(03-02-2024 01:14 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 11:49 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 11:14 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 08:59 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 08:53 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  Cable channels come, cable channels go.

Cable channels go, very true. But in 2024 cable channels with meaningful subscriber revenue don't come anymore.

Quote:Slap a coat of paint on those satellite trucks, bring in some SEC Network backdrops for the studios, delete the ACCN ads and keep it moving.

No. Charter, Comcast, DirecTV, youtubeTV and the rest have no legal obligation to continue paying for and charging customers for an ACC Network without ACC schools. Disney can't just rebrand to SEC2 and carry on -- SEC2 would be a whole new set of negotiations, which Disney doesn't have leverage in.

If ESPN drops the ACC, it's because the bundle is disintegrating even faster than expected, and the ACC content doesn't move the needle for ESPN Mothership or the ESPN-Fox-WBD joint venture.

ACC Network is, based on my wild guesses and half-rememberd factoids from old articles on the internet, in 50M homes * $0.67 a month * 12 months = $400M in revenue. The PAC 12 NEtwork cost $80M to run the one year that they published numbers, so let's say $320M in profit, split 50-50 gives the Mouse $160M a year in ACC Network revenue.

On the one hand, those numbers are so second hand that they're practically made up. On the other hand, I don't remember if they include the bump from adding Texas and California to the ACC Network in state footprint. (And the one thing we know for a rock-solid fact is that ACC Network gets the higher rate for having a school in the state, word of John Skipper, the cokehead ESPN president who negotiated the deal). On the other other hand, that 50M is going to shrink, the only question is how quickly.

Another way to estimate ACCN profits is based on FOI requests of public universities’ athletic department financials. UNC’s athletic department has reported $11.3M in ACCN distribution/revenue for FY2022-23. IIRC the ACC distributes ACCN revenue equally amongst all 15 teams and the conference administration gets an equal share.

I think it's 14+1/3 (Notre Dame partial share), and the conference office getting a full share is an SEC thing. So $11.3 * 14.3333 = $162M. So my wild-ass guess of $160M was pretty good.

Quote:With a 50/50 profit sharing arrangement, the Mouse made approximately $180M in ACCN profits last year. The ACC’s expansion into California and Texas will be a windfall for ACCN revenue next year.

I don't think the conference office or Notre Dame get full shares. Agreed that California and Texas will boost ACCN revenues. On the other hand that might be only a short-term gain, as those contracts run 3-5 years and then get renegotiated.

What value does ACCn have in a streaming world is much harder to say.

Quote:Disney spent years on tough fights, especially with Comcast, negotiating distribution contracts. In the midst of cord-cutting headwinds they actually invested their capital on the ACCN. The ACCN crossed the toughest distribution obstacles. ACCN (and all dedicated conference networks’) revenue is mainly driven by the number of subscribers in a state. ACC membership will include #1 California, #2 Texas, #3 Florida, #4 New York, #5 Pennsylvania, #8 Georgia, #9 North Carolina, #12 Virginia, #16 Massachusetts, #17 Indiana, etc. Disney has transformed the ACCN into a cash-cow. ESPN has a lot of financial incentive to keep growing the ACCN and continue the ACC deal.

Yeah, it would be a big surprise if ESPN pulls the plug on the ACC.

Even though ND is not a football member and football drives approximately 80% of conference media value, ND gets a full-member share of ACCN distribution. That sweetheart financial provision was requested by ESPN and is broadly reported. The majority of the ACC distribution to ND results from ACCN revenue.

It’s also the reason why ND’s public advocacy of invitations to Cal & Stanford last summer caused aggressive questions and remarks from the FSU AD. Expansion into the California and Texas markets grows per member ACCN revenue, while weakening T1 media value on a per member basis. ND promptly reiterated that it would not change its 5 game per year commitment.

That's not true. In 21-22 Notre Dame got $17.7 million when the average for everyone else was $39.4 million. You can look it up for yourself. Don't believe everything people post on message boards. Its not any more reliable than news journalists!

(03-02-2024 03:13 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  This is something I've been thinking about for awhile.

Constantly hearing posters, commentators and pundits talking about what would be financially "accretive" for the SEC.

Or that espn is no way going to pay more for schools that they are getting "cheap"

etc.

So here's the thing.

What if we're looking at this backwards?

espn had the ACC deal before they ever had the SEC deal.

As much as people say that the ACC is "stuck" in the long term espn deal - so is espn!

So the question is: that deal is said to be such a bad deal for the ACC.

But is it?

if you remove the top 4 ratings draws. (and ND has their own deal), is the deal a bad one for the ACC or for espn?

If the SEC/espn adds the top 4 schools from the ACC, and then does not exercise the 2027 option that we've now heard about, that's pretty easy math.

If we say the 4 schools get paid roughly double in the SEC, that's roughly a cost of "8" instead of 17/18...

espn saves money, and overhead.

So if espn drops the ACC deal in 2027. Fox likely picks it up. (probably with others - for example, I think NBC would be interested in the rest of ND.)

And so if Fox has the ACC, does the Big10 now need to add any of the schools from the ACC?

Probably not.

At that point, Miami for recruiting is likely it.

The result?

espn gets the best 4 from the ACC, and drops the cost of the rest of that deal

Fox picks up the ACC (likely with NBC's help), and gets those schools without needing to pay them Big10-level money. The Big10 adds Miami (with a travel partner - USF?).

The schools thinking they were leveraging a way into the P2 suddenly blink and wonder what happened.

What are you talking about? ESPN and ACC are in a deal together through 2036.

(03-02-2024 05:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 01:14 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 11:49 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 11:14 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 08:59 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Cable channels go, very true. But in 2024 cable channels with meaningful subscriber revenue don't come anymore.


No. Charter, Comcast, DirecTV, youtubeTV and the rest have no legal obligation to continue paying for and charging customers for an ACC Network without ACC schools. Disney can't just rebrand to SEC2 and carry on -- SEC2 would be a whole new set of negotiations, which Disney doesn't have leverage in.

If ESPN drops the ACC, it's because the bundle is disintegrating even faster than expected, and the ACC content doesn't move the needle for ESPN Mothership or the ESPN-Fox-WBD joint venture.

ACC Network is, based on my wild guesses and half-rememberd factoids from old articles on the internet, in 50M homes * $0.67 a month * 12 months = $400M in revenue. The PAC 12 NEtwork cost $80M to run the one year that they published numbers, so let's say $320M in profit, split 50-50 gives the Mouse $160M a year in ACC Network revenue.

On the one hand, those numbers are so second hand that they're practically made up. On the other hand, I don't remember if they include the bump from adding Texas and California to the ACC Network in state footprint. (And the one thing we know for a rock-solid fact is that ACC Network gets the higher rate for having a school in the state, word of John Skipper, the cokehead ESPN president who negotiated the deal). On the other other hand, that 50M is going to shrink, the only question is how quickly.

Another way to estimate ACCN profits is based on FOI requests of public universities’ athletic department financials. UNC’s athletic department has reported $11.3M in ACCN distribution/revenue for FY2022-23. IIRC the ACC distributes ACCN revenue equally amongst all 15 teams and the conference administration gets an equal share.

I think it's 14+1/3 (Notre Dame partial share), and the conference office getting a full share is an SEC thing. So $11.3 * 14.3333 = $162M. So my wild-ass guess of $160M was pretty good.

Quote:With a 50/50 profit sharing arrangement, the Mouse made approximately $180M in ACCN profits last year. The ACC’s expansion into California and Texas will be a windfall for ACCN revenue next year.

I don't think the conference office or Notre Dame get full shares. Agreed that California and Texas will boost ACCN revenues. On the other hand that might be only a short-term gain, as those contracts run 3-5 years and then get renegotiated.

What value does ACCn have in a streaming world is much harder to say.

Quote:Disney spent years on tough fights, especially with Comcast, negotiating distribution contracts. In the midst of cord-cutting headwinds they actually invested their capital on the ACCN. The ACCN crossed the toughest distribution obstacles. ACCN (and all dedicated conference networks’) revenue is mainly driven by the number of subscribers in a state. ACC membership will include #1 California, #2 Texas, #3 Florida, #4 New York, #5 Pennsylvania, #8 Georgia, #9 North Carolina, #12 Virginia, #16 Massachusetts, #17 Indiana, etc. Disney has transformed the ACCN into a cash-cow. ESPN has a lot of financial incentive to keep growing the ACCN and continue the ACC deal.

Yeah, it would be a big surprise if ESPN pulls the plug on the ACC.

Even though ND is not a football member and football drives approximately 80% of conference media value, ND gets a full-member share of ACCN distribution. That sweetheart financial provision was requested by ESPN and is broadly reported. The majority of the ACC distribution to ND results from ACCN revenue.

It’s also the reason why ND’s public advocacy of invitations to Cal & Stanford last summer caused aggressive questions and remarks from the FSU AD. Expansion into the California and Texas markets grows per member ACCN revenue, while weakening T1 media value on a per member basis. ND promptly reiterated that it would not change its 5 game per year commitment.

That's not true. In 21-22 Notre Dame got $17.7 million when the average for everyone else was $39.4 million. You can look it up for yourself. Don't believe everything people post on message boards. Its not any more reliable than news journalists!

100 Percent correct! It is crazy what people believe!

(03-02-2024 06:04 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 03:13 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  This is something I've been thinking about for awhile.

Constantly hearing posters, commentators and pundits talking about what would be financially "accretive" for the SEC.

Or that espn is no way going to pay more for schools that they are getting "cheap"

etc.

So here's the thing.

What if we're looking at this backwards?

espn had the ACC deal before they ever had the SEC deal.

As much as people say that the ACC is "stuck" in the long term espn deal - so is espn!

So the question is: that deal is said to be such a bad deal for the ACC.

But is it?

if you remove the top 4 ratings draws. (and ND has their own deal), is the deal a bad one for the ACC or for espn?

If the SEC/espn adds the top 4 schools from the ACC, and then does not exercise the 2027 option that we've now heard about, that's pretty easy math.

If we say the 4 schools get paid roughly double in the SEC, that's roughly a cost of "8" instead of 17/18...

espn saves money, and overhead.

So if espn drops the ACC deal in 2027. Fox likely picks it up. (probably with others - for example, I think NBC would be interested in the rest of ND.)

And so if Fox has the ACC, does the Big10 now need to add any of the schools from the ACC?

Probably not.

At that point, Miami for recruiting is likely it.

The result?

espn gets the best 4 from the ACC, and drops the cost of the rest of that deal

Fox picks up the ACC (likely with NBC's help), and gets those schools without needing to pay them Big10-level money. The Big10 adds Miami (with a travel partner - USF?).

The schools thinking they were leveraging a way into the P2 suddenly blink and wonder what happened.

What are you talking about? ESPN and ACC are in a deal together through 2036.

No.

They are in a deal until 2027, at which point espn has the ability to extend the deal to 2036.

This has come out in the recent court case disclosures.

(03-02-2024 09:57 AM)gwelymernans Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 06:31 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Perhaps if the Big 10 added Pittsburgh and Virginia and the SEC added Virginia Tech and N.C. State then figuring out 24 wouldn't be as hard.

Pitt's chances in a 24 team B1G are def underrated on this board. Folks keep listing a second Az or second Bay/fourth Cali school that won't bring BTN subs, and then procede to count out a school whose only notable deficiency is ability to deliver BTN subs.

PSU's only rival, UND rival, solid athletics, great academics, drivable for OSU/UM/MSU/UMd fans, fits culturally.

I doubt Pitt is in the B1G's ideal 24, but if the SEC takes four or six of the common targets, or if UND joins and wants buddies, Pitt's chances skyrocket.

Pitt would be duplictive to Big Ten. Pitt's P2 best chance is a tandem with WVU to the SEC. They're a great school (AAU) in urban center to help fight 'NASCAR' narrative.
They have a large stadium to accommodate traveling SEC fans and adds a state with 13 million people for SEC network. WVU is a flagship in a contiguous state to current SEC (Kentucky) with no professional sports and passionate fan base. They also encroach on Big Ten territory, especially if Pitt joins.

(03-02-2024 07:11 PM)kundrky Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 09:57 AM)gwelymernans Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 06:31 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Perhaps if the Big 10 added Pittsburgh and Virginia and the SEC added Virginia Tech and N.C. State then figuring out 24 wouldn't be as hard.

Pitt's chances in a 24 team B1G are def underrated on this board. Folks keep listing a second Az or second Bay/fourth Cali school that won't bring BTN subs, and then procede to count out a school whose only notable deficiency is ability to deliver BTN subs.

PSU's only rival, UND rival, solid athletics, great academics, drivable for OSU/UM/MSU/UMd fans, fits culturally.

I doubt Pitt is in the B1G's ideal 24, but if the SEC takes four or six of the common targets, or if UND joins and wants buddies, Pitt's chances skyrocket.

Pitt would be duplictive to Big Ten. Pitt's P2 best chance is a tandem with WVU to the SEC. They're a great school (AAU) in urban center to help fight 'NASCAR' narrative.
They have a large stadium to accommodate traveling SEC fans and adds a state with 13 million people for SEC network. WVU is a flagship in a contiguous state to current SEC (Kentucky) with no professional sports and passionate fan base. They also encroach on Big Ten territory, especially if Pitt joins.

If that's the case, they have no chance. As well rounded as WVU is there are a lot of better market adds ahead of them. And there is no NASCAR narrative. NASCAR went nationwide and died. Its roots were in ridge-running moonshine. It just didn't translate out of the mountain area South. If the SEC is holding a Virginia school Pitt's market would be intriguing but still not in the wheelhouse of what makes money for the SEC.

(03-02-2024 06:50 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 06:04 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  What are you talking about? ESPN and ACC are in a deal together through 2036.

No.

They are in a deal until 2027, at which point espn has the ability to extend the deal to 2036.

This has come out in the recent court case disclosures.

It's been interesting, hasn't it? Watching people lose the memo on a bombshell.

ESPN gave itself the exit option for a reason. We might even learn the reason... if discovery gets that far in the Florida State-ACC dispute.

(03-02-2024 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 06:50 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 06:04 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  What are you talking about? ESPN and ACC are in a deal together through 2036.

No.

They are in a deal until 2027, at which point espn has the ability to extend the deal to 2036.

This has come out in the recent court case disclosures.

It's been interesting, hasn't it? Watching people lose the memo on a bombshell.

ESPN gave itself the exit option for a reason. We might even learn the reason... if discovery gets that far in the Florida State-ACC dispute.

Way back in 2012 when I joined the board, I stated what I had posted on a Georgia site that ESPN had assembled the parts it wanted in the ACC so that when the time came, they would have leverage with the SEC and Big 10. It's why I called it as it grew a Frankenstein conference. Now I realize that wasn't accurate enough. It was a Comatose creation waiting to be used for organ donation. Parts are appealing to the SEC and parts to the Big 10, and now the creature being created is the Big 12. Almost all will live on after the transplants, but as part of one of 3 existing bodies.
When I heard at the same time as all of us did, about the extension option that was the first thing that came back to mind.

Now admittedly the ACC could become a unique entity if a legal change in the status of students as employees doesn't foul it up. It could become a conference where academics and athletics are stressed together but without the push on revenue sports. However, if athletes become employees, particularly at the P5 level and G5 level, I think that potentiality fades quickly. Revenue will be more crucial than ever before, and all decisions will hinge on the procurement of it. In that world we move to the grafting of the healthier pieces into the Big 10 and SEC and the Big 12 becomes a new creation yet again.

(03-02-2024 06:50 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 06:04 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 03:13 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  This is something I've been thinking about for awhile.

Constantly hearing posters, commentators and pundits talking about what would be financially "accretive" for the SEC.

Or that espn is no way going to pay more for schools that they are getting "cheap"

etc.

So here's the thing.

What if we're looking at this backwards?

espn had the ACC deal before they ever had the SEC deal.

As much as people say that the ACC is "stuck" in the long term espn deal - so is espn!

So the question is: that deal is said to be such a bad deal for the ACC.

But is it?

if you remove the top 4 ratings draws. (and ND has their own deal), is the deal a bad one for the ACC or for espn?

If the SEC/espn adds the top 4 schools from the ACC, and then does not exercise the 2027 option that we've now heard about, that's pretty easy math.

If we say the 4 schools get paid roughly double in the SEC, that's roughly a cost of "8" instead of 17/18...

espn saves money, and overhead.

So if espn drops the ACC deal in 2027. Fox likely picks it up. (probably with others - for example, I think NBC would be interested in the rest of ND.)

And so if Fox has the ACC, does the Big10 now need to add any of the schools from the ACC?

Probably not.

At that point, Miami for recruiting is likely it.

The result?

espn gets the best 4 from the ACC, and drops the cost of the rest of that deal

Fox picks up the ACC (likely with NBC's help), and gets those schools without needing to pay them Big10-level money. The Big10 adds Miami (with a travel partner - USF?).

The schools thinking they were leveraging a way into the P2 suddenly blink and wonder what happened.

What are you talking about? ESPN and ACC are in a deal together through 2036.

No.

They are in a deal until 2027, at which point espn has the ability to extend the deal to 2036.

This has come out in the recent court case disclosures.

You can't believe everything you read. What FSU is referencing is the next "look-in". FSU just making a play on words... As some expect the ACC to get a 250M per year at said look-in. FSU trying to get out before that look-in (which is still way less then the SEC or BiG)

Link
https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2020/...tball.html

Link
https://www.tigernet.com/story/Swofford-...ball-10633

Link
https://floridastate.rivals.com/news/acc...s-thrasher

(03-02-2024 08:46 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 06:50 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  They are in a deal until 2027, at which point espn has the ability to extend the deal to 2036.

This has come out in the recent court case disclosures.

You can't believe everything you read. What FSU is referencing is the next "look-in". FSU just making a play on words... As some expect the ACC to get a 250M per year at said look-in. FSU trying to get out before that look-in (which is still way less then the SEC or BiG)

Link https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2020/...tball.html
Link https://www.tigernet.com/story/Swofford-...ball-10633
Link https://floridastate.rivals.com/news/acc...s-thrasher

It's not about "look-ins" A look-in means nothing. A look-in says you'll sit down and decide if you want to revise the contract.

Guess what? If the parties want to revise a contract, they can just do that. They don't need a "look-in"

From Florida State's initial court filing:

2
It is a widely repeated misconception that the ACC’s multi-media rights agreement expires in 2036. As explained below, in truth, the multi-media rights agreement expires in 2027 unless ESPN chooses to exercise its unilateral option through 2036, a decision ESPN has no duty to make until February 2025, thanks to other additional conference mismanagement detailed below.

72. Perhaps most glaring, as the above chart demonstrates, (a) in 2016, the ACC negotiated NO guaranteed payments from ESPN for the nine-year period of extension mandated under the 2016 Grant of Rights, from 2027 to 2036; and (b) the ACC left in place an outdated and increasingly below market base payment rate (first negotiated in 2012), for 24 years – more than a generation.
73. For reasons never explained to FLORIDA STATE, the 2016 ACC Tier I Agreement granted ESPN a unilateral option to extend that Agreement with its already out-of-market rates an additional nine years beyond its expiration on June 30, 2027, or until 2036 (the “Unilateral ESPN Nine-Year Option”).

74. As a result, although the 2016 ACC Tier I Agreement locked down the ACC members for an unheard of 24 years (through 2036) at Tier I rates negotiated in 2012 (capped at 4.5% annual growth), which rendered the ACC unable to “market” its media rights for the period from 2027 to 2036, the Unilateral ESPN Nine-Year Option left ESPN free to walk away from the ACC (even at those below market rates) during that same nine year period.

That's not a look-in. that's an option. https://news.fsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/...aint-4.pdf

(03-02-2024 06:52 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  It seems unlikely that ESPN would ever not renew the "alleged option for 2027 onwards. If they did. I think the ACC would increase in value on the open market just as the B12 did after they lost Texas and Oklahoma.

There is no report of ESPN opposing the pro rata adds to the ACC. ESPN is invested in ACC Network as it bolsters both ESPN leverage in carriage negotiations and streaming offerings. Fixed cost is all upside for ESPN. I can't imagine FSU being able to get out before 2027 as the finance cost and willingness of the ACC to settle are far to high of barriers.

"

What makes you think that? OUT departing hurt the big 12 a lot, but they haven't dominated in the tv ratings as much as you'd expect. FSU, Clemson and Miami are are actually further ahead of the rest of the ACC in TV ratings than OUT were ahead of the rest of the Big 12. In the Big 12 CCG, they just plug and play different schools every year and still crank out 8-10m viewers. The biggest ACC CCG ever (ratings wise) was the covid year with ND-Clemson, obviously a 1 off. They pulled in about 10m. 15 months ago, TCU-Ks St pulled in 9.41m for the Big 12 CCG. Think about that for a minute, especially think about it from a network executive's perspective. Since that 2020 ACC CCG, they've pulled 2.7m (behind the AAC CCG that year!), 3.4m and then an ok 7m this year that was still last in the P5. What's gonna happen to the ACC when/if their big Brands leave? Their TV numbers will plummet.

It's funny, on paper OUT were worth 50% of the total Big 12 value, but in reality, once the networks put a pen to paper, it wasn't as much as people thought b/c others could carry the load. In the ACC, on paper the Big 3 of FSU/Clemson/Miami don't look to be worth anything remotely like the Brand value that OUT bring, but they provide a disproportionate number of the top-rated games.

Even if ND and UNC both decide to stay, the ACC will probably disintegrate if only FSU, Clemson and Miami leave. Those 3 actually do provide 50% or more of the TV ratings for the ACC.

(03-02-2024 07:42 AM)kundrky Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 06:31 AM)JRsec Wrote:  If Notre Dame and Miami head to the Big 10, Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina and Duke to the SEC ESPN would likely think the top 6 had been taken. But UNC would be longing for N.C. State & Virginia. The answer is more complicated than most think, unless you go to 24. At 24 the margins aren't as clean for the networks.

Perhaps if the Big 10 added Pittsburgh and Virginia and the SEC added Virginia Tech and N.C. State then figuring out 24 wouldn't be as hard.

I agree UNC would probably prefer the SEC. Do you think their preferred partners are Duke/UVa? Or NC St. alone? I think Duke and UVa would prefer the Big Ten, but would they have enough sway over UNC? Or would ESPN allow UNC to get away?

UNC is good enough to get an invite, but they're more like UCLA than USC. Ie, they're a big Brand basketball school in a good location with good academics, but they're not a huge draw in football and won't be able to dictate terms to either of the P2. If we invite anyone with them, it will be b/c we decided that bringing the tagalong was the right move for the conference, and we wouldn't care if they preferred Duke or NC St or (insert name of random future Big 12 school here).

(03-02-2024 06:05 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 05:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 01:14 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 11:49 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 11:14 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  Another way to estimate ACCN profits is based on FOI requests of public universities’ athletic department financials. UNC’s athletic department has reported $11.3M in ACCN distribution/revenue for FY2022-23. IIRC the ACC distributes ACCN revenue equally amongst all 15 teams and the conference administration gets an equal share.

I think it's 14+1/3 (Notre Dame partial share), and the conference office getting a full share is an SEC thing. So $11.3 * 14.3333 = $162M. So my wild-ass guess of $160M was pretty good.

Quote:With a 50/50 profit sharing arrangement, the Mouse made approximately $180M in ACCN profits last year. The ACC’s expansion into California and Texas will be a windfall for ACCN revenue next year.

I don't think the conference office or Notre Dame get full shares. Agreed that California and Texas will boost ACCN revenues. On the other hand that might be only a short-term gain, as those contracts run 3-5 years and then get renegotiated.

What value does ACCn have in a streaming world is much harder to say.

Quote:Disney spent years on tough fights, especially with Comcast, negotiating distribution contracts. In the midst of cord-cutting headwinds they actually invested their capital on the ACCN. The ACCN crossed the toughest distribution obstacles. ACCN (and all dedicated conference networks’) revenue is mainly driven by the number of subscribers in a state. ACC membership will include #1 California, #2 Texas, #3 Florida, #4 New York, #5 Pennsylvania, #8 Georgia, #9 North Carolina, #12 Virginia, #16 Massachusetts, #17 Indiana, etc. Disney has transformed the ACCN into a cash-cow. ESPN has a lot of financial incentive to keep growing the ACCN and continue the ACC deal.

Yeah, it would be a big surprise if ESPN pulls the plug on the ACC.

Even though ND is not a football member and football drives approximately 80% of conference media value, ND gets a full-member share of ACCN distribution. That sweetheart financial provision was requested by ESPN and is broadly reported. The majority of the ACC distribution to ND results from ACCN revenue.

It’s also the reason why ND’s public advocacy of invitations to Cal & Stanford last summer caused aggressive questions and remarks from the FSU AD. Expansion into the California and Texas markets grows per member ACCN revenue, while weakening T1 media value on a per member basis. ND promptly reiterated that it would not change its 5 game per year commitment.

That's not true. In 21-22 Notre Dame got $17.7 million when the average for everyone else was $39.4 million. You can look it up for yourself. Don't believe everything people post on message boards. Its not any more reliable than news journalists!

100 Percent correct! It is crazy what people believe!

How is that correct? The rest of the teams in the league didn't get $39.4 million from the ACCN alone. What he said was that ND gets a full share from the ACC network, not from its media contract with ESPN. You are comparing apples and oranges.

(03-02-2024 08:59 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 08:53 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 03:46 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  ESPN owns the ACC Network. They have a lot of money invested in it.

Cable channels come, cable channels go.

Cable channels go, very true. But in 2024 cable channels with meaningful subscriber revenue don't come anymore.

Quote:Slap a coat of paint on those satellite trucks, bring in some SEC Network backdrops for the studios, delete the ACCN ads and keep it moving.

No. Charter, Comcast, DirecTV, youtubeTV and the rest have no legal obligation to continue paying for and charging customers for an ACC Network without ACC schools. Disney can't just rebrand to SEC2 and carry on -- SEC2 would be a whole new set of negotiations, which Disney doesn't have leverage in.

If ESPN drops the ACC, it's because the bundle is disintegrating even faster than expected, and the ACC content doesn't move the needle for ESPN Mothership or the ESPN-Fox-WBD joint venture.

ACC Network is, based on my wild guesses and half-rememberd factoids from old articles on the internet, in 50M homes * $0.67 a month * 12 months = $400M in revenue. The PAC 12 NEtwork cost $80M to run the one year that they published numbers, so let's say $320M in profit, split 50-50 gives the Mouse $160M a year in ACC Network revenue.

On the one hand, those numbers are so second hand that they're pracitically made up. On the other hand, I don't remember if they include the bump from adding Texas and California to the ACC Network in state footprint. (And the one thing we know for a rock-solid fact is that ACC Network gets the higher rate for having a school in the state, word of John Skipper, the cokehead ESPN president who negotiated the deal). On the other other hand, that 50M is going to shrink, the only question is how quickly.

I don't remember the number, but I'm pretty sure that it was more $.67 per month. I feel like it was in the $1-2 range.

(03-02-2024 11:49 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 11:14 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 08:59 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 08:53 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 03:46 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  ESPN owns the ACC Network. They have a lot of money invested in it.

Cable channels come, cable channels go.

Cable channels go, very true. But in 2024 cable channels with meaningful subscriber revenue don't come anymore.

Quote:Slap a coat of paint on those satellite trucks, bring in some SEC Network backdrops for the studios, delete the ACCN ads and keep it moving.

No. Charter, Comcast, DirecTV, youtubeTV and the rest have no legal obligation to continue paying for and charging customers for an ACC Network without ACC schools. Disney can't just rebrand to SEC2 and carry on -- SEC2 would be a whole new set of negotiations, which Disney doesn't have leverage in.

If ESPN drops the ACC, it's because the bundle is disintegrating even faster than expected, and the ACC content doesn't move the needle for ESPN Mothership or the ESPN-Fox-WBD joint venture.

ACC Network is, based on my wild guesses and half-rememberd factoids from old articles on the internet, in 50M homes * $0.67 a month * 12 months = $400M in revenue. The PAC 12 NEtwork cost $80M to run the one year that they published numbers, so let's say $320M in profit, split 50-50 gives the Mouse $160M a year in ACC Network revenue.

On the one hand, those numbers are so second hand that they're practically made up. On the other hand, I don't remember if they include the bump from adding Texas and California to the ACC Network in state footprint. (And the one thing we know for a rock-solid fact is that ACC Network gets the higher rate for having a school in the state, word of John Skipper, the cokehead ESPN president who negotiated the deal). On the other other hand, that 50M is going to shrink, the only question is how quickly.

Another way to estimate ACCN profits is based on FOI requests of public universities’ athletic department financials. UNC’s athletic department has reported $11.3M in ACCN distribution/revenue for FY2022-23. IIRC the ACC distributes ACCN revenue equally amongst all 15 teams and the conference administration gets an equal share.

I think it's 14+1/3 (Notre Dame partial share), and the conference office getting a full share is an SEC thing. So $11.3 * 14.3333 = $162M. So my wild-ass guess of $160M was pretty good.

Quote:With a 50/50 profit sharing arrangement, the Mouse made approximately $180M in ACCN profits last year. The ACC’s expansion into California and Texas will be a windfall for ACCN revenue next year.

I don't think the conference office or Notre Dame get full shares. Agreed that California and Texas will boost ACCN revenues. On the other hand that might be only a short-term gain, as those contracts run 3-5 years and then get renegotiated.

What value does ACCn have in a streaming world is much harder to say.

Quote:Disney spent years on tough fights, especially with Comcast, negotiating distribution contracts. In the midst of cord-cutting headwinds they actually invested their capital on the ACCN. The ACCN crossed the toughest distribution obstacles. ACCN (and all dedicated conference networks’) revenue is mainly driven by the number of subscribers in a state. ACC membership will include #1 California, #2 Texas, #3 Florida, #4 New York, #5 Pennsylvania, #8 Georgia, #9 North Carolina, #12 Virginia, #16 Massachusetts, #17 Indiana, etc. Disney has transformed the ACCN into a cash-cow. ESPN has a lot of financial incentive to keep growing the ACCN and continue the ACC deal.

Yeah, it would be a big surprise if ESPN pulls the plug on the ACC.

ND get's 20% of the media rights deal but a full share of ACCN. The conference getting a full share is a B1G thing, not SEC.

(03-02-2024 06:05 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 05:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 01:14 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 11:49 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 11:14 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  Another way to estimate ACCN profits is based on FOI requests of public universities’ athletic department financials. UNC’s athletic department has reported $11.3M in ACCN distribution/revenue for FY2022-23. IIRC the ACC distributes ACCN revenue equally amongst all 15 teams and the conference administration gets an equal share.

I think it's 14+1/3 (Notre Dame partial share), and the conference office getting a full share is an SEC thing. So $11.3 * 14.3333 = $162M. So my wild-ass guess of $160M was pretty good.

Quote:With a 50/50 profit sharing arrangement, the Mouse made approximately $180M in ACCN profits last year. The ACC’s expansion into California and Texas will be a windfall for ACCN revenue next year.

I don't think the conference office or Notre Dame get full shares. Agreed that California and Texas will boost ACCN revenues. On the other hand that might be only a short-term gain, as those contracts run 3-5 years and then get renegotiated.

What value does ACCn have in a streaming world is much harder to say.

Quote:Disney spent years on tough fights, especially with Comcast, negotiating distribution contracts. In the midst of cord-cutting headwinds they actually invested their capital on the ACCN. The ACCN crossed the toughest distribution obstacles. ACCN (and all dedicated conference networks’) revenue is mainly driven by the number of subscribers in a state. ACC membership will include #1 California, #2 Texas, #3 Florida, #4 New York, #5 Pennsylvania, #8 Georgia, #9 North Carolina, #12 Virginia, #16 Massachusetts, #17 Indiana, etc. Disney has transformed the ACCN into a cash-cow. ESPN has a lot of financial incentive to keep growing the ACCN and continue the ACC deal.

Yeah, it would be a big surprise if ESPN pulls the plug on the ACC.

Even though ND is not a football member and football drives approximately 80% of conference media value, ND gets a full-member share of ACCN distribution. That sweetheart financial provision was requested by ESPN and is broadly reported. The majority of the ACC distribution to ND results from ACCN revenue.

It’s also the reason why ND’s public advocacy of invitations to Cal & Stanford last summer caused aggressive questions and remarks from the FSU AD. Expansion into the California and Texas markets grows per member ACCN revenue, while weakening T1 media value on a per member basis. ND promptly reiterated that it would not change its 5 game per year commitment.

That's not true. In 21-22 Notre Dame got $17.7 million when the average for everyone else was $39.4 million. You can look it up for yourself. Don't believe everything people post on message boards. Its not any more reliable than news journalists!

100 Percent correct! It is crazy what people believe!

20% of the media rights agreement + 100% of ACCN revenue was $17.7m in 21-22...not sure what point you guys are trying to make here.

(03-02-2024 07:42 AM)kundrky Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 06:31 AM)JRsec Wrote:  If Notre Dame and Miami head to the Big 10, Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina and Duke to the SEC ESPN would likely think the top 6 had been taken. But UNC would be longing for N.C. State & Virginia. The answer is more complicated than most think, unless you go to 24. At 24 the margins aren't as clean for the networks.

Perhaps if the Big 10 added Pittsburgh and Virginia and the SEC added Virginia Tech and N.C. State then figuring out 24 wouldn't be as hard.

I agree UNC would probably prefer the SEC. Do you think their preferred partners are Duke/UVa? Or NC St. alone? I think Duke and UVa would prefer the Big Ten, but would they have enough sway over UNC? Or would ESPN allow UNC to get away?

Just found this post as the thread end had moved on past it.

UVa would prefer the Big 10 if they were the only ones deciding. But there top preference is to stay with UNC and Duke. I think you would find Duke to be ambivalent about the Big 10 or SEC. They very much like being a traditional Southern school with national appeal to Ivy level students. And like Virginia they just want to keep the gang together.

This is why taking the 5 together may well be a ploy that gains traction among those schools and their presidents and certainly among the presidents in the SEC. ESPN sees it as building the dominant Winter lineup to match the SEC's football in the Fall. If we are talking conferences of 24 members the SEC can afford this move, the Big 10 cannot. The SEC has 8 slots to fill and the Big 10 has 6 and will need a couple out west if they want divisions to cut down on the travel, which I believe everyone will see the wisdom in having.

The conferences know that divisions promote sub regionalism and add greatly to travel interest which drives donations for a limited supply of visitor tickets. But everyone forgets is that solid divisions appeal to the networks because if they produce a champion that qualifies for the playoff then each region of the regular season is represented in the post season, and this keeps the audience national. Without divisions you could wind up with 4 schools from the Deep South or Northern Midwest grabbing all of the playoff slots and that alienates unrepresented regions and kills part of the national audience.

I think the Big 10 will add 2 to the West and 3 to the East, and one in the Plains. I also think the SEC will add at least 1 to the West and the rest up the East Coast.

(03-02-2024 09:59 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 08:59 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 08:53 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 03:46 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  ESPN owns the ACC Network. They have a lot of money invested in it.

Cable channels come, cable channels go.

Cable channels go, very true. But in 2024 cable channels with meaningful subscriber revenue don't come anymore.

Quote:Slap a coat of paint on those satellite trucks, bring in some SEC Network backdrops for the studios, delete the ACCN ads and keep it moving.

No. Charter, Comcast, DirecTV, youtubeTV and the rest have no legal obligation to continue paying for and charging customers for an ACC Network without ACC schools. Disney can't just rebrand to SEC2 and carry on -- SEC2 would be a whole new set of negotiations, which Disney doesn't have leverage in.

If ESPN drops the ACC, it's because the bundle is disintegrating even faster than expected, and the ACC content doesn't move the needle for ESPN Mothership or the ESPN-Fox-WBD joint venture.

ACC Network is, based on my wild guesses and half-rememberd factoids from old articles on the internet, in 50M homes * $0.67 a month * 12 months = $400M in revenue. The PAC 12 NEtwork cost $80M to run the one year that they published numbers, so let's say $320M in profit, split 50-50 gives the Mouse $160M a year in ACC Network revenue.

On the one hand, those numbers are so second hand that they're pracitically made up. On the other hand, I don't remember if they include the bump from adding Texas and California to the ACC Network in state footprint. (And the one thing we know for a rock-solid fact is that ACC Network gets the higher rate for having a school in the state, word of John Skipper, the cokehead ESPN president who negotiated the deal). On the other other hand, that 50M is going to shrink, the only question is how quickly.

I don't remember the number, but I'm pretty sure that it was more $.67 per month. I feel like it was in the $1-2 range.

https://variety.com/vip/pay-tv-true-cost...234810682/

Article from 2020 gives the ACC Network average as $0.67, SEC Network as $0.93 per month.

My guess is it's $2-3 in-market and a nickel or a dime a month out of market, for an average of $1 or so. Before bringing Texas & California into the ACC Network in-market list.

(03-02-2024 10:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 07:42 AM)kundrky Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 06:31 AM)JRsec Wrote:  If Notre Dame and Miami head to the Big 10, Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina and Duke to the SEC ESPN would likely think the top 6 had been taken. But UNC would be longing for N.C. State & Virginia. The answer is more complicated than most think, unless you go to 24. At 24 the margins aren't as clean for the networks.

Perhaps if the Big 10 added Pittsburgh and Virginia and the SEC added Virginia Tech and N.C. State then figuring out 24 wouldn't be as hard.

I agree UNC would probably prefer the SEC. Do you think their preferred partners are Duke/UVa? Or NC St. alone? I think Duke and UVa would prefer the Big Ten, but would they have enough sway over UNC? Or would ESPN allow UNC to get away?

Just found this post as the thread end had moved on past it.

UVa would prefer the Big 10 if they were the only ones deciding. But there top preference is to stay with UNC and Duke. I think you would find Duke to be ambivalent about the Big 10 or SEC. They very much like being a traditional Southern school with national appeal to Ivy level students. And like Virginia they just want to keep the gang together.

This is why taking the 5 together may well be a ploy that gains traction among those schools and their presidents and certainly among the presidents in the SEC. ESPN sees it as building the dominant Winter lineup to match the SEC's football in the Fall. If we are talking conferences of 24 members the SEC can afford this move, the Big 10 cannot. The SEC has 8 slots to fill and the Big 10 has 6 and will need a couple out west if they want divisions to cut down on the travel, which I believe everyone will see the wisdom in having.

The conferences know that divisions promote sub regionalism and add greatly to travel interest which drives donations for a limited supply of visitor tickets. But everyone forgets is that solid divisions appeal to the networks because if they produce a champion that qualifies for the playoff then each region of the regular season is represented in the post season, and this keeps the audience national. Without divisions you could wind up with 4 schools from the Deep South or Northern Midwest grabbing all of the playoff slots and that alienates unrepresented regions and kills part of the national audience.

I think the Big 10 will add 2 to the West and 3 to the East, and one in the Plains. I also think the SEC will add at least 1 to the West and the rest up the East Coast.

If the Big10 decides to ignore the west (and they could, I suppose - the eastern schools apparently want more east than west), then adding VA, NC, and Duke could actually be an option.

Delaney said something about that around a decade ago (the reporting was that he was trying to get his alma mater to a "yes").

Add Miami plus a travel partner (FSU/GT/USF), and Kansas, and that's actually a pretty solid set of additions.

It pacifies the eastern schools, adds basketball powers, adds a plains school, and gets them into the state of Florida.

And that's if they're stopping at adding 6, for 24.

at 28, then they can add: VA, NC, and Duke, and expand the eastern choices: Miami, GT, and either FSU or USF, for 6, with room for more out west - your choice of 4 of: Kansas, AZ, AZ State, Colorado, Utah, Stanford, or Cal.

And what's interesting to me is, that based on the SEC fan lists I've seen, the main contentious questions seem to be FSU and NC. Most SEC fans (you aside of course : ) - don't seem to care if the rest of those schools are added or not.

(03-02-2024 10:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 07:42 AM)kundrky Wrote:  

(03-02-2024 06:31 AM)JRsec Wrote:  If Notre Dame and Miami head to the Big 10, Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina and Duke to the SEC ESPN would likely think the top 6 had been taken. But UNC would be longing for N.C. State & Virginia. The answer is more complicated than most think, unless you go to 24. At 24 the margins aren't as clean for the networks.

Perhaps if the Big 10 added Pittsburgh and Virginia and the SEC added Virginia Tech and N.C. State then figuring out 24 wouldn't be as hard.

I agree UNC would probably prefer the SEC. Do you think their preferred partners are Duke/UVa? Or NC St. alone? I think Duke and UVa would prefer the Big Ten, but would they have enough sway over UNC? Or would ESPN allow UNC to get away?

Just found this post as the thread end had moved on past it.

UVa would prefer the Big 10 if they were the only ones deciding. But there top preference is to stay with UNC and Duke. I think you would find Duke to be ambivalent about the Big 10 or SEC. They very much like being a traditional Southern school with national appeal to Ivy level students. And like Virginia they just want to keep the gang together.

This is why taking the 5 together may well be a ploy that gains traction among those schools and their presidents and certainly among the presidents in the SEC. ESPN sees it as building the dominant Winter lineup to match the SEC's football in the Fall. If we are talking conferences of 24 members the SEC can afford this move, the Big 10 cannot. The SEC has 8 slots to fill and the Big 10 has 6 and will need a couple out west if they want divisions to cut down on the travel, which I believe everyone will see the wisdom in having.

The conferences know that divisions promote sub regionalism and add greatly to travel interest which drives donations for a limited supply of visitor tickets. But everyone forgets is that solid divisions appeal to the networks because if they produce a champion that qualifies for the playoff then each region of the regular season is represented in the post season, and this keeps the audience national. Without divisions you could wind up with 4 schools from the Deep South or Northern Midwest grabbing all of the playoff slots and that alienates unrepresented regions and kills part of the national audience.

I think the Big 10 will add 2 to the West (Cal & Stanford ?) and 3 to the East, (Miami, USF, & either Duke or Pittsburgh) and one in the Plains. (Colorado?) I also think the SEC will add at least 1 to the West (Kansas) and the rest up the East Coast.

JR, my guesses are in parentheses.