(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:  

(08-26-2019 11:04 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Let's say the ACCN costs the cable company $1 per month per subscriber. If all they did was pass that cost on, I doubt the lose a single customer over a $1 increase. The problem comes when they jack up the price $10/month and try to justify it by saying "we added the ACC Network".

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

Nope, full share with the network.

(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:  

(08-26-2019 11:04 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Let's say the ACCN costs the cable company $1 per month per subscriber. If all they did was pass that cost on, I doubt the lose a single customer over a $1 increase. The problem comes when they jack up the price $10/month and try to justify it by saying "we added the ACC Network".

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.

(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:  

(08-26-2019 11:04 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Let's say the ACCN costs the cable company $1 per month per subscriber. If all they did was pass that cost on, I doubt the lose a single customer over a $1 increase. The problem comes when they jack up the price $10/month and try to justify it by saying "we added the ACC Network".

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.

Keep in mind - that's the AVERAGE, not the IN-FOOTPRINT. IIRC, the SECN gets $1.25 per sub in-footprint; not saying the ACCN will get the same amount, though.

$0.50 sub average yields $5.625m per year per school in napkin math. The key for the ACC is what is the in footprint rate, and what is the proportion of those 30m subs is in footprint? The population in footprint is the ACC's biggest strength in TV revenue. I'd have to imagine most of that 30m is in footprint. Some other hypotheticals:

$0.20 -> $2.25m/yr/school
$0.30 -> $3.375m/yr/school
$0.40 -> $4.5m/yr/school
$0.55 -> $6.1875m/yr/school
$0.60 -> $6.75m/yr/school
$0.65 -> $7.3125m/yr/school
$0.70 -> $7.875m/yr/school
$0.75 -> $8.4375m/yr/school

So when factoring in personnel costs .... two years of ACCN revenue will be needed just to offset the startup costs at the schools.


Even a Pac-12 type revenue failure will still put the Pac-12 firmly in the rear view mirror. This plausibly catches up to the Big 12 and passes it. I suspect after the SEC completes renegotiation with CBS it will be back to an 8 figure deficit relative to the SEC though.

(08-26-2019 01:45 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  $0.50 sub average yields $5.625m per year per school in napkin math. The key for the ACC is what is the in footprint rate, and what is the proportion of those 30m subs is in footprint? The population in footprint is the ACC's biggest strength in TV revenue. I'd have to imagine most of that 30m is in footprint. Some other hypotheticals:

$0.20 -> $2.25m/yr/school
$0.30 -> $3.375m/yr/school
$0.40 -> $4.5m/yr/school
$0.55 -> $6.1875m/yr/school
$0.60 -> $6.75m/yr/school
$0.65 -> $7.3125m/yr/school
$0.70 -> $7.875m/yr/school
$0.75 -> $8.4375m/yr/school

So when factoring in personnel costs .... two years of ACCN revenue will be needed just to offset the startup costs at the schools.


Even a Pac-12 type revenue failure will still put the Pac-12 firmly in the rear view mirror. This plausibly catches up to the Big 12 and passes it. I suspect after the SEC completes renegotiation with CBS it will be back to an 8 figure deficit relative to the SEC though.

How many subscribers are you assuming ACCN will have? What assumptions are you making about advertising revenue? What deductions are you making for revenue lost because the ACC is no longer distributing games by syndication and RSN? Do you realize that ESPN is allowing carriers to distribute to premium package subscribers outside the ACC footprint and presumably getting a higher per subscriber fee for these subscribers? Will that help or hurt ACCN revenues? Do you realize that there are many, perhaps millions, of former TWC subscribers who won't be receiving ACCN and on whom the ESPN won't be getting revenues because they haven't changed to a new package with Spectrum, unless Spectrum is convinced that they have to give them ACCN?

Napkin math will only get you so far. There's a lot of moving parts here.

I agree that at a minimum the ACC is almost certain to move ahead of the B12 and PAC, because that's easy to do, but who knows how far ahead.

(08-26-2019 12:34 PM)domer1978 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:  

(08-26-2019 11:04 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Let's say the ACCN costs the cable company $1 per month per subscriber. If all they did was pass that cost on, I doubt the lose a single customer over a $1 increase. The problem comes when they jack up the price $10/month and try to justify it by saying "we added the ACC Network".

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

Nope, full share with the network.

"Also during that one-on-one, Swofford said that Notre Dame, an ACC member for sports other than football, will receive a full share of ACC Network revenue. The Fighting Irish receive one-fifth of a full share of the conference's guaranteed rights fees from ESPN.

And while the full-share arrangement may frustrate some who want Notre Dame all in, understand that without the Irish's national brand and overall sports excellence, there might well not be an ACC Network. Further, Notre Dame will produce more than its share of ACC Network content."

https://www.dailypress.com/sports/column...-post.html

(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:  

(08-26-2019 11:04 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Let's say the ACCN costs the cable company $1 per month per subscriber. If all they did was pass that cost on, I doubt the lose a single customer over a $1 increase. The problem comes when they jack up the price $10/month and try to justify it by saying "we added the ACC Network".

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?

(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.

Here's a source saying that the ACC will be getting $1 within its footprint and half that outside it's footprint.
https://www.multichannel.com/blog/acc-ne...tual-mvpds

That makes sense to me. The ACC has a lot of private schools as members. Their students come from far and wide. When they graduate, they spread far and wide. Duke and Notre Dame, in particular, have highly engaged alumni all over the country and many non-alum fans all over the country. We may get less inside the footprint but more outside.

I wonder what the rate will be for those outside the footprint whose carrier only has ACCN on a premium level of service. ESPN is apparently making deals that allow that. That was not the case for the B10 and SEC networks. I think ACCN should be getting the same rate as inside the footprint, if not higher, for those subscribers.

(08-26-2019 02:57 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(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:  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.

Exatamente! I would have just said because ESPN is backing the ACCN. But your explanation was much more eloquent and informative.

(08-26-2019 03:02 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  Here's a source saying that the ACC will be getting $1 within its footprint and half that outside it's footprint.
https://www.multichannel.com/blog/acc-ne...tual-mvpds

That makes sense to me. The ACC has a lot of private schools as members. Their students come from far and wide. When they graduate, they spread far and wide. Duke and Notre Dame, in particular, have highly engaged alumni all over the country and many non-alum fans all over the country. We may get less inside the footprint but more outside.

I wonder what the rate will be for those outside the footprint whose carrier only has ACCN on a premium level of service. ESPN is apparently making deals that allow that. That was not the case for the B10 and SEC networks. I think ACCN should be getting the same rate as inside the footprint, if not higher, for those subscribers.

That's an excellent article, hadn't seen that before.

(08-26-2019 03:02 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  Here's a source saying that the ACC will be getting $1 within its footprint and half that outside it's footprint.
https://www.multichannel.com/blog/acc-ne...tual-mvpds

That makes sense to me. The ACC has a lot of private schools as members. Their students come from far and wide. When they graduate, they spread far and wide. Duke and Notre Dame, in particular, have highly engaged alumni all over the country and many non-alum fans all over the country. We may get less inside the footprint but more outside.

I wonder what the rate will be for those outside the footprint whose carrier only has ACCN on a premium level of service. ESPN is apparently making deals that allow that. That was not the case for the B10 and SEC networks. I think ACCN should be getting the same rate as inside the footprint, if not higher, for those subscribers.

Nice Find HallCity. Thanks for sharing.



Industry experts say however, that unlike previous college conference-based networks, the ACC has benefited from the advent of virtual MVPDs. Network carriage deals with Playstation Vue, Hulu + Live TV and YouTube TV have provided the network with a national footprint, allowing sports fans digital access to the ACC Network anywhere in the country, irrespective of deals with cable and satellite service providers. ESPN does have distribution deals with Charter (Spectrum), Altice USA (Optimum and Suddenlink), Verizon Fios, DirecTV and NCTC members. And while ACC is on DirecTV, it's not on AT&T's vMVPD, AT&T TV Now.


“Unfortunately when traditional sports media covers network launches they tend to go at it from the standpoint of someone’s local cable or satellite system, and figure if its not on that [service] then nobody can get the network,” said sports consultant Lee Berke. “The reality is that the ACC Network can be obtained nationally on these virtual MVPDs -- everyone in the footprint of the ACC Network can obtain the network if they want to buy a virtual MVPD that carries the network. Is everyone going to go that route and drop their cable subscriptions? No, but it is available to anyone who wants to see it.”

The existence of vMVPDs changes the strategy of how distribution deals are done, according to Berke. ESPN now can wait until exiting deals with MVPDs are renewed to package in the ACC Network while still providing the conference’s sports fans with access to the channel through the $50 per month PlayStation Vue, Hulu + Live TV and YouTube TV. Prior to the advent of vMVPDs, a new network's distribution success was beholden to traditional distributors to reach their target audiences.

“The media landscape now is vastly different than it was five years ago with our last linear network launch,” ESPN's Durant said. “How we think about success for a network launch is the same. It's about having ... a multiplicity of providers, and we've always had the traditional. Now we also have the streaming providers to add to that mix.”

Obviously ESPN’s ultimate goal is to have full carriage for the ACC Network across all linear and digital distributors. The virtual MVPDs allow the network to reach fans while negotiations continue, according to ESPN. “So while we are incredibly pleased with the options that we have in place with our streaming partners and others, we are confident that there will be other announcements in the very near future,” Durant said.





I thought the following was key for folks who dont think the ACCN is doing very well at this point:

Indeed, ESPN senior vice president of college networks Rosalyn Durant said in a recent ACC Network conference call that ESPN is “very pleased with the distribution agreements that we have in place currently,” referencing deals with virtual MVPDs that can “cover the ACC footprint and beyond the footprint.”

Yeah, the idea of the appearance on Vue, Hulu and YoutubeTV is definitely not nothing. It might be next to nothing in terms of number of subscribers, but it's a game changer for sure. By comparison, the Pac 12 didn't land on any of those. They are available on Sling and Fubo, but only with the addition of sports packages that increase the price substantially. I think on Fubo, it costs like $65 to get the Pac 12 Network.

It says something, either about the content, or the power of ESPN, or something, that the ACC was able to land on three of those major players, as low as $45/mo for Hulu. Total different dynamic when it comes to waiting out the providers, that the PAC doesn't have.

Now, it doesn't matter if people don't end up switching, but it definitely relieves a lot of the pressure to cave to carriers, and will reduce some of the blowback from fans that the PAC has endured, with people almost literally not able to get it.

(08-26-2019 03:02 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  Here's a source saying that the ACC will be getting $1 within its footprint and half that outside it's footprint.
https://www.multichannel.com/blog/acc-ne...tual-mvpds

That makes sense to me. The ACC has a lot of private schools as members. Their students come from far and wide. When they graduate, they spread far and wide. Duke and Notre Dame, in particular, have highly engaged alumni all over the country and many non-alum fans all over the country. We may get less inside the footprint but more outside.

I wonder what the rate will be for those outside the footprint whose carrier only has ACCN on a premium level of service. ESPN is apparently making deals that allow that. That was not the case for the B10 and SEC networks. I think ACCN should be getting the same rate as inside the footprint, if not higher, for those subscribers.

BASED ON THIS...

12 months/year X (80% X 36M) X (AVG of $1 and $0.50) = $259.2M/year
Half of $259.2M split 16 ways = $8.1M/school/year in year one*
($5.1M if you remove the $3M they were getting for no network).

* $6.9M/school if you adjust for partial year.

https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2019/...te-in.html for details.

(08-26-2019 08:14 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-26-2019 03:02 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  Here's a source saying that the ACC will be getting $1 within its footprint and half that outside it's footprint.
https://www.multichannel.com/blog/acc-ne...tual-mvpds

That makes sense to me. The ACC has a lot of private schools as members. Their students come from far and wide. When they graduate, they spread far and wide. Duke and Notre Dame, in particular, have highly engaged alumni all over the country and many non-alum fans all over the country. We may get less inside the footprint but more outside.

I wonder what the rate will be for those outside the footprint whose carrier only has ACCN on a premium level of service. ESPN is apparently making deals that allow that. That was not the case for the B10 and SEC networks. I think ACCN should be getting the same rate as inside the footprint, if not higher, for those subscribers.

BASED ON THIS...

12 months/year X (80% X 36M) X (AVG of $1 and $0.50) = $259.2M/year
Half of $259.2M split 16 ways = $8.1M/school/year in year one*
($5.1M if you remove the $3M they were getting for no network).

* $6.9M/school if you adjust for partial year.

https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2019/...te-in.html for details.

Your contract is for 50% of the profits minus overhead. It's the same contract as for the SEC. The rates will be different. The SEC 1.35 in some states and 1.25 in others and I don't really know why that is. We get .25 per sub out of footprint but have pretty much universal coverage without having to have the most expensive tier. A lot of ours is on the 2nd tier.

The SEC average is .74 cents per sub for all subs. The Big 10's was .49 cents. The PAC 12's was .11 cents.

One dollar in footprint with .50 cents out of is an interesting average of what the SEC gets. But your out of footprint carriage isn't that universal yet, and certainly not widespread below the highest tier.

Number of subs, rates inside the footprint and out, are all subject to 1 thing, profit. Any expenses for ESPN is shared when the remainder is split 50/50. I still standby what I've said from the beginning. Look for 3 million in the first year (which is only a partial year anyway) and 7 to 8 million when your carriage is fully picked up (think year 3 or 4).

(08-26-2019 09:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2019 08:14 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-26-2019 03:02 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  Here's a source saying that the ACC will be getting $1 within its footprint and half that outside it's footprint.
https://www.multichannel.com/blog/acc-ne...tual-mvpds

That makes sense to me. The ACC has a lot of private schools as members. Their students come from far and wide. When they graduate, they spread far and wide. Duke and Notre Dame, in particular, have highly engaged alumni all over the country and many non-alum fans all over the country. We may get less inside the footprint but more outside.

I wonder what the rate will be for those outside the footprint whose carrier only has ACCN on a premium level of service. ESPN is apparently making deals that allow that. That was not the case for the B10 and SEC networks. I think ACCN should be getting the same rate as inside the footprint, if not higher, for those subscribers.

BASED ON THIS...

12 months/year X (80% X 36M) X (AVG of $1 and $0.50) = $259.2M/year
Half of $259.2M split 16 ways = $8.1M/school/year in year one*
($5.1M if you remove the $3M they were getting for no network).

* $6.9M/school if you adjust for partial year.

https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2019/...te-in.html for details.

Your contract is for 50% of the profits minus overhead. It's the same contract as for the SEC. The rates will be different. The SEC 1.35 in some states and 1.25 in others and I don't really know why that is. We get .25 per sub out of footprint but have pretty much universal coverage without having to have the most expensive tier. A lot of ours is on the 2nd tier.

The SEC average is .74 cents per sub for all subs. The Big 10's was .49 cents. The PAC 12's was .11 cents.

One dollar in footprint with .50 cents out of is an interesting average of what the SEC gets. But your out of footprint carriage isn't that universal yet, and certainly not widespread below the highest tier.

Number of subs, rates inside the footprint and out, are all subject to 1 thing, profit. Any expenses for ESPN is shared when the remainder is split 50/50. I still standby what I've said from the beginning. Look for 3 million in the first year (which is only a partial year anyway) and 7 to 8 million when your carriage is fully picked up (think year 3 or 4).

Despite what I'm reading elsewhere, I tend to agree with JR. I'm thinking revenue in year one will probably be around $3M -- $5M if everything goes perfectly. Long term, I think the upper limit is about $11M, but $8M is more reasonable.

The X factor for the ACC is what happened to the tier 1 contract when they extended it? Still no word at all on that part.

Another piece of information. I think most of you know that the NYS politicians (led by the Dems) have used Spectrum as a punching bag. Congressman Brindisi from the Utica Area is now seeking answers why Spectrum is making Legacy TWC customers have to switch to get the ACC Network.
https://www.syracuse.com/politics/2019/0...th-ny.html

(08-27-2019 06:48 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another piece of information. I think most of you know that the NYS politicians (led by the Dems) have used Spectrum as a punching bag. Congressman Brindisi from the Utica Area is now seeking answers why Spectrum is making Legacy TWC customers have to switch to get the ACC Network.
https://www.syracuse.com/politics/2019/0...th-ny.html

To be fair to the company, the ACC Network was never on Time Warner Cable....

(08-27-2019 06:54 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-27-2019 06:48 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another piece of information. I think most of you know that the NYS politicians (led by the Dems) have used Spectrum as a punching bag. Congressman Brindisi from the Utica Area is now seeking answers why Spectrum is making Legacy TWC customers have to switch to get the ACC Network.
https://www.syracuse.com/politics/2019/0...th-ny.html

To be fair to the company, the ACC Network was never on Time Warner Cable....

The article says that the TWC legacy account problem affects 18% of Spectrum customers. Spectrum has 25 million customers so this affects about 4.5 million customers, most of them in the ACC footprint. This alone will reduce ACCN revenues by a significant amount and will frustrate large numbers of fans. In New York they're asking questions of Spectrum, which is appropriate, but I think somebody needs to be asking questions of ESPN and the ACC. Did they know this was going to happen? If so, why did they agree to it?

After considering some additional factors I revised my revenue estimate for year one of the ACCN down a little. My new projection is $4.16 million per school. Here's my math:

https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2019/...djust.html