If the SEC added a new school or two, would they have to buy into the SEC Network and if so how much do you think that would cost roughly?
Just curious as I know the Big Ten has a buy in to both their network and membership.
(10-15-2016 12:28 PM)murrdcu Wrote: [ -> ]If the SEC added a new school or two, would they have to buy into the SEC Network and if so how much do you think that would cost roughly?
Just curious as I know the Big Ten has a buy in to both their network and membership.
1. They would have to foot the overhead of getting digital ready if they aren't already. Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas are already digital ready. I don't know about W.V.U. and O.S.U. All of the ACC schools are ready now, or working on it if they aren't.
2. No. ESPN owns the SECN right now. It is my understanding that we have the right to buy in if we wish, but with the change in delivery models anticipated I don't think we think that it is a prudent action. That's why it's nice to be a part of the BTN now, but if the model changes to streaming the value of that model dissipates. So all of the hoopla over the BTN payouts is fine as long as those doing the whooping realize that the downside of owning 50% of it is that if it goes a cropper that loss is your loss.
3. The BTN's buy in is strictly for their shares of the network. The buy in keeps it evenly distributed in revenue and risk.
4. The LHN for instance would be instantly convertible for a move by Texas to a conference where the network was handled by ESPN.
(10-15-2016 12:38 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (10-15-2016 12:28 PM)murrdcu Wrote: [ -> ]If the SEC added a new school or two, would they have to buy into the SEC Network and if so how much do you think that would cost roughly?
Just curious as I know the Big Ten has a buy in to both their network and membership.
1. They would have to foot the overhead of getting digital ready if they aren't already. Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas are already digital ready. I don't know about W.V.U. and O.S.U. All of the ACC schools are ready now, or working on it if they aren't.
2. No. ESPN owns the SECN right now. It is my understanding that we have the right to buy in if we wish, but with the change in delivery models anticipated I don't think we think that it is a prudent action. That's why it's nice to be a part of the BTN now, but if the model changes to streaming the value of that model dissipates. So all of the hoopla over the BTN payouts is fine as long as those doing the whooping realize that the downside of owning 50% of it is that if it goes a cropper that loss is your loss.
3. The BTN's buy in is strictly for their shares of the network. The buy in keeps it evenly distributed in revenue and risk.
4. The LHN for instance would be instantly convertible for a move by Texas to a conference where the network was handled by ESPN.
I know the streaming options are growing, but I doubt they ever put cable/satellite providers out of business. Downsides to streaming exist. Everyone does not have 50-100 mg wifi. There are limitations on how many TVs which can be utilized for same programs. DISH/DTV,etc. do not even need the existing kinds of equipment. They stream right now. I have DISH Anywhere. Without equipment costs of today, they can lower their rates and compete. ESPN and the others will just increase charges to PlayStation Vue, Amazon, and others as they increase their customer base.