"The ACC’s media rights deal with ESPN includes all game inventory, digital rights and corporate sponsorship. That, plus the security provided by the grant of rights, puts the ACC in a position of starting a network without having to buy back rights from third parties, as the SEC did with IMG College and Learfield Sports.
The ACC commissioned a study by Wasserman Media Group to determine whether the new conference footprint would support a network. Swofford said the ACC’s footprint along the Northeast and Southeast U.S. reaches 43 million TV households, more than other conferences.
“The grant of rights sets the table for us to have substantive conversations about a network,” said Clemson Athletic Director Dan Radakovich, who sits with Duke AD Kevin White and North Carolina’s Bubba Cunningham on the ACC’s TV subcommittee.
“With the expansion we’ve had, our demographics, our financials and our projections are much more palatable,” Radakovich said. “The only thing holding us up is time. The SEC Network was three years in the making. Distribution, programming, legal, it all takes time.”
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...work.aspx?
(05-06-2013 11:29 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote: [ -> ]"The ACC’s media rights deal with ESPN includes all game inventory, digital rights and corporate sponsorship. That, plus the security provided by the grant of rights, puts the ACC in a position of starting a network without having to buy back rights from third parties, as the SEC did with IMG College and Learfield Sports.
The ACC commissioned a study by Wasserman Media Group to determine whether the new conference footprint would support a network. Swofford said the ACC’s footprint along the Northeast and Southeast U.S. reaches 43 million TV households, more than other conferences.
“The grant of rights sets the table for us to have substantive conversations about a network,” said Clemson Athletic Director Dan Radakovich, who sits with Duke AD Kevin White and North Carolina’s Bubba Cunningham on the ACC’s TV subcommittee.
“With the expansion we’ve had, our demographics, our financials and our projections are much more palatable,” Radakovich said. “The only thing holding us up is time. The SEC Network was three years in the making. Distribution, programming, legal, it all takes time.”
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...work.aspx?
It boggles the mind why this wasn't on the plate 3 years ago. Maybe Swofford got myopic about sorting out the details from the 06 expansion and lost sight of the big picture. Was Maryland leaving a catalyst or was their membership a retardant?
(05-06-2013 11:51 AM)L-yes Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2013 11:29 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote: [ -> ]"The ACC’s media rights deal with ESPN includes all game inventory, digital rights and corporate sponsorship. That, plus the security provided by the grant of rights, puts the ACC in a position of starting a network without having to buy back rights from third parties, as the SEC did with IMG College and Learfield Sports.
The ACC commissioned a study by Wasserman Media Group to determine whether the new conference footprint would support a network. Swofford said the ACC’s footprint along the Northeast and Southeast U.S. reaches 43 million TV households, more than other conferences.
“The grant of rights sets the table for us to have substantive conversations about a network,” said Clemson Athletic Director Dan Radakovich, who sits with Duke AD Kevin White and North Carolina’s Bubba Cunningham on the ACC’s TV subcommittee.
“With the expansion we’ve had, our demographics, our financials and our projections are much more palatable,” Radakovich said. “The only thing holding us up is time. The SEC Network was three years in the making. Distribution, programming, legal, it all takes time.”
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...work.aspx?
It boggles the mind why this wasn't on the plate 3 years ago. Maybe Swofford got myopic about sorting out the details from the 06 expansion and lost sight of the big picture. Was Maryland leaving a catalyst or was their membership a retardant?
market demographics & distribution have always been the negatives of a ACC Network. remember 3 years ago their was no Pitt,Syracuse, or Notre Dame,Louisville & just didn't make sense. the single biggest thing that has happened IMO is Notre Dame apparently shelving a standalone Digital network in favor of a conference based network
(05-06-2013 11:51 AM)L-yes Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2013 11:29 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote: [ -> ]"The ACC’s media rights deal with ESPN includes all game inventory, digital rights and corporate sponsorship. That, plus the security provided by the grant of rights, puts the ACC in a position of starting a network without having to buy back rights from third parties, as the SEC did with IMG College and Learfield Sports.
The ACC commissioned a study by Wasserman Media Group to determine whether the new conference footprint would support a network. Swofford said the ACC’s footprint along the Northeast and Southeast U.S. reaches 43 million TV households, more than other conferences.
“The grant of rights sets the table for us to have substantive conversations about a network,” said Clemson Athletic Director Dan Radakovich, who sits with Duke AD Kevin White and North Carolina’s Bubba Cunningham on the ACC’s TV subcommittee.
“With the expansion we’ve had, our demographics, our financials and our projections are much more palatable,” Radakovich said. “The only thing holding us up is time. The SEC Network was three years in the making. Distribution, programming, legal, it all takes time.”
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...work.aspx?
It boggles the mind why this wasn't on the plate 3 years ago. Maybe Swofford got myopic about sorting out the details from the 06 expansion and lost sight of the big picture. Was Maryland leaving a catalyst or was their membership a retardant?
3 years ago ESPN was buying all the rights of the ACC and SEC to ward off us getting our own networks. Now they're so confident that they'll launch networks they own for us and pay us ~$8 million a school. That's a big difference. The question is whether we should let ESPN own the network or should we launch our own because we might make even more 10 years down the road.
Being a sports commissioner has to be one of the worst jobs on the planet. Being a college sports commissioner has to be on the bottom (top?) of that list. You get credit for nothing and blamed for everything. You have to deal with presidents who don't have the best interest of the sport/league in mind. And rightfully so. It is a university first. It makes for an interesting dynamic.
(05-06-2013 12:57 PM)Wolfman Wrote: [ -> ]Being a sports commissioner has to be one of the worst jobs on the planet. Being a college sports commissioner has to be on the bottom (top?) of that list. You get credit for nothing and blamed for everything. You have to deal with presidents who don't have the best interest of the sport/league in mind. And rightfully so. It is a university first. It makes for an interesting dynamic.
Hardly. He makes 2 million clams a year to work out of an office on sports related issues.
(05-06-2013 12:22 PM)ChrisLords Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2013 11:51 AM)L-yes Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2013 11:29 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote: [ -> ]"The ACC’s media rights deal with ESPN includes all game inventory, digital rights and corporate sponsorship. That, plus the security provided by the grant of rights, puts the ACC in a position of starting a network without having to buy back rights from third parties, as the SEC did with IMG College and Learfield Sports.
The ACC commissioned a study by Wasserman Media Group to determine whether the new conference footprint would support a network. Swofford said the ACC’s footprint along the Northeast and Southeast U.S. reaches 43 million TV households, more than other conferences.
“The grant of rights sets the table for us to have substantive conversations about a network,” said Clemson Athletic Director Dan Radakovich, who sits with Duke AD Kevin White and North Carolina’s Bubba Cunningham on the ACC’s TV subcommittee.
“With the expansion we’ve had, our demographics, our financials and our projections are much more palatable,” Radakovich said. “The only thing holding us up is time. The SEC Network was three years in the making. Distribution, programming, legal, it all takes time.”
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...work.aspx?
It boggles the mind why this wasn't on the plate 3 years ago. Maybe Swofford got myopic about sorting out the details from the 06 expansion and lost sight of the big picture. Was Maryland leaving a catalyst or was their membership a retardant?
3 years ago ESPN was buying all the rights of the ACC and SEC to ward off us getting our own networks. Now they're so confident that they'll launch networks they own for us and pay us ~$8 million a school. That's a big difference. The question is whether we should let ESPN own the network or should we launch our own because we might make even more 10 years down the road.
According to JRSec on the CR Board (One of the few level headed posters over there) the SEC has the option to buy a 50% stake into the network during their next "look in". I'd imagine that the ACC would do something similar.
(05-06-2013 01:40 PM)krux Wrote: [ -> ]According to JRSec on the CR Board (One of the few level headed posters over there) the SEC has the option to buy a 50% stake into the network during their next "look in". I'd imagine that the ACC would do something similar.
That sounds good. Sounds like something that would be a compromise between ESPN and the SEC. So, it's probably accurate. I'd be a lot more comfortable with ESPN owning the network if we can buy a 50% share later.
(05-06-2013 12:02 PM)mj4life Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2013 11:51 AM)L-yes Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2013 11:29 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote: [ -> ]"The ACC’s media rights deal with ESPN includes all game inventory, digital rights and corporate sponsorship. That, plus the security provided by the grant of rights, puts the ACC in a position of starting a network without having to buy back rights from third parties, as the SEC did with IMG College and Learfield Sports.
The ACC commissioned a study by Wasserman Media Group to determine whether the new conference footprint would support a network. Swofford said the ACC’s footprint along the Northeast and Southeast U.S. reaches 43 million TV households, more than other conferences.
“The grant of rights sets the table for us to have substantive conversations about a network,” said Clemson Athletic Director Dan Radakovich, who sits with Duke AD Kevin White and North Carolina’s Bubba Cunningham on the ACC’s TV subcommittee.
“With the expansion we’ve had, our demographics, our financials and our projections are much more palatable,” Radakovich said. “The only thing holding us up is time. The SEC Network was three years in the making. Distribution, programming, legal, it all takes time.”
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...work.aspx?
It boggles the mind why this wasn't on the plate 3 years ago. Maybe Swofford got myopic about sorting out the details from the 06 expansion and lost sight of the big picture. Was Maryland leaving a catalyst or was their membership a retardant?
market demographics & distribution have always been the negatives of a ACC Network. remember 3 years ago their was no Pitt,Syracuse, or Notre Dame,Louisville & just didn't make sense. the single biggest thing that has happened IMO is Notre Dame apparently shelving a standalone Digital network in favor of a conference based network
I think that may be a part of it. A digital "Irish Network" accessible by all devices has been a big project for Jack Swarbrick for about three years now.
He used to talk all the time about partnering with NBC on this digital network. Then, he stopped talking about it several months ago and maintained radio silence since then.
(05-06-2013 03:05 PM)TerryD Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2013 12:02 PM)mj4life Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2013 11:51 AM)L-yes Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2013 11:29 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote: [ -> ]"The ACC’s media rights deal with ESPN includes all game inventory, digital rights and corporate sponsorship. That, plus the security provided by the grant of rights, puts the ACC in a position of starting a network without having to buy back rights from third parties, as the SEC did with IMG College and Learfield Sports.
The ACC commissioned a study by Wasserman Media Group to determine whether the new conference footprint would support a network. Swofford said the ACC’s footprint along the Northeast and Southeast U.S. reaches 43 million TV households, more than other conferences.
“The grant of rights sets the table for us to have substantive conversations about a network,” said Clemson Athletic Director Dan Radakovich, who sits with Duke AD Kevin White and North Carolina’s Bubba Cunningham on the ACC’s TV subcommittee.
“With the expansion we’ve had, our demographics, our financials and our projections are much more palatable,” Radakovich said. “The only thing holding us up is time. The SEC Network was three years in the making. Distribution, programming, legal, it all takes time.”
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...work.aspx?
It boggles the mind why this wasn't on the plate 3 years ago. Maybe Swofford got myopic about sorting out the details from the 06 expansion and lost sight of the big picture. Was Maryland leaving a catalyst or was their membership a retardant?
market demographics & distribution have always been the negatives of a ACC Network. remember 3 years ago their was no Pitt,Syracuse, or Notre Dame,Louisville & just didn't make sense. the single biggest thing that has happened IMO is Notre Dame apparently shelving a standalone Digital network in favor of a conference based network
I think that may be a part of it. A digital "Irish Network" accessible by all devices has been a big project for Jack Swarbrick for about three years now.
He used to talk all the time about partnering with NBC on this digital network. Then, he stopped talking about it several months ago and maintained radio silence since then.
it's still early in the process but i have to think that if the ACC's network includes a digital(espn3) type channel & N.Dame includes replays, coaches shows & access to their video collection does nothing but increase the value to this proposed network. add that to what is all ready available to the conference equals $$$
Question for you guys...this quotes a price of $260M per year. Even without assigning a share to the office, or a portion for ND, that's only $18.5M per 14 teams. We've been told by several sources it will average over $20M.
Is the $260M a pre-GOR or pre-ND number, and the SBJ just isn't quite clear on it?
(05-06-2013 05:09 PM)Lou_C Wrote: [ -> ]Question for you guys...this quotes a price of $260M per year. Even without assigning a share to the office, or a portion for ND, that's only $18.5M per 14 teams. We've been told by several sources it will average over $20M.
Is the $260M a pre-GOR or pre-ND number, and the SBJ just isn't quite clear on it?
the SBJ data is a mix of up tp date and outdated numbers - virtually useless, IMO
David Teel @DavidTeelatDP 2m
More Swofford on #ACC channel: "We’ve been looking at it for about a year, and now we’ll look at it more seriously."
(05-06-2013 09:10 PM)Chris02M Wrote: [ -> ]David Teel @DavidTeelatDP 2m
More Swofford on #ACC channel: "We’ve been looking at it for about a year, and now we’ll look at it more seriously."
So we're probably looking at a 2015 start up date, unless ESPN wants to give the ACC the hookup.
(05-06-2013 09:10 PM)Chris02M Wrote: [ -> ]David Teel @DavidTeelatDP 2m
More Swofford on #ACC channel: "We’ve been looking at it for about a year, and now we’ll look at it more seriously."
This is just stupid. Whether or not the ACC was going to start a Network years ago, the vast majority of the "looking" should already be done.
(05-06-2013 10:12 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2013 09:10 PM)Chris02M Wrote: [ -> ]David Teel @DavidTeelatDP 2m
More Swofford on #ACC channel: "We’ve been looking at it for about a year, and now we’ll look at it more seriously."
So we're probably looking at a 2015 start up date, unless ESPN wants to give the ACC the hookup.
I wonder how much of a delay will be due to the fact that Maryland will continue to be in the room possibly as late as the Fall ACC meeting? Will they hold off discussing certain things until the Terps are gone?