(07-20-2016 02:24 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-20-2016 02:09 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  ...As for Notre Dame, the question is: if/when ACC teams are making $30 million/year from TV revenue and ND is only making $20 million, will that $10M matter to UND decision makers?

I know that I sound like a broken record but I really don't think so.

Besides, ND gets about $22-23 million/yr. from NBC and what, $3-5 million or so from ESPN? So, that is about $25-28 million a year.

From Forbes: "...[in 2013] NBC signed its fifth and biggest (some sources value the entire package close to an average of $20 million a year) deal with Notre dame." If that number is wrong, fine. If you have a link showing a higher number, better still - I like to keep up with this stuff (for my blog).

Quote:The main reason that ND chose the ACC over the Big Ten is that football could stay indy.

So playing all up and down the East Coast had nothing to do with it? Hmm.

Quote:Even so, just this past week, it could have been the easiest thing to slide ND into the football conference as part of the ACC Network deal. ND could have easily sold it to its fanbase by saying it was necessary to save the ACC home for its other sports and for additional revenues. It did not, did it? Why not?

Because the ACC didn't really need saving?

Quote:The ACC agreed contractually that ND football is not required to join the conference for the next twenty years... You have to think that the ACC and ESPN put the carrot and stick to ND to get them to do just that.

No doubt. Look, the ACC has not, and presumably will not, attempt to "force" Notre Dame to join for football. That's just not their way. But what they WILL do is work with UND, get close, try to eventually - dare I say - seduce UND?

(07-20-2016 02:51 PM)green Wrote:  

(07-20-2016 02:24 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Remember, ND could have easily joined the Big Ten instead of the ACC if it wanted to sacrifice football independence.

It did not, knowing that it was leaving millions of dollars of potential TV money on the table.

like you're doing us a favor ...
far be it for me to extoll the virtues ...

GIVE TO EVERYONE WHAT YOU OWE

It was a mutually beneficial compromise agreement, nothing more, nothing less.

No virtues involved. Nothing owed.

BLANK SLATE

(07-20-2016 03:36 PM)omniorange Wrote:  Here is David Teel's article piggy-backing off Clay Travis:

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-bl...-post.html

Matching the SEC and Big Ten's estimated per-school network shares of $7.5 million-$10 million annually is a pipe dream given the ACC's smaller fan base, so let's set a modest base of $5 million.

Multiply the $5 million by 14 fulltime members and you get $70 million. A quarter share for Notre Dame -- that's the Irish's take of other conference revenue -- bumps the total to $71.25 million.

But the ACC doesn't distribute 100 percent of revenue to its schools. The most recent rate was 92.5 percent. So to send $71.25 million to members, the league would need $77.03 million in annual network windfall.

Since ESPN will split profits with the ACC, the network would need to net $154.06 million. Travis estimates annual network expenses at $100 million, bringing the needed revenue to $254.06 million.

Cheers,
Neil

It's all speculative. The SEC is getting $1.40 per subscriber per month in region and $0.25 per subscriber out of region. I'd guess that the ACC can get something like $1.40 per month in NC and Virginia, in the Syracuse, Louisville, Greenville-Spartanburg, and Atlanta areas and some areas of Florida. It can probably get at least the $0.25 in Boston, Pittsburgh, DC and Chicago as well as the rest of NY, Kentucky, SC, Georgia and Florida and maybe some of Ohio. I think Teel isn't paying attention to just how big the NC, Virginia, Louisville, Atlanta and Miami markets are. I'd estimate that the area where the ACC could probably get $1.40 per subscriber per month is more than 10% of the country's population and the area where the ACC can get $.25 per month is far larger than the area where the SEC can get $.25 per month.

However, it's all speculative. Nobody's going to know until it's actually done.

(07-20-2016 04:13 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(07-20-2016 03:36 PM)omniorange Wrote:  Here is David Teel's article piggy-backing off Clay Travis:

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-bl...-post.html

Matching the SEC and Big Ten's estimated per-school network shares of $7.5 million-$10 million annually is a pipe dream given the ACC's smaller fan base, so let's set a modest base of $5 million.

Multiply the $5 million by 14 fulltime members and you get $70 million. A quarter share for Notre Dame -- that's the Irish's take of other conference revenue -- bumps the total to $71.25 million.

But the ACC doesn't distribute 100 percent of revenue to its schools. The most recent rate was 92.5 percent. So to send $71.25 million to members, the league would need $77.03 million in annual network windfall.

Since ESPN will split profits with the ACC, the network would need to net $154.06 million. Travis estimates annual network expenses at $100 million, bringing the needed revenue to $254.06 million.

Cheers,
Neil

It's all speculative. The SEC is getting $1.40 per subscriber per month in region and $0.25 per subscriber out of region. I'd guess that the ACC can get something like $1.40 per month in NC and Virginia, in the Syracuse, Louisville, Greenville-Spartanburg, and Atlanta areas and some areas of Florida. It can probably get at least the $0.25 in Boston, Pittsburgh, DC and Chicago as well as the rest of NY, Kentucky, SC, Georgia and Florida and maybe some of Ohio. I think Teel isn't paying attention to just how big the NC, Virginia, Louisville, Atlanta and Miami markets are. I'd estimate that the area where the ACC could probably get $1.40 per subscriber per month is more than 10% of the country's population and the area where the ACC can get $.25 per month is far larger than the area where the SEC can get $.25 per month.

However, it's all speculative. Nobody's going to know until it's actually done.

ESPN can charge almost whatever they want in NC, VA, and SC. It's a must have in these states.

I could see $2.00 per in these three states and there are 24 million in the three states or about 10 million households.

All of Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, and Massachusetts would get the full rate without the extortion surchage. And that full rate would also apply to Upstate NY, and Western PA, and DC. This is 55 million or about 26 million households. I'd charge them a $1.00

Then the periphery rate for states without a school, but in the ACC's media footprint/overlap you could get that in Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, NYC metro, Philly metro, Indiana, Chicago Metro, Eastern Alabama, Eastern TN, West Va, MD, DC, and Delaware. I'd charge 50 cents. This is about 60 million or so, or 29 million households.

Then the rate beyond for everyone else at 25 cents.

Assuming 2/3rds in the core, half in the seocndary area, and 1/3 of househods in the teritary area and that's"

6.7 million paying $2 a month
13 million paying $1 a month
9.6 million paying 50 cents a month

And you are at $357 million before the rest of the folks in the country pay. Lets say you get 10% of those households and that's almost 10 million and you charge them a quarter that's another $30 million.

So about $380 million. Take $100 million off the top (that seems high) and you have $280 to split 50/50. The ACC share is 140 million and that amounts to about $9.2 million per share.

I think you can get $160 million a year out of NC, Va, and SC alone and by charging more in these states it might stop some bitching and moaning about equal weight pulling. (SC pays up because of Charlotte).

(07-20-2016 04:55 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-20-2016 04:13 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(07-20-2016 03:36 PM)omniorange Wrote:  Here is David Teel's article piggy-backing off Clay Travis:

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-bl...-post.html

Matching the SEC and Big Ten's estimated per-school network shares of $7.5 million-$10 million annually is a pipe dream given the ACC's smaller fan base, so let's set a modest base of $5 million.

Multiply the $5 million by 14 fulltime members and you get $70 million. A quarter share for Notre Dame -- that's the Irish's take of other conference revenue -- bumps the total to $71.25 million.

But the ACC doesn't distribute 100 percent of revenue to its schools. The most recent rate was 92.5 percent. So to send $71.25 million to members, the league would need $77.03 million in annual network windfall.

Since ESPN will split profits with the ACC, the network would need to net $154.06 million. Travis estimates annual network expenses at $100 million, bringing the needed revenue to $254.06 million.

Cheers,
Neil

It's all speculative. The SEC is getting $1.40 per subscriber per month in region and $0.25 per subscriber out of region. I'd guess that the ACC can get something like $1.40 per month in NC and Virginia, in the Syracuse, Louisville, Greenville-Spartanburg, and Atlanta areas and some areas of Florida. It can probably get at least the $0.25 in Boston, Pittsburgh, DC and Chicago as well as the rest of NY, Kentucky, SC, Georgia and Florida and maybe some of Ohio. I think Teel isn't paying attention to just how big the NC, Virginia, Louisville, Atlanta and Miami markets are. I'd estimate that the area where the ACC could probably get $1.40 per subscriber per month is more than 10% of the country's population and the area where the ACC can get $.25 per month is far larger than the area where the SEC can get $.25 per month.

However, it's all speculative. Nobody's going to know until it's actually done.

ESPN can charge almost whatever they want in NC, VA, and SC. It's a must have in these states.

I could see $2.00 per in these three states and there are 24 million in the three states or about 10 million households.

All of Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, and Massachusetts would get the full rate without the extortion surchage. And that full rate would also apply to Upstate NY, and Western PA, and DC. This is 55 million or about 26 million households. I'd charge them a $1.00

Then the periphery rate for states without a school, but in the ACC's media footprint/overlap you could get that in Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, NYC metro, Philly metro, Indiana, Chicago Metro, Eastern Alabama, Eastern TN, West Va, MD, DC, and Delaware. I'd charge 50 cents. This is about 60 million or so, or 29 million households.

Then the rate beyond for everyone else at 25 cents.

Assuming 2/3rds in the core, half in the seocndary area, and 1/3 of househods in the teritary area and that's"

6.7 million paying $2 a month
13 million paying $1 a month
9.6 million paying 50 cents a month

And you are at $357 million before the rest of the folks in the country pay. Lets say you get 10% of those households and that's almost 10 million and you charge them a quarter that's another $30 million.

So about $380 million. Take $100 million off the top (that seems high) and you have $280 to split 50/50. The ACC share is 140 million and that amounts to about $9.2 million per share.

I think you can get $160 million a year out of NC, Va, and SC alone and by charging more in these states it might stop some bitching and moaning about equal weight pulling. (SC pays up because of Charlotte).

The impact of Notre Dame also has to be considered. The content of the network will not be football alone and the marquee matchups will be carried on traditional channels when they occur. Notre Dame dominates Indiana and the Chicago area and will assist on the eastern seaboard.

Not in favor of higher rates in SC, NC and VA - but he is probably right

I can make a case for higher rates in NC, SC, and Va due to the concentration of 7 schools all over each other's footprint.

Going metro by metro:

Asheville/Greenville/Spartenburg

Clemson and Carolina Towns in addition to UT, UGA, SC, NC State, and GT

Charlotte

UNC, Clemson, NC State, Duke Town in addition to SC, WF, and ECU

Tri-Cities VA

VT, TN, and UVa Town in addiiton to a little sliver of NC State and UNC

Tidewater VA

VT, UVa, UNC Town in addition to NC State and ECU

Myrtle Beach SC

SC, Clemson, UNC, NC State town

I could go on, but the overlap of the schools, the residences, and where people vacation make the ACC network more important than in other places because the single school fan in NC, VA, and SC is somewhat rare and when I say fan, I also mean hater. I'll pay almost as much money to watch UNC lose as to watch State win.

Also the ACCN will be more basketball network than the BTN or SECN - just the way it goes. But that will generate money and more might buy into the ACCN for basketball content than football.

I don't think it's as cut and dry as the analysis you guys are doing. I think we're going to see a sizeable jump from day one. You don't extend for ten years just for a chance to make a few million more in four years. I think this is going to me like a brand new tv deal, albeit one with an upside still limited by the bad 2010 deal.

(07-20-2016 10:23 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  I don't think it's as cut and dry as the analysis you guys are doing. I think we're going to see a sizeable jump from day one. You don't extend for ten years just for a chance to make a few million more in four years. I think this is going to me like a brand new tv deal, albeit one with an upside still limited by the bad 2010 deal.

You're right. We've been looking at the ACC network angle and forgetting the new longer tier 1 and 2 deal which should involve far more money.

(07-20-2016 10:23 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  I don't think it's as cut and dry as the analysis you guys are doing. I think we're going to see a sizeable jump from day one. You don't extend for ten years just for a chance to make a few million more in four years. I think this is going to me like a brand new tv deal, albeit one with an upside still limited by the bad 2010 deal.

The ACC has been undersold. I think many will be pleasantly surprised with the financial details and many of the haters, even among the ignorant punditry in our own back yards, will be shocked by how comparable the package will be with the SEC/B1G.

I've mentioned the oppurtunity ESPN and the two conferences have to do something groundbreaking with the relationships and I expect the GOR is indicative of their intention to do just that.

I don't believe the future relationship between The ACC and SEC that ESPN envisions can't be overstated.

ESPN has successfully paired the best football conference and the best basketball conference. Interleague play between the two will be heavily encouraged by ESPN. I would look for a basketball challenge between the two and more football games like The Battle in Bristol.

When you look back at how things have unfolded the last few years with both conferences relationships with ESPN you begin to see the plan of matching the best of the best against each other.
CJ

(07-21-2016 04:01 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I don't believe the future relationship between The ACC and SEC that ESPN envisions can't be overstated.

ESPN has successfully paired the best football conference and the best basketball conference. Interleague play between the two will be heavily encouraged by ESPN. I would look for a basketball challenge between the two and more football games like The Battle in Bristol.

When you look back at how things have unfolded the last few years with both conferences relationships with ESPN you begin to see the plan of matching the best of the best against each other.
CJ

I'm all for playing football games against the SEC, as long as some of their weaker teams also participate. It makes the ACC look bad when it only plays against SEC powers like Alabama - a team other SEC teams cannot beat themselves!

As for a basketball "challenge" between the ACC and SEC - it wouldn't be much of a challenge, IMO. The SEC might win 5 or 6 match-ups, but it's going to be 8-6 or 9-5 every year in favor of the ACC... and quite frankly, most of the top ACC teams won't have a worthy opponent (they can't all play Kentucky!)

JMO, but if the ACC/B1G Challenge comes to an end in hoops, the best conference to replace them would probably be the Big XII... especially if they end up adding Cincinnati, Memphis, Houston and UConn!

$8 or $10 million is $8 or $10 million more than we make now, I would take it!

Well, the goal was to stay at least at 85% of the B10. With an extra quarter of a share to dispense, the very small alumni size of some schools and the concentration of 4 schools in one state with just a 10 million population, anything over 85% is great. If NC were Texas with 24 million or California with 39 million, 4 schools in the same state would not have evolved into a drag.

(07-21-2016 01:05 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Well, the goal was to stay at least at 85% of the B10. With an extra quarter of a share to dispense, the very small alumni size of some schools and the concentration of 4 schools in one state with just a 10 million population, anything over 85% is great. If NC were Texas with 24 million or California with 39 million, 4 schools in the same state would not have evolved into a drag.

If you're talking TV revenue, not sure how the ACC gets to 85% of the B1G when the SEC is only projected to get 71% of the B1G themselves. I do think the ACC gets to 95% of the SEC, however... but NOBODY is catching the B1G any time soon, not after this recent windfall they got.

(07-21-2016 01:13 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(07-21-2016 01:05 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Well, the goal was to stay at least at 85% of the B10. With an extra quarter of a share to dispense, the very small alumni size of some schools and the concentration of 4 schools in one state with just a 10 million population, anything over 85% is great. If NC were Texas with 24 million or California with 39 million, 4 schools in the same state would not have evolved into a drag.

If you're talking TV revenue, not sure how the ACC gets to 85% of the B1G when the SEC is only projected to get 71% of the B1G themselves. I do think the ACC gets to 95% of the SEC, however... but NOBODY is catching the B1G any time soon, not after this recent windfall they got.

Talking ALL revenue not from a schools own ticket sales and fund raising. 85% is the goal. A goal is a goal. I have a goal to snag Dina Meyer, but I don't think I will realize that goal.

Heh, don't expect clarity any time soon...

Quote:ESPN's Skipper on ACCNetwork: "We will be consistently obfuscatory about what the financials of this arrangement are."

- tweeted by David Teel

However, Teel also tweeted this from the ACC's consultant Wasserman Media:

Quote:Consultant Dean Jordan says if #ACCNetwork "performs even moderately," league will be "very, very competitive financially." #ACCKickoff

So there you have it!

(07-20-2016 02:24 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Why didn't ND's leadership take the "easy way out" for full membership and the extra cash and easier playoff chances?

Jack Swarbrick is a pretty smart guy. I bet he can multiply a number by 10. Why didn't he pull the trigger? You have to think that the ACC and ESPN put the carrot and stick to ND to get them to do just that.

ND again said "No sale". Why would it do that?

ACC ADs + ND AD John Swarbrick are lining the front row as Swofford speaks.
-- @aadelsonESPN

why did jack swarbrick sit in on ACC kickoff ...

MEMBERS ONLY

(07-20-2016 02:24 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Why didn't ND's leadership take the "easy way out" for full membership and the extra cash and easier playoff chances?

Jack Swarbrick is a pretty smart guy. I bet he can multiply a number by 10. Why didn't he pull the trigger? You have to think that the ACC and ESPN put the carrot and stick to ND to get them to do just that.

ND again said "No sale". Why would it do that?

1-on-1 w/Swoff: Says Notre Dame will receive full share of #ACCNetwork revenue, as opposed to the 1/5 share it gets from overall rights.
-- David Teel

TO BE SURE

(07-21-2016 03:30 PM)green Wrote:  

(07-20-2016 02:24 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Why didn't ND's leadership take the "easy way out" for full membership and the extra cash and easier playoff chances?

Jack Swarbrick is a pretty smart guy. I bet he can multiply a number by 10. Why didn't he pull the trigger? You have to think that the ACC and ESPN put the carrot and stick to ND to get them to do just that.

ND again said "No sale". Why would it do that?

1-on-1 w/Swoff: Says Notre Dame will receive full share of #ACCNetwork revenue, as opposed to the 1/5 share it gets from overall rights.
-- David Teel

TO BE SURE

Fair enough. The network is built around all-sports and ND brings a strong all-sports program. They will have a lot to do with penetrating the B1G markets.