Medford M.
Well-Known Member
This is basucally coming from TV money correct?
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!
Pac-12 expansion is now inevitable
- Thread starter Duff Man
- Start date
Yes. It is conference distribution based on their TV contracts.
What is the Pac 12 Network distribution per team?
I haven't seen a breakdown of the 2016 numbers yet, but here is the FY15 numbers from Wilner
SEC (only 9 months of SEC Net)
Total Revenue: 527.4M
% Revenue distrubuted: 86.8%
Revenue per school: 32.7M
Big 10
Total Revenue: 448.8M
% Revenue distrubuted: NA
Revenue per school: 32.4M
Pac-12
Total Revenue: 439M
% Revenue distrubuted: 68.5% (Pac-12 Schools fund entire operating cost of Pac-12 Net)
Revenue per school: 25.1M
Big 12
Total Revenue: 267.8M
% Revenue distrubuted: 88%
Revenue per school: 23.3M (This is an unbalanced number as the big 12 does not equally share)
The numbers are sobering. How far would an extra 15 million go in our coffers? What would we be willing to put up with for another 15 million per year?
I don't like this, Pac 12 needs to step the **** up. No matter if it's right, wrong, or indifferent, they need to do something.
UT, OU, OSU, and TT...
Sykobuff
Well-Known Member
I agree that expansion will happen but with UTand OU coming in, doesn't that put CU in a deeper hole recruiting wise?
Hell no, opens up Texas more and eliminates some P5 programs in that state. Honestly couldn't be better for CU and the PAC.
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
i don't think so. i can sort of get OSU but T Tech. no way.
Dog ****
15 million piles of **it per year.
EddieCrowder
Well-Known Member
I think UT right now is a lot more like the McWilliams/Mackovic era Longhorns. They are not the bullies we tangled with in the Big 12 days. Not afraid of them at all, bring their entitled asses on.
the one rub is dont the Big 12 "partners" have an iron clad (hahaha) agreement till like 2025 ?
the one rub is dont the Big 12 "partners" have an iron clad (hahaha) agreement till like 2025 ?
GoBuffs08
Well-Known Member
This is the biggest issue. How much more would each Pac school be getting if there was DTV distribution in the mix?
EddieCrowder
Well-Known Member
I have debated the Directv issue since day one and there are valid points from both sides. This one however is not 1 of them EXPOSURE. If you are on DTV you now are on 99% of the sports bars TV's in america. Sports bars have DTV for the monster that is the NFL and Sunday Ticket, until your a member of the DTV family your second class.
Probably Scott's biggest failure as commish. The Pac-12 has to find a way to get on DTV.
I haven't followed the specifics of that, but what are the major roadblocks? Is it just a disagreement on $$?
Basically it comes down to dollars.
From what I understand, there is some kind of clause in the contracts the conference signed that the contract value from one provider to another is to be the same. DTV wants more, which would raise the cost of all providers.
DTV is being greedy but the Pac12 signed stupid contracts.
DTV is also shorting the Pac-12 because they are NFL dominated markets and have a lot of late night programming where the ratings are lower. I think the biggest issue Scott has is that the Pac-12 will take the late night stuff because there is demand for it and it makes the most sense based on local start times but he isn't going to let it be used against the conference in negotiations.
Perfect
How is DTV shorting the Pac? The Pac puts their good games on network TV. So DTV should shell out for bottom-rung matchups in the middle of the night? Scott overplayed his hand and negotiated bad deals with local access cable providers. And his continued excuse that he can't change the contracts with cable providers is a joke. Why cater to the small fish, when you could hook the big one? Failure. The network, frankly, doesn't exist east of Denver, or in any sports bar in the nation.
Even if DTV got the Pac12 Network Im never going back. I terminated service over the price and their unwillingness to make a deal. Im saving $1200 a year by streaming. If push comes to shove I go to a bar and watch maybe 1-2 games. This decision was influenced by doznens of friends and neighbors that went before me.
Im happy with Sony Vue. Happy with the channels it gives me for $40.
Cord cutting is slowing but when it was accelerating it took millions of subscribers out of the market. ESPN convinced the ACC to delay it's channel for a year. Fox told the Big12 to pound sand when they tried for expansion (grant of rights). That trend and my $40 bundle are going to make it harder. There is no money unicorn at the end of the TV rainbow anymore.
Lets all keep in mind that the SEC (ESPN 2014-2029, CBS 2014-2024) and B1G (2016-2024) TV deals are newer than the Pac12s deal (2012-2024) contract. Our new deal was the richest deal at the time among the P5. But there is a ways to go before it runs out.
Larry Scott did hire a new director of distribution for the P12N in Aug/Sept. Hopefully she can make something happen.
Im happy with Sony Vue. Happy with the channels it gives me for $40.
Cord cutting is slowing but when it was accelerating it took millions of subscribers out of the market. ESPN convinced the ACC to delay it's channel for a year. Fox told the Big12 to pound sand when they tried for expansion (grant of rights). That trend and my $40 bundle are going to make it harder. There is no money unicorn at the end of the TV rainbow anymore.
Lets all keep in mind that the SEC (ESPN 2014-2029, CBS 2014-2024) and B1G (2016-2024) TV deals are newer than the Pac12s deal (2012-2024) contract. Our new deal was the richest deal at the time among the P5. But there is a ways to go before it runs out.
Larry Scott did hire a new director of distribution for the P12N in Aug/Sept. Hopefully she can make something happen.
Last edited:
How do you get out of a contract you signed in 2012 that runs to 2024? One in which you agreed to the richest contract at the time. Your obligation is to provide access to content in exchange for money. Both sides are meeting their defined obligations. These network channels were not then in the configuration they are now except for the B1G Network.
We obviously can kick their TV trucks out of the stadium (how does that help). We can all go to court and wait for a judge to decide things. At the end of the day they offered an amount for access and we agreed to it.
What then? You think CBS or someone will come in and bid with confidence knowing that half we thru it we might pull the same stunt because we have buyers remorse?
Last edited:
I never said terminate the contracts with the major networks. I am not complaining about the Pac receiving top dollar from ABC/etc. for the top games. Just explaining why there isn't much value in the network when OSU v. Wazzu at 2am eastern is a marquee matchup. As for the contracts I was referring to, the Pac would be obligated to give the small fish the same rates as DTV. Very dumb clause, but it is what it is. Entering into a contract with DTV would trigger the clauses contained in the small-time contracts and automatically lower those carrying rates. Scott must have been absent the day they taught business at business school. Boutique retailers pay more for wholesale than a Target/Wal-Mart. Not only do the big stores have greater purchasing power, they also have a larger customer base. So tangibly, you can sell more widgets at a lower price and make more. Intangibly, you get in front of a larger customer pool which raises brand awareness/loyalty. Scott was so desperate to get any deal that he shot the network in the foot. But at least they have a corner on the Aussie market.
Every conference puts their good games on a network. And not every game on the Pac-12 network is bad so I don't get what you are saying there, especially when compared to a lot of the games the other conference networks put out.
Yeah except that the offer, which all 12 presidents voted against, would have lowered what we get from Dish and Comcast (not boutique entities) and the deal required the universities to give up some physical campus property. The legality of that was questioned because most state laws require a formal open bidding process (The DTV/ATT deal required that they are given sole provider rights for on campus cable TV service).
The reality is that DirecTV doesnt want these channels. They know the audience is fractionally small. The only reason the SEC and B1G have their channels there is because they are included in the ESPN bundle because, and here's the actual mistake, they are 50% network owned.
Another reason why the schools get less back is that they are producing far more content.
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]The network could be for sale as well
If they did sell the P12N would the new operator keep all the regional channels? My suspicion is the buyer would cut back to one singal channel. At which point you no longer need 850 unique pieces of programing either.
 | The Pac-12 Networks reached their goal of producing 850 live events for its linear channels in 2014-15. Some ADs are asking if the networks really need to produce so many events. By comparison, Big Ten Network produced 500 live events and the SEC Network did 470 last year, although neither has multiple local channels to program like the Pac-12. Most Olympic sporting events cost $15,000 to $25,000 to produce in HD for linear TV, Murphy-Stephans said. “Maybe we need to consider cutting back,” Washington State’s Moos said. “Doing 850 events … that’s not cheap.” |
When the Pac-12 hired Lazard this year, it set off questions about the conference’s intent. Lazard, a 167-year-old financial advisory firm, specializes in mergers, acquisitions and restructuring.
The conference said it hired Lazard to determine the value of the networks after spending three years pumping millions into infrastructure and technology. When news of Lazard’s hiring began to spread over the summer, speculation centered on whether the Pac-12 was looking to sell all or part of the networks or possibly take on equity partners. Sources said that Fox and ESPN executives looked at the networks’ books, but neither made a move. Fox is already a partner in the Big Ten Network, while ESPN owns the SEC Network.
The conference said it hired Lazard to determine the value of the networks after spending three years pumping millions into infrastructure and technology. When news of Lazard’s hiring began to spread over the summer, speculation centered on whether the Pac-12 was looking to sell all or part of the networks or possibly take on equity partners. Sources said that Fox and ESPN executives looked at the networks’ books, but neither made a move. Fox is already a partner in the Big Ten Network, while ESPN owns the SEC Network.
The Pac-12 and Lazard have an ongoing relationship, the conference said. (Link)
If they did sell the P12N would the new operator keep all the regional channels? My suspicion is the buyer would cut back to one singal channel. At which point you no longer need 850 unique pieces of programing either.