(08-26-2019 02:19 PM)Win5002 Wrote: (08-26-2019 01:13 PM)cuseroc Wrote: (08-26-2019 12:30 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: (08-26-2019 11:58 AM)TerryD Wrote: (08-26-2019 11:55 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: There are different rates in market vs. out of market. Let's assume an average of $1/mo/sub. It could be less than that out of market, but it will definitely be above that in market.
Let's do some napkin math:
( ($1/mo/sub * 30m subs * 12 months) * 50% for ESPN taking half) / 15 (we'll assume the ACC offices + ND are one share) = $12,000,000/yr/school
Basically, year one will pay for the cost of putting in the studios on campus in the first place.
ND gets a full share of ACC Network profits, the same as the other 14 schools.
No football carve out? If that's the case dividing by 16 yields $11.25m/yr/school.
Sent from my ZTE A2017U using CSNbbs mobile app
I dont think they ACCN will ever average $1 per sub. I think it was JRSEC who put up some numbers what the college networks were averaging and I believe the SECN averaged $.74 per sub and the BIG averaged like $.55 per sub. I think the ACC will average somewhere in between those numbers.
I'm curious why you think the ACCN would get a higher rate than the BTN? The BTN has been around and the B1G commands a lot better tv revenue deals with a lot larger fan bases. I'm not trying to flame but I'm wondering what your logic is in arriving at that conclusion?
I actually think the ACC may get more than the B1G rate. Has nothing to do with the ACC's value relative the B1G, it has to do with how big a dog ESPN is.
ESPN isn't doing some rational calculation of how many fans are in the stadium, how many hot dogs get sold, who has more alumni, etc to determine a value to ask vis a vis the B1G and SEC.
ESPN's calculation comes down to one thing...how much can they force down the carriers' throats for the ACC network. They'll point to things like the education level and income and youth of the ACC fanbases, they'll point to the defending champions in both major sports, but at the end of the day, their calculation is all about one thing...how much can they force carriers to eat.
I don't even think the carriers care about fanbase sizes or ratings per se...the only real factor going into this is if cost of eating the carriage fee offsets the loss of subscribers.
All these projections about how much the ACC is worth relative any other network in terms of carriage rate is way, way secondary. It's about how much ESPN can force them to take. And because they tied the launch to so many new contracts, ESPN's leverage on making them eat it was so much greater for them.
Given that, I would be very disappointed if they didn't ask for more than the B1G gets, simply as a reflection of Disney's power and leverage versus that of Fox and the B1G. In fact, given the ramp up and that the channel is being folded into the overall Disney agreements, I'd be disappointed if they asked for significantly less than the SEC. I mean, if they wanted to ask $1.10 to the SEC's $1.25, because "Well, come on, let's be serious", that's cool, but it would be absurd to ask for like 60 cents or something.
That defeats the whole purpose of the long ramp up, and the purpose of potentially waiting up to three years for Comcast.
Considering that beyond streaming services, the ACC has only been picked up in new overall agreements, that indicates they're asking a good amount. Whether they can get it picked up before current agreements expire with other providers will simply come down to how many people actually cancel.
If you told me that less passion from ACC fans results in less cancellations, and it doesn't get added this week, I'll buy that, but I don't think that means a lower carriage fee. I hope not...it's not in the best interest for ESPN and the ACC to blink now and cut the price. They've got enough on board to launch.
Now, that's just about carriage fees. Not necessarily about overall revenue. With the BTN drawing more eyeballs, advertising revenue share will probably will be much higher for the BTN and SECN.
And then there is the nature of the deal. Presumably, the B1G's deal, as half owner, is the most friendly of any of them, and they might get the biggest share of carriage and ad revenue.
And we'd all like to think that the ACC terms will be the same as the SEC terms as far as splits, but there's no guarantee of that at all. Would it surprise you at all if you found out the SEC was getting 50% and the ACC 40%? It wouldn't surprise me...it's not like the ACC had any leverage at all in this...I'd frankly be pretty surprised if the ACC's deal wasn't more ESPN-sided than the SEC. We'll never know...that info will never come out.
So even in a world where the ACC got the exact same carriage rate as the SEC, and more than the B1G, the network revenues still might be considerably less. I'd pretty much bank on it, because of ad revenue and terms of the agreement.
But I personally think the carriage rate will be just fine.