(01-18-2023 03:29 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-18-2023 01:24 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(01-18-2023 01:13 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(01-18-2023 11:21 AM)Poster Wrote:  Is the PAC seriously going to keep alive its network? The only reason why they would even consider doing so is some super extreme case of the sunk cost fallacy.

Probably about 10% of cable subscribers in the PAC states themselves can get the PAC12N. (Forget about outside the PAC states.) And the network if anything is even more impossible to access for streamers.

I strongly suspect that USC would never have left the PAC if they hadn't created that awful network.

The Pac-12 Network just signed a new lease in San Ramon. It is not going away.
https://www.siliconvalley.com/2023/01/11...ch-office/

The Pac-12 production center will shift its operations to San Ramon — and exit San Francisco — after the college athletics organization signed a lease to rent a big chunk of office space at the Bishop Ranch business park.
“The studio will focus on live sports content with the facility being built with cutting-edge production technology,” the organization said. “The office is expected to welcome more than 100 staffers and freelancers on busy game days.”

The production center will probably become the streaming network for Amazon or Apple, since neither has production facilities. I get the Pac-12 Network on Spectrum cable, along with the SEC Network, the Big Ten Network and the ACC Network. It is called the sports package. The Pac-12 Network was a business model failure and a production quality success. Kliavkoff is cleaning up the business model.

USC football has won one conference championship in 14 years. Maybe the network would have had more success if USC was putting better quality football teams on the field.

Well, if that’s the case, the PAC really is suffering from the sunk cost fallacy.


USC fans were always complaining about how they had three football games a year that basically weren’t on TV. That was no small part of why they left the conference.

The Amazon deal basically seems like an attempt to keep the PAC 12 network alive, except on a streaming platform. I think even that is a bad idea, although it’s less bad than keeping the PAC network alive in its current form.


In 2019, the PAC 12 network reached 17.9 million homes, out of 140 million homes in America. It’s probably even less now, since the distribution of the network constantly fell over time.


https://cronkitenews.azpbs.org/2019/10/2...rk-future/

I'd argue that 100% of the reason USC left is about money rather than exposure. If the Pac had made the necessary decisions in the past 35 years to keep themselves at the top of the sporting heap, then they'd still be there. Unfortunately, they didn't, and now all of them except the ones who made the actual decisions (like Stanford and USCLA) are going to suffer for it. I give Larry Scott a ton of grief for his ineptitude, but he didn't start the fire, it was always burnin' since the world been turnin' (well since the late '80s anyway).

It was both.

You can't be a relevant program playing games when half the country is sleep.