I'm not sure that NYC is paying $1/mo/subscriber for the BTN. The BTN practically begged just to get carried in NYC.

Besides, if the footprint was really the basis, the BTN would have taken Syracuse before the ACC came knocking. By taking Syracuse, they would have gotten the whole State of NY. Syracuse has more fans in NYC and LI than Rutgers. Nobody in NYC follows Rutgers. But again, if numbers were the sole source of motivation, Syracuse and Rutgers would have been the combo. NY has far more residents than MD.

Basically, the B1G figured the ACC was washed up and they could take whomever they wanted when they wanted. PSU leaned on them after the ACC made their move. The B1G/BTN was stuck with Rutgers to calm down PSU. And then the PSU revelations came out...

(05-17-2016 09:11 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  I'm not sure that NYC is paying $1/mo/subscriber for the BTN.

According to SNL Kagan data, cable operators pay an estimated "in-market" rate of $1 per sub per month, more than double the $0.44 fees charged outside the conference's home markets.
-- adage.com

QUIT WHILE YOU'RE AHEAD

(05-17-2016 09:11 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  But again, if numbers were the sole source of motivation, Syracuse and Rutgers would have been the combo. NY has far more residents than MD.

Our goal was to achieve distribution in New York and D.C., Maryland and New Jersey.
-- B1G commissioner Jim Delany

CORRIDORS OF POWER

(05-18-2016 11:39 AM)green Wrote:  

(05-17-2016 09:11 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  But again, if numbers were the sole source of motivation, Syracuse and Rutgers would have been the combo. NY has far more residents than MD.

Our goal was to achieve distribution in New York and D.C., Maryland and New Jersey.
-- B1G commissioner Jim Delany

CORRIDORS OF POWER

Guess where PSU's two biggest pockets of non-B1G-area alumni were.

(05-18-2016 11:24 AM)green Wrote:  

(05-17-2016 09:11 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  I'm not sure that NYC is paying $1/mo/subscriber for the BTN.

According to SNL Kagan data, cable operators pay an estimated "in-market" rate of $1 per sub per month, more than double the $0.44 fees charged outside the conference's home markets.
-- adage.com

QUIT WHILE YOU'RE AHEAD

CBS gets between $1-$2/subscriber. The BTN matches that? I am sure there is a little math discrepancy going on somewhere.

Besides, from my understanding, NYC is NOT considered in the same DMA as Rutgers, taking the claim that NY and NYC are in the B1G footprint.

In the article you refer to, the the BTN allegedly increases revenue from $13.9MM to $31.7MM. This may not seem out of whack until you double the payout as the BTN only gets 49%; or $17.8MM X 2 = $35.6MM increase from one cable provider for one year. While the same Cable provider has 2.64MM (in Jersey, NYC and south Conn) subscribers @ $1/month X 2.64MM subscribers x 12 months = $31.68MM. In short, this article claims that Cablevision is losing ($63.4MM - $31.68MM) $32.24MM annually just to carry the BTN. You cited the article and these are their numbers.

"In expanding its scholastic footprint, the Big Ten also increased the value of the BTN's New York and D.C. subscribers. According to SNL Kagan data, cable operators pay an estimated "in-market" rate of $1 per sub per month, more than double the $0.44 fees charged outside the conference's home markets. Cablevision alone serves 2.64 million video customers in New York, New Jersey and southwestern Connecticut; with the upgraded fee in place, BTN sees its annual payout from the operator rise to around $31.7 million from $13.9 million."

http://adage.com/article/media/east-youn...rk/300748/

I think there is a little BS being thrown around some. The numbers are messed up and the carriage estimates having to include Jersey (and S. CT) are skewed to hide how many NYCers have the BTN as well as the fact that the total subscribers are listed without distinction of who pays of that total.

(05-18-2016 10:06 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 11:24 AM)green Wrote:  

(05-17-2016 09:11 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  I'm not sure that NYC is paying $1/mo/subscriber for the BTN.

According to SNL Kagan data, cable operators pay an estimated "in-market" rate of $1 per sub per month, more than double the $0.44 fees charged outside the conference's home markets.
-- adage.com

QUIT WHILE YOU'RE AHEAD

CBS gets between $1-$2/subscriber. The BTN matches that? I am sure there is a little math discrepancy going on somewhere.

Besides, from my understanding, NYC is NOT considered in the same DMA as Rutgers, taking the claim that NY and NYC are in the B1G footprint.

In the article you refer to, the the BTN allegedly increases revenue from $13.9MM to $31.7MM. This may not seem out of whack until you double the payout as the BTN only gets 49%; or $17.8MM X 2 = $35.6MM increase from one cable provider for one year. While the same Cable provider has 2.64MM (in Jersey, NYC and south Conn) subscribers @ $1/month X 2.64MM subscribers x 12 months = $31.68MM. In short, this article claims that Cablevision is losing ($63.4MM - $31.68MM) $32.24MM annually just to carry the BTN. You cited the article and these are their numbers.

"In expanding its scholastic footprint, the Big Ten also increased the value of the BTN's New York and D.C. subscribers. According to SNL Kagan data, cable operators pay an estimated "in-market" rate of $1 per sub per month, more than double the $0.44 fees charged outside the conference's home markets. Cablevision alone serves 2.64 million video customers in New York, New Jersey and southwestern Connecticut; with the upgraded fee in place, BTN sees its annual payout from the operator rise to around $31.7 million from $13.9 million."

http://adage.com/article/media/east-youn...rk/300748/

I think there is a little BS being thrown around some. The numbers are messed up and the carriage estimates having to include Jersey (and S. CT) are skewed to hide how many NYCers have the BTN as well as the fact that the total subscribers are listed without distinction of who pays of that total.

Are you suggesting that someone is OVERESTIMATING BTN revenue?

(05-19-2016 08:36 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 10:06 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 11:24 AM)green Wrote:  

(05-17-2016 09:11 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  I'm not sure that NYC is paying $1/mo/subscriber for the BTN.

According to SNL Kagan data, cable operators pay an estimated "in-market" rate of $1 per sub per month, more than double the $0.44 fees charged outside the conference's home markets.
-- adage.com

QUIT WHILE YOU'RE AHEAD

CBS gets between $1-$2/subscriber. The BTN matches that? I am sure there is a little math discrepancy going on somewhere.

Besides, from my understanding, NYC is NOT considered in the same DMA as Rutgers, taking the claim that NY and NYC are in the B1G footprint.

In the article you refer to, the the BTN allegedly increases revenue from $13.9MM to $31.7MM. This may not seem out of whack until you double the payout as the BTN only gets 49%; or $17.8MM X 2 = $35.6MM increase from one cable provider for one year. While the same Cable provider has 2.64MM (in Jersey, NYC and south Conn) subscribers @ $1/month X 2.64MM subscribers x 12 months = $31.68MM. In short, this article claims that Cablevision is losing ($63.4MM - $31.68MM) $32.24MM annually just to carry the BTN. You cited the article and these are their numbers.

"In expanding its scholastic footprint, the Big Ten also increased the value of the BTN's New York and D.C. subscribers. According to SNL Kagan data, cable operators pay an estimated "in-market" rate of $1 per sub per month, more than double the $0.44 fees charged outside the conference's home markets. Cablevision alone serves 2.64 million video customers in New York, New Jersey and southwestern Connecticut; with the upgraded fee in place, BTN sees its annual payout from the operator rise to around $31.7 million from $13.9 million."

http://adage.com/article/media/east-youn...rk/300748/

I think there is a little BS being thrown around some. The numbers are messed up and the carriage estimates having to include Jersey (and S. CT) are skewed to hide how many NYCers have the BTN as well as the fact that the total subscribers are listed without distinction of who pays of that total.

Are you suggesting that someone is OVERESTIMATING BTN revenue?

I would never ... OK, yes I would.