Hey everybody, please pardon my ignorance on these matters. I just have some questions regarding television contracts and markets. I'm hoping some of you may be able to answer.

1. Which do you think is preferable, a Big East Network, or to try to land a deal with a major network such as ESPN?

2. If a major network deal is more preferable, what exactly is the driving force behind the MASSIVE amounts of money being paid? Is it solely the size of markets?

2.a. Is it the ability of teams to "deliver" markets and the size of their fanbase (ie number of tv sets on and watching rather than the "potential" tv sets)?

2.b. Is it the popularity and brand recognition of the teams within a conference that would attract viewers from outside the respective schools TV Market?

3. If a Big East Network is preferable, do you think the existing Big East States would pick up the network on their basic cable or basic digital cable packages like the Big 10 Network.

4. Along the same vein, do you think USF wold be enough pull to land the BEN on basic cable throughout the state of Florida? Would they need UCF also? Would the two schools combined have enough clout to get the BEN on basic cable in a state of 18 million people?

4.a. Would it even be possible for the cable company to provide the BEN as basic service in Orlando and Tampa and subscription sports tier throughout other parts of the state?

5. In keeping with the theme, how about Texas? Would one or both of TCU or Houston be enough to get the whole state? How about just the metro areas? Is it possible?

6. Who, if any, among the expansion candidates, do you think has the best chance to land the Big East Network on basic or basic digital cable throughout their respective states?

7. Finally, if no expansion candidates could produce a possible Big East Network on basic cable service for various reasons; and the success of the network depended on subscriptions to a digital "tier," would the size of the fanbase matter?

I know these are a lot of questions. But for those that really know about this stuff, I look forward to hearing from you. Even if you don't know, but have an opinion, I'm sure I'll hear from you too.

Thank you.

I'll take a stab at a few of these

1. Which do you think is preferable, a Big East Network, or to try to land a deal with a major network such as ESPN? This is the million dollar question. My guess is a conference network is only possible if the national contract is with a company other than ESPN, who wants to use the conference to push its auxilery channesl, like ESPNU and ESPN3.com. I hope it is anyone other than ESPN, as this ESPN3.com crap is for the birds.

2. If a major network deal is more preferable, what exactly is the driving force behind the MASSIVE amounts of money being paid? Is it solely the size of markets? This depends on which conference you are discussing

2.a. Is it the ability of teams to "deliver" markets and the size of their fanbase (ie number of tv sets on and watching rather than the "potential" tv sets)? depends on the network (i.e. The Big Ten network gets most of its money from the market size via subscription fees

2.b. Is it the popularity and brand recognition of the teams within a conference that would attract viewers from outside the respective schools TV Market? My guess is if you have no affiliation to either team, it is a question of national championship implications, or do you simply do you want to watch it. For Example, the Big East who gets by far the lowest TV payouts of BCS conferences, has two games in ESPN's top 5 all time for viewership, due mostly to drawing casual observors because the games had title impications.

3. If a Big East Network is preferable, do you think the existing Big East States would pick up the network on their basic cable or basic digital cable packages like the Big 10 Network. That's the (multi) million dollar question

4. Along the same vein, do you think USF wold be enough pull to land the BEN on basic cable throughout the state of Florida? Would they need UCF also? Would the two schools combined have enough clout to get the BEN on basic cable in a state of 18 million people? No, no, and no


4.a. Would it even be possible for the cable company to provide the BEN as basic service in Orlando and Tampa and subscription sports tier throughout other parts of the state? See question number 3



5. In keeping with the theme, how about Texas? Would one or both of TCU or Houston be enough to get the whole state? How about just the metro areas? Is it possible? See question 4



6. Who, if any, among the expansion candidates, do you think has the best chance to land the Big East Network on basic or basic digital cable throughout their respective states? "State" is a long shot for most of the current teams, save for WVU, UConn, and maybe Rutgers. We have to start with their own market, then work your way down. If I had to guess, of the available teams, probably ECU, because the other general candidates are in states where there is no way they would EVER get state wide clearance on basic cable.



7. Finally, if no expansion candidates could produce a possible Big East Network on basic cable service for various reasons; and the success of the network depended on subscriptions to a digital "tier," would the size of the fanbase matter? the size of the fanbase always matters, because that is what will determine the leve of clearance, if any at all.

I talked a lot about the prospects of a Big East network in Section 4 of the blog post below:

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2010/1...nsion-faq/

Basically, I'm pretty skeptical it would work for the Big East. A comprehensive ESPN deal is likely the best option for the BE (which isn't exactly crazy, as the SEC and ACC made the same determination).

(11-04-2010 02:34 PM)piratefan1975 Wrote:  Hey everybody, please pardon my ignorance on these matters. I just have some questions regarding television contracts and markets. I'm hoping some of you may be able to answer.

1. Which do you think is preferable, a Big East Network, or to try to land a deal with a major network such as ESPN?

The real question is a national network contract supplemented by a BEN or simply a national network contract.

The former may carry a huge financial risk upfront for a network that may not pay out in the long run while the latter risks not getting true value for the entire product.

At this stage, I think the Big East is better off with the latter but might need at least the potential threat of the former to get a better deal than they have in the past.

But let's not kid ourselves that the league under either scenario will get Big Ten, SEC, or even ACC $$$. It is what it is folks.

Quote:2. If a major network deal is more preferable, what exactly is the driving force behind the MASSIVE amounts of money being paid? Is it solely the size of markets?

2.a. Is it the ability of teams to "deliver" markets and the size of their fanbase (ie number of tv sets on and watching rather than the "potential" tv sets)?

2.b. Is it the popularity and brand recognition of the teams within a conference that would attract viewers from outside the respective schools TV Market?

It's both reach and pull. The Big East has reach in football, but not pull. It has both reach and pull in basketball. Unfortunately, pull in football is what is driving the bus.

Quote:3. If a Big East Network is preferable, do you think the existing Big East States would pick up the network on their basic cable or basic digital cable packages like the Big 10 Network.

In terms of states, most likely yes for New York (including NYC and Northern New Jersey), Connecticut, and West Virginia as long as it is reasonably priced. In other words, nowhere near the 70 cents per subscriber the Big Ten gets in their states. Anything over 20 cents per subscriber will be trouble in NYC.

After that, you start talking metro areas in terms of Pittsburgh, Louisville, Cincinnati, Tampa-Orlando, and a slight chance of Philly (although Philly is stranger than NYC) on basic. Doubt Chicago, DC, Providence, Boston, or Milwaukee get it on basic. It would most likely be sports tier in those areas.

Quote:4. Along the same vein, do you think USF wold be enough pull to land the BEN on basic cable throughout the state of Florida? Would they need UCF also? Would the two schools combined have enough clout to get the BEN on basic cable in a state of 18 million people?

No. Brighthouse Cable which covers Tampa and Orlando would likely put a BEN on basic in those areas, but I don't see any other cable subscriber in Florida doing so. And I think Brighthouse would do so with or without UCF, although it would go down better with UCF than without.

Quote:4.a. Would it even be possible for the cable company to provide the BEN as basic service in Orlando and Tampa and subscription sports tier throughout other parts of the state?

Yes. And that is likely what would happen.

Quote:5. In keeping with the theme, how about Texas? Would one or both of TCU or Houston be enough to get the whole state? How about just the metro areas? Is it possible?

The entire state on basic, no way. The two metro areas of DFW and Houston. Well, anything is possible. But I simply don't know Texas well enough to have an opinion on this one.

Quote:6. Who, if any, among the expansion candidates, do you think has the best chance to land the Big East Network on basic or basic digital cable throughout their respective states?

None of them, imho.

Quote:7. Finally, if no expansion candidates could produce a possible Big East Network on basic cable service for various reasons; and the success of the network depended on subscriptions to a digital "tier," would the size of the fanbase matter?

I know these are a lot of questions. But for those that really know about this stuff, I look forward to hearing from you. Even if you don't know, but have an opinion, I'm sure I'll hear from you too.

Thank you.

It is what it is. The best hope the Big East has is that some other network really, really wants to give ABC/ESPN a run for their money. Up until this point in time it has been half-hearted efforts by FOX and Fox Sports Network and CBS and CBS College Sports.

Who knows, maybe NBC and Comcast will be up to the task?

Cheers,
Neil

If I am ECU, I would go around and put together a TV market package for the BE right now. If ECU can show BE that if there is a BEN, ECU can deliver huge part of the NC on basic tier then value of ECU to BE would go up a ton.

(11-04-2010 03:48 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  If I am ECU, I would go around and put together a TV market package for the BE right now. If ECU can show BE that if there is a BEN, ECU can deliver huge part of the NC on basic tier then value of ECU to BE would go up a ton.

I'm sure that's already been done. Whether or not BE officials see it the same way remains to be seen.

(11-04-2010 03:30 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I talked a lot about the prospects of a Big East network in Section 4 of the blog post below:

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2010/1...nsion-faq/

Basically, I'm pretty skeptical it would work for the Big East. A comprehensive ESPN deal is likely the best option for the BE (which isn't exactly crazy, as the SEC and ACC made the same determination).

Could the Big East's decision be different because ESPN is not willing to slobber all over our conference they way it slobbers on the SEC and ACC? I'm wondering if ESPN might be thinking they've bought just about all the college sports programming they need, and that they may just bid enough on us to make Fox pay up, but that's about it.

(11-04-2010 03:30 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Basically, I'm pretty skeptical it would work for the Big East. A comprehensive ESPN deal is likely the best option for the BE (which isn't exactly crazy, as the SEC and ACC made the same determination).

Frank, I know you don't watch Big East football much, but there has been a significant change the past year that may change the Big East's view on ESPN, or at least has changed how Big East fans view ESPN. ESPN has started putting several Big East and ACC games each week exclusively on ESPN3.com only, and no longer syndicating them through the Big East Network package liek they used to, save for one "game of the week." A renewal will likely be more of the same.

I realize that internet streams may be a wave of the future, but the exposure loss by having web-only availability, which on a Saturday afternoon is not likely to draw any viewers who are not tuning in specifically to watch one of the two teams involved, at a time when the Big East is fairly vulnerable as it is, is definitely not good. And while the affects are unknown, if the Big East continues to be the only conference where this happens on a regular basis, this could have serious long term affects on programs ability to recruit players.

And with ESPN now picking up ALL ACC men's basketball games, and with only a finite amount of room on the calendar's of ESPN, ESPN2, and ESPNU, this may start to happen in basketball as well. The "best" option, in my opinion, would be a comprehensive national deal with another network that would make Big East sports more of a priority, and allow for better distrubution of games not carried nationally. Unless ESPN just blows everyone out of the water financially.

PS: Kudos on your blog. An excellent read. Granted I am biased since you raised many of the same points I have in the past, but still an excellent piece.

I'll chime in on the "will Houston/TCU bring their respective markets?" The answer is: kinda.

Houston is a pro town first last and always. The city has not been feverently behind any one college team since the last year of Rice fielding a powerhouse squad in 1953-54 (winning the SWC and beating Alabama in the Cotton Bowl) which was also the last time they would win a bowl till 2 years ago in Houston. Even after UH joined and had a lot of success their first few years (before falling off the face of the Earth for the SWC's last decade) they always struggled for attendance at the Astro Dome and the city never really got behind them. Compounding this is a large UT bandwagon fan base and the single largest A&M alumni base that both call the Bayou City home, not to mention the largest LSU and Ole Miss alumni bases outside their respective states. Despite their claims to the contrary, UH is still burdened by being a predominantly commuter school whose students are there for a degree and tend not to look back once they have it.

The DFW Metroplex is even worse (I know, I live here). In addition to being a pro town, it is also a college town but its a no man's land with lots of large collegiate fan bases that greatly outnumber the small Frog alumni base. UT, OU, A&M, OSU, TTU and Arkansas all have significant alumni presences, each one much larger than the TCU contingent. Add to that several other medium size fan bases like SMU, UNT and Baylor who dont have the visibility of the larger programs but aren't going to root for TCU either. I've seen more TCU gear this month than at any other time in my life...and that is still a very tiny number of people.

So, they will bring a piece of their markets, but they have to both be winning really big to grab those small pieces. When those two aren't winning, they are completely invisible in their home markets like most urban schools.

Thank you for the replies. I hope to see more.

I read where the Big 10 network is shown on basic cable throughout ALL 8 states in which there is a Big 10 team. Outside of those 8 states, it is available in most areas through a subscription "sports pass" tier. That's impressive that those schools were able to command entire states on basic cable coverage (but then again, it's the Big 10). That's alot of reach and pull as was said earlier.

How does the Big East get more pull?

(11-04-2010 03:30 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I talked a lot about the prospects of a Big East network in Section 4 of the blog post below:

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2010/1...nsion-faq/

Basically, I'm pretty skeptical it would work for the Big East. A comprehensive ESPN deal is likely the best option for the BE (which isn't exactly crazy, as the SEC and ACC made the same determination).

That was a great read Frank! 2 quick tidbits about C-USA:
-C-USA had a 2nd deal with ESPN (2010-2011 is the final year), that I believe pays $3 Million-$4 Million per year. So on average, C-USA has been paying out around $11 Million per year, split 12 ways. IMO....just because revenue was shared evenly between all 12 members, doesn't necessarily mean that all 12 members bring equal "value" and "quality" to the table. Equal revenue sharing was simply the method voted on by the decision makers at that time.

-I believe the deal with CBS College Sports, as originally structured, was "back-loaded". So it's not really $11 Million per year EXACTLY for 6 years.....the yearly payouts escalated as time went on (again...2010-2011 is the final year of the original deal).
None of that is really important in the grand scheme of things ( :) ).....but....just wanted to add extra context.

IMO....when "value" and "quality" are discussed......referring back to 2005 based numbers doesn't seem to be the most accurate way to do things. Because things have changed since 2005......

People need to understand that what the Big East needs isn't for TCU and Houston to dominate a market, just get enough of the market to be profitable, get the Big East Network into Texas, get our next television contract into Texas and sell Texas a major coup, things like that.

(11-04-2010 05:50 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  People need to understand that what the Big East needs isn't for TCU and Houston to dominate a market, just get enough of the market to be profitable, get the Big East Network into Texas, get our next television contract into Texas and sell Texas a major coup, things like that.

This.

If TCU and UH are playing big time football, people will watch. All but 2 of Houston's games are on TV this year. That says UH plays an exciting brand of football that people will watch.

On the other hand, Texas A&M only has 4 games on TV this year.

I read your blog Frank. Enjoyed it.

It seems to me that the value generated from the SEC and ACC's television contracts was generated from "pull" which was the term used earlier. Other than Atlanta and Boston, neither conference has many major TV markets. I see the value generated by the product on the field and court.

As an outsider, the Big East has by far, the most reach in large media markets of any conference in the country. You guys have the northeast locked up, which is where most urban large markets are. If you land Orlando, Houston and DFW, that would be huge. But, to be honest, it appears that what you lack in pull, you're trying to make up for in reach. Whether that has the same value to a major network remains to be seen. Would love to see my Pirates be a part of it, but if not, good luck to the Big East.

(11-04-2010 05:56 PM)Bob Barker Wrote:  

(11-04-2010 05:50 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  People need to understand that what the Big East needs isn't for TCU and Houston to dominate a market, just get enough of the market to be profitable, get the Big East Network into Texas, get our next television contract into Texas and sell Texas a major coup, things like that.

This.

If TCU and UH are playing big time football, people will watch. All but 2 of Houston's games are on TV this year. That says UH plays an exciting brand of football that people will watch.

On the other hand, Texas A&M only has 4 games on TV this year.

Houston had a lot of hype going into this season. Legit Heisman contender in Case Keenum...........Houston was a preseason candidate for some BCS Bustering.....Case appeared on some of the ESPN talk shows over the summer.......Houston was a "sexy" pick by the networks when TV appearances were being dished out. Remember......with C-USA.....ESPN makes all of their picks PRESEASON, CBS College Sports makes most of their picks preseason....they have saved some 12 day selections in late November......but the picks are primarily based on who is predicted to be in the Conference Championship hunt.
All C-USA teams get most of their unpicked national network games on some sort of regional TV.

(11-04-2010 06:02 PM)piratefan1975 Wrote:  I read your blog Frank. Enjoyed it.

It seems to me that the value generated from the SEC and ACC's television contracts was generated from "pull" which was the term used earlier. Other than Atlanta and Boston, neither conference has many major TV markets. I see the value generated by the product on the field and court.

As an outsider, the Big East has by far, the most reach in large media markets of any conference in the country. You guys have the northeast locked up, which is where most urban large markets are. If you land Orlando, Houston and DFW, that would be huge. But, to be honest, it appears that what you lack in pull, you're trying to make up for in reach. Whether that has the same value to a major network remains to be seen. Would love to see my Pirates be a part of it, but if not, good luck to the Big East.

That was my general conclusion as well. And IMO.......ECU brings as much "pull" as any of the candidates mentioned. (the "usual suspects"......not the Notre Dame's of the world).

(11-04-2010 03:30 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I talked a lot about the prospects of a Big East network in Section 4 of the blog post below:

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2010/1...nsion-faq/

Basically, I'm pretty skeptical it would work for the Big East. A comprehensive ESPN deal is likely the best option for the BE (which isn't exactly crazy, as the SEC and ACC made the same determination).

An ESPN deal would be fine, if all the viable time slots weren't already taken for football.

Maybe if the Comcast purchase of NBC goes thru, you can work out something for a few games a year on NBC (the weeks ND isn't playing/ the week of their primetime game), and a couple games on Versus. Basketball is a tougher situation.

Keeping football with ESPN is just going to get us more Wednesday and Friday games. At the same time, this was the MWC's argument in 2004, and it ended up hurting them.

If they can get into basic cable (won't happen in NYC) in most areas it will be a success.

They cannot go out and ask for 70 cents more like 10 cents and thats even a FIGHT with cablevision in NYC. Remember that cablevision had problems with the YES channel for months. Now Cablevision is fighting with Fox. It could get ugly BUT the Big East is part of the MSG crowd where they hold St. John's bball games, Big East Tournament, Coach vs. Cancer and so on.

I am VERY VERY confident that we will blow away the big 10 in terms of money if we don't ask for a whole lot and get into the markets that we are in...

NY State, PHI, CHI, DC, Tampa, DFW (with TCU), WV, Pittsburgh... I mean these are some of the biggest markets in the country. I don't get how we can't dominate most of the Northeast corridor as well as other places.

(11-04-2010 05:48 PM)piratefan1975 Wrote:  Thank you for the replies. I hope to see more.

I read where the Big 10 network is shown on basic cable throughout ALL 8 states in which there is a Big 10 team. Outside of those 8 states, it is available in most areas through a subscription "sports pass" tier. That's impressive that those schools were able to command entire states on basic cable coverage (but then again, it's the Big 10). That's alot of reach and pull as was said earlier.

How does the Big East get more pull?

This simply isn't true. Granted, it's been 1 year since I left Cincinnati but the BTN was part of a sports pass tier on Time Warner.

Can someone currently in Ohio vouch for this because it is fairly important to know that with all the success of the BTN, they aren't fully delivering their states.

(11-04-2010 09:13 PM)Tampa Bearcat Wrote:  

(11-04-2010 05:48 PM)piratefan1975 Wrote:  Thank you for the replies. I hope to see more.

I read where the Big 10 network is shown on basic cable throughout ALL 8 states in which there is a Big 10 team. Outside of those 8 states, it is available in most areas through a subscription "sports pass" tier. That's impressive that those schools were able to command entire states on basic cable coverage (but then again, it's the Big 10). That's alot of reach and pull as was said earlier.

How does the Big East get more pull?

This simply isn't true. Granted, it's been 1 year since I left Cincinnati but the BTN was part of a sports pass tier on Time Warner.

Can someone currently in Ohio vouch for this because it is fairly important to know that with all the success of the BTN, they aren't fully delivering their states.

This is definitely not true. There are some small cable operators that are holdouts (mainly in Pennsylvania) but all of the big players like Comcast and Time Warner are signed up with full basic coverage in the Big Ten footprint. Time Warner signed up in 2008:

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id...-agreement

BTN is also on basic on DirecTV no matter where you live.