Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
SEC Network announcement next week.
Author Message
Dasville Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,796
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 246
I Root For: UofL
Location:
Post: #141
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
Those that control the questions also control the answers!
04-16-2013 07:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Marge Schott Offline
Banned

Posts: 5,989
Joined: Dec 2012
I Root For: YouAreButtHurt
Location: OnTopOfDwarfMountain
Post: #142
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
(04-16-2013 03:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  For those blasting the ACC's decision to go all-in with ESPN (just like the SEC)!03-lmfao



http://www.mrsec.com/2013/04/the-new-sec...ore-268651


Quote:One group selling everything. A sales force that can sell the SEC’s rights — TV, digital, etc — as a bundle or, if it chooses, a la carte (without the worry of spare change falling through the cracks as rival companies clumsily trip all over one another).

You want to talk about money? That’s where the money is. Sure, the SEC Network is going to be a cash cow. But eventually the cable/satellite bubble will pop and viewers will be able to pick and choose the networks they want without having to buy a provider’s bundle. When that happens, the SEC will still have the ability to move, shift, slide, and shimmy it’s way into whatever media universe comes next. All because the SEC has taken back its main media rights and it will allow just one group to sell them.

Except there are obvious differences between the two conferences and their relationships with ESPN. Especially the fact that the SEC never sold the entirety of its tier 3 rights to ESPN without having a conference network in place first.
04-16-2013 08:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dasville Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,796
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 246
I Root For: UofL
Location:
Post: #143
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
(04-16-2013 08:06 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  
(04-16-2013 03:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  For those blasting the ACC's decision to go all-in with ESPN (just like the SEC)!03-lmfao



http://www.mrsec.com/2013/04/the-new-sec...ore-268651


Quote:One group selling everything. A sales force that can sell the SEC’s rights — TV, digital, etc — as a bundle or, if it chooses, a la carte (without the worry of spare change falling through the cracks as rival companies clumsily trip all over one another).

You want to talk about money? That’s where the money is. Sure, the SEC Network is going to be a cash cow. But eventually the cable/satellite bubble will pop and viewers will be able to pick and choose the networks they want without having to buy a provider’s bundle. When that happens, the SEC will still have the ability to move, shift, slide, and shimmy it’s way into whatever media universe comes next. All because the SEC has taken back its main media rights and it will allow just one group to sell them.

Except there are obvious differences between the two conferences and their relationships with ESPN. Especially the fact that the SEC never sold the entirety of its tier 3 rights to ESPN without having a conference network in place first.

At the end of the day, no matter how you slice it, ESPN owns ALL the SEC and almost ALL the ACC. Does ESPN GAIN money by an ACC team moving to the SEC?
(This post was last modified: 04-16-2013 08:34 PM by Dasville.)
04-16-2013 08:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
wildthing202 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 716
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 14
I Root For: ND & BC
Location: Massachusetts
Post: #144
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
(04-16-2013 08:33 PM)Dasville Wrote:  
(04-16-2013 08:06 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  
(04-16-2013 03:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  For those blasting the ACC's decision to go all-in with ESPN (just like the SEC)!03-lmfao



http://www.mrsec.com/2013/04/the-new-sec...ore-268651


Quote:One group selling everything. A sales force that can sell the SEC’s rights — TV, digital, etc — as a bundle or, if it chooses, a la carte (without the worry of spare change falling through the cracks as rival companies clumsily trip all over one another).

You want to talk about money? That’s where the money is. Sure, the SEC Network is going to be a cash cow. But eventually the cable/satellite bubble will pop and viewers will be able to pick and choose the networks they want without having to buy a provider’s bundle. When that happens, the SEC will still have the ability to move, shift, slide, and shimmy it’s way into whatever media universe comes next. All because the SEC has taken back its main media rights and it will allow just one group to sell them.

Except there are obvious differences between the two conferences and their relationships with ESPN. Especially the fact that the SEC never sold the entirety of its tier 3 rights to ESPN without having a conference network in place first.

At the end of the day, no matter how you slice it, ESPN owns ALL the SEC and almost ALL the ACC. Does ESPN GAIN money by an ACC team moving to the SEC?

When did ESPN buy CBS?
04-16-2013 11:11 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
curtis0620 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,943
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 60
I Root For: Pitt
Location:
Post: #145
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
The point I have been trying to make is that the SEC will probably get most if not all cable subs in Alabama. The ACC only needs a fraction of the state of NY and that would be huge.

Much bigger population base and a smaller percentage will get you bigger revenue.
04-17-2013 07:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #146
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
(04-17-2013 07:28 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  The point I have been trying to make is that the SEC will probably get most if not all cable subs in Alabama. The ACC only needs a fraction of the state of NY and that would be huge.

Much bigger population base and a smaller percentage will get you bigger revenue.

No. That isn't necessarily true (see BIG EAST payout). Having a ton of passionate fans will translate into a big payout. If nobody watches the channel and if nobody cares if they have the channel or not, then it is worthless, no matter how many people have access to it. Cable companies will not pay substantial amounts of money for something that nobody wants, watches, or cares about (see Pac-12 network carriage problems, LHN, and BTN negotiations in NYC). Conversely, if a channel is wildly popular and has a fanatical following, then there is a very good chance that it will have a very large payout, even if the population in it's "home footprint" isn't particularily large (see BTN's profits from the Midwest).

If you disagree, then make your case. Answer any of my questions. I have answered all of your questions. How would you justify a given carriage rate? And, from where do you think the cable providers derive value?

This is semi-OT, but it's worth stating:
*The average New Yorker doesn't watch college sports because there is simply too much to do in the city. If they watch sports at all, which many do at some level, they usually watch pro sports, like the Yankees, Mets, Giants, Jets, Knicks, Nets, Rangers, Islanders, Devils, Red Bulls (to a lesser extent). Anyway, many New Yorkers either haven't been in this country long enough to have strong attachments to a particular college, or haven't been in NY long enough to have attachments to a particular college in the region. People come to NYC from all over the world and all over the country.
*The average Bostonian doesn't watch college sports either. Like in NYC, there is simply too much going on, and there are too many pro sports with fanatical followings. Boston is home to the Red Sox, Celtics, Bruins, (effectively) the Patriots, and (effectively) the Revolution. All of those teams are amongst the most important teams in theire respective professional sports and those are the biggest professional sports in America. Anyway, if the average Bostonian did follow college sports, their team wouldn't be Boston College. I don't know if you know this, but Boston is home to more colleges, and more college students per capita than any other place in the entire world. Not only does this fact suggest that BC has to compete with more colleges in their local market than any other university (how many BU, Harvard, MIT, Northeastern, Emory, and so on grads care about BC athletics?), but the lack of elite teams to come out of Boston suggests that nobody goes to school in Boston because they care about college athletics. Despite the fact that there are a zillion teams in the city, almost none of them are any good, ever.
*Philly, like NYC and Boston, is another city with a lot going on. Honestly, you're a Pitt fan. Do you really think that there is a large, loud, and vocal Pitt following in Philly? I don't even think that there is a particularily large, loud, and vocal Penn State following in Philly, and PSU is bigger and closer. To put things in perspective, the BTN charges out of footprint rates in Philly. Thats 1/8.8 of their "home" rates, and the BIG TEN has Penn State in it.
*Heck, I'm not even sure that Miami will make the ACC a ton of money. Look at the []_[]'s attendance for their regular season and spring games and tell me that people really, really care. Admittedly, I think that things would be different if Miami was winning, but residents of big cities have a lot going on, so they have little patients for teams that aren't winning championships.
*I could make similar arguments about DC, Atlanta, and some of the cities in Florida (i.e. Orlando and probs Tampa), but, admittedly, the arguments would be to a MUCH lesser extent.

If markets were all that mattered, The America would be loaded. Off the top of my head, they have Dallas, Houston, NYC, Philly, Memphis, New Orleans, Cinci, DC (Navy), and arguably Boston (UCONN is in New England), yet they are getting paid $2 million per school per year (aka peanuts).
04-17-2013 08:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
orangefan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,208
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 354
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #147
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
(04-17-2013 08:11 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(04-17-2013 07:28 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  The point I have been trying to make is that the SEC will probably get most if not all cable subs in Alabama. The ACC only needs a fraction of the state of NY and that would be huge.

Much bigger population base and a smaller percentage will get you bigger revenue.

No. That isn't necessarily true (see BIG EAST payout). Having a ton of passionate fans will translate into a big payout. If nobody watches the channel and if nobody cares if they have the channel or not, then it is worthless, no matter how many people have access to it. Cable companies will not pay substantial amounts of money for something that nobody wants, watches, or cares about (see Pac-12 network carriage problems, LHN, and BTN negotiations in NYC). Conversely, if a channel is wildly popular and has a fanatical following, then there is a very good chance that it will have a very large payout, even if the population in it's "home footprint" isn't particularily large (see BTN's profits from the Midwest).

If you disagree, then make your case. Answer any of my questions. I have answered all of your questions. How would you justify a given carriage rate? And, from where do you think the cable providers derive value?

This is semi-OT, but it's worth stating:
*The average New Yorker doesn't watch college sports because there is simply too much to do in the city. If they watch sports at all, which many do at some level, they usually watch pro sports, like the Yankees, Mets, Giants, Jets, Knicks, Nets, Rangers, Islanders, Devils, Red Bulls (to a lesser extent). Anyway, many New Yorkers either haven't been in this country long enough to have strong attachments to a particular college, or haven't been in NY long enough to have attachments to a particular college in the region. People come to NYC from all over the world and all over the country.
*The average Bostonian doesn't watch college sports either. Like in NYC, there is simply too much going on, and there are too many pro sports with fanatical followings. Boston is home to the Red Sox, Celtics, Bruins, (effectively) the Patriots, and (effectively) the Revolution. All of those teams are amongst the most important teams in theire respective professional sports and those are the biggest professional sports in America. Anyway, if the average Bostonian did follow college sports, their team wouldn't be Boston College. I don't know if you know this, but Boston is home to more colleges, and more college students per capita than any other place in the entire world. Not only does this fact suggest that BC has to compete with more colleges in their local market than any other university (how many BU, Harvard, MIT, Northeastern, Emory, and so on grads care about BC athletics?), but the lack of elite teams to come out of Boston suggests that nobody goes to school in Boston because they care about college athletics. Despite the fact that there are a zillion teams in the city, almost none of them are any good, ever.
*Philly, like NYC and Boston, is another city with a lot going on. Honestly, you're a Pitt fan. Do you really think that there is a large, loud, and vocal Pitt following in Philly? I don't even think that there is a particularily large, loud, and vocal Penn State following in Philly, and PSU is bigger and closer. To put things in perspective, the BTN charges out of footprint rates in Philly. Thats 1/8.8 of their "home" rates, and the BIG TEN has Penn State in it.
*Heck, I'm not even sure that Miami will make the ACC a ton of money. Look at the []_[]'s attendance for their regular season and spring games and tell me that people really, really care. Admittedly, I think that things would be different if Miami was winning, but residents of big cities have a lot going on, so they have little patients for teams that aren't winning championships.
*I could make similar arguments about DC, Atlanta, and some of the cities in Florida (i.e. Orlando and probs Tampa), but, admittedly, the arguments would be to a MUCH lesser extent.

If markets were all that mattered, The America would be loaded. Off the top of my head, they have Dallas, Houston, NYC, Philly, Memphis, New Orleans, Cinci, DC (Navy), and arguably Boston (UCONN is in New England), yet they are getting paid $2 million per school per year (aka peanuts).

According to the attached chart, ESPNU charged 18 cents/subscriber/month in 2011. If the ACCN got 18 cents a subscriber in the NYC market, even with only 75% clearance of its 7.4 million TV HH, that would translate into $12 million per year. With a combination of Syracuse and Notre Dame games, together with Duke, UNC and the Ville, I don't think 18 cents or 75% clearance is a stretch at all, despite all of the distractions of NYC.


Attached File(s)
.png  snl-kagan-chart.png (Size: 27 KB / Downloads: 6)
04-17-2013 10:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #148
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
The problem was, markets were never "all" that mattered. That was their problem.
04-17-2013 10:24 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #149
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
(04-17-2013 10:13 AM)orangefan Wrote:  According to the attached chart, ESPNU charged 18 cents/subscriber/month in 2011. If the ACCN got 18 cents a subscriber in the NYC market, even with only 75% clearance of its 7.4 million TV HH, that would translate into $12 million per year. With a combination of Syracuse and Notre Dame games, together with Duke, UNC and the Ville, I don't think 18 cents or 75% clearance is a stretch at all, despite all of the distractions of NYC.

Now you're throwing in Duke, UNC, UL, and ND. It was originally SU v. 'Bama.

When you throw in 1/3rd of the ACC, then I agree that the ACC could get more out of NYC than 1/14th of the SEC could get out of Alabama. I am admittedly the one who widened the scope with my OT comment. However, the point of my OT comment wasn't that the ACC doesn't have a ton of fans in NYC, or anywhere else for that matter, it was that big populations don't inherently mean big fan bases, and big fan bases are what matters. Look at your comment. Whether you meant to or not, you even implied so much. You supported a claim that "the ACCN could get a certain carriage rate in NYC" (paraquote) by stating that a number of ACC schools have large fan bases which are well-represented in the area.
04-17-2013 10:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #150
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
(04-17-2013 10:24 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  The problem was, markets were never "all" that mattered. That was their problem.

[Image: 22011tvrevenuevsavgtvhouseholdsperteam.jpg]
[Image: 6attendancewithnewb12accandsec.jpg]

If you can explain those graphs and show me where market matter at all, I'll believe you.

Until then, I will believe that, for the purposes of directly affecting TV contracts, markets matter to the extent that the markets are filled with passionate fans, no less, and no more. There is a mountain of evidence and economics against anything to the contrary, and I have yet to see any coherent argument/piece of evidence against that claim.

Yes, it is hard to have a ton of fans in a sparsely-popualted area, but the value (or lack thereof) derived from that area of an area isn't a product of the number of people. It's a product of the number of people who care and how much they care. The same is true for an area with a high popualtion. It's value isn't its high population. Its value is based on the amount of fans in said location.

In short, there may be a correlation between being located near big cities and big media payouts, but it isn't a causal relationship. However, the relationship between having a huge number of fans who are passionate and having a big media payout is causal.
04-17-2013 10:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #151
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
Here is what I will tell you. The SEC currently distributes the games that would make up the SEC network via syndication, some games on various RSN's of Fox Sports, and PPV. They do not draw very well. Despite what people claim about people in th southeast loving their SEC, they choose not to watch the crap games on syndication over the games available on ESPN or elsewhere. I mean these schools have games on PPV, and no one buys them.

Meanwhile ACC basketball games that are syndicated, the same ones that would make up an ACC Network, actually draw better ratings in some areas than basketball games on national TV. Because conference networks are driven more by the daily programming that is basketball than they are football (see the Big Ten Network), an ACC Network would be stronger than a lot of people think.
04-17-2013 10:53 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #152
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
(04-17-2013 10:53 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  Here is what I will tell you. The SEC currently distributes the games that would make up the SEC network via syndication, some games on various RSN's of Fox Sports, and PPV. They do not draw very well. Despite what people claim about people in th southeast loving their SEC, they choose not to watch the crap games on syndication over the games available on ESPN or elsewhere. I mean these schools have games on PPV, and no one buys them.

Meanwhile ACC basketball games that are syndicated, the same ones that would make up an ACC Network, actually draw better ratings in some areas than basketball games on national TV. Because conference networks are driven more by the daily programming that is basketball than they are football (see the Big Ten Network), an ACC Network would be stronger than a lot of people think.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not bashing the ACC. I think it's a great cofnerence and I think that it will do fine. The end of the ACC predictions are wishful thinking. The Big XII knows that, unless the ACCf alls, they are next, WVU knows that they are on an island and without friends, and UCONN and "The American" know that they are hopelessly outgunned by the ACC and they want to move up.

I said this earlier, and I stand by it:
(04-16-2013 05:38 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  ...The money that we get will be the result of the fact that each and every team in the ACC has consistently fielded a quality product over the years and has amassed a following of which we can be proud. Our payout will not be the result of mere proximity to cities. It will be the result of hard work and years of sweat.

The ACC is a quality conference. It has been for many years and it will continue to be a great conference moving forward. Teh recent additions have only made it stronger. I don't see the ACC outgunning the SEC, however, your'e right that ACC basketball/olympic sports haev more fans than people think, and that's what drivces value in the network.

ACC schools also have a lot in common with each other. That makes the network far less price elastic (which is a good thing).
04-17-2013 11:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,720
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1392
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #153
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
(04-17-2013 10:13 AM)orangefan Wrote:  According to the attached chart, ESPNU charged 18 cents/subscriber/month in 2011. If the ACCN got 18 cents a subscriber in the NYC market, even with only 75% clearance of its 7.4 million TV HH, that would translate into $12 million per year. With a combination of Syracuse and Notre Dame games, together with Duke, UNC and the Ville, I don't think 18 cents or 75% clearance is a stretch at all, despite all of the distractions of NYC.

Thanks for the chart! (see orangefan's 12:13 post)

That table shows ESPNU charges $0.18/month, ESPN2 gets $0.62, and Fox College Sports gets $0.37. So my goal for ESPN/ACC would be to get at least $0.38/month (up $0.20). For the state of NY, that's 19.3M/3.5 per house X 80% X $0.38 X 12 months = $20.12 million/year.

Assuming ESPN cuts the ACC's guaranteed money by $1M/team (to buy back tier 3) and then splits the revenues from ESPN/ACC 50/50...

new revenue = (total population*)/(3.5 per house) X 80% with cable X $0.38 in footprint rate = $92.87M /year. If we assume that get's split 50/50, that means the ACC cut is $46.43M/yr. Now accounting for the loss of $14M/year back to ESPN for tier 3 rights drops that to $32.43M, and when we divide that 14.2 ways that's an extra $2.28M/year per team. Not a windfall, but not bad - and that is assuming a modest carriage fee of only $0.38 per month within the footprint (I suspect we can get more, but then we might have to compensate ESPN more for the loss of ESPNU also, so the final number may not be much higher than this).

* here are the population numbers I used (millions):
NY State*... 19.3
Florida........ 18.8
Pennsylvania 12.7
Georgia....... 9.7
N Carolina.... 9.5
Virginia....... 8.0
Massachusetts 6.5
S Carolina.... 4.6
TOTAL........ 89.1 (I didn't count Kentucky or Maryland)
04-17-2013 11:28 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
orangefan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,208
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 354
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #154
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
(04-17-2013 11:28 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(04-17-2013 10:13 AM)orangefan Wrote:  According to the attached chart, ESPNU charged 18 cents/subscriber/month in 2011. If the ACCN got 18 cents a subscriber in the NYC market, even with only 75% clearance of its 7.4 million TV HH, that would translate into $12 million per year. With a combination of Syracuse and Notre Dame games, together with Duke, UNC and the Ville, I don't think 18 cents or 75% clearance is a stretch at all, despite all of the distractions of NYC.

Thanks for the chart! (see orangefan's 12:13 post)

That table shows ESPNU charges $0.18/month, ESPN2 gets $0.62, and Fox College Sports gets $0.37. So my goal for ESPN/ACC would be to get at least $0.38/month (up $0.20). For the state of NY, that's 19.3M/3.5 per house X 80% X $0.38 X 12 months = $20.12 million/year.

Assuming ESPN cuts the ACC's guaranteed money by $1M/team (to buy back tier 3) and then splits the revenues from ESPN/ACC 50/50...

new revenue = (total population*)/(3.5 per house) X 80% with cable X $0.38 in footprint rate = $92.87M /year. If we assume that get's split 50/50, that means the ACC cut is $46.43M/yr. Now accounting for the loss of $14M/year back to ESPN for tier 3 rights drops that to $32.43M, and when we divide that 14.2 ways that's an extra $2.28M/year per team. Not a windfall, but not bad - and that is assuming a modest carriage fee of only $0.38 per month within the footprint (I suspect we can get more, but then we might have to compensate ESPN more for the loss of ESPNU also, so the final number may not be much higher than this).

* here are the population numbers I used (millions):
NY State*... 19.3
Florida........ 18.8
Pennsylvania 12.7
Georgia....... 9.7
N Carolina.... 9.5
Virginia....... 8.0
Massachusetts 6.5
S Carolina.... 4.6
TOTAL........ 89.1 (I didn't count Kentucky or Maryland)

Nice analysis. I would expect the standard rate in home markets to be 70-90 cents, but 38 cents is probably not a bad bogie given that NYS, PA and MA are going to require discounts to clear in their largest markets.

You mention that you have omitted Kentucky, which is fine. You should also consider Indiana and the Chicago market for Notre Dame. Again, not likely to be full price markets, but huge ND fanbases.
04-17-2013 11:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TexanMark Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 25,637
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 1326
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Post: #155
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
Nationwide (outside the ACC Footprint) don't you think 10 cents per household? That should add millions more. I know I have the Pac12 Network on Time Warner hear in TX.
04-17-2013 01:26 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
krux Offline
Banned

Posts: 2,490
Joined: Apr 2010
I Root For: Louisville
Location: st louis
Post: #156
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
Louisville actually has a pretty good chunck of Southern Indiana as well.
(This post was last modified: 04-17-2013 01:50 PM by krux.)
04-17-2013 01:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,720
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1392
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #157
RE: SEC Network announcement next week.
(04-17-2013 01:26 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Nationwide (outside the ACC Footprint) don't you think 10 cents per household? That should add millions more. I know I have the Pac12 Network on Time Warner hear in TX.

I just worked through the whole thing, including out-of-market estimates, and posted it on my blog. I used 15 cents average for out of market, because I figure Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana, and all of New England (outside of Boston) will pay 20 cents while the rest of the country will pay 10 cents. Anyway, it's just a guesstimate.

In the end, I figure this ACC Network channel gets each team anywhere from $2 to $5 million/year each. When you add that in with the new playoff money, etc., that puts the ACC between $36 and $40 million/year by 2016 or so (if my assumptions and calculations are all correct, of course).

In other words, right in line with the other "big boy" conferences.
(This post was last modified: 04-17-2013 02:14 PM by Hokie Mark.)
04-17-2013 02:05 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.