Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
ACC Network- Forbes Article Suggests ESPN Can Be Profitable With The ACCN
Author Message
MWC Tex Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,002
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 83
I Root For: MW
Location: Amarillo
Post: #21
RE: ACC Network- Forbes Article Suggests ESPN Can Be Profitable With The ACCN
(05-15-2017 10:29 AM)mj4life Wrote:  
(05-15-2017 10:06 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  In the old days, Cord Cutting meant going straight to OTA. Now, it is actually Streaming Providers vs Cable Providers. How many cord cutters actually are not using their internet service to stream sports, movies and tv shows? The main savings I have gotten is not having to lease cable boxes, DVRs and modems. I really love to see the number of ESPN users that switched from Cable to Sling, PSVUE or another streaming service. I rarely watch live tv anymore except for sports. Many times I start an 1-2 hours later due to doing family stuff or appointments. Many times I actually catchup live in the last part of the game and cuss I can't skip the commercial or ESPN non sport topic discussions. With VUE I get B10 & SEC, I will be happy when ACC is added so I just have one place to watch and record. THe only sprts channel I don't get is CBSSN, rarely has there been a game there I wanted to watch.

Last info I could find had Sling,Vue & Directtv Now in the combined 2-3 million range, this number is likely to grow even if it's spread over several providers. Every streaming package I have seen has ESPN &Fox related content

Dish's numbers are still going down even with Sling numbers added so the vast majority of cords cutters are just going OTA but subscribing to Netflix and Hulu.
Remember there was an article that only 20% of the households even watched ESPN. So those 80% are the ones that are not even bothering to use OTT TV streaming.
(This post was last modified: 05-16-2017 07:20 AM by MWC Tex.)
05-16-2017 07:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,600
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 247
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #22
RE: ACC Network- Forbes Article Suggests ESPN Can Be Profitable With The ACCN
There's nothing stopping bundling in the digital age (it's actually been quite common for a long time), and fans matter, not markets.
05-16-2017 07:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 8,304
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 255
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #23
RE: ACC Network- Forbes Article Suggests ESPN Can Be Profitable With The ACCN
(05-15-2017 07:50 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  These conference networks are toast if more cord cutting happens. Nobody in the south gives a crap about the Big 10. Nobody in the Pac-12 area cares about the SEC. You basically only watch your team and your conference for most people. The amount of time devoted to binge watching college football isn't done by that many.

BTN and SECN make some money "out-of-footprint", but the big money is in $1-a-month subscription fees in your market.

(05-15-2017 10:06 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  In the old days, Cord Cutting meant going straight to OTA. Now, it is actually Streaming Providers vs Cable Providers. How many cord cutters actually are not using their internet service to stream sports, movies and tv shows?

Snarkly answer: The ones that don't care about sports.
Real answer: The big issue isn't number of people watching, it's number of people paying. If Grandpa dies (one less cable household) and Junior graduates college and watches games religiously using Dad's ESPN password, ESPN is out $7 a month net.

(05-15-2017 10:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Based on those numbers you'd expect the ACC Network to generate only slightly more money than the Pac12 Network. I would have expected the ACC to have a substantially better ratings performance than the Pac12 due to its far more populated footprint--but that chart surprisingly says there isn't much difference.

It's not just footprint, or AAC and CUSA would be swimming in money from the Florida, Houston, DAllas etc markets. It's how intense the demand is, how many people will change cable/satellite providers over having the programming. I'm pretty sure the Bama fan with herringbone curtains in his doublewide will switch from cable to satellite to whatever to make sure he catches every Tide game. Not so sure about the Virginia Tech fan in NoVA.

(05-15-2017 02:39 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  That 100% ownership sounds like it would be awesome when it comes to revenue. But, the problem is--without a well connected network partner that can apply leverage to cable carriers--its a lot harder to get carriage---which negatively affects the number of subscribers and ultimately---revenue. If they stick with it, I think the Pac-12 100% ownership model will outperform the others---its just going to take significantly more time to build the subscriber base.

Network has been online for what, five years now? Where is the big basket of PAC-12 fans who are going to wake up and decide that PACnet is a thing that they need to pay extra for?
05-16-2017 07:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,835
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 432
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #24
RE: ACC Network- Forbes Article Suggests ESPN Can Be Profitable With The ACCN
(05-15-2017 02:39 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(05-15-2017 01:45 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I just want to point something out for those who think the ACC or SEC "own" any shares of the conference network. ESPN will own the ACC network 100%, just like ESPN owns 100% of the SEC network. ESPN does a (rumored) 70/30 revenue split with the SEC, but it's ESPN's network.
PAC 12 Network: Owned 100% by PAC 12.
Big 10 Network: Owned 49% by Big 10, 51% by Fox.
SEC Network: Owned 100% by ESPN. SEC receives 30% of the revenues (rumored)
ACC Network: Will be owned 100% by ESPN. Revenue splits are unknown.

That 100% ownership sounds like it would be awesome when it comes to revenue. But, the problem is--without a well connected network partner that can apply leverage to cable carriers--its a lot harder to get carriage---which negatively affects the number of subscribers and ultimately---revenue. If they stick with it, I think the Pac-12 100% ownership model will outperform the others---its just going to take significantly more time to build the subscriber base.

Concerning ownership: strictly in terms of money, it's better to own 30% of $100 million than 100% of $10 million. But on the other hand, it's better to own 100% of $10 million than 10% of $70 million. Or 50% of $15 million.

So no ownership split is ideal, in and of itself. The optimal value-creating synergy between you and a partner can theoretically be at any level of splitting (above zero for you, of course).

The problem the SEC has, and the ACC will have, is that their revenue splits with regards to the SECN and coming ACCN are not based purely on what is "optimal value creating synergy", rather, they are (in the case of the SEC) and will (in the case of the ACC) be heavily influenced by the fact that ESPN already has both conferences locked in to long-term contracts, giving ESPN much greater bargaining power in making the network deals.

IOW's, had the SEC not signed the disastrous 2008 contract with ESPN, and the ACC not signed their equally dumb 2010 contract with ESPN, each would get a much bigger share of the revenue pie than they are/will get, and that pie would be the same size as it otherwise would be.

So considering the SEC, sans that 2008 contract, rather than getting 30% of the $500m SECN revenue, they would likely (using the B1G/FOX deal as a benchmark) be getting 50% of $500m SECN revenue, an enormous loss of money as a legacy of the awful Slive 2008 contract.
(This post was last modified: 05-16-2017 08:15 AM by quo vadis.)
05-16-2017 08:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,039
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 485
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Upstate SC
Post: #25
RE: ACC Network- Forbes Article Suggests ESPN Can Be Profitable With The ACCN
(05-16-2017 07:54 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  It's not just footprint, or AAC and CUSA would be swimming in money from the Florida, Houston, DAllas etc markets. It's how intense the demand is, how many people will change cable/satellite providers over having the programming. I'm pretty sure the Bama fan with herringbone curtains in his doublewide will switch from cable to satellite to whatever to make sure he catches every Tide game. Not so sure about the Virginia Tech fan in NoVA.

I think most ACC fans would be willing to change provider - or go streaming - to get the ACC network.

Plus, a few well-placed ooc games will insure that Penn State, Kentucky, S Carolina, Georgia and Florida fans will want it too.
05-16-2017 09:56 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,410
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 449
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #26
RE: ACC Network- Forbes Article Suggests ESPN Can Be Profitable With The ACCN
In the case of the ACC Network being profitable, it's actually a much simpler calculation regardless of demographics, cord cutting or other overarching media issues.

At the end of the day, ESPN has *already* paid for ACC rights. They own them 100% at this point. As a result, even a modest subscription rate for the ACC Network compared to the BTN or SEC Network would likely be a revenue generator for ESPN because they're getting an additional subscriber fee for content that they *already* own. Assuming that ESPN isn't taking ACC content off of its mothership ESPN and ESPN2 channel and this is purely additive, the ACC Network allows for ESPN to monetize ACC content that they own and aren't showing otherwise (outside of maybe purely online offerings).
05-16-2017 12:04 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 7,257
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 287
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #27
RE: ACC Network- Forbes Article Suggests ESPN Can Be Profitable With The ACCN
(05-16-2017 07:54 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(05-15-2017 07:50 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  These conference networks are toast if more cord cutting happens. Nobody in the south gives a crap about the Big 10. Nobody in the Pac-12 area cares about the SEC. You basically only watch your team and your conference for most people. The amount of time devoted to binge watching college football isn't done by that many.

BTN and SECN make some money "out-of-footprint", but the big money is in $1-a-month subscription fees in your market.

(05-15-2017 10:06 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  In the old days, Cord Cutting meant going straight to OTA. Now, it is actually Streaming Providers vs Cable Providers. How many cord cutters actually are not using their internet service to stream sports, movies and tv shows?

Snarkly answer: The ones that don't care about sports.
Real answer: The big issue isn't number of people watching, it's number of people paying. If Grandpa dies (one less cable household) and Junior graduates college and watches games religiously using Dad's ESPN password, ESPN is out $7 a month net.

(05-15-2017 10:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Based on those numbers you'd expect the ACC Network to generate only slightly more money than the Pac12 Network. I would have expected the ACC to have a substantially better ratings performance than the Pac12 due to its far more populated footprint--but that chart surprisingly says there isn't much difference.

It's not just footprint, or AAC and CUSA would be swimming in money from the Florida, Houston, DAllas etc markets. It's how intense the demand is, how many people will change cable/satellite providers over having the programming. I'm pretty sure the Bama fan with herringbone curtains in his doublewide will switch from cable to satellite to whatever to make sure he catches every Tide game. Not so sure about the Virginia Tech fan in NoVA.

(05-15-2017 02:39 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  That 100% ownership sounds like it would be awesome when it comes to revenue. But, the problem is--without a well connected network partner that can apply leverage to cable carriers--its a lot harder to get carriage---which negatively affects the number of subscribers and ultimately---revenue. If they stick with it, I think the Pac-12 100% ownership model will outperform the others---its just going to take significantly more time to build the subscriber base.

Network has been online for what, five years now? Where is the big basket of PAC-12 fans who are going to wake up and decide that PACnet is a thing that they need to pay extra for?

Are PAC 12 fans wasting money on the PAC network? I don't know anyone who has it..
05-16-2017 12:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 7,257
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 287
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #28
RE: ACC Network- Forbes Article Suggests ESPN Can Be Profitable With The ACCN
(05-16-2017 09:56 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(05-16-2017 07:54 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  It's not just footprint, or AAC and CUSA would be swimming in money from the Florida, Houston, DAllas etc markets. It's how intense the demand is, how many people will change cable/satellite providers over having the programming. I'm pretty sure the Bama fan with herringbone curtains in his doublewide will switch from cable to satellite to whatever to make sure he catches every Tide game. Not so sure about the Virginia Tech fan in NoVA.

I think most ACC fans would be willing to change provider - or go streaming - to get the ACC network.

Plus, a few well-placed ooc games will insure that Penn State, Kentucky, S Carolina, Georgia and Florida fans will want it too.

Doubt it. If ECU played 3 football games on the road and all 3 were on ACC network, I wouldn't get it. I don't know why Florida or penn st fans would buy it either.
(This post was last modified: 05-16-2017 12:10 PM by billybobby777.)
05-16-2017 12:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 7,257
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 287
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #29
RE: ACC Network- Forbes Article Suggests ESPN Can Be Profitable With The ACCN
(05-16-2017 12:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  In the case of the ACC Network being profitable, it's actually a much simpler calculation regardless of demographics, cord cutting or other overarching media issues.

At the end of the day, ESPN has *already* paid for ACC rights. They own them 100% at this point. As a result, even a modest subscription rate for the ACC Network compared to the BTN or SEC Network would likely be a revenue generator for ESPN because they're getting an additional subscriber fee for content that they *already* own. Assuming that ESPN isn't taking ACC content off of its mothership ESPN and ESPN2 channel and this is purely additive, the ACC Network allows for ESPN to monetize ACC content that they own and aren't showing otherwise (outside of maybe purely online offerings).

AAC fans are counting on "ESPN taking ACC content off of ESPN/ESPN2 to show AAC games"...We talk about all the time on here.
(This post was last modified: 05-16-2017 12:15 PM by billybobby777.)
05-16-2017 12:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,709
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 457
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #30
RE: ACC Network- Forbes Article Suggests ESPN Can Be Profitable With The ACCN
(05-16-2017 09:56 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(05-16-2017 07:54 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  It's not just footprint, or AAC and CUSA would be swimming in money from the Florida, Houston, DAllas etc markets. It's how intense the demand is, how many people will change cable/satellite providers over having the programming. I'm pretty sure the Bama fan with herringbone curtains in his doublewide will switch from cable to satellite to whatever to make sure he catches every Tide game. Not so sure about the Virginia Tech fan in NoVA.

I think most ACC fans would be willing to change provider - or go streaming - to get the ACC network.

Plus, a few well-placed ooc games will insure that Penn State, Kentucky, S Carolina, Georgia and Florida fans will want it too.

The ACC Network Extra has been good enough for me. It is part of the $40 Sling package.

I only watch ND baseball games on it, masochist that I am.

I may have to pass on the "linear" channel, if I have that option and the cost is more than very minimal.

I don't want to pay for stuff like coaches shows, "classic" games and junk like that.

I also really don't want to pay for non-ND ACC content, no matter what. I never watch it.
(This post was last modified: 05-16-2017 12:57 PM by TerryD.)
05-16-2017 12:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2017 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.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.