Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Article About ACC Network Distribution
Author Message
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #21
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-14-2018 05:35 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  And you need to take a long cold and hard stare at the population numbers for the ACC versus the SEC.

To simplify matters, just explain why the ACC would not command the same rate in VA, NC, SC, GA and FL as the SEC? Those states alone would probably equal the SEC’s population apart from Texas.

The reality here is that you really, really wish Ga Tech was in the SEC. Fine, but don’t ignore reality. We can’t know for sure but the early signs on the ACC network are reasonably optimistic. We won’t know for sure for another couple of years.

Electoral votes are apportioned through population through the census. So it's a great way to do a fair comparison:

SEC: TX 38 + AR 6 + LA 8 + MS 6 + AL 9 + GA 16 + SC 9 + FL 29 + KY 8 + MO 10 = 139
B1G: MN 10 + IA 6 + WI 10 + IL 20 + IN 11 + OH 18 + MI 16 + PA 20 + NJ 14 + MD 10 = 135
Pac12: CA 55 + WA 12 + OR 7 + UT 6 + AZ 11 + CO 9 = 100
ACC: FL 29 + SC 9 + GA 16 + NC 15 + VA 13 + PA 20 + NY 29 + MA 11 = 142

So yes, the ACC has the population advantage..... JUST. Texas A&M in one big gobble caught the SEC up most of the way on that. So my long hard stare into the SEC's population comes back with "modest advantage ACC". And that assumes all electoral votes are equal. They aren't. There's way more TV mojo for college football in Texas than there is in New York. Will basketball mojo offset? Maybe. But given clear and decisive revenue trends of the last 20 years I wouldn't wanna bank on that or depend upon it.

Now, if you wish to be childish and ascribe my motivations because you disagree we can play that game. GT doesn't want to be in the SEC as currently constituted because it is flagrantly academically and ethically bankrupt. But Miami and UNC have taken most of the smell off that rose in the ACC. What we don't want to be is pigeon holed into a new Big East conference where football teams go to die. You'd think Duke of all people in the ACC (among those who don't have an in-state SEC rival at least) would understand the need to take football seriously especially after Alabama turned Wallace Wade into Bryant-Denny East.

[Image: DSC_9617-L.jpg]

[Image: duke-alabama-1711.jpg]

[Image: Alabama+v+Duke+kaHCEWLF6e8l.jpg]

[Image: Duke-vs-Alabama-Football09.jpg]


08-14-2018 08:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,913
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-14-2018 08:05 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(08-14-2018 05:35 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  And you need to take a long cold and hard stare at the population numbers for the ACC versus the SEC.

To simplify matters, just explain why the ACC would not command the same rate in VA, NC, SC, GA and FL as the SEC? Those states alone would probably equal the SEC’s population apart from Texas.

The reality here is that you really, really wish Ga Tech was in the SEC. Fine, but don’t ignore reality. We can’t know for sure but the early signs on the ACC network are reasonably optimistic. We won’t know for sure for another couple of years.

Electoral votes are apportioned through population through the census. So it's a great way to do a fair comparison:

SEC: TX 38 + AR 6 + LA 8 + MS 6 + AL 9 + GA 16 + SC 9 + FL 29 + KY 8 + MO 10 = 139
B1G: MN 10 + IA 6 + WI 10 + IL 20 + IN 11 + OH 18 + MI 16 + PA 20 + NJ 14 + MD 10 = 135
Pac12: CA 55 + WA 12 + OR 7 + UT 6 + AZ 11 + CO 9 = 100
ACC: FL 29 + SC 9 + GA 16 + NC 15 + VA 13 + PA 20 + NY 29 + MA 11 = 142

So yes, the ACC has the population advantage..... JUST. Texas A&M in one big gobble caught the SEC up most of the way on that. So my long hard stare into the SEC's population comes back with "modest advantage ACC". And that assumes all electoral votes are equal. They aren't. There's way more TV mojo for college football in Texas than there is in New York. Will basketball mojo offset? Maybe. But given clear and decisive revenue trends of the last 20 years I wouldn't wanna bank on that or depend upon it.

Now, if you wish to be childish and ascribe my motivations because you disagree we can play that game. GT doesn't want to be in the SEC as currently constituted because it is flagrantly academically and ethically bankrupt. But Miami and UNC have taken most of the smell off that rose in the ACC. What we don't want to be is pigeon holed into a new Big East conference where football teams go to die. You'd think Duke of all people in the ACC (among those who don't have an in-state SEC rival at least) would understand the need to take football seriously especially after Alabama turned Wallace Wade into Bryant-Denny East.

[Image: DSC_9617-L.jpg]

[Image: duke-alabama-1711.jpg]

[Image: Alabama+v+Duke+kaHCEWLF6e8l.jpg]

[Image: Duke-vs-Alabama-Football09.jpg]



Well just assuming that you split states you share with the SEC is inaccurate. You split roughly Florida and South Carolina. You don't split Georgia or Kentucky although the latter is probably a bit closer to a split.

You aren't getting paid for population. You are getting paid for viewers. The ACC's obstacle has always been that for your population the % of actual viewers was virtually tied with the PAC for last place. The SEC has the highest % of engaged viewers within their footprint. The Big 12 is sometimes second in that statistic and are nip and tuck with the Big 10. It's just that they have so few total possible viewers to reach. If the ACC wants higher rates now is the time to get them. Your subscriber push can earn you a higher rate if it exceeds expectations.
08-14-2018 08:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #23
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
We will know soon enough if the ACC can convert a numbers advantage into dollars.
08-14-2018 08:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hallcity Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,684
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Duke
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-14-2018 08:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-14-2018 08:05 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(08-14-2018 05:35 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  And you need to take a long cold and hard stare at the population numbers for the ACC versus the SEC.

To simplify matters, just explain why the ACC would not command the same rate in VA, NC, SC, GA and FL as the SEC? Those states alone would probably equal the SEC’s population apart from Texas.

The reality here is that you really, really wish Ga Tech was in the SEC. Fine, but don’t ignore reality. We can’t know for sure but the early signs on the ACC network are reasonably optimistic. We won’t know for sure for another couple of years.

Electoral votes are apportioned through population through the census. So it's a great way to do a fair comparison:

SEC: TX 38 + AR 6 + LA 8 + MS 6 + AL 9 + GA 16 + SC 9 + FL 29 + KY 8 + MO 10 = 139
B1G: MN 10 + IA 6 + WI 10 + IL 20 + IN 11 + OH 18 + MI 16 + PA 20 + NJ 14 + MD 10 = 135
Pac12: CA 55 + WA 12 + OR 7 + UT 6 + AZ 11 + CO 9 = 100
ACC: FL 29 + SC 9 + GA 16 + NC 15 + VA 13 + PA 20 + NY 29 + MA 11 = 142

So yes, the ACC has the population advantage..... JUST. Texas A&M in one big gobble caught the SEC up most of the way on that. So my long hard stare into the SEC's population comes back with "modest advantage ACC". And that assumes all electoral votes are equal. They aren't. There's way more TV mojo for college football in Texas than there is in New York. Will basketball mojo offset? Maybe. But given clear and decisive revenue trends of the last 20 years I wouldn't wanna bank on that or depend upon it.

Now, if you wish to be childish and ascribe my motivations because you disagree we can play that game. GT doesn't want to be in the SEC as currently constituted because it is flagrantly academically and ethically bankrupt. But Miami and UNC have taken most of the smell off that rose in the ACC. What we don't want to be is pigeon holed into a new Big East conference where football teams go to die. You'd think Duke of all people in the ACC (among those who don't have an in-state SEC rival at least) would understand the need to take football seriously especially after Alabama turned Wallace Wade into Bryant-Denny East.

[Image: DSC_9617-L.jpg]

[Image: duke-alabama-1711.jpg]

[Image: Alabama+v+Duke+kaHCEWLF6e8l.jpg]

[Image: Duke-vs-Alabama-Football09.jpg]



Well just assuming that you split states you share with the SEC is inaccurate. You split roughly Florida and South Carolina. You don't split Georgia or Kentucky although the latter is probably a bit closer to a split.

You aren't getting paid for population. You are getting paid for viewers. The ACC's obstacle has always been that for your population the % of actual viewers was virtually tied with the PAC for last place. The SEC has the highest % of engaged viewers within their footprint. The Big 12 is sometimes second in that statistic and are nip and tuck with the Big 10. It's just that they have so few total possible viewers to reach. If the ACC wants higher rates now is the time to get them. Your subscriber push can earn you a higher rate if it exceeds expectations.

I think you need a remedial course in civics if you think electoral votes are allocated simply according to population. Each state gets two extra electoral votes, one for each Senator, which gives an advantage to states with smaller populations, which the B1G and SEC have a lot of. You’re also conveniently overlooking the fact that the ACC has a school in Indiana which has a strong following in Chicago. You’re also heavily football scentric. The SEC’s engagement is in football. There are far more basketball games broadcast. In any case, if the report that the ACC has already signed contracts with many cable operators are accurate, the ACC must not be having problems selling its network.
08-14-2018 08:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #25
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-14-2018 08:59 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  I think you need a remedial course in civics if you think electoral votes are allocated simply according to population. Each state gets two extra electoral votes, one for each Senator, which gives an advantage to states with smaller populations, which the B1G and SEC have a lot of. You’re also conveniently overlooking the fact that the ACC has a school in Indiana which has a strong following in Chicago. You’re also heavily football scentric. The SEC’s engagement is in football. There are far more basketball games broadcast. In any case, if the report that the ACC has already signed contracts with many cable operators are accurate, the ACC must not be having problems selling its network.

As though that really changes the math. Without the US Senate:

SEC: TX 36 + AR 4 + LA 6 + MS 4 + AL 7 + GA 14 + SC 7 + FL 27 + KY 6 + MO 8 = 119
B1G: MN 8 + IA 4 + WI 8 + IL 18 + IN 9 + OH 16 + MI 14 + PA 18 + NJ 12 + MD 8 = 115
Pac12: CA 53 + WA 10 + OR 5 + UT 4 + AZ 9 + CO 7 = 88
ACC: FL 27 + SC 7 + GA 14 + NC 13 + VA 11 + PA 18 + NY 27 + MA 9 = 126

From ACC+3 to ACC+7. A net difference of 4 which given the number sizes is a low single digit percentage error.

I'm overlooking ND because in football they have their own contract with NBC and it's pretty well established that football is, depending upon which source you agree with, around 3/4 to 4/5 of the TV revenue. Let's toss in Indiana for ***** and giggles:

SEC: TX 36 + AR 4 + LA 6 + MS 4 + AL 7 + GA 14 + SC 7 + FL 27 + KY 6 + MO 8 = 119
B1G: MN 8 + IA 4 + WI 8 + IL 18 + IN 9 + OH 16 + MI 14 + PA 18 + NJ 12 + MD 8 = 115
Pac12: CA 53 + WA 10 + OR 5 + UT 4 + AZ 9 + CO 7 = 88
ACC: FL 27 + SC 7 + GA 14 + NC 13 + VA 11 + PA 18 + NY 27 + MA 9 + IN 9 = 135

Net +3 to Net +16. About a 10% difference. By no means a grand slam or a game changer.

Yes there are more basketball games broadcast. But they have WAY lower ratings. There's so many basketball games that an individual game doesn't have much meaning in the context of the season. In football there are so few games that ALL OF THEM matter a great deal to the season.

Random week of the CFB season last year: http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-...s/#2017wk6

12 games with a 1.0 or better rating.


Random week of the CBB season had just 2 games with a 1.0 or better: http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2018/02/...t-of-home/

And the National Championship game between Villanova and Michigan drew less than half the rating of any CFP game: http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2018/04/...-michigan/
08-14-2018 09:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,728
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1392
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #26
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
Why not just use actual census population numbers?

Code:
Conf    #states    population*
ACC     10     104.2
SEC     11      95.6
B1G     11      85.1
Pac      6      65.7
XII      5      37.8
* in millions of people

And GTS is absolutely correct - thinking that the SEC is way behind the ACC in population is a throwback to pre-expansion days. Texas A&M caught them up by about 27 million people... and don't forget, Missouri also joined at the same time, bringing another 6 million. So the SEC went from 63 to 96 million by adding just 2 teams! (Of course, the ACC answered smartly by adding NY and PA for a combined 32 million).

https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2016/...-2016.html
(This post was last modified: 08-14-2018 09:33 PM by Hokie Mark.)
08-14-2018 09:32 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #27
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-14-2018 09:32 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Why not just use actual census population numbers?

Code:
Conf    #states    population*
ACC     10     104.2
SEC     11      95.6
B1G     11      85.1
Pac      6      65.7
XII      5      37.8
* in millions of people

And GTS is absolutely correct - thinking that the SEC is way behind the ACC in population is a throwback to pre-expansion days. Texas A&M caught them up by about 27 million people... and don't forget, Missouri also joined at the same time, bringing another 6 million. So the SEC went from 63 to 96 million by adding just 2 teams! (Of course, the ACC answered smartly by adding NY and PA for a combined 32 million).

https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2016/...-2016.html

It's easier to track the long term demographic trends via the electoral vote. Nice easy numbers that are re-calibrated every 10 years. The Big Ten's picture is less bright when you see how many electoral votes they've bled out in just the last 10 years.
08-14-2018 10:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,913
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-14-2018 08:59 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  
(08-14-2018 08:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-14-2018 08:05 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(08-14-2018 05:35 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  And you need to take a long cold and hard stare at the population numbers for the ACC versus the SEC.

To simplify matters, just explain why the ACC would not command the same rate in VA, NC, SC, GA and FL as the SEC? Those states alone would probably equal the SEC’s population apart from Texas.

The reality here is that you really, really wish Ga Tech was in the SEC. Fine, but don’t ignore reality. We can’t know for sure but the early signs on the ACC network are reasonably optimistic. We won’t know for sure for another couple of years.

Electoral votes are apportioned through population through the census. So it's a great way to do a fair comparison:

SEC: TX 38 + AR 6 + LA 8 + MS 6 + AL 9 + GA 16 + SC 9 + FL 29 + KY 8 + MO 10 = 139
B1G: MN 10 + IA 6 + WI 10 + IL 20 + IN 11 + OH 18 + MI 16 + PA 20 + NJ 14 + MD 10 = 135
Pac12: CA 55 + WA 12 + OR 7 + UT 6 + AZ 11 + CO 9 = 100
ACC: FL 29 + SC 9 + GA 16 + NC 15 + VA 13 + PA 20 + NY 29 + MA 11 = 142

So yes, the ACC has the population advantage..... JUST. Texas A&M in one big gobble caught the SEC up most of the way on that. So my long hard stare into the SEC's population comes back with "modest advantage ACC". And that assumes all electoral votes are equal. They aren't. There's way more TV mojo for college football in Texas than there is in New York. Will basketball mojo offset? Maybe. But given clear and decisive revenue trends of the last 20 years I wouldn't wanna bank on that or depend upon it.

Now, if you wish to be childish and ascribe my motivations because you disagree we can play that game. GT doesn't want to be in the SEC as currently constituted because it is flagrantly academically and ethically bankrupt. But Miami and UNC have taken most of the smell off that rose in the ACC. What we don't want to be is pigeon holed into a new Big East conference where football teams go to die. You'd think Duke of all people in the ACC (among those who don't have an in-state SEC rival at least) would understand the need to take football seriously especially after Alabama turned Wallace Wade into Bryant-Denny East.

[Image: DSC_9617-L.jpg]

[Image: duke-alabama-1711.jpg]

[Image: Alabama+v+Duke+kaHCEWLF6e8l.jpg]

[Image: Duke-vs-Alabama-Football09.jpg]



Well just assuming that you split states you share with the SEC is inaccurate. You split roughly Florida and South Carolina. You don't split Georgia or Kentucky although the latter is probably a bit closer to a split.

You aren't getting paid for population. You are getting paid for viewers. The ACC's obstacle has always been that for your population the % of actual viewers was virtually tied with the PAC for last place. The SEC has the highest % of engaged viewers within their footprint. The Big 12 is sometimes second in that statistic and are nip and tuck with the Big 10. It's just that they have so few total possible viewers to reach. If the ACC wants higher rates now is the time to get them. Your subscriber push can earn you a higher rate if it exceeds expectations.

I think you need a remedial course in civics if you think electoral votes are allocated simply according to population. Each state gets two extra electoral votes, one for each Senator, which gives an advantage to states with smaller populations, which the B1G and SEC have a lot of. You’re also conveniently overlooking the fact that the ACC has a school in Indiana which has a strong following in Chicago. You’re also heavily football scentric. The SEC’s engagement is in football. There are far more basketball games broadcast. In any case, if the report that the ACC has already signed contracts with many cable operators are accurate, the ACC must not be having problems selling its network.

Where did I say anything about the electoral college system ye who cannot read and comprehend. What I was pointing out was that splitting a state between conferences doesn't guarantee a split in TV viewers. UGA carries almost 85% of the state of Georgia and Kentucky probably has a 60/40 advantage over Louisville. Florida carries the plurality of the state of Florida around 49% to F.S.U. and Miami's 51 combined. So a slight edge to the ACC in the Sunshine state. Clemson and South Carolina are fairly evenly divided with the edge going to the school with the whip hand at the time.

My point was exactly the same as yours. Electoral college might reflect overall population advantages but is certainly no indicator of what % of viewers a college football team will or will not carry.

Now as to your last two fails. Basketball's regular season severely lags in viewership. It's the tourney that brings the ratings. And having cable contracts doesn't determine your earnings. Advertising rates do and those are based on actual viewers. Football outdraws basketball and the two are not remotely close. And the % of your actual viewers vs your total potential viewers goes a long way to determining your rate.
08-14-2018 10:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,913
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-14-2018 09:32 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Why not just use actual census population numbers?

Code:
Conf    #states    population*
ACC     10     104.2
SEC     11      95.6
B1G     11      85.1
Pac      6      65.7
XII      5      37.8
* in millions of people

And GTS is absolutely correct - thinking that the SEC is way behind the ACC in population is a throwback to pre-expansion days. Texas A&M caught them up by about 27 million people... and don't forget, Missouri also joined at the same time, bringing another 6 million. So the SEC went from 63 to 96 million by adding just 2 teams! (Of course, the ACC answered smartly by adding NY and PA for a combined 32 million).

https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2016/...-2016.html

So Mark the real question is how much of Pennsylvania does Pitt carry versus Penn State? And how much of New York does Syracuse carry? Then in add how much of New York Notre Dame carries. There's your percentage of viewers in New York.

Then compare them to how many Texans actually watch A&M and how many Missourians actually watch Mizzou. The Texas vs Texas A&M % would be interesting as well.

It's one thing to have a school in a state. It's another thing to say that school carries the majority of college football viewers in the state. Your rate is based on the latter.
08-14-2018 10:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #30
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-14-2018 10:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So Mark the real question is how much of Pennsylvania does Pitt carry versus Penn State? And how much of New York does Syracuse carry? Then in add how much of New York Notre Dame carries. There's your percentage of viewers in New York.

Then compare them to how many Texans actually watch A&M and how many Missourians actually watch Mizzou. The Texas vs Texas A&M % would be interesting as well.

It's one thing to have a school in a state. It's another thing to say that school carries the majority of college football viewers in the state. Your rate is based on the latter.


This is why it's so important that GT got rid of Bobinski and installed Stansbury. The ACC needs GT to be strong in football. It's recruiting headwaters and Mecca for CFB. And all it takes is some success for the truckloads of Wal-Mart UGAg fans to put on a different colored hat. I'm old enough to remember LL Cool J wearing GT hats in 1990 -- even in movies. And you couldn't throw a rock in Atlanta without landing on somebody wearing a GT Starter Jacket. It has happened before people ... with the right leadership (Stansbury looks the part so far) it can happen again.
08-14-2018 11:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,913
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-14-2018 11:08 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(08-14-2018 10:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So Mark the real question is how much of Pennsylvania does Pitt carry versus Penn State? And how much of New York does Syracuse carry? Then in add how much of New York Notre Dame carries. There's your percentage of viewers in New York.

Then compare them to how many Texans actually watch A&M and how many Missourians actually watch Mizzou. The Texas vs Texas A&M % would be interesting as well.

It's one thing to have a school in a state. It's another thing to say that school carries the majority of college football viewers in the state. Your rate is based on the latter.


This is why it's so important that GT got rid of Bobinski and installed Stansbury. The ACC needs GT to be strong in football. It's recruiting headwaters and Mecca for CFB. And all it takes is some success for the truckloads of Wal-Mart UGAg fans to put on a different colored hat. I'm old enough to remember LL Cool J wearing GT hats in 1990 -- even in movies. And you couldn't throw a rock in Atlanta without landing on somebody wearing a GT Starter Jacket. It has happened before people ... with the right leadership (Stansbury looks the part so far) it can happen again.

Back in 1990 my across the street neighbor and one of the Thursday night poker game buddies, was a Tech engineer. He had the time of his life that year and we were all happy for him and Tech. He was retired when I knew him and helluva competent and nice guy. And yes, Georgia is a state where the T shirt fans get on board the hot hand. But the Dawgs still carry it, especially in Southeast and Southwest Georgia. I lived on the coast in the Golden Isles in those days and it was the most tech gear I had seen in years.

A great Tech team can carry Atlanta. Above average Georgia team carry the rest of the state, particularly Savannah.
08-14-2018 11:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 16,477
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 2968
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Staffordsville, KY
Post: #32
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-14-2018 03:48 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(08-14-2018 01:35 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Probably written by some kid in his Mom's basement. ;-)

BTW, Mark does any other fan website link you as much as Syracusefan.com?

YES. You'd be surprised. Most of my visitors come from either Tigernet, one of the many FSU sites (such as AllThingsFSU), or one of the Ga Tech sites (such as TheSwarm)... or, yes, one of the Syracuse sites (such as SyracuseFan). I used to get tons of visitors from GobblerCountry, CardiacHill and BCInterruption - but about a year ago they enacted some policy which shut down links from those sites. I used to get a lot more Louisville visitors when the ACC experience was fresh to them, too.

You would probably get more visitors from Louisville if UofL and Tech ever got to play. ACC is missing out on what would be some amazing games with the present scheduling arrangement.
CJ
08-15-2018 02:08 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: #33
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-14-2018 04:21 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Anybody who thinks the ACCN is just going to magically close the gap immediately needs to take a long cold and hard stare into this image ... ask .... "Why should the ACC command a higher price than (insert major network here with a track record, like the NBA or FS1)?" And as a corollary to that ... "Where do you see a very loud and very public drum beat of demand coming from?"

[Image: img_28031.png?w=620&crop=0%2C0px...;amp;ssl=1]

The key to the business model of the conference networks is to be treated by the MSOs like a Regional Sports Network within the geographic footprint of the conference. RSNs are not listed in the chart you've shared, but their rates are across the board higher than any sports network except ESPN because they show sports programming with strong local interest. In a few cases, they may even be higher than ESPN. I'm guessing the carriage fees shown for SECN, BTN and P12N are weighted average of in footprint and out of footprint subscribers and that within the footprint, they are substantially higher.
(This post was last modified: 08-15-2018 05:54 AM by orangefan.)
08-15-2018 05:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,913
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-15-2018 05:54 AM)orangefan Wrote:  
(08-14-2018 04:21 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Anybody who thinks the ACCN is just going to magically close the gap immediately needs to take a long cold and hard stare into this image ... ask .... "Why should the ACC command a higher price than (insert major network here with a track record, like the NBA or FS1)?" And as a corollary to that ... "Where do you see a very loud and very public drum beat of demand coming from?"

[Image: img_28031.png?w=620&crop=0%2C0px...;amp;ssl=1]

The key to the business model of the conference networks is to be treated by the MSOs like a Regional Sports Network within the geographic footprint of the conference. RSNs are not listed in the chart you've shared, but their rates are across the board higher than any sports network except ESPN because they show sports programming with strong local interest. In a few cases, they may even be higher than ESPN. I'm guessing the carriage fees shown for SECN, BTN and P12N are weighted average of in footprint and out of footprint subscribers and that within the footprint, they are substantially higher.

Those are the average rates for in state and out of footprint models. And you are correct they get substantially higher in conference footprint rates. The SEC makes $1.25 in the footprint with a $1.35 supposedly in a couple of states (It's claimed but I've not seen confirmation) and .25 out of the footprint. The Big 10 at last report got .90 cents in footprint and I think 17 cents out of it but I haven't seen that data in over a year and am trusting my memory. What's sobering is that the PAC averages 11 cents.
08-15-2018 02:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #35
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
To correct earlier me ... it wasn't LL Cool J. It was Cuba Gooding Jr.

08-15-2018 02:12 PM
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: #36
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
JR: any word on how ACC and SEC network revenue will be treated along the east coast? I.e. SEC gets a bump in NYC and ACC gets a bump Houston?
08-15-2018 04:05 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,913
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-15-2018 04:05 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  JR: any word on how ACC and SEC network revenue will be treated along the east coast? I.e. SEC gets a bump in NYC and ACC gets a bump Houston?

The SEC will get the higher rate in Kentucky, Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Missouri, Arkansas, and Texas. They will get the lower rate in North Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York, and Massachusetts. I'm not sure about Indiana.

The ACC should get whatever your higher rate will be in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New York and Indiana.

You should get the lower rate in Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Arkansas, Missouri, Texas, and Louisiana.

I don't know if we each get a higher out of state rate than the usual out of footprint rate because we will be bundled or even if we will be bundled. I initially heard that we would be. But I haven't heard any confirmation on it.
08-15-2018 05:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,262
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 546
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #38
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-15-2018 02:12 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  To correct earlier me ... it wasn't LL Cool J. It was Cuba Gooding Jr.


Im watching college week champions on Jeopardy and theres a kid there from Georgia Tech. Hes not doing too goo right now though.
08-15-2018 06:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #39
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-15-2018 06:46 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  Im watching college week champions on Jeopardy and theres a kid there from Georgia Tech. Hes not doing too goo right now though.

They don't exactly ask you how you build a nuclear reactor or an enterprise datacenter on Jeopardy.
(This post was last modified: 08-15-2018 07:01 PM by georgia_tech_swagger.)
08-15-2018 07:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,262
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 546
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #40
RE: Article About ACC Network Distribution
(08-15-2018 07:01 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(08-15-2018 06:46 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  Im watching college week champions on Jeopardy and theres a kid there from Georgia Tech. Hes not doing too goo right now though.

They don't exactly ask you how you build a nuclear reactor or an enterprise datacenter on Jeopardy.

True,

But he ended up winning.
08-15-2018 07:04 PM
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.