 10-20 program, solid TV ratings,) Colorado (Denver and Rocky Mountain market plus strong ratings in California and historically solid national ratings when we have been decent. Then you look at either Utah (strong program recently, SLC and intermountain west market) or more likely one, and only one, of the Arizona Schools, probably UofA giving Arizona as well as similar to CU strong ratings nationally, especially in the Southwestern US.

If the B1G doesn't happen for us then as stated before the only way I see us remaining relevant and financially competitive would be the forming of a 3rd superconference dumping all the dead weight schools, not dragging more in to take their shares of the money as the SEC and the B1G continue to pull further away in media payouts.
Click to expand...

BAD News: Other than Notre Dame for sure and a few ACC schools maybe, both the B1G and the SEC know they can now offer partial rights to the rest of us have nots and we’d take it.


BUFFS14 said:
I

Disagree with SEC not wanting to expand. I don't believe it does them any good to have the B1G from coast to coast when they can also pick up some of the later time slots. If this is an arms race to the top they will not stand by and let the B1G dominate. We start winning and Prime keeps recruiting the South, I could easily see us with an invite to the SEC in the future. Obviously a lot has to happen, but I can see it.
Click to expand...

TV is driving the bus. They write the checks. They decide who gets money and who doesnt. Prime will need to demonstrate five years of sustained success and deliver McCartney level results before we ever sniff an invitation.
 
Jens1893 said:
Has no effect on the Pac 12 directly, but still relevant

www.sportico.com

Diamond RSNs Planning Bankruptcy in Blow to Lucrative Cable Model

The Bally Sports RSNs are planning to declare bankruptcy next week, according to sources, a move with major consequences across U.S. sports.
www.sportico.com www.sportico.com

Especially this: The number of US cable subscribers (103.3m to 66.1m) and number of households with a TV (90% to 54%) has declined between 2012 and 2022 as this effectively means the P12N as currently constructed is dying.
Click to expand...
The big providers are trying to kill RSN’s like Altitude and ATT Sports Net. And Pac 12 Network.
 
Sinclair bought high in 2019 for the regional sports networks using subscriber fee income derived from cable TV customers to underwrite its debt structure. Cable TV subscribers have declined in numbers by 1/3rd. Sinclair tried moving to streaming under Bally Sports+, but found that interest in their product is far lower than estimated. And they paid up for content rights on long term contracts, and the revenue isn’t there. So, you have a bankruptcy.

This is not unlike ESPN, which is losing an average of 10,000 subscribers per day. ESPN charges a ~$6.00 per month carriage fee to the cable companies, which is then recouped through the cable TV package. This is the single largest source of its revenue streams, massively outweighing advertising. I can go to my 105 year old grandmother’s house and she has ESPN. Now, she has never watched a minute of ESPN her entire life, but has been paying for it for 40 years as part of her cable TV package. She likes cable news, and ESPN comes with the package. In essence, she’s been subsidizing sports viewers for four decades. Now, ESPN isn’t going bankrupt, but its profitability has collapsed, resulting in a lot of layoffs in recent years. Investors like a lot about Disney, but they hate ESPN.

With streaming coming along, consumers pay for the content they want. And what big media is finding out is that sports is a hell of lot less popular than people thought. ESPN would have to charge $25 or more per month to maintain its revenue, without little old grandmothers subsidizing it.

For me, PAC 12 sports (all sports) is worth $20/month. Happy to pay for that. The rest of college football would be worth a few more bucks, but not anything close to the PAC 12 because CU is my team. It’s really all that I tune in to see.

The NFL value for me? $0, because I don’t really care about it that much, although I will casually watch some games if it’s on.

NBA? $0

MLB? $0

NHL? $0

PGA Golf? $0

And as sports content fractures and splits from the cable model, parsing out who will pay to subscribe to what becomes very important.

As far as realignment in college football conferences, this is relevant because the media execs at Disney know and understand that everything will go streaming soon. Linear TV through cable is dying. Personally, I very much disagree with the narrative that certain teams are valuable because they ”deliver the market”, like Rutgers delivers NYC. Yes, that was true under the old cable TV model, but I don’t think that’s the case any more. I think teams/conferences are going to be valued based on what streaming subscriber revenue they can actually deliver.
 
Apparently, the streaming number for ESPN is $36/month by one estimate:

In a video programming business that will be increasingly dominated by over-the-top distribution and skinnier bundles, "reach"--the actual percentage of viewers that watch a channel over a set time period--will have a much greater role in defining consumer pricing.

And using some complex mathematical formulas, MoffettNathanson analyst Michael Nathanson arrived at some interesting per-subscriber price projections for major cable networks operating in a world where channels get paid based more purely on the amount of people who actually watch them.

As it is with previous speculative models for a la carte pricing, Disney's ESPN is a prime example in Nathanson's study, currently distributed in the vast majority of pay-TV homes and commanding a per-subscriber fee averaging out to around $6.10. In an a la carte scenario, Nathanson postulates that ESPN's distribution dwindles to about 16.81 percent of TV homes, matching its reach. With the smaller distribution footprint, advertising revenue also goes down.

Disney would have to charge a per-sub fee of $36.30 to maintain its current margins, Nathanson postulates.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
BAD News: Other than Notre Dame for sure and a few ACC schools maybe, both the B1G and the SEC know they can now offer partial rights to the rest of us have nots and we’d take it.




TV is driving the bus. They write the checks. They decide who gets money and who doesnt. Prime will need to demonstrate five years of sustained success and deliver McCartney level results before we ever sniff an invitation.
Click to expand...
No question that we would take partial rights, and we would like it. Half of a full share of B1G or SEC money is still likely to be $20 million a year more than what we will be getting in a dying PAC or a diluted B12. And the hope that eventually we might get a bigger share down the road once we are in.

And yes TV not only drives the bus but decides which routes it will take.

TV isn't going to pay for a bunch of games with teams that cant even get their own fans to watch. SMU, Rice, SDSU, UNLV don't move the needle in their home markets much less nationally.

I don't think we need five years and we don't have five years. CU has historically been a program that draws solid ratings nationally if we are any good at all. We are a better TV draw, again assuming that we are even decent, than a number of programs that are already in the big two conferences.

The next couple of years with Prime and even more importantly Saliman will need to show the conferences and the networks that CU is back in the football business. Prime can bring us to winning but Saliman and the decision made about who will be Chancellor will be telling for those wondering if CU is going to be serious about putting a quality product on the field or going back to pretending like we want to be in the big time.
 
Creebuzz said:
This is not unlike ESPN, which is losing an average of 10,000 subscribers per day. ESPN charges a ~$6.00 per month carriage fee to the cable companies, which is then recouped through the cable TV package. This is the single largest source of its revenue streams, massively outweighing advertising. I can go to my 105 year old grandmother’s house and she has ESPN. Now, she has never watched a minute of ESPN her entire life, but has been paying for it for 40 years as part of her cable TV package. She likes cable news, and ESPN comes with the package. In essence, she’s been subsidizing sports viewers for four decades. Now, ESPN isn’t going bankrupt, but its profitability has collapsed, resulting in a lot of layoffs in recent years. Investors like a lot about Disney, but they hate ESPN.
Click to expand...
Coupled with Jens article peak cable and peak satellite were years ago and are well behind us. I’d imagine DirecTV is about to lose a lot of subs due to losing NFLST (my dad, for one). ESPN will never make up those losses in streaming subscribers. Disney has been trying to convert Disney only/hulu only/ESPN only subscribers to the bundle because that pumps up the subscriber counts. But probably not really improves ratings. There has been rumors of Disney spinning off ESPN. Soft advertising sales hit them in the quarter before this last one which is also concerning.

As you point out right here 👇👇👇
Creebuzz said:
Apparently, the streaming number for ESPN is $36/month by one estimate:

In a video programming business that will be increasingly dominated by over-the-top distribution and skinnier bundles, "reach"--the actual percentage of viewers that watch a channel over a set time period--will have a much greater role in defining consumer pricing.

And using some complex mathematical formulas, MoffettNathanson analyst Michael Nathanson arrived at some interesting per-subscriber price projections for major cable networks operating in a world where channels get paid based more purely on the amount of people who actually watch them.

As it is with previous speculative models for a la carte pricing, Disney's ESPN is a prime example in Nathanson's study, currently distributed in the vast majority of pay-TV homes and commanding a per-subscriber fee averaging out to around $6.10. In an a la carte scenario, Nathanson postulates that ESPN's distribution dwindles to about 16.81 percent of TV homes, matching its reach. With the smaller distribution footprint, advertising revenue also goes down.

Disney would have to charge a per-sub fee of $36.30 to maintain its current margins, Nathanson postulates.
Click to expand...
 


This is an interesting show. These guys look at all the recent rumors and apply a different approach to how universities look at things.
After watching this I really feel CU is going to stay with the PAC till the bitter end due to their research fuding.
 


also....at 5 p.m. tonight this will b the subject-
Could be interesting as I've heard ASU is the school voicing the most displeasure right now.
 
InTheBuff said:


also....at 5 p.m. tonight this will b the subject-
Could be interesting as I've heard ASU is the school voicing the most displeasure right now.
Click to expand...

ASU, not being an AAU member, might not have a path to the B1G. But considering the size of their school and home metro, there's a case for them in the SEC. I wouldn't be surprised if the networks worked to consolidate into SEC/B1G each having 24 and the only western properties the SEC took were ASU and SDSU for the time zones. The rest of their targets would be ACC.

B1G would be interested in (from the AAU list): 8 in the west KU, CU, UU, UA, Cal, Stan, UO and UW with 6 from the ACC Pitt, UVA, UNC, Duke, Wake and GT being possible. They'd also break their AAU rule for Notre Dame (possibly Clemson and Miami, maybe Syracuse).
 
889eaa3dfdab95d4975411fa253cb7c6ec22d4b9.gif
 
Thought this was relevant to the whole discussion: Disney+ lost 2.4 million subscribers worldwide. But, they're attributing it mostly to losing cricket streaming rights in India. I know India is not the US, but, this is where the market is going. Streaming rights will be more important than over the air rights at some point... but probably not before the Pac-12/10 either dies or figures out a partner/plan to maintain relevance.
 
Lol no actual information, just an "official statement" saying they will have a deal soon. Coming from a conference that's been a national punchline for years.
 
InTheBuff said:


This is an interesting show. These guys look at all the recent rumors and apply a different approach to how universities look at things.
After watching this I really feel CU is going to stay with the PAC till the bitter end due to their research fuding.
Click to expand...

The first 12 minutes are rough. Most would just turn it off. However, once they turn it over to Tony and his charts, there is some credible arguments in there.

Around the 49 minute mark, when they discuss the “blood oath” the Big 12 schools have signed and new schools would have to sign, there is zero chance they‘re poaching anyone from the PAC 12. And there is zero chance the PAC 12 is poaching any of them. The Big 12 members essentially are locked in for life.

Overall, a much better than expected listen, especially between 12 minute mark and 55 minute mark.
 
This can only be taken as bad news if you are skeptical of streaming. ESPN doesn't want anything other than late night inventory since it went all in with the SEC and still has ACC content, so feels like Pac 12 is all in with Amazon and/or Apple
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
This can only be taken as bad news if you are skeptical of streaming. ESPN doesn't want anything other than late night inventory since it went all in with the SEC and still has ACC content, so feels like Pac 12 is all in with Amazon and/or Apple
Click to expand...

I guess the P12 statement from earlier
this week was designed to soften this blow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top