You can always "play" with numbers...

From the article:

The ACC does not have its own standalone cable sports network, but that does not appear to be getting in the way of spreading the ACC brand across the country. On the eve of the ACC Football Kickoff, the ACC released a statement claiming the conference will have football games airing in an estimated 90 million homes this fall.

Part of this is having fun with numbers to make things sound better than they really are. For instance, not all 90 million home sin the country are going to be plugged into ACC football for the entire season. This is just more about the potential reach of the conference through various partnerships with broadcast outlets and more. But it sure sounds like a nice, juicy number when the SEC is getting pumped about reaching an estimated 45 million customers on the brand new SEC Network launching next month.

Do not take away from the growth of the syndicated ACC Network, because there has been some great progress made in a short period of time. According to the press release numbers, the ACC Network has increased the number of households it can reach from 27 million in 201 to 90 million in 2014.

“Our goal is to continue delivering ACC content to as many fans as possible,” said ACC Commissioner John Swofford in a released statement. “We are proud of our partnership with ESPN, Raycom and the Fox regional networks. It’s these relationships that allow us to maximize the exposure for our schools and conference.”

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ion-homes/

The problem with a lot of these numbers for the ACC is a lot of them are on subchannels that folks don't get. That's a joke.

Oh, and SEC will be in a whole lot more than 45 million viewers. You'll add about 20 million when Directv is added and more when Verizon is added.

(07-20-2014 05:15 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The problem with a lot of these numbers for the ACC is a lot of them are on subchannels that folks don't get. That's a joke.

Oh, and SEC will be in a whole lot more than 45 million viewers. You'll add about 20 million when Directv is added and more when Verizon is added.

No, this article is referring to the ACC games which are either over-the-air or picked up by regional cable channels (typically Fox, but also some others). Chances are good the next ACC football game will be available in YOUR area, on a channel you already get.

If you want to criticize, the issue would be price. Essentially there is a huge demand for ACC sports nationwide - as long as it's free.

(07-20-2014 05:27 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 05:15 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The problem with a lot of these numbers for the ACC is a lot of them are on subchannels that folks don't get. That's a joke.

Oh, and SEC will be in a whole lot more than 45 million viewers. You'll add about 20 million when Directv is added and more when Verizon is added.

No, this article is referring to the ACC games which are either over-the-air or picked up by regional cable channels (typically Fox, but also some others). Chances are good the next ACC football game will be available in YOUR area, on a channel you already get.

If you want to criticize, the issue would be price. Essentially there is a huge demand for ACC sports nationwide - as long as it's free.

No you look at places out west, and they are on over the air, but on sub channels(and sometimes on the east even just looking). I mean, like Seattle's got a sub channel for it- so can you really count Seattle? Doubt it.

(07-20-2014 06:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 05:27 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 05:15 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The problem with a lot of these numbers for the ACC is a lot of them are on subchannels that folks don't get. That's a joke.

Oh, and SEC will be in a whole lot more than 45 million viewers. You'll add about 20 million when Directv is added and more when Verizon is added.

No, this article is referring to the ACC games which are either over-the-air or picked up by regional cable channels (typically Fox, but also some others). Chances are good the next ACC football game will be available in YOUR area, on a channel you already get.

If you want to criticize, the issue would be price. Essentially there is a huge demand for ACC sports nationwide - as long as it's free.

No you look at places out west, and they are on over the air, but on sub channels(and sometimes on the east even just looking). I mean, like Seattle's got a sub channel for it- so can you really count Seattle? Doubt it.

All he said though was 90 million. That isn't stating the entire country.

This is the same old Raycom syndication deal with more tv sets in the syndication setup. I'm curious if all those tv channels are getting every ACC/Raycom game or if it's just certain parts of that total figure for each one.

Either way it's an improvement for them.

(07-20-2014 06:59 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  This is the same old Raycom syndication deal with more tv sets in the syndication setup. I'm curious if all those tv channels are getting every ACC/Raycom game or if it's just certain parts of that total figure for each one.

Either way it's an improvement for them.

It isn't every game, just the ones the local station or regional cable channel wants to pick up. So each of those stations/channels is getting at least one ACC football game (typically 4 or 5, I think). Some do get the entire season, of course.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people confuse a geographical "market" with actual viewership. Many states in the ACC footprint do not have a large enough percentage of their citizens watching their teams to command substantial carriage rates. If a school cannot pull its state then it does not matter how large the state's population is.

(07-20-2014 07:33 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  It never ceases to amaze me how many people confuse a geographical "market" with actual viewership. Many states in the ACC footprint do not have a large enough percentage of their citizens watching their teams to command substantial carriage rates. If a school cannot pull its state then it does not matter how large the state's population is.

Not to mention that more than 1/4 of their full members are from 1 state and almost half from 2 states. Now that said they have entry into some nice markets, but your question, or observation, remains valid. Having an entry into a market doesn't guarantee that the school in question carries their state, especially in pro saturated markets.

(07-20-2014 07:33 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  It never ceases to amaze me how many people confuse a geographical "market" with actual viewership. Many states in the ACC footprint do not have a large enough percentage of their citizens watching their teams to command substantial carriage rates. If a school cannot pull its state then it does not matter how large the state's population is.

There's is no such thing as actual viewership when it comes to cable subscription fees. Do you think people are actually watching Rutgers and Maryland in the NYC and DC market areas? Yet the Big 10 easily made cable agreements at $1.00-$1.20 in those areas.

The footprint is exactly all you need. Demand will drive it slightly but not much. Georgia Tech might be distant 2nd in its own state, but you can bet just about every major cable provider in the state will carry ACC Channel and it will be at least $1.00.

(07-20-2014 09:21 PM)GTTiger Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 07:33 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  It never ceases to amaze me how many people confuse a geographical "market" with actual viewership. Many states in the ACC footprint do not have a large enough percentage of their citizens watching their teams to command substantial carriage rates. If a school cannot pull its state then it does not matter how large the state's population is.

There's is no such thing as actual viewership when it comes to cable subscription fees. Do you think people are actually watching Rutgers and Maryland in the NYC and DC market areas? Yet the Big 10 easily made cable agreements at $1.00-$1.20 in those areas.

The footprint is exactly all you need. Demand will drive it slightly but not much. Georgia Tech might be distant 2nd in its own state, but you can bet just about every major cable provider in the state will carry ACC Channel and it will be at least $1.00.

Rutgers and Maryland are large state schools, which the ACC does not have above the state of Virginia.

(07-20-2014 10:15 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 09:21 PM)GTTiger Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 07:33 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  It never ceases to amaze me how many people confuse a geographical "market" with actual viewership. Many states in the ACC footprint do not have a large enough percentage of their citizens watching their teams to command substantial carriage rates. If a school cannot pull its state then it does not matter how large the state's population is.

There's is no such thing as actual viewership when it comes to cable subscription fees. Do you think people are actually watching Rutgers and Maryland in the NYC and DC market areas? Yet the Big 10 easily made cable agreements at $1.00-$1.20 in those areas.

The footprint is exactly all you need. Demand will drive it slightly but not much. Georgia Tech might be distant 2nd in its own state, but you can bet just about every major cable provider in the state will carry ACC Channel and it will be at least $1.00.

Rutgers and Maryland are large state schools, which the ACC does not have above the state of Virginia.

True but there are literally thousands of Fans of ACC Schools that will be demanding the ACC Network be brought into those markets. Every cable subscriber will pay the 1.00 just like I do with the BTN in Louisville and no B1G school in Kentucky. ACC Network will cover those markets.

Fox Sports South will be announcing a new weekly studio show called ACC Gridiron Live that will air each Wednesday night beginning August the 27th. The show will be made available to over 70 million cable and satellite households across the country each week, and it will deliver stories, highlights and interviews from around the ACC along with a weekly breakdown of every regular season matchup.

Here is the announcement by Fox:

http://www.foxsports.com/south/acc-gridiron-live

(07-21-2014 05:07 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

Fox Sports South will be announcing a new weekly studio show called ACC Gridiron Live that will air each Wednesday night beginning August the 27th. The show will be made available to over 70 million cable and satellite households across the country each week, and it will deliver stories, highlights and interviews from around the ACC along with a weekly breakdown of every regular season matchup.

Here is the announcement by Fox:

http://www.foxsports.com/south/acc-gridiron-live

Nice play by Fox. It shows a new commitment to college sports. Why did ESPN not give the ACC at least its own 1/2 hour show?

(07-21-2014 06:50 AM)Lurker Above Wrote:  Nice play by Fox. It shows a new commitment to college sports.

It seems like Fox is filling the void left by SEC football moving to its own network with ACC football.

Quote:Why did ESPN not give the ACC at least its own 1/2 hour show?

Similar questions get asked often on the ACC board. I have no idea. Maybe all available ESPN folks are tied up with the launch of the SECN?

Why is a ACC Network being discussed as if it is happening?


Seems tenuous at best and that doesn't address whether it will produce decent revenue.


Seems the ACC is looking to sell the media a win where they are really getting whooped.

(07-21-2014 05:02 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Every cable subscriber will pay the 1.00 just like I do with the BTN in Louisville and no B1G school in Kentucky. ACC Network will cover those markets.

We pay $0.10 per subscriber, not $1.00. Because we are out of area

(07-21-2014 01:13 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 05:02 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Every cable subscriber will pay the 1.00 just like I do with the BTN in Louisville and no B1G school in Kentucky. ACC Network will cover those markets.

We pay $0.10 per subscriber, not $1.00. Because we are out of area

Never broke down the cable bill that far. Still over $200 a month for nothing with TWC

It doesn't show itemized on the bill. I just know the cost. It is $.10 per subscriber and on the sports tier. Note that if you have Louisville - TWC, but live in southern Indiana, that is not the case.

(07-21-2014 09:40 AM)nole Wrote:  Why is a ACC Network being discussed as if it is happening?


Seems tenuous at best and that doesn't address whether it will produce decent revenue.


Seems the ACC is looking to sell the media a win where they are really getting whooped.

Upon further reflection this is not a good sign the ACC is getting a network any year soon. It looks like FOX plans to keep and use every bit of the ACC rights it bought from Raycom, who got such rights in the off-criticized ESPN contract side deal. There cannot be an ACC Network without those tier 3 rights.

And here is a really bad sign the ACC Network is not happening any time soon.

Swofford says the ACC does not have its own network because the ACC is not sure it wants one.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/07/20/4...sense.html

Just a sample of Swofford bloviating in this article:

“Time will tell,” Swofford said. “There’s at least a belief right now by what you see happening that a devoted conference channel is the way people seem to be going. We’re all a little different. From our standpoint, you don’t want to go down that road simply because it’s the fad or the sexy thing to be doing. You want to go down the road because you strongly believe it’s in the best interests of your conference.”