(01-17-2019 11:40 AM)Tigers2B1 Wrote: Seems some posters in this thread are confused. Fox was paying out 25 million to the Big 12 for their championship game not 20 million. The Big 12 countered with a 20 million offer and Fox refused. The 25 million was part of the payout to Big 12 schools ... a payout which looks like it will now be reduced.
Seems you are also confused. The deal for the championship is separate, although fox picked up the first one as part of the no expansion deal.
The championship is not part of the regular deal between fox/ESPN and the big 12. The option was lowered from 25 to 20 after the amended deal for expansion. Fox said no thank you.
This will only reduce their pay out by whatever the difference is from the 25 million original game. Their regular media pay out from the original contract with bump from non-expansion amendment won't change.
The championship is an option offer, like a bonus, fox doesn't want it.
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2019 01:09 PM by Foreverandever.)
(01-17-2019 11:40 AM)Tigers2B1 Wrote: Seems some posters in this thread are confused. Fox was paying out 25 million to the Big 12 for their championship game not 20 million. The Big 12 countered with a 20 million offer and Fox refused. The 25 million was part of the payout to Big 12 schools ... a payout which looks like it will now be reduced.
Im wondering if reducing that payout from 25 million to less than 20 virtually eliminates most of the "increase" the Big12 got for giving up the "pro rata" clause in the their contract. Seems like over paying for the game was kinda part of the deal that got the Big12 to eliminate that contractual benefit.
ESPN was the one that paid the contract clause removal. Fox never did. I think Fox was ok landing a few more markets especially in a different time zone.
I think this is simply they overpaid for one game and the market rate might be around $10-15 million based on ratings. This year's ratings were awesome, but if you ever had TCU vs Kansas State the ratings would suck.
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2019 12:58 PM by KNIGHTTIME.)
(01-17-2019 11:40 AM)Tigers2B1 Wrote: Seems some posters in this thread are confused. Fox was paying out 25 million to the Big 12 for their championship game not 20 million. The Big 12 countered with a 20 million offer and Fox refused. The 25 million was part of the payout to Big 12 schools ... a payout which looks like it will now be reduced.
Seems you are also confused. The deal for the championship is separate, although fox picked up the first one as part of the no expansion deal.
The championship is not part of the regular deal between fox/ESPN and the big 12. The option was lowered from 25 to 20 after the amended deal for expansion. Fox said no thank you.
This will only reduce their pay out by whatever the difference is from the 25 million original game. Their regular media pay out from the original contract with bump from non-expansion amendment won't change.
The championship is an option offer, like a bonus, fox doesn't want it.
No confusion. Fox paid 25 million for the 2017 championship game. They did not pay 20 million that seemed to be suggested by some in the thread. The 20 million dollar number comes from what the big 12 says it will have to have per game for the next 3 games .... at a minimum. Fox declined. Those are the numbers. The rest of needless detail in my opinion.
(01-17-2019 11:40 AM)Tigers2B1 Wrote: Seems some posters in this thread are confused. Fox was paying out 25 million to the Big 12 for their championship game not 20 million. The Big 12 countered with a 20 million offer and Fox refused. The 25 million was part of the payout to Big 12 schools ... a payout which looks like it will now be reduced.
Seems you are also confused. The deal for the championship is separate, although fox picked up the first one as part of the no expansion deal.
The championship is not part of the regular deal between fox/ESPN and the big 12. The option was lowered from 25 to 20 after the amended deal for expansion. Fox said no thank you.
This will only reduce their pay out by whatever the difference is from the 25 million original game. Their regular media pay out from the original contract with bump from non-expansion amendment won't change.
The championship is an option offer, like a bonus, fox doesn't want it.
No confusion. Fox paid 25 million for the 2017 championship game. They did not pay 20 million that seemed to be suggested by some in the thread. The 20 million dollar number comes from what the big 12 says it will have to have per game for the next 3 games .... at a minimum. Fox declined. Those are the numbers. The rest of needless detail in my opinion.
(01-17-2019 11:40 AM)Tigers2B1 Wrote: Seems some posters in this thread are confused. Fox was paying out 25 million to the Big 12 for their championship game not 20 million. The Big 12 countered with a 20 million offer and Fox refused. The 25 million was part of the payout to Big 12 schools ... a payout which looks like it will now be reduced.
Seems you are also confused. The deal for the championship is separate, although fox picked up the first one as part of the no expansion deal.
The championship is not part of the regular deal between fox/ESPN and the big 12. The option was lowered from 25 to 20 after the amended deal for expansion. Fox said no thank you.
This will only reduce their pay out by whatever the difference is from the 25 million original game. Their regular media pay out from the original contract with bump from non-expansion amendment won't change.
The championship is an option offer, like a bonus, fox doesn't want it.
No confusion. Fox paid 25 million for the 2017 championship game. They did not pay 20 million that seemed to be suggested by some in the thread. The 20 million dollar number comes from what the big 12 says it will have to have per game for the next 3 games .... at a minimum. Fox declined. Those are the numbers. The rest of needless detail in my opinion.
Link?
I can't link from where I'm at. But Google 'Big 12 championship game' and then look under 'news.' The first article showing from LA Biz.
(01-17-2019 11:40 AM)Tigers2B1 Wrote: Seems some posters in this thread are confused. Fox was paying out 25 million to the Big 12 for their championship game not 20 million. The Big 12 countered with a 20 million offer and Fox refused. The 25 million was part of the payout to Big 12 schools ... a payout which looks like it will now be reduced.
Seems you are also confused. The deal for the championship is separate, although fox picked up the first one as part of the no expansion deal.
The championship is not part of the regular deal between fox/ESPN and the big 12. The option was lowered from 25 to 20 after the amended deal for expansion. Fox said no thank you.
This will only reduce their pay out by whatever the difference is from the 25 million original game. Their regular media pay out from the original contract with bump from non-expansion amendment won't change.
The championship is an option offer, like a bonus, fox doesn't want it.
No confusion. Fox paid 25 million for the 2017 championship game. They did not pay 20 million that seemed to be suggested by some in the thread. The 20 million dollar number comes from what the big 12 says it will have to have per game for the next 3 games .... at a minimum. Fox declined. Those are the numbers. The rest of needless detail in my opinion.
Link?
I can't link from where I'm at. But Google 'Big 12 championship game' and then look under 'news.' The first article showing from LA Biz.
Gotcha.
The LA Biz is a reprint of Sports Business Journal (Messrs. Ourand and Smith).
"Fox carried the 2017 game as part of a mediated settlement around conference expansion, paying about $25 million for its rights. But the network and the conference could not come to terms on the other three available games. Sources said the last offer made to Fox valued the game in the high teens.
The conference is trying to get at least $20 million for the game, sources said."
(01-17-2019 12:47 PM)Foreverandever Wrote: Seems you are also confused. The deal for the championship is separate, although fox picked up the first one as part of the no expansion deal.
The championship is not part of the regular deal between fox/ESPN and the big 12. The option was lowered from 25 to 20 after the amended deal for expansion. Fox said no thank you.
This will only reduce their pay out by whatever the difference is from the 25 million original game. Their regular media pay out from the original contract with bump from non-expansion amendment won't change.
The championship is an option offer, like a bonus, fox doesn't want it.
No confusion. Fox paid 25 million for the 2017 championship game. They did not pay 20 million that seemed to be suggested by some in the thread. The 20 million dollar number comes from what the big 12 says it will have to have per game for the next 3 games .... at a minimum. Fox declined. Those are the numbers. The rest of needless detail in my opinion.
Link?
I can't link from where I'm at. But Google 'Big 12 championship game' and then look under 'news.' The first article showing from LA Biz.
Gotcha.
The LA Biz is a reprint of Sports Business Journal (Messrs. Ourand and Smith).
"Fox carried the 2017 game as part of a mediated settlement around conference expansion, paying about $25 million for its rights. But the network and the conference could not come to terms on the other three available games. Sources said the last offer made to Fox valued the game in the high teens.
The conference is trying to get at least $20 million for the game, sources said."
If Fox valued the big12 CCG in the high teens, what do you think the AAC CCG should be worth on the open market with less but comparable ratings.
(01-17-2019 01:53 PM)Tigers2B1 Wrote: No confusion. Fox paid 25 million for the 2017 championship game. They did not pay 20 million that seemed to be suggested by some in the thread. The 20 million dollar number comes from what the big 12 says it will have to have per game for the next 3 games .... at a minimum. Fox declined. Those are the numbers. The rest of needless detail in my opinion.
Link?
I can't link from where I'm at. But Google 'Big 12 championship game' and then look under 'news.' The first article showing from LA Biz.
Gotcha.
The LA Biz is a reprint of Sports Business Journal (Messrs. Ourand and Smith).
"Fox carried the 2017 game as part of a mediated settlement around conference expansion, paying about $25 million for its rights. But the network and the conference could not come to terms on the other three available games. Sources said the last offer made to Fox valued the game in the high teens.
The conference is trying to get at least $20 million for the game, sources said."
If Fox valued the big12 CCG in the high teens, what do you think the AAC CCG should be worth on the open market with less but comparable ratings.
Seems like around 10 million to me which would almost bump everyone another million per year just for that 1 game.
I can't link from where I'm at. But Google 'Big 12 championship game' and then look under 'news.' The first article showing from LA Biz.
Gotcha.
The LA Biz is a reprint of Sports Business Journal (Messrs. Ourand and Smith).
"Fox carried the 2017 game as part of a mediated settlement around conference expansion, paying about $25 million for its rights. But the network and the conference could not come to terms on the other three available games. Sources said the last offer made to Fox valued the game in the high teens.
The conference is trying to get at least $20 million for the game, sources said."
If Fox valued the big12 CCG in the high teens, what do you think the AAC CCG should be worth on the open market with less but comparable ratings.
Seems like around 10 million to me which would almost bump everyone another million per year just for that 1 game.
That seems about right, if we can get that for our basketball tournament also that would be about what we are getting for our entire package right now.
(01-17-2019 02:11 PM)Tigers2B1 Wrote: I can't link from where I'm at. But Google 'Big 12 championship game' and then look under 'news.' The first article showing from LA Biz.
Gotcha.
The LA Biz is a reprint of Sports Business Journal (Messrs. Ourand and Smith).
"Fox carried the 2017 game as part of a mediated settlement around conference expansion, paying about $25 million for its rights. But the network and the conference could not come to terms on the other three available games. Sources said the last offer made to Fox valued the game in the high teens.
The conference is trying to get at least $20 million for the game, sources said."
If Fox valued the big12 CCG in the high teens, what do you think the AAC CCG should be worth on the open market with less but comparable ratings.
Seems like around 10 million to me which would almost bump everyone another million per year just for that 1 game.
That seems about right, if we can get that for our basketball tournament also that would be about what we are getting for our entire package right now.
2017-2018 together, the BigXII football CCGs totalled 2.5 times the viewers as the AAC CCGs.
That is closer to $7M than ten.
And the ccg viewership is already part of the equation when industry voices say "six to eight million per team per year."
I agree that we maximize value with multiple partners and multiple tiers...but if you separate the football ccg, you have just devalued the regular season package by roughly 10%.
(This post was last modified: 01-20-2019 12:50 PM by slhNavy91.)
(01-17-2019 02:28 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote: Gotcha.
The LA Biz is a reprint of Sports Business Journal (Messrs. Ourand and Smith).
"Fox carried the 2017 game as part of a mediated settlement around conference expansion, paying about $25 million for its rights. But the network and the conference could not come to terms on the other three available games. Sources said the last offer made to Fox valued the game in the high teens.
The conference is trying to get at least $20 million for the game, sources said."
If Fox valued the big12 CCG in the high teens, what do you think the AAC CCG should be worth on the open market with less but comparable ratings.
Seems like around 10 million to me which would almost bump everyone another million per year just for that 1 game.
That seems about right, if we can get that for our basketball tournament also that would be about what we are getting for our entire package right now.
2017-2018 together, the BigXII football CCGs totalled 2.5 times the viewers as the AAC CCGs.
That is closer to $7M than ten.
And the ccg viewership is already part of the equation when industry voices say "six to eight million per team per year."
I agree that we maximize value with multiple partners and multiple tiers...but if you separate the football ccg, you have just devalued the regular season package by roughly 10%.
I wasn’t saying separate it unless it would maximize value. Just pointing out that for that game alone it would add significant value based on what the league should be getting. I mean the league is getting around 2 total for everything and if we say the championship game should be getting 7-10 million that alone equates to almost half what the league is getting now for everything. I am simple saying for that group that thinks the league isn’t getting a significant raise. Now whether it is 8 or 10 a year or whatever there are too many pieces that suggest the league is vastly underpaid.
(This post was last modified: 01-20-2019 01:38 PM by PT_american.)
(01-17-2019 02:28 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote: Gotcha.
The LA Biz is a reprint of Sports Business Journal (Messrs. Ourand and Smith).
"Fox carried the 2017 game as part of a mediated settlement around conference expansion, paying about $25 million for its rights. But the network and the conference could not come to terms on the other three available games. Sources said the last offer made to Fox valued the game in the high teens.
The conference is trying to get at least $20 million for the game, sources said."
If Fox valued the big12 CCG in the high teens, what do you think the AAC CCG should be worth on the open market with less but comparable ratings.
Seems like around 10 million to me which would almost bump everyone another million per year just for that 1 game.
That seems about right, if we can get that for our basketball tournament also that would be about what we are getting for our entire package right now.
2017-2018 together, the BigXII football CCGs totalled 2.5 times the viewers as the AAC CCGs.
That is closer to $7M than ten.
And the ccg viewership is already part of the equation when industry voices say "six to eight million per team per year."
I agree that we maximize value with multiple partners and multiple tiers...but if you separate the football ccg, you have just devalued the regular season package by roughly 10%.
But to be fair, 2017 was a max rating not involving Texas/OU because it was the return of the game. The 2018 was a max rating involving Texas/OU, it involved cfp contention.
The AAC was constant, that was vs the big Xii championship returning and did pretty good heads up vs that game with its boosted interest, and a massive SEC championship that was the highest rated non-bowl game last year I believe.
That shows staying power. Whether it's the floor or the ceiling I'm not sure anyone can say. Of course say a OTA channel hyping the game all year long as opposed to back burner status would probably make a difference.
I know it's been discussed ad nauseam but the American would be a more valuable commodity if it expanded across the continental US and scooped up the best available brands out west. It's also been pointed out ad nauseam that the American is in a much better position of 'power' now in terms of bargaining position, not only due to a surge in stability and pecuniary value but also due to those factors correspondingly and intrinsically creating more incentive for west coast teams to join and stay this time around. West coast expansion would also make the conference name more apt and applicable for branding purposes (something most conferences haven't figured out how to achieve yet) so lets just go ahead and make this a real 'American' conference. In fact, now that I think about it, why stop at the continental US? Why not go all American by inviting Hawaii, Alaska Anchorage, and University of American Samoa?
Just noticed on college game day that they used the term "big six" in referring to college basketball conferences. The #6 is the BE... which TOTALLY SUCKS.
It the "Power 5" in football.
They don't include us in anything respect-worthy that they do. We're always left out.
And some of you think they're going to give us a big raise? They're going to stick it to us... again.
(01-26-2019 11:32 AM)Def Berkkat Wrote: Just noticed on college game day that they used the term "big six" in referring to college basketball conferences. The #6 is the BE... which TOTALLY SUCKS.
It the "Power 5" in football.
They don't include us in anything respect-worthy that they do. We're always left out.
And some of you think they're going to give us a big raise? They're going to stick it to us... again.
ESPN just spent 150 million dollars stealing a property that will give them 20 events that average a bit over a million viewers each. Our top 20 football games would compare very favorably with that transaction as many of those top 20 AAC games are over 2 million viewers (some are over 3 million viewers). Plus---we'd still have all of basketball and all the rest of our football to sell---or we could throw that other content to sweeten the pot for a bidder. Thats 12.5 million per team before you sell off the other stuff.
While I still think the final deal will end up at 6-8 million a team---its not hard to make a case we could get 10-12 million. Thats why I feel like my 6-8 million a team range is extremely conservative and reasonable. If its not in that range---I think the chances of an upside surprise are MUCH greater than a downside surprise. A 6-8 million a team deal would equate to the conference getting 75-100 million (it gets only 20 right now). That value is more based upon the MLS and Premier League (US Rights only) deals which are at 75 million and $160 million respectively. Its worth noting that the high end of this MLS/Premier range overlaps the UFC/WWE range discussed in the first paragraph. Its also worth noting that the WWE/UFC deals were made in 2018 and the soccer deals were from 2015. In a live sports rising market---the most recent data would tend to be the more accurate measure of value.
So--again---to me the data indicates that the 6-8 range Im expecting is a VERY conservative estimate.
(This post was last modified: 01-26-2019 01:16 PM by Attackcoog.)
(01-26-2019 11:32 AM)Def Berkkat Wrote: Just noticed on college game day that they used the term "big six" in referring to college basketball conferences. The #6 is the BE... which TOTALLY SUCKS.
It the "Power 5" in football.
They don't include us in anything respect-worthy that they do. We're always left out.
And some of you think they're going to give us a big raise? They're going to stick it to us... again.
ESPN just spent 150 million dollars stealing a property that will give them 20 events that average a bit over a million viewers each. Our top 20 football games would compare very favorably with that transaction as many of those top 20 AAC games are over 2 million viewers (some are over 3 million viewers). Plus---we'd still have all of basketball and all the rest of our football to sell---or we could throw that other content to sweeten the pot for a bidder. Thats 12.5 million per team before you sell off the other stuff.
While I still think the final deal will end up at 6-8 million a team---its not hard to make a case we could get 10-12 million. Thats why I feel like my 6-8 million a team range is extremely conservative and reasonable. If its not in that range---I think the chances of an upside surprise are MUCH greater than a downside surprise. A 6-8 million a team deal would equate to the conference getting 75-100 million (it gets only 20 right now). That value is more based upon the MLS and Premier League (US Rights only) deals which are at 75 million and $160 million respectively. Its worth noting that the high end of this MLS/Premier range overlaps the UFC/WWE range. Its also worth noting that the WWE/UFC deals were made in 2018 and the soccer deals were from 2015. In a rising market---the most recent data would tend to be the more accurate measure of value.
So--again---to me the data indicates to me that the 6-8 range Im expecting is a VERY conservative estimate.
I'll be happy if we can get between 6-8 million. That will really separate us with the g4.
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media.giphy.com/media/eojbwsT5POMak/giphy.gif)
.gif)
![[Image: National-Portrait-Gallery-0764.jpg]](https://ssl.c.photoshelter.com/img-get2/I0000vEt611iyoac/fit=1000x750/National-Portrait-Gallery-0764.jpg)
![[Image: maxresdefault.jpg]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/K0K3w2Ty8GU/maxresdefault.jpg)
