...not saying we will have a choice, but here is reality.

Be thankful for the exposure.

There is no look in. Otherwise I agree. I seriously doubt that we get much more than we have if any increase. By 2020, when the current AAC / ESPN contract expires, there will be even more entertainment options for people who don't care about sports. Those folks make up a vast majority of America.

Nice breakdown of the payments to different conferences and when their deals expire.

http://www.whatyoupayforsports.com/numbers/

Looks like some of the P5 leagues were smart when they negotiated long term values.

I think discussions about tv revenue should mostly be "how much will the P5's lose in the next round of tv contracts" instead of "how much more will AAC/CUSA/SBC/MAC/MWC get"


The good thing is, virtually all the G5 programs have learned to survive (and some thrive) with virtually no TV dollars. How will the programs accustomed to getting tens of millions adapt if they see significant declines?

Maybe it doesn't happen, but I feel pretty strongly that we're hitting bubble status for tv contracts. That said, if the AAC keeps things going at the same level they have during this football season, I do think it stands to get a reasonable increase. I'm sure ESPN's margins on AAC content are larger than they are for P5 conferences.

Well when the American is no longer on ESPN they will lose my 6 bucks a month also. I had stopped watching ESPN due to the fact I just can't stomach the power 5 rhetoric.

espn will easily bounce back.

They don't have to do anything until deal is up. That may well be when setting up a real Tier 1 and 2 make sense. Tier 1 being 65 to 75% of what ESPN now gets, and Tier 2 being current BB games and the rest. Hopefully you could sell 1 for 3 or 4 mil, and the other for 1.5 to 2.5 mil. In the End it is still cheap programming to the buyers and a decent lift to the AAC.

(10-27-2015 02:51 PM)laser101 Wrote:  espn will easily bounce back.

I don't see how they will. They made a killing from people being forced to bundle their cable with ESPN channels.

Now that there are more options out there than just traditional cable offerings, people are no longer forced to pay for ESPN.

Some of the major telecoms are looking into bare-bones subscription offerings without ESPN included. Right now, most are contractually obligated to, but what about when those contracts are up? If ESPN has to revert to levels where it is only available to people who specifically want to include it in their cable packages, that is a huge revenue loss for them.

(10-27-2015 02:57 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 02:51 PM)laser101 Wrote:  espn will easily bounce back.

I don't see how they will. They made a killing from people being forced to bundle their cable with ESPN channels.

Now that there are more options out there than just traditional cable offerings, people are no longer forced to pay for ESPN.

Some of the major telecoms are looking into bare-bones subscription offerings without ESPN included. Right now, most are contractually obligated to, but what about when those contracts are up? If ESPN has to revert to levels where it is only available to people who specifically want to include it in their cable packages, that is a huge revenue loss for them.

People will still have to purchase the WatchESPN app

Most everybody knew the exorbitant rights fees they were paying were a bubble anyway. The timing of all of it sucks for the American, but it was inevitable with the rights fees they were paying and changes to the way cable companies do business looming on the horizon.

(10-27-2015 03:26 PM)piratefan1975 Wrote:  Most everybody knew the exorbitant rights fees they were paying were a bubble anyway. The timing of all of it sucks for the American, but it was inevitable with the rights fees they were paying and changes to the way cable companies do business looming on the horizon.

They are playing $1.9 BILLION a year for MNF through 2021. If I did my numbers right, that $110 million a game. I just don't get it.

im honestly not worried..ive said this for the last few years but what we will get will depend on the big 10 rights deal..the big 10 deal is next year, if they leave espn like everyone is projecting that clears about 300mil a year in capital for espn and alot of open tv slots...

what we are asking for is about 6-8mil a year per team, thats only an increase of 60-70mil more a year ..a bargin for espn

So will ESPN even get aggressive trying to do a new deal with the Big Ten, or do they shift more content to
BTN/Fox?

(10-27-2015 02:50 PM)Niner National Wrote:  I think discussions about tv revenue should mostly be "how much will the P5's lose in the next round of tv contracts" instead of "how much more will AAC/CUSA/SBC/MAC/MWC get"


The good thing is, virtually all the G5 programs have learned to survive (and some thrive) with virtually no TV dollars. How will the programs accustomed to getting tens of millions adapt if they see significant declines?

Maybe it doesn't happen, but I feel pretty strongly that we're hitting bubble status for tv contracts. That said, if the AAC keeps things going at the same level they have during this football season, I do think it stands to get a reasonable increase. I'm sure ESPN's margins on AAC content are larger than they are for P5 conferences.

Conf USA new contract will be a surprise to its member teams. Low payout and less tv are in the works.

(10-27-2015 03:12 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 02:57 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 02:51 PM)laser101 Wrote:  espn will easily bounce back.

I don't see how they will. They made a killing from people being forced to bundle their cable with ESPN channels.

Now that there are more options out there than just traditional cable offerings, people are no longer forced to pay for ESPN.

Some of the major telecoms are looking into bare-bones subscription offerings without ESPN included. Right now, most are contractually obligated to, but what about when those contracts are up? If ESPN has to revert to levels where it is only available to people who specifically want to include it in their cable packages, that is a huge revenue loss for them.

People will still have to purchase the WatchESPN app

Which will net them far less money than what they've enjoyed previously. Right now they get paid per subscriber, whether they watch or not. Moving to streams, it'll be a % of a % (not just viewers, but viewers willing to pay).

Whole thing is moving towards a conference network/app model as the end game. Direct to consumer is the way of things when everyone has access to the same medium of distribution as everyone else.

It'll just take a long time to play out.

(10-27-2015 03:12 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 02:57 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 02:51 PM)laser101 Wrote:  espn will easily bounce back.

I don't see how they will. They made a killing from people being forced to bundle their cable with ESPN channels.

Now that there are more options out there than just traditional cable offerings, people are no longer forced to pay for ESPN.

Some of the major telecoms are looking into bare-bones subscription offerings without ESPN included. Right now, most are contractually obligated to, but what about when those contracts are up? If ESPN has to revert to levels where it is only available to people who specifically want to include it in their cable packages, that is a huge revenue loss for them.

People will still have to purchase the WatchESPN app

But only the people that actually want to watch ESPN. If that happens it will cost out the butt to watch for sports fans to make up for the ridiculous subscriber fees. The majority of tv consumers are NOT watching ESPN and other sports channels.

(10-27-2015 03:30 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 03:26 PM)piratefan1975 Wrote:  Most everybody knew the exorbitant rights fees they were paying were a bubble anyway. The timing of all of it sucks for the American, but it was inevitable with the rights fees they were paying and changes to the way cable companies do business looming on the horizon.

They are playing $1.9 BILLION a year for MNF through 2021. If I did my numbers right, that $110 million a game. I just don't get it.

It's not just for the 17 MNF games. It also includes access to the playoffs and tons of video highlights and studio shows and other NFL programming.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/09/sports....html?_r=0

“Hypothetically,” he wrote in an e-mail, “if you say 50 cents or one dollar (or more) of the $4.50 monthly sub fee is attributed to the N.F.L. on ESPN (and push that forward to support future increases in sub fees), you can easily justify the rights fee given all the programming and content ESPN will be carrying.”

ESPN will cut some of their ESPN-Owned Bowl games before they give up Big10 rights. TV rights trump loser bowls every time. Good-bye St.Pete, Bahamas, Birmingham, Idaho, and whatever obscure bowl games with terrible match-ups they have...

On Demand content providers will be the norm very soon.

(10-27-2015 03:51 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  ESPN will cut some of their ESPN-Owned Bowl games before they give up Big10 rights. TV rights trump loser bowls every time. Good-bye St.Pete, Bahamas, Birmingham, Idaho, and whatever obscure bowl games with terrible match-ups they have...

you are acting like espn is volunteering to give it up...

espn reporters are saying its likely going to be fox....all reports are that fox is going to inhumanly overpay and that espn wont match that ...

it is reported that the big 10 will almost double the payout at fox....

IMO i think ESPN will settle for a package of 4-7 games, 4 for abc and like 3 for espn with some powerhouse matchups (or something like that) and not pay more than the projected 40mil per team average fox is reportedly going to offer

espn pays almost nothing for the bowl games, its mostly paid for by tickets and sponsors
not pay 500k for st petes that draws 1.4 mil viewers or not pay purdue 40mil a year for 5 espnu games

(10-27-2015 04:06 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 03:51 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  ESPN will cut some of their ESPN-Owned Bowl games before they give up Big10 rights. TV rights trump loser bowls every time. Good-bye St.Pete, Bahamas, Birmingham, Idaho, and whatever obscure bowl games with terrible match-ups they have...

you are acting like espn is volunteering to give it up...

espn reporters are saying its likely going to be fox....all reports are that fox is going to inhumanly overpay and that espn wont match that ...

it is reported that the big 10 will almost double the payout at fox....

IMO i think ESPN will settle for a package of 4-7 games, 4 for abc and like 3 for espn with some powerhouse matchups (or something like that) and not pay more than the projected 40mil per team average fox is reportedly going to offer

espn pays almost nothing for the bowl games, its mostly paid for by tickets and sponsors
not pay 500k for st petes that draws 1.4 mil viewers or not pay purdue 40mil a year for 5 espnu games

Good more slots and money for us then