Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
GoR’s are unbreakable
Author Message
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #21
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 09:39 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  IMO, people who believe the GORs have a chance to be overturned in a court are missing the point.

Even if a school or conference felt they might have a shot of overturning a GOR, the risk of failing to do so is so enormous that it is likely to prevent such an attempt. Remember, by their very nature, these organizations are risk adverse and rolling the dice in this manner is something that Boards of Trustees would be reluctant to do, IMO.


Not really. Schools have gone to court with their conferences or governing parties with mixed results. The bigger issue is that just about all teams who have signed a GOR did so voluntarily. Essentially, you don't sign a GOR if you are planning an escape. THAT is the bigger issue. However taking your conference to court when you are unhappy? That has happened several times in the past few years (West Virginia, Maryland, for example).
07-23-2015 10:21 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nebraskafan Offline
Banned

Posts: 1,342
Joined: Jul 2015
I Root For: Nebreaska
Location:
Post: #22
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 08:21 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 07:43 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  I'll try one last time:

Nebraskafan, why is a (supposed) fan of a school that hightailed it out of the XII, for their own good, so adamant on shouting down everyone who says that the XII is not going to survive??


But you ignored my question in two other threads, so I don't expect you to expose your true agenda now.

What question? I work for a living and don't read every post. So, what question you have?

What does Nebraska being in the B1G have anything to do with the current environment of GOR's????????

Your post is very odd.

You read it just fine in the previous two threads. Just like you avoided it here.

The question, as it was plainly stated multiple times: why are you so adamant on making sure the XII is going to survive??

In other words, a Nebraska fan should be rooting for the demise of that conference.

Why are you trying to ask a question that is even there to ask?

I debate the topic. The topic these days involves the GOR, ACC Network, B1G TV negotiations. That is the real world of today, not 2009, 2010, and 2011.

Today is 2015...different environment.
07-23-2015 10:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frog in the Kitchen Sink Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,839
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 154
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #23
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 08:21 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 07:43 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  I'll try one last time:

Nebraskafan, why is a (supposed) fan of a school that hightailed it out of the XII, for their own good, so adamant on shouting down everyone who says that the XII is not going to survive??


But you ignored my question in two other threads, so I don't expect you to expose your true agenda now.

What question? I work for a living and don't read every post. So, what question you have?

What does Nebraska being in the B1G have anything to do with the current environment of GOR's????????

Your post is very odd.

You read it just fine in the previous two threads. Just like you avoided it here.

The question, as it was plainly stated multiple times: why are you so adamant on making sure the XII is going to survive??

In other words, a Nebraska fan should be rooting for the demise of that conference.

The bigger question is why you think that fans should be required to root for the demise of other conferences? Most fans don't think like you do and wish ill on other conferences. And most of us root for teams in multiple conferences, anyway. This isn't an episode of survivor where only one conference exists at the end.
07-23-2015 10:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #24
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:24 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 08:21 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 07:43 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  I'll try one last time:

Nebraskafan, why is a (supposed) fan of a school that hightailed it out of the XII, for their own good, so adamant on shouting down everyone who says that the XII is not going to survive??


But you ignored my question in two other threads, so I don't expect you to expose your true agenda now.

What question? I work for a living and don't read every post. So, what question you have?

What does Nebraska being in the B1G have anything to do with the current environment of GOR's????????

Your post is very odd.

You read it just fine in the previous two threads. Just like you avoided it here.

The question, as it was plainly stated multiple times: why are you so adamant on making sure the XII is going to survive??

In other words, a Nebraska fan should be rooting for the demise of that conference.

Why are you trying to ask a question that is even there to ask?

I debate the topic. The topic these days involves the GOR, ACC Network, B1G TV negotiations. That is the real world of today, not 2009, 2010, and 2011.

Today is 2015...different environment.

Avoided it again.

It's safe to assume that you're just posing as a Nebraska fan. You just signed up this month and have been running amok, posting about how the XII is going to expand and survive. A conference that your (supposed) team left because they couldn't stand it there anymore, some years ago.


Could be a West Virginia fan with an agenda? Not sure.

I don't think people should ignore you, but it should be out in the open what you're all about.
(This post was last modified: 07-23-2015 10:29 AM by MplsBison.)
07-23-2015 10:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #25
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:25 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 08:21 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 07:43 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  I'll try one last time:

Nebraskafan, why is a (supposed) fan of a school that hightailed it out of the XII, for their own good, so adamant on shouting down everyone who says that the XII is not going to survive??


But you ignored my question in two other threads, so I don't expect you to expose your true agenda now.

What question? I work for a living and don't read every post. So, what question you have?

What does Nebraska being in the B1G have anything to do with the current environment of GOR's????????

Your post is very odd.

You read it just fine in the previous two threads. Just like you avoided it here.

The question, as it was plainly stated multiple times: why are you so adamant on making sure the XII is going to survive??

In other words, a Nebraska fan should be rooting for the demise of that conference.

The bigger question is why you think that fans should be required to root for the demise of other conferences? Most fans don't think like you do and wish ill on other conferences. And most of us root for teams in multiple conferences, anyway. This isn't an episode of survivor where only one conference exists at the end.

Four conferences for four CFP slots makes much more sense than five conferences.

That's why.

I don't care if it ends up being four conferences of 16 teams each (64 team P4), 18 teams each (72 team P4) or 20 teams each (80 team P4). But one of those is what it should be.
(This post was last modified: 07-23-2015 10:30 AM by MplsBison.)
07-23-2015 10:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,094
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 817
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #26
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-22-2015 11:07 PM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  Likely not what people may want to read, but it is always best to know the real truth. This article is arguably the best article I have seen written on this topic.

Please take the time to read it. It is a great read.

http://big12fanatics.com/expansion-p...-grant-rights/

Grant of Rights
...GoR’s are unbreakable, as they have been upheld in court numerous times in multiple industries, but they are not unmalleable. They are often bought and sold within the process of doing business. This is an extremely important distinction.

I’m not a media lawyer, but I’ve talked to a few and what I can tell you about a Grant of Rights (GoR) is they are not unique to Sports Conferences. They are tried and true contracts that are used for nearly every endeavor where someone provides some value to something you created. For instance, you could write a song and grant the rights to a recording label to market it for you. Or, you could be an author and grant the rights to your work to a publishing house to provide it a larger distribution or even grant the rights to make a movie adaptation of your story. Or, you could have produced a TV show and granted the rights to a network to broadcast it.

All contracts can be adapted if both parties sign off on it, but the strength of the Grant of Rights, as opposed to the buyout, is that the GoR has an end date. You will always get your rights back at some future date, as opposed to a buyout which runs indefinitely. Think of it as a contract a baseball player has with a team. They are paid to perform under the contract and at the end of the contract they can become a free agent. However, they cannot walk away from the team and play for another team mid contract and expect to get paid. The only way that works is if the team they are on sells their rights to another baseball team.

This is the basic use of a Grant of Rights. For sports conferences and leagues from the Power Five to the NFL to the MLS, who I spoke too, bundle all the video broadcast rights to their teams home sporting events and granted them to the conference/league to market and sell to broadcasters. Having them secured under a GoR reduces the risk for the media company because they know exactly what inventory they will have for years to come. Less risk means more revenue to those providing the inventory, much like how you’ll receive a lower interest rate on a loan if you are less risk to the bank.

It may feel this way, because the first time most sports fans heard of them was to end realignment, but it is not new. All conferences have used GoRs within their media deals that rolled yearly so that a school could not sell a game twice or pull it back mid-season if they didn’t like the scheduling. What has changed within college sports, however, is the duration of the grant of rights and that happened in 2007 with the advent of the Big Ten Network.

In order to secure the resources needed to build a conference network, the Big Ten needed to bind all of the media rights for the schools together for a long time, which provided the network the inventory it needed to secure a partnership and to build a venture around that asset. This is no different than a label locking up an artist to a multiple album deal.

This grant of rights the Big Ten put in place was apparently for twenty five years, however I have also been told it is a rolling ten year contract. The Pac 12 put one in place with the advent of the Pac 12 Network as well, though I have not heard the duration. The Big 12 and ACC put one together, tied to their media contract, to solidify their strength of commitment to each other within the conference.

To date only the SEC has stated it has neither a buyout nor a Grant of Rights. However, that was prior to the formation of the SEC Network. It is unknown at this time if ESPN required one to alter their contract with the SEC when they bundled all of the SEC’s inventory on all of its channels, including the SEC Network, for the new value of $6 billion over 25 years.

With all that being said, how they work is actually quite simple. The teams have video broadcast inventory, e.g. home games in various sports. They grant the rights to these home games to the conference to bundle and sell to a media channel. No one can force you to sign away your rights, you have to do it yourself, which is another reason why they are difficult to break. Once they are signed, you no longer control those rights until the term of the agreement ends.

What happens then is that any revenue generated from the inventory goes to the conference, who pays out their members based on their bylaws. They do not go directly to the school nor does the school control them during the duration. This acts like a poison pill. If a team without a Grant of Rights leaves a conference, their rights and the revenue derived from those rights flow with them. However, while a team under a grant of rights could move conferences, the revenue generated from their rights would still flow back to the conference that holds the GoR. As an example, if the SEC expanded with North Carolina, the SEC would have to pay the ACC for any revenue North Carolina’s inventory generated. This makes it difficult for both North Carolina and the SEC, because North Carolina doesn’t have much to offer the SEC any longer.

Additionally, North Carolina may lose their revenue stream completely. The Big 12’s bylaws are public and they clearly state in section 3.1 that

The Grant of Rights Agreement which will remain in full force and effect as to such Withdrawing Member and the Withdrawing Member shall continue to be fully bound under the Grant of Rights Agreement after Withdraw for the remainder of the term of any Grant of Rights Agreement as if it remained a Member of the Conference, but the Withdrawing Member shall not be entitled to payment of any amounts or any other benefits arising under the Grant of Rights Agreement after Withdraw.

In short, if you are no longer a member you are not paid as a member would be paid, even if your rights are owned by the conference.

When the Big Ten raiding the ACC rumors were spreading the ACC was looking for ways to state publically that no one was interested in moving to the Big Ten. The Big 12 was apparently instrumental and assisting the ACC with crafting their Grant of Rights and stopping realignment cold. It wouldn’t be a stretch to imagine the ACC’s language is similar to the Big 12’s due to this. Additionally, most GoRs in many industries have similar language to protect the owner of the rights, in this case it is the conference, not the university.

So to push our North Carolina example one step forward, if the ACC held UNC’s rights through 2027 and UNC joined the SEC in 2015, the ACC could technically gain 12 years of revenue off of UNC without having to pass any of it back to UNC, since they are no longer a member of the ACC.

This is why University of Oklahoma President Boren called Grant of Rights “handcuffs”, because you don’t sign them unless you plan on staying where you want to be. I’ve seen several reporters try and claim that Texas wouldn’t have signed something they couldn’t break. But from what I have been told Texas signed it because they are where they wanted to be. They wanted to facilitate stability as a means to stop everyone else, namely Missouri and Oklahoma, from looking around as well. Now signing it is a requirement to joining the conference.

However, Grant of Rights are still contracts, which means they can be amended if both parties mutually agree to do so. There are limitless ways that these rights could be bought and sold over the years if realignment needed to occur, but what GoR’s do is take the power away from the schools and hand it to the conferences, who now have all the leverage.

Much like our earlier example about baseball players, the ACC could allow UNC to move, however they may sell the rights to the SEC for some sum, which would be on top of whatever buyout UNC had to pay via the bylaws. The ACC could also be creative and do something like cash over time and guaranteed events against each of the SEC schools a year. Much like a trade in the MLB, all that matters is that it is mutually agreed upon to make the change. GoR’s are unbreakable, as they have been upheld in court numerous times in multiple industries, but they are not unmalleable. They are often bought and sold within the process of doing business. This is an extremely important distinction.

For this discussion quantifying this should be easy; do you have one or not. What is difficult to determine is if any sort of business deal could be brokered to allow a team to move. For now I’ll just give a penalty to a team’s score if they have a grant of rights active for more than the next five years.

If you have any questions or would like some numbers discussed, contact The Number Monkey on Twitter @TheNumberMonkey or via email theNumberMonkey@Big12Fanatics.com.

2015 Number Monkey Media


ACC tried to hold Maryland to the GoRs, but it turned into an ugly court process.
07-23-2015 10:31 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #27
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:31 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  ACC tried to hold Maryland to the GoRs, but it turned into an ugly court process.


This is not true. Maryland was NEVER a party to a GOR with the ACC. The GOR was signed after Maryland had announced it was leaving. in fact Louisville and Notre Dame both signed the GOR, Notre Dame whose addition and subsequent exit fee increase was the trigger that caused Maryland to look at leaving, and Louisville the school that replaced them.
07-23-2015 10:34 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eagle78 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,390
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 111
I Root For: BC
Location:
Post: #28
GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)krup Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 09:39 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  IMO, people who believe the GORs have a chance to be overturned in a court are missing the point.

Even if a school or conference felt they might have a shot of overturning a GOR, the risk of failing to do so is so enormous that it is likely to prevent such an attempt. Remember, by their very nature, these organizations are risk adverse and rolling the dice in this manner is something that Boards of Trustees would be reluctant to do, IMO. (If you are a BOT member of a state school, for example, do YOU want to go back and to explain to your state legislature, and, more importantly, the taxpayers, the huge hole the school YOU had a fiduciary responsibility for was put into based on YOUR decisions?)

Added to this huge potential hole are the exit fees. The recent ACC situation is a case in point. According to reports, UMD agreed to pay over $31M in exit fees despite the fact that they did NOT support the previous hike in the fee. (Does anybody believe a school that DID support the hike would get a better or even the same deal?). Sure, it wasn't the full exit fee, but it was hardly chump change either!

Finally, since 4 of the 5 P5's have similar GORs, it would seem illogical for a conference to try to bust one in court since they would be virtually litigating against their own GOR as well.

I just don't see any school or conference challenging one of these.

I think the "risk of failing to overturn" one of these GORs just reduces the pool of schools you consider taking to those in a populous state that is new for your conference. For example, let's say the B1G wanted to add a Texas, UNC or VA.

If the B1G guaranteed them that if the GOR holds up, they still make what they were getting from the B12 or ACC, the absolute worst case scenario for the B1G is that they have pay them approx $20 million without getting any of their home games, but they still get to add that school to their conference AND they get to make a lot more BTN carriage fees from those state's cable households to offset any payouts.

If that is the absolute worst case, and the upside is so high for those schools mentioned, I don't see the risk as that much of a deterrent.


Yeah, but you are minimizing the potential maximum downside risk. In your example, if I understand you correctly, the $20M you cite that the conference would pay said school for the loss of their media revenues is only for one year. If the GOR goes for 10 years (as the ACC one does), the theoretical maximum exposure would be $20M a year, or an aggregate 200M, plus at least $31M+ in exit fees over the life of the media deal, right? So the full exposure (considering the $20M a year you cited is a probably a low number over the full course of the deal) would be closer to quarter of a billion dollars.

That's a big potential exposure, regardless of how it ultimately turns out.

Again, my point is not how a court would ultimately decide this. IMO, I don't think any school's BOT's, no matter how big the school, would take that risk. Just my opinion.
(This post was last modified: 07-23-2015 10:47 AM by Eagle78.)
07-23-2015 10:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nebraskafan Offline
Banned

Posts: 1,342
Joined: Jul 2015
I Root For: Nebreaska
Location:
Post: #29
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:28 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:24 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 08:21 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 07:43 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  I'll try one last time:

Nebraskafan, why is a (supposed) fan of a school that hightailed it out of the XII, for their own good, so adamant on shouting down everyone who says that the XII is not going to survive??


But you ignored my question in two other threads, so I don't expect you to expose your true agenda now.

What question? I work for a living and don't read every post. So, what question you have?

What does Nebraska being in the B1G have anything to do with the current environment of GOR's????????

Your post is very odd.

You read it just fine in the previous two threads. Just like you avoided it here.

The question, as it was plainly stated multiple times: why are you so adamant on making sure the XII is going to survive??

In other words, a Nebraska fan should be rooting for the demise of that conference.

Why are you trying to ask a question that is even there to ask?

I debate the topic. The topic these days involves the GOR, ACC Network, B1G TV negotiations. That is the real world of today, not 2009, 2010, and 2011.

Today is 2015...different environment.

Avoided it again.

It's safe to assume that you're just posing as a Nebraska fan. You just signed up this month and have been running amok, posting about how the XII is going to expand and survive. A conference that your (supposed) team left because they couldn't stand it there anymore, some years ago.


Could be a West Virginia fan with an agenda? Not sure.

I don't think people should ignore you, but it should be out in the open what you're all about.

Ah, I see, you have an issue that I think the Big 12 expands. Ok then. That was easy to resolve.
07-23-2015 10:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
YNot Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,672
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 298
I Root For: BYU
Location:
Post: #30
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 09:30 AM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  But again, the school grants rights to the conference in exchange for pay - withhold the pay and I think there is a huge poblem. For those of you who dont know this a penalty is not an enforceable contract right (regardless of whether a party assents to it). The basic test to determine if a provision is a penalty or an approximation of damages is whether it is designed to compensate the non-breaching party or prevent a party from breaching. Every indication that i have seen is that it is designed to keep parties from breaching. Therefore, it is likely that the GOR as structured prevents efficient breach and is therefore unenforceable.

This is important point that can't be understated.

Also consider that the remedy for a breach of the GOR contract is likely damages and not a specific enforcement of the GOR. If Texas refuses to give the Big 12 its media rights, the Big 12 will sue Texas (or its new conference). What are the Big 12's damages for the 6 or 7 games that Texas withholds each year? Remember - those damages are likely offset by the amount that the Big 12 doesn't have to pay Texas.

Even if the damages are $100M per year, that just might be a good deal for Texas (and its new conference). Let's say the B1G is able to sign a deal worth $640M ($40M per member x 16 members) if Texas is in the conference. B1G pays the Big 12 $100M in damages and still has $540M to distribute to 16 members - or nearly $34M per member. Once the GOR expires and damages are no longer required, the B1G is paying the full $40M per member. Challenging the GOR might be worth it, even if the full value of the damages are paid to the Big 12.

But, more likely, the Big 12 damages are less than $100M, which makes the B1G math to add Texas even less stifling - and that's assuming they aren't able to negotiate a buyout of Texas' GOR.
07-23-2015 10:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frog in the Kitchen Sink Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,839
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 154
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #31
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:29 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:25 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 08:21 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 07:43 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  I'll try one last time:

Nebraskafan, why is a (supposed) fan of a school that hightailed it out of the XII, for their own good, so adamant on shouting down everyone who says that the XII is not going to survive??


But you ignored my question in two other threads, so I don't expect you to expose your true agenda now.

What question? I work for a living and don't read every post. So, what question you have?

What does Nebraska being in the B1G have anything to do with the current environment of GOR's????????

Your post is very odd.

You read it just fine in the previous two threads. Just like you avoided it here.

The question, as it was plainly stated multiple times: why are you so adamant on making sure the XII is going to survive??

In other words, a Nebraska fan should be rooting for the demise of that conference.

The bigger question is why you think that fans should be required to root for the demise of other conferences? Most fans don't think like you do and wish ill on other conferences. And most of us root for teams in multiple conferences, anyway. This isn't an episode of survivor where only one conference exists at the end.

Four conferences for four CFP slots makes much more sense than five conferences.

That's why.

I don't care if it ends up being four conferences of 16 teams each (64 team P4), 18 teams each (72 team P4) or 20 teams each (80 team P4). But one of those is what it should be.

Most of us just don't think like you do. Sure there are rivalries, but this stuff isn't life and death type stuff that requires absolute, "pure" allegiance to particular schools and conferences.
07-23-2015 10:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nebraskafan Offline
Banned

Posts: 1,342
Joined: Jul 2015
I Root For: Nebreaska
Location:
Post: #32
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:42 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)krup Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 09:39 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  IMO, people who believe the GORs have a chance to be overturned in a court are missing the point.

Even if a school or conference felt they might have a shot of overturning a GOR, the risk of failing to do so is so enormous that it is likely to prevent such an attempt. Remember, by their very nature, these organizations are risk adverse and rolling the dice in this manner is something that Boards of Trustees would be reluctant to do, IMO. (If you are a BOT member of a state school, for example, do YOU want to go back and to explain to your state legislature, and, more importantly, the taxpayers, the huge hole the school YOU had a fiduciary responsibility for was put into based on YOUR decisions?)

Added to this huge potential hole are the exit fees. The recent ACC situation is a case in point. According to reports, UMD agreed to pay over $31M in exit fees despite the fact that they did NOT support the previous hike in the fee. (Does anybody believe a school that DID support the hike would get a better or even the same deal?). Sure, it wasn't the full exit fee, but it was hardly chump change either!

Finally, since 4 of the 5 P5's have similar GORs, it would seem illogical for a conference to try to bust one in court since they would be virtually litigating against their own GOR as well.

I just don't see any school or conference challenging one of these.

I think the "risk of failing to overturn" one of these GORs just reduces the pool of schools you consider taking to those in a populous state that is new for your conference. For example, let's say the B1G wanted to add a Texas, UNC or VA.

If the B1G guaranteed them that if the GOR holds up, they still make what they were getting from the B12 or ACC, the absolute worst case scenario for the B1G is that they have pay them approx $20 million without getting any of their home games, but they still get to add that school to their conference AND they get to make a lot more BTN carriage fees from those state's cable households to offset any payouts.

If that is the absolute worst case, and the upside is so high for those schools mentioned, I don't see the risk as that much of a deterrent.


Yeah, but you are minimizing the potential maximum downside risk. In your example, the $20M you cite that the conference would pay said school for the loss of their media revenues is only for one year. If the GOR goes for 10 years (as the ACC one does), the theoretical maximum exposure would be $20M a year, or an aggregate 200M plus at least $30M in exit fees over the life of the media deal, right? So the full exposure (considering the $20m a year is a probably a low number) would be closer to quarter of a billion dollars.

That's a big exposure, regardless of how it ultimately turns out.

Yep, that doesn't include lawyer fees, lawsuits against the schools and individuals in the schools, lawsuit against the conference the school moved to, and more.

It's a headache that isn't worth going down and a school isn't going to go down that path. It isn't that hard to wait less than a decade, save all of the court time and headaches, and then move if the need/desire is still there.
07-23-2015 10:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eagle78 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,390
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 111
I Root For: BC
Location:
Post: #33
GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:45 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:42 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)krup Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 09:39 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  IMO, people who believe the GORs have a chance to be overturned in a court are missing the point.

Even if a school or conference felt they might have a shot of overturning a GOR, the risk of failing to do so is so enormous that it is likely to prevent such an attempt. Remember, by their very nature, these organizations are risk adverse and rolling the dice in this manner is something that Boards of Trustees would be reluctant to do, IMO. (If you are a BOT member of a state school, for example, do YOU want to go back and to explain to your state legislature, and, more importantly, the taxpayers, the huge hole the school YOU had a fiduciary responsibility for was put into based on YOUR decisions?)

Added to this huge potential hole are the exit fees. The recent ACC situation is a case in point. According to reports, UMD agreed to pay over $31M in exit fees despite the fact that they did NOT support the previous hike in the fee. (Does anybody believe a school that DID support the hike would get a better or even the same deal?). Sure, it wasn't the full exit fee, but it was hardly chump change either!

Finally, since 4 of the 5 P5's have similar GORs, it would seem illogical for a conference to try to bust one in court since they would be virtually litigating against their own GOR as well.

I just don't see any school or conference challenging one of these.

I think the "risk of failing to overturn" one of these GORs just reduces the pool of schools you consider taking to those in a populous state that is new for your conference. For example, let's say the B1G wanted to add a Texas, UNC or VA.

If the B1G guaranteed them that if the GOR holds up, they still make what they were getting from the B12 or ACC, the absolute worst case scenario for the B1G is that they have pay them approx $20 million without getting any of their home games, but they still get to add that school to their conference AND they get to make a lot more BTN carriage fees from those state's cable households to offset any payouts.

If that is the absolute worst case, and the upside is so high for those schools mentioned, I don't see the risk as that much of a deterrent.


Yeah, but you are minimizing the potential maximum downside risk. In your example, the $20M you cite that the conference would pay said school for the loss of their media revenues is only for one year. If the GOR goes for 10 years (as the ACC one does), the theoretical maximum exposure would be $20M a year, or an aggregate 200M plus at least $30M in exit fees over the life of the media deal, right? So the full exposure (considering the $20m a year is a probably a low number) would be closer to quarter of a billion dollars.

That's a big exposure, regardless of how it ultimately turns out.

Yep, that doesn't include lawyer fees, lawsuits against the schools and individuals in the schools, lawsuit against the conference the school moved to, and more.

It's a headache that isn't worth going down and a school isn't going to go down that path. It isn't that hard to wait less than a decade, save all of the court time and headaches, and then move if the need/desire is still there.

Yup, that's the smarter play, IMO. All a school has to do is wait for the GOR to expire. Or at least close to the expiration. Of course, a lot is likely to happen over the next 10 years. For the ACC, IMO, it gives them breathing space to get either out of the deal they signed a few years ago before the market moved, or have that deal expire.
(This post was last modified: 07-23-2015 10:54 AM by Eagle78.)
07-23-2015 10:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
krup Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 303
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 20
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #34
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:42 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)krup Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 09:39 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  IMO, people who believe the GORs have a chance to be overturned in a court are missing the point.

Even if a school or conference felt they might have a shot of overturning a GOR, the risk of failing to do so is so enormous that it is likely to prevent such an attempt. Remember, by their very nature, these organizations are risk adverse and rolling the dice in this manner is something that Boards of Trustees would be reluctant to do, IMO. (If you are a BOT member of a state school, for example, do YOU want to go back and to explain to your state legislature, and, more importantly, the taxpayers, the huge hole the school YOU had a fiduciary responsibility for was put into based on YOUR decisions?)

Added to this huge potential hole are the exit fees. The recent ACC situation is a case in point. According to reports, UMD agreed to pay over $31M in exit fees despite the fact that they did NOT support the previous hike in the fee. (Does anybody believe a school that DID support the hike would get a better or even the same deal?). Sure, it wasn't the full exit fee, but it was hardly chump change either!

Finally, since 4 of the 5 P5's have similar GORs, it would seem illogical for a conference to try to bust one in court since they would be virtually litigating against their own GOR as well.

I just don't see any school or conference challenging one of these.

I think the "risk of failing to overturn" one of these GORs just reduces the pool of schools you consider taking to those in a populous state that is new for your conference. For example, let's say the B1G wanted to add a Texas, UNC or VA.

If the B1G guaranteed them that if the GOR holds up, they still make what they were getting from the B12 or ACC, the absolute worst case scenario for the B1G is that they have pay them approx $20 million without getting any of their home games, but they still get to add that school to their conference AND they get to make a lot more BTN carriage fees from those state's cable households to offset any payouts.

If that is the absolute worst case, and the upside is so high for those schools mentioned, I don't see the risk as that much of a deterrent.


Yeah, but you are minimizing the potential maximum downside risk. In your example, if I understand you correctly, the $20M you cite that the conference would pay said school for the loss of their media revenues is only for one year. If the GOR goes for 10 years (as the ACC one does), the theoretical maximum exposure would be $20M a year, or an aggregate 200M, plus at least $31M+ in exit fees over the life of the media deal, right? So the full exposure (considering the $20M a year you cited is a probably a low number over the full course of the deal) would be closer to quarter of a billion dollars.

That's a big potential exposure, regardless of how it ultimately turns out.

Again, my point is not how a court would ultimately decide this. IMO, I don't think any school's BOT's, no matter how big the school, would take that risk. Just my opinion.
I don't think someone would make this move with as much as 10 years to go, but let's go with your example. You left out a big part.

"the theoretical maximum exposure would be $20M a year, or an aggregate 200M, plus at least $31M+ in exit fees over the life of the media deal" OFFSET BY WHATEVER PROFIT YOU MAKE FOR GETTING AN EXTRA $1 A MONTH IN BTN REVENUE FROM THE CABLE HOUSEHOLDS IN THAT STATE.

For North Carolina and its 3.7 million cable households, that is over $400 million in carriage fees over that 10 year period. With the huge size of Texas, the extra revenue is almost $1 billion.
07-23-2015 10:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #35
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:42 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:28 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:24 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 08:21 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  What question? I work for a living and don't read every post. So, what question you have?

What does Nebraska being in the B1G have anything to do with the current environment of GOR's????????

Your post is very odd.

You read it just fine in the previous two threads. Just like you avoided it here.

The question, as it was plainly stated multiple times: why are you so adamant on making sure the XII is going to survive??

In other words, a Nebraska fan should be rooting for the demise of that conference.

Why are you trying to ask a question that is even there to ask?

I debate the topic. The topic these days involves the GOR, ACC Network, B1G TV negotiations. That is the real world of today, not 2009, 2010, and 2011.

Today is 2015...different environment.

Avoided it again.

It's safe to assume that you're just posing as a Nebraska fan. You just signed up this month and have been running amok, posting about how the XII is going to expand and survive. A conference that your (supposed) team left because they couldn't stand it there anymore, some years ago.


Could be a West Virginia fan with an agenda? Not sure.

I don't think people should ignore you, but it should be out in the open what you're all about.

Ah, I see, you have an issue that I think the Big 12 expands. Ok then. That was easy to resolve.

Of course I don't have an issue with that. All opinions are welcome.

You should just have signed up with a true name, like WVfan.
07-23-2015 10:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
domer1978 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,469
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 367
I Root For: Notre Dame/Chaos
Location: California/Georgia
Post: #36
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:57 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:42 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:28 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:24 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  You read it just fine in the previous two threads. Just like you avoided it here.

The question, as it was plainly stated multiple times: why are you so adamant on making sure the XII is going to survive??

In other words, a Nebraska fan should be rooting for the demise of that conference.

Why are you trying to ask a question that is even there to ask?

I debate the topic. The topic these days involves the GOR, ACC Network, B1G TV negotiations. That is the real world of today, not 2009, 2010, and 2011.

Today is 2015...different environment.

Avoided it again.

It's safe to assume that you're just posing as a Nebraska fan. You just signed up this month and have been running amok, posting about how the XII is going to expand and survive. A conference that your (supposed) team left because they couldn't stand it there anymore, some years ago.


Could be a West Virginia fan with an agenda? Not sure.

I don't think people should ignore you, but it should be out in the open what you're all about.

Ah, I see, you have an issue that I think the Big 12 expands. Ok then. That was easy to resolve.

Of course I don't have an issue with that. All opinions are welcome.

You should just have signed up with a true name, like WVfan.

He is on landthieves also doing the same thing. Almost reminds me of Buck.
(This post was last modified: 07-23-2015 11:01 AM by domer1978.)
07-23-2015 11:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nebraskafan Offline
Banned

Posts: 1,342
Joined: Jul 2015
I Root For: Nebreaska
Location:
Post: #37
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:54 AM)krup Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:42 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)krup Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 09:39 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  IMO, people who believe the GORs have a chance to be overturned in a court are missing the point.

Even if a school or conference felt they might have a shot of overturning a GOR, the risk of failing to do so is so enormous that it is likely to prevent such an attempt. Remember, by their very nature, these organizations are risk adverse and rolling the dice in this manner is something that Boards of Trustees would be reluctant to do, IMO. (If you are a BOT member of a state school, for example, do YOU want to go back and to explain to your state legislature, and, more importantly, the taxpayers, the huge hole the school YOU had a fiduciary responsibility for was put into based on YOUR decisions?)

Added to this huge potential hole are the exit fees. The recent ACC situation is a case in point. According to reports, UMD agreed to pay over $31M in exit fees despite the fact that they did NOT support the previous hike in the fee. (Does anybody believe a school that DID support the hike would get a better or even the same deal?). Sure, it wasn't the full exit fee, but it was hardly chump change either!

Finally, since 4 of the 5 P5's have similar GORs, it would seem illogical for a conference to try to bust one in court since they would be virtually litigating against their own GOR as well.

I just don't see any school or conference challenging one of these.

I think the "risk of failing to overturn" one of these GORs just reduces the pool of schools you consider taking to those in a populous state that is new for your conference. For example, let's say the B1G wanted to add a Texas, UNC or VA.

If the B1G guaranteed them that if the GOR holds up, they still make what they were getting from the B12 or ACC, the absolute worst case scenario for the B1G is that they have pay them approx $20 million without getting any of their home games, but they still get to add that school to their conference AND they get to make a lot more BTN carriage fees from those state's cable households to offset any payouts.

If that is the absolute worst case, and the upside is so high for those schools mentioned, I don't see the risk as that much of a deterrent.


Yeah, but you are minimizing the potential maximum downside risk. In your example, if I understand you correctly, the $20M you cite that the conference would pay said school for the loss of their media revenues is only for one year. If the GOR goes for 10 years (as the ACC one does), the theoretical maximum exposure would be $20M a year, or an aggregate 200M, plus at least $31M+ in exit fees over the life of the media deal, right? So the full exposure (considering the $20M a year you cited is a probably a low number over the full course of the deal) would be closer to quarter of a billion dollars.

That's a big potential exposure, regardless of how it ultimately turns out.

Again, my point is not how a court would ultimately decide this. IMO, I don't think any school's BOT's, no matter how big the school, would take that risk. Just my opinion.
I don't think someone would make this move with as much as 10 years to go, but let's go with your example. You left out a big part.

"the theoretical maximum exposure would be $20M a year, or an aggregate 200M, plus at least $31M+ in exit fees over the life of the media deal" OFFSET BY WHATEVER PROFIT YOU MAKE FOR GETTING AN EXTRA $1 A MONTH IN BTN REVENUE FROM THE CABLE HOUSEHOLDS IN THAT STATE.

For North Carolina and its 3.7 million cable households, that is over $400 million in carriage fees over that 10 year period. With the huge size of Texas, the extra revenue is almost $1 billion.

when Disney bought Marvel Entertainment in 2009, the Mickey Mouse conglomerate (which also happens to be the primary beneficiary of these GOR contracts via ESPN) employed armies of lawyers to try to figure out how to get out of all the long-term or even perpetual licenses that the comic book company granted to other competing movie studios when it was on the verge of bankruptcy in the 1980s and 1990s and they came up empty. Thus, Sony (via Columbia Pictures) continues to have the movie rights to Spider-Man* and Fox has the full suite of X-Men characters at its disposal despite Disney having paid $4 billion for Marvel.

Now translate that to a school moving to a new conference while having failed to defeat the GOR.

Good luck to whatever school wants to go down that disastrous path.
07-23-2015 11:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #38
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:54 AM)krup Wrote:  "the theoretical maximum exposure would be $20M a year, or an aggregate 200M, plus at least $31M+ in exit fees over the life of the media deal" OFFSET BY WHATEVER PROFIT YOU MAKE FOR GETTING AN EXTRA $1 A MONTH IN BTN REVENUE FROM THE CABLE HOUSEHOLDS IN THAT STATE.

For North Carolina and its 3.7 million cable households, that is over $400 million in carriage fees over that 10 year period. With the huge size of Texas, the extra revenue is almost $1 billion.

That comment assumes that the Big Bundle economic model for TV will last forever, including the part where the 90% of cable subscribers who never watch any conference sports network pay for them anyway.

If that doesn't last forever, e.g. if we start to buy TV sports a la carte and/or "over the top" through mobile devices and Roku-type boxes, then some of the short-term decisions made only to grab cable dollars might not look so good.
07-23-2015 11:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,194
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 785
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #39
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 05:59 AM)krup Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 12:10 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  There is one MAjOR part missing. Yes they are nearly unbreakable; but ONLY if the granting party continues to receive their royalies for said granting of right. Every single time, without exception, the grantee stop payment on said royalties, the contract was made null and void. That opens the opportunity for negotiation.

That's the problem I have with his post. It may be true that GORs have been used in a lot of industries, but whether these conference bylaws that let a conference stop paying a defector would hold up in court seems like a unique issue to college football and I have not seen a relevant precedent cited to prove either way.
Actually, so long as the conference does not make use of its rights ... that is, does not broadcast the games of the defector school ... that is not all that unusual. There are a number of grants of rights where one side sits on the rights without using them, and if the payment is tied to the use, no payment is made during that period.
07-23-2015 11:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
domer1978 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,469
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 367
I Root For: Notre Dame/Chaos
Location: California/Georgia
Post: #40
RE: GoR’s are unbreakable
(07-23-2015 10:57 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:42 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:28 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:24 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-23-2015 10:18 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  You read it just fine in the previous two threads. Just like you avoided it here.

The question, as it was plainly stated multiple times: why are you so adamant on making sure the XII is going to survive??

In other words, a Nebraska fan should be rooting for the demise of that conference.

Why are you trying to ask a question that is even there to ask?

I debate the topic. The topic these days involves the GOR, ACC Network, B1G TV negotiations. That is the real world of today, not 2009, 2010, and 2011.

Today is 2015...different environment.

Avoided it again.

It's safe to assume that you're just posing as a Nebraska fan. You just signed up this month and have been running amok, posting about how the XII is going to expand and survive. A conference that your (supposed) team left because they couldn't stand it there anymore, some years ago.


Could be a West Virginia fan with an agenda? Not sure.

I don't think people should ignore you, but it should be out in the open what you're all about.

Ah, I see, you have an issue that I think the Big 12 expands. Ok then. That was easy to resolve.

Of course I don't have an issue with that. All opinions are welcome.

You should just have signed up with a true name, like WVfan.

Now he also is posting Dude of WVU tweets like they are worth anything(On landthieves).
07-23-2015 11:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.