Two good reads...lots of info here.

https://ucf.n.rivals.com/news/aresco-ame...tv-revenue

On the upcoming meetings:

Quote: "We've got a lot of issues," Aresco said. "Student-athlete endorsements, whether we favor that. The new values-based distribution initiative, distributing money from the NCAA Tournament differently from what we've been doing. Student-athlete time demands in addition to our own league issues, whether we're dealing with the football championship game and men's and women's basketball tournaments, things of that nature. We'll have a number of speakers making formal presentations."

On TV:

Quote:Given our druthers we would certainly sit down and talk with ESPN and I hope we have that opportunity. I think we will have it before the end of this contract, before we have to go to the open market, and see whether ESPN is interested in extending it. We get great exposure from ESPN. The sky is not falling when it comes to cord cutting. ESPN is by far still the worldwide leader and they do a tremendous job for us. We think we've created enormous value for them that maybe they didn't anticipate three years ago. Maybe nobody anticipated it three years ago. We're hoping if we can generate sufficient revenue perhaps we can extend.

"If not, then obviously there are a lot of platforms we're going to have to explore. As we talk to ESPN and others down the road, the digital world is changing. The online companies are getting more involved in live video. That's going to be huge. Younger people don't watch TV the way they used to. They don't consume sports content the way we once did. It's changing. We have to be aware of that. We're spending a lot of time with it. We have excellent consultants, the Wasserman Media Group. We've been in close touch with them to determine where we stand and what strategies would make sense for us.

http://www.todaysu.com/aac-today/mike-ar...2-reports/

On realignment:

Quote:“If we lost a team or two, we would not do anything rash quickly. We would be very deliberate. Also we might not decide to add any teams. We can play with 10 if that were to happen. We’re not going to dilute our brand..."



And even though schools such as Memphis, Houston and Cincinnati have campaigned publicly for attention from the Big 12, Aresco isn’t angry. He said no school has gone behind his back or betrayed the AAC.

“They’re very forthcoming and we understand the situation,” Aresco said. “They’re under a lot of pressure from their boards and donors. They’ve been very open with me. We all know the pressures. Many of them have issued statements complimentary about the conference.”

Clearly, the preferred route to Aresco is to sign an early extension that nets a solid raise. Don't know what that number is, but my guess is that if ESPN placed anything in the 5-8 million a team range on the table we'd probably take it. It sure looks like he is clearly signaling to ESPN to put something decent on the table and we'll forego the open market and sign up now.

ESPN is losing a lot of inventory recently. I can see them biting.

I would be very happy with $8 mil. per team.

I think you guys are a bit optimistic. I think we are definitely worth 8 million per school when compared with how much the P5 get. However ESPN also knows how much we need the exposure.

I mean, would you take 8 million with FS1 or 3 million with ESPN??? I would probably go with ESPN.

Here's the complete 20 min radio interview that Aresco had earlier this week with an Orlando radio station.

https://soundcloud.com/ucfsports/johnny-dawkins

(05-28-2016 04:01 AM)IAH Wrote:  I think you guys are a bit optimistic. I think we are definitely worth 8 million per school when compared with how much the P5 get. However ESPN also knows how much we need the exposure.

I mean, would you take 8 million with FS1 or 3 million with ESPN??? I would probably go with ESPN.

TAKE THE MONEY! FS1 isn't going away and with the Big 10 on FS1 it isn't what it was when it started.
Back in the day the NFL was on NBC and CBS. Then along came an unknown network and took the NFL away from CBS. Fox. What the hell is Fox? In Tampa Channel 13 was CBS and home to the Bucs. Fox purchased Channel 13 and hasn't looked back.

Also it seems Aresco is willing to sell the AAC digital rights to ESPN something we held on to earlier.

(05-28-2016 04:01 AM)IAH Wrote:  I mean, would you take 8 million with FS1 or 3 million with ESPN??? I would probably go with ESPN.

That's too big a differential to turn down.

(05-28-2016 04:01 AM)IAH Wrote:  I think you guys are a bit optimistic. I think we are definitely worth 8 million per school when compared with how much the P5 get. However ESPN also knows how much we need the exposure.

I mean, would you take 8 million with FS1 or 3 million with ESPN??? I would probably go with ESPN.

Not sure why you would turn down that much money...

(05-28-2016 09:15 AM)Westhoff123 Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 04:01 AM)IAH Wrote:  I think you guys are a bit optimistic. I think we are definitely worth 8 million per school when compared with how much the P5 get. However ESPN also knows how much we need the exposure.

I mean, would you take 8 million with FS1 or 3 million with ESPN??? I would probably go with ESPN.

Not sure why you would turn down that much money...

Odds are that offer difference won't exist...but the main reason why every coach in AAC (Football and especially basically) LOVE the AAC's current deal with ESPN Networks (mostly) is EXPOSURE.

Having all AAC Conf games on ESPN Networks is huge...(plus a majority of non-conf home games too). Even old Big East teams didn't get that same exposure.

FS1 ratings are still dwarfed by ESPN Networks...(especially for regular daytime/show broadcasts...when many promos are run), and while FS1 can slowly continue to improve...it might be 10-20 years or so till they regularly challenge ESPN on a day to day basis.

Exposure over money. Fox sports does nothing for the AAC. We need ESPN exposure for lots of reasons. I believe CUSA tool Fox over ESPN for money years ago and it cost them dearly.

Exposure over money if the difference isn't too great. 5m/year increase with 10 teams is 60m/year over say 5 years. That's 300m to our schools that you can't just walk away from. If the difference was 2m/year or something I'd say take the exposure but at a certain point you have to start making cents.

Well that was the gamble the league took first go around exposure over money gambling that the exposure also provided tv results that would lead to higher payments. If the Big12 doesn't expand or announce expansion plans this summer it will strengthen the league's position. With ESPN losing money they might not be able to go after the bigger boys but the AAC gives them affordable league that can give them tv inventory. They can't just not provide college football as part of their coverage

(05-28-2016 10:07 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  ... With ESPN losing money ....

Don't confuse a slight decrease in operating profit or gross revenue as "losing money" as ESPN is still highly profitable for Disney...but that huge rate of increase in annual growth profit for the broadcast division has slowed...while their studios (help from Star Wars and other properties) are seeing record returns.

(05-28-2016 10:16 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 10:07 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  ... With ESPN losing money ....

Don't confuse a slight decrease in operating profit or gross revenue as "losing money" as ESPN is still highly profitable for Disney...but that huge rate of increase in annual growth profit for the broadcast division has slowed...while their studios (help from Star Wars and other properties) are seeing record returns.

Correct. Sick of reading the falsehood there.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

(05-28-2016 10:19 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 10:16 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 10:07 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  ... With ESPN losing money ....

Don't confuse a slight decrease in operating profit or gross revenue as "losing money" as ESPN is still highly profitable for Disney...but that huge rate of increase in annual growth profit for the broadcast division has slowed...while their studios (help from Star Wars and other properties) are seeing record returns.

Correct. Sick of reading the falsehood there.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

While ESPN/Disney Cable Networks strategies have been changing, here are their latest quarterly results:

Revenue: $3.955 Billion

Operating Income: $2.021 Billion

Those percentages are INSANE!!

CEO Iger understands that new platforms and even bundles (like Dish's successful $20 bundle which ESPN is a part of) have made their growth challenging but it will continually evolve as studies show, access to LIVE SPORTS (ease of access is still key) will still be a subscriber AND a ad revenue stream (especially) for them as most sporting events are "DVR PROOF", as most viewers want to watch them live.

Pressure as a publicly owned company (i.e. stockholders want seemingly record profits each and every year) will actually help Disne"get ahead" of some changes...as ESPN has been proactive over the last 12-18 months (i.e. lots of duplication layoffs, letting highly paid show hosts go...rumor is Chris Berman is next), which should help them keep profit percentages still high.

If the AAC gets a better deal and goes to the fox, guess who's watching fox? If we stay at ESPN, I'll watch ESPN. We've got to go somewhere where the money and exposure make sense.

The new G-5 contracts are down right scary. The separation is going to be extreme. That 100 million from the Big East buy out is probably about gone. The AAC needs to get paid.

I'm certainly enjoying the "potential recruits are such stupid morons" posts. Top shelf stuff, guys.

(05-28-2016 10:40 AM)Pirate1 Wrote:  The new G-5 contracts are down right scary. The separation is going to be extreme. That 100 million from the Big East buy out is probably about gone. The AAC needs to get paid.

The buy out money runs out at same time as our original tv contract