(07-05-2019 12:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 12:46 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  PAC 12 network produced 850 events

they had $143 million in total conference expenses and if you count about $43 million of that as regular conference expenses like other conferences (probably high, but leaves an even $100 million for PAC 12n expenses

so they put on 850 events for $100 million or $117,647 per event

we already inflated the "conference" expenses by about $13+ million to leave the "network" expenses at an even $100 million

then you have to consider the expenses the PAC 12 has for actually running the network (which are quite high) like sales, administration, offices ect., but even if you say that is half the overall network cost well that leaves about $54,000 per event to produce

sports business journal says it cost the PAC 12n about $15,000 to $25,000 per Olympic event (which would be cheaper to produce than Football or even mens BB)

so it is not unrealistic that it could cost $50,000 per football game to get it on linear TV using PAC 12 network numbers two different ways and probably close to that for mens BB

even using the PAC 12 Olympic event production cost per event that is $15,000 to $25,000 per event....for the PAC 12 $25,000 X 850 = $21,250,000 so that would leave about $80,000,000 million for other cost associated with the network (and that is leaving $43 million for conference cost not related to the network which is high)

and I doubt the administrative cost of the network outside of production cost is that full $80 million, but even if it is you are looking at about $25,000 per event on average to produce an event and possibly higher if more of those events are football and mens BB

an ECU article says that by the 3rd year ESPN+ will have had 1,000 AAC events so about 333 a year X $25,000 = $8,325,000 so you can chop about $8 million+ a year (one full member share plus) of the AAC deal in production cost using those comparable numbers

and if you work those numbers around that looks pretty reasonable to expect if not on the low side if a decent number of those events are football and mens BB

Linear production costs do not reflect digital production costs. The standards, requirements, and costs are dramatically different. You have schools like N Alabama, with a total budget of 8-9 million a year that are producing all their games for ESPN+. No way these guys are spending almost 25% of their budget producing events for ESPN+ when they cant even afford to hire the full complement of coaches allowed for the sports that they play. Between the lower standards, fewer camera angles, and the use of student labor---these digital productions are being done for pennies on the dollar when compared to the elaborate linear productions you will find at the Pac12 Network.

well we have the numbers I showed above that seem to work out doing them from any direction

and more importantly we have the opinion of this guy ---> Lulla, the former head of ABC Sports’ legal and business department and a lead counsel at IMG

I will take his opinion because just like when we had the opinion of Neal Pilson the former head of CBS sports that told us that "look ins" for the CBS contract with the SEC SEC SEC basically meant nothing Vs those that said the SEC SEC SEC was going to get huge new money from CBS for adding aggy (and oh yea MU)......well CBS paid zero dollars and zero cents and only gave the SEC SEC SEC the right to have other games on at the same time as the game of the week.....so the vast majority of people on this forum were wrong (as was known idiot travis clay)

and Neal Pilson also said that the SEC SEC SEC network was not going to bring in the $20+ million per year per team that some "consulting services" were predicting he said it would be closer to $2 the first year and probably get to about $5 or a little higher

he was of course correct there as well because I think the first year was about $3 and now it is about $6 (people forget that there was a long term extension of the existing ESPN contract with the SEC SEC SEC when the network deal was signed so there was new money there as well, but that is not SEC SEC SEC network money that is money for extending a contract)

Neal also said that "in market" rates were not as simple as "we have a team in this state every cable box in this state with that network pays a higher rate now than before" and again we know he was correct because comcrap refused to do in state rates in most of Texas for the SEC SEC SEC network

so I will go with the opinion of this guy --> Lulla, the former head of ABC Sports’ legal and business department and a lead counsel at IMG vs the opinion of others just like I believed Neal Pilson former head of CBS sports even though he has been out of the business for a number of years (even though he is a respected media consultant still and on faculty at a major university with a top broadcasting program)......sort of like a guy that is hardly "out of the business and using 4 year old numbers from some article" when that guy works for IMG one of the most powerful entities in sports at all levels...and he is one of their highest level people