Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Variable Revenue Conferences
Author Message
jarmzet Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 763
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 14
I Root For: UTSA
Location:
Post: #1
Variable Revenue Conferences
Why do all (almost all?) conference share conference revenue evenly? Wouldn't it make sense to play more valuable schools more? This would make it easier to construct conferences that made sense (across geographic or cultural or whatever lines).

So, for example, the Big 12 could do something like this:

The conference revenue is placed in a big pool and each school gets shares of that revenue based on:

1) 1 share for just being in the conference.

2) Up to 1 share based on how long a school has been in a conference.

The Big 12 was founded in 1996. Original members have been in the conference for 21 years. They would receive a full share.

TCU has been in the conference for 5 years. They would receive a 5/21 share. Any new members add in 2017 would receive a 1/21 share. Each year these shares would be recalculated and new members would gradually catch up with schools that have been in the conference longer.

3) Up to 1 share based on how valuable a school is to a conference (determined somehow objectively). So, say OU and UT are equally the most valuable schools. They'd get a full share. Say Iowa State is determined to be 1/10 as valuable as those two schools. They'd get a 1/10 share.

Under this scheme, the list of schools you could add to the conference would go way up, because you'd more nearly be paying the new schools what they were worth to the conference.

For example, say you added Tulsa for some reason. They'd end up getting something like 1 + 1/21 + 1/10 = 1.15 shares compared to UT and OU's 3 shares. And, I think they'd be happy to have it because it'd be a big step up from AAC money.

You'd need to do away with the Longhorn Network and go to a conference network, but I think this revenue model (or something like it) is a good idea.

The weights of the three types of shares could be adjusted if need be.
07-22-2016 09:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


TexanMark Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 25,637
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 1326
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Post: #2
RE: Variable Revenue Conferences
won't happen...the closest thing might be a quicker buyin over 4-8 seasons.

I was wondering if the ACC could offer a #15 a reduced payout over 4-8 years since a Network is in play now? It goes against the past but it is hard to justify any school other than the Top 15 brands out there an immediate full share anymore.
07-22-2016 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: #3
RE: Variable Revenue Conferences
(07-22-2016 09:57 AM)jarmzet Wrote:  Why do all (almost all?) conference share conference revenue evenly? Wouldn't it make sense to play more valuable schools more? This would make it easier to construct conferences that made sense (across geographic or cultural or whatever lines).

So, for example, the Big 12 could do something like this:

The conference revenue is placed in a big pool and each school gets shares of that revenue based on:

1) 1 share for just being in the conference.

2) Up to 1 share based on how long a school has been in a conference.

The Big 12 was founded in 1996. Original members have been in the conference for 21 years. They would receive a full share.

TCU has been in the conference for 5 years. They would receive a 5/21 share. Any new members add in 2017 would receive a 1/21 share. Each year these shares would be recalculated and new members would gradually catch up with schools that have been in the conference longer.

3) Up to 1 share based on how valuable a school is to a conference (determined somehow objectively). So, say OU and UT are equally the most valuable schools. They'd get a full share. Say Iowa State is determined to be 1/10 as valuable as those two schools. They'd get a 1/10 share.

Under this scheme, the list of schools you could add to the conference would go way up, because you'd more nearly be paying the new schools what they were worth to the conference.

For example, say you added Tulsa for some reason. They'd end up getting something like 1 + 1/21 + 1/10 = 1.15 shares compared to UT and OU's 3 shares. And, I think they'd be happy to have it because it'd be a big step up from AAC money.

You'd need to do away with the Longhorn Network and go to a conference network, but I think this revenue model (or something like it) is a good idea.

The weights of the three types of shares could be adjusted if need be.

Stability.
07-22-2016 10:31 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.