Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
Author Message
TheBasketBallOpinion Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 220
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Georgetown
Location:
Post: #1
Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/unl...e-1700826/

“The number the American Athletic Conference got, it’s a little misleading because the AAC is going to have to produce a lot of events, and that’s going to cost millions of dollars,” said Lulla, the former head of ABC Sports’ legal and business department and a lead counsel at IMG."

I have been seeing a lot of people around here talk about how the ESPN +events won't cost the AAAC schools a lot of money. This quote says different 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2019 11:19 AM by TheBasketBallOpinion.)
07-05-2019 11:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 29,044
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1264
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
The quote is simply wrong. These references basically all trace their source back to a very misleading article months ago that claimed the cost of producing these ESPN+ events COULD BE AS HIGH as 2 million dollars. Thats like saying the cost of buying your high school kid a car COULD BE AS HIGH AS $250,000. Sure, if you buy your kid a Lamborghini--yeah--it could be that high.

The MW Digital Network has produced 6000 live athletic events since 2012. Thats about 1000 events a year, almost the same number of ESPN+ events the AAC contract calls for the AAC to deliver once it is fully ramped up. Mountain West schools, other than Boise, are only receiving about 1.1 million each a year from their CBSSN/ESPN media deals. Are they actually losing almost a million a year because MW Digital productions are eating up 2 million a school per year in costs? Funny---Why I havent heard or read that? Wouldnt you think MW AD's would be screaming bloody murder about those costs? Why would MW AD's be concerned about getting paid by ESPN+ to produce 1000 ESPN+ events when they are already doing it for nothing?

Clearly, unless Harry Potter is producing their athletic events, then MW schools are either losing almost a million a year on their media deals or they are producing about 100 events per school for something FAR LESS than 2 million a year. Ochams Razor says the simplest explanation is usually correct. The simplest explanation is the costs for producing this stuff is FAR LESS than 2 million. My guess is the actual cost is only around $200-400K tops.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2019 11:39 AM by Attackcoog.)
07-05-2019 11:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,208
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 464
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #3
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
(07-05-2019 11:23 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The quote is wrong. These references basically all trace their source back to a very misleading article months ago that claimed the cost of producing these ESPN+ events COULD BE AS HIGH as 2 million dollars. Thats like saying the cost of buying your high school kid a car COULD BE AS HIGH $250K. Sure, if you buy your kid a Lamborghini--yeah--it could be that high.

The MW Digital Network has produced 6000 live athletic events since 2012. Thats about 1000 events a year, almost the same number of events ESPN+ events the AAC contract calls for the conference to deliver once it is fully ramped up. Mountain West schools, other than Boise, are only receiving about 1.1 million each a year from their CBS/ESPN media deals. Are they actually losing almost a million a year because MW Digital productions are eating up 2 million a school per year in costs? Funny---I havent heard or read that? Wouldnt you think MW AD's would be screaming bloody murder about those costs? Clearly, unless Harry Potter is producing their athletic events, then MW schools are either losing almost a million a year on their media deals or they are producing about 100 events per school for something FAR LESS than 2 million a year. My guess is the costs for producing this stuff is around $200-400K tops.

Maybe you haven't heard it because no one has said it - including the quote above. You added the "per school" part. The quote would suggest that the cost per event would be less than $50K.
07-05-2019 11:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 29,044
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1264
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
(07-05-2019 11:35 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(07-05-2019 11:23 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The quote is wrong. These references basically all trace their source back to a very misleading article months ago that claimed the cost of producing these ESPN+ events COULD BE AS HIGH as 2 million dollars. Thats like saying the cost of buying your high school kid a car COULD BE AS HIGH $250K. Sure, if you buy your kid a Lamborghini--yeah--it could be that high.

The MW Digital Network has produced 6000 live athletic events since 2012. Thats about 1000 events a year, almost the same number of events ESPN+ events the AAC contract calls for the conference to deliver once it is fully ramped up. Mountain West schools, other than Boise, are only receiving about 1.1 million each a year from their CBS/ESPN media deals. Are they actually losing almost a million a year because MW Digital productions are eating up 2 million a school per year in costs? Funny---I havent heard or read that? Wouldnt you think MW AD's would be screaming bloody murder about those costs? Clearly, unless Harry Potter is producing their athletic events, then MW schools are either losing almost a million a year on their media deals or they are producing about 100 events per school for something FAR LESS than 2 million a year. My guess is the costs for producing this stuff is around $200-400K tops.

Maybe you haven't heard it because no one has said it - including the quote above. You added the "per school" part. The quote would suggest that the cost per event would be less than $50K.

Well yes...as in WAAAAAAYYYYYY less than $50K per event. Two million dollars divided by 1100 events a year is only $1,800 an event. Not sure why this is such a talking point if the 2 million is the cost for the entire conference and not a per school number. So I question the OP quote----How is the 7 million dollar per team number "misleading" if the ESPN+ production costs are only about $180K per school? The difference is negligible and is largely offset by the fact that the cost of producing AAC Digital Network events and maintaining the infrastructure for the AAC Digital Network will be eliminated.

That said, I dont think the 2 million estimate is a conference wide number---I think its intended as a per school number (and the OP appears to think that as well based on his comment at the end).
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2019 12:17 PM by Attackcoog.)
07-05-2019 11:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,208
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 464
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #5
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
(07-05-2019 11:45 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(07-05-2019 11:35 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(07-05-2019 11:23 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The quote is wrong. These references basically all trace their source back to a very misleading article months ago that claimed the cost of producing these ESPN+ events COULD BE AS HIGH as 2 million dollars. Thats like saying the cost of buying your high school kid a car COULD BE AS HIGH $250K. Sure, if you buy your kid a Lamborghini--yeah--it could be that high.

The MW Digital Network has produced 6000 live athletic events since 2012. Thats about 1000 events a year, almost the same number of events ESPN+ events the AAC contract calls for the conference to deliver once it is fully ramped up. Mountain West schools, other than Boise, are only receiving about 1.1 million each a year from their CBS/ESPN media deals. Are they actually losing almost a million a year because MW Digital productions are eating up 2 million a school per year in costs? Funny---I havent heard or read that? Wouldnt you think MW AD's would be screaming bloody murder about those costs? Clearly, unless Harry Potter is producing their athletic events, then MW schools are either losing almost a million a year on their media deals or they are producing about 100 events per school for something FAR LESS than 2 million a year. My guess is the costs for producing this stuff is around $200-400K tops.

Maybe you haven't heard it because no one has said it - including the quote above. You added the "per school" part. The quote would suggest that the cost per event would be less than $50K.

Well yes...as in WAAAAAAYYYYYY less than $50K. Two million dollars divided by 1100 events a year is only $1,800 an event. Not sure why this is such a talking point if the 2 million is the cost for the entire conference and not a per school number. I go back to the quote being irrelavant----how is the 7 million dollar per team number "misleading" if the ESPN+ production costs are only about $180K per school?

The AAC wouldn't be producing 1100 events per year. Only the number of football and basketball games called for by the contract. We can't conflate the estimated annual cost to the AAC with the total number of events produced by the MW Digital Network. Those are completely separate and unrelated things.
07-05-2019 11:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Foreverandever Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,739
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 144
I Root For: &
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
(07-05-2019 11:53 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(07-05-2019 11:45 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(07-05-2019 11:35 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(07-05-2019 11:23 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The quote is wrong. These references basically all trace their source back to a very misleading article months ago that claimed the cost of producing these ESPN+ events COULD BE AS HIGH as 2 million dollars. Thats like saying the cost of buying your high school kid a car COULD BE AS HIGH $250K. Sure, if you buy your kid a Lamborghini--yeah--it could be that high.

The MW Digital Network has produced 6000 live athletic events since 2012. Thats about 1000 events a year, almost the same number of events ESPN+ events the AAC contract calls for the conference to deliver once it is fully ramped up. Mountain West schools, other than Boise, are only receiving about 1.1 million each a year from their CBS/ESPN media deals. Are they actually losing almost a million a year because MW Digital productions are eating up 2 million a school per year in costs? Funny---I havent heard or read that? Wouldnt you think MW AD's would be screaming bloody murder about those costs? Clearly, unless Harry Potter is producing their athletic events, then MW schools are either losing almost a million a year on their media deals or they are producing about 100 events per school for something FAR LESS than 2 million a year. My guess is the costs for producing this stuff is around $200-400K tops.

Maybe you haven't heard it because no one has said it - including the quote above. You added the "per school" part. The quote would suggest that the cost per event would be less than $50K.

Well yes...as in WAAAAAAYYYYYY less than $50K. Two million dollars divided by 1100 events a year is only $1,800 an event. Not sure why this is such a talking point if the 2 million is the cost for the entire conference and not a per school number. I go back to the quote being irrelavant----how is the 7 million dollar per team number "misleading" if the ESPN+ production costs are only about $180K per school?

The AAC wouldn't be producing 1100 events per year. Only the number of football and basketball games called for by the contract. We can't conflate the estimated annual cost to the AAC with the total number of events produced by the MW Digital Network. Those are completely separate and unrelated things.

Actually yes we would, that's what the plus part of the contract calls for.

ESPN+ produces Olympic sport championships, AAC is responsible for football games per the commish who said they thought it made more sense, and individual schools are responsible for the rest.

His point is currently those games are produced by the schools (no change for the ESPN+ deal) or the American Digital Network (which will now be on ESPN+, so no change) which the schools currently pay for. Really it's a matter of any upgrades needed for quality which seems to be very minor and vary a bit from AAC school to AAC school. ESPN reportedly has agreed to help with some of those upgrades.

Anything the MWC put on ESPN+ is likely in the same boat (already streamed by school or MW Digital Network), I have no idea how set a school like Utah St, New Mexico, or SJST would be, but I doubt they are super far behind.

The quote in the article is attributed to a guy who hasn't been on the production side in quite a while and the advancement of streaming technology is pretty rapid, he is also most likely going off an article from 2015 that Attac brought up.

The MAC and CUSA make peanuts (less than 500k) and are doing this so obviously the cost isn't 2m.
07-05-2019 12:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Kit-Cat Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,580
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 17
I Root For: Championships
Location:

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #7
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
MAC makes 830k and SBC makes 500k on ESPN. The MAC has the deal for 5 years now so could renegotiate upwards.

CUSA makes 440k competing on non-ESPN networks.
07-05-2019 12:08 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,448
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 156
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #8
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
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
07-05-2019 12:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 29,044
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1264
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
(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.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2019 12:54 PM by Attackcoog.)
07-05-2019 12:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,448
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 156
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #10
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
(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
07-05-2019 01:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,320
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 159
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #11
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
The figure is reasonable, and typical of many (not all) ESPN contracts.

The MAC which supposedly gets a little of $1.1M from ESPN is also on the hook for production costs, and for a much smaller number of events pays around $900K back to ESPN for production cost. (CUSA in their press release about their $200-300K per school CBS contract made a sarcastic reference to the SBC and MAC contracts, noting that other conferences give higher figures, but do not mention that they return 90% of the money to ESPN for production costs).

The other misleading aspect of the AAC contract is the escalator. While the final year of the contract (2030-31) will be paying out over $7.5M per school, they actual first year payout will be under $5.5M per school. Then factor in production costs. The $7M figure is an average (which will be reached after the 7th year on the escalator), which is also a bit high (about 10% high), since it does not factor in the AAC HQ share (this is true of all press reports for all conferences, as reporters rarely factor in the conference HQ share).

It's still an extremely good G5 contract, but it may only net schools, after production costs, $3.5M in 2020-21, and for a Football only school under $3M. That doesn't seem like enough of a net to draw anyone in the West away, when contrasted to a $50-60M budget for Athletics, and taking in $1-2M net on the MWC contract (MWC contract is unbalanced, successful programs get far more), especially when considering the cost for moving Olympics (Basketball) into a low end one bid conference, and the impact that would have on gate, donations, loss of NCAA credits/payments and recruiting. (C-USA/MAC/SBC are a one bid conferences, and a school would be Football and Basketball invite to the AAC, a clear $3.3M jump immediately and growing, with no downside ... except that all but Rice and ODU would be faced with needing to spend $10M/year more to compete in the AAC)

UConn may actually be ahead since I am pretty sure FOX pays the Big East production costs. Any football earnings would thus be a net increase over the AAC for them.

I do think think this does put in better perspective the actual level of money, and focuses the gap to P5 all the more, since ESPN pays the production cost of the LHN and SEC, while the ACC schools are paying a couple $million each on production (P12 takes that out of distributions from P12N, and they are more inefficient than ESPN or FOX for SEC and B1G respectively).

Back to the AAC: 1) Uconn's move looks even more financially sensible; 2) the AAC package looks even more insufficient to draw a football only MWC school. We are back where we started. The AAC is better off than it was, but it's not the game changer some of the supporters expected.
07-05-2019 01:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

scoscox Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 106
Joined: Mar 2019
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Xavier
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
When you consider that, on top of that, they'll save about 2 million in travel (according to UConn), and get renewed ticket sales, fan interest, donations, etc., the move makes plenty of sense
07-05-2019 01:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,039
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 107
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
Staffing, equipment, production, maintenance, infrastructure...it’s simply the overhead the networks put back onto schools. ESPN will give them money, but the schools are going to have to do some of the work.

YMMV, but if you aren’t a major, and you’re on the hook for all sports, that’s going to add up. More content is not necessarily a good thing.
07-05-2019 01:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 29,044
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1264
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
(07-05-2019 01:11 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The figure is reasonable, and typical of many (not all) ESPN contracts.

The MAC which supposedly gets a little of $1.1M from ESPN is also on the hook for production costs, and for a much smaller number of events pays around $900K back to ESPN for production cost. (CUSA in their press release about their $200-300K per school CBS contract made a sarcastic reference to the SBC and MAC contracts, noting that other conferences give higher figures, but do not mention that they return 90% of the money to ESPN for production costs).

The other misleading aspect of the AAC contract is the escalator. While the final year of the contract (2030-31) will be paying out over $7.5M per school, they actual first year payout will be under $5.5M per school. Then factor in production costs. The $7M figure is an average (which will be reached after the 7th year on the escalator), which is also a bit high (about 10% high), since it does not factor in the AAC HQ share (this is true of all press reports for all conferences, as reporters rarely factor in the conference HQ share).

It's still an extremely good G5 contract, but it may only net schools, after production costs, $3.5M in 2020-21, and for a Football only school under $3M. That doesn't seem like enough of a net to draw anyone in the West away, when contrasted to a $50-60M budget for Athletics, and taking in $1-2M net on the MWC contract (MWC contract is unbalanced, successful programs get far more), especially when considering the cost for moving Olympics (Basketball) into a low end one bid conference, and the impact that would have on gate, donations, loss of NCAA credits/payments and recruiting. (C-USA/MAC/SBC are a one bid conferences, and a school would be Football and Basketball invite to the AAC, a clear $3.3M jump immediately and growing, with no downside ... except that all but Rice and ODU would be faced with needing to spend $10M/year more to compete in the AAC)

UConn may actually be ahead since I am pretty sure FOX pays the Big East production costs. Any football earnings would thus be a net increase over the AAC for them.

I do think think this does put in better perspective the actual level of money, and focuses the gap to P5 all the more, since ESPN pays the production cost of the LHN and SEC, while the ACC schools are paying a couple $million each on production (P12 takes that out of distributions from P12N, and they are more inefficient than ESPN or FOX for SEC and B1G respectively).

Back to the AAC: 1) Uconn's move looks even more financially sensible; 2) the AAC package looks even more insufficient to draw a football only MWC school. We are back where we started. The AAC is better off than it was, but it's not the game changer some of the supporters expected.

On the escalator---yes it starts at 5.5---but that means it ends somewhere around 8.5 million. The averge is 7 million. That means the front half is under 7 million and the back half of the contract is over 7 million. Every sports media contract works the same way. As for the production costs and the allegation that 90% of the MAC money goes back to ESPN for production costs---any links to support that claim? However, even using your numbers---the MAC make $800K a team. 90% of 800K is $720K. Thats not even half of the reported 2 million per schools costs claimed in the articles. For the Sunbelt, the numbers would indicated the costs are more where I think suspect they are (less than $400K per school).
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2019 02:02 PM by Attackcoog.)
07-05-2019 01:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 29,044
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1264
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
(07-05-2019 01:46 PM)scoscox Wrote:  When you consider that, on top of that, they'll save about 2 million in travel (according to UConn), and get renewed ticket sales, fan interest, donations, etc., the move makes plenty of sense

How do figure? Half the travel is no different. Cinci, Temple, ECU, Memphis, Tulsa are little differnt. You dont know three quarters of the football schedule. Football travel costs eat up the lions share of the travel budget. If you dont know the football schedule--how can you possibly know the savings? Additionally, much of the team travel is out of conference--so that doesnt change. Also, some UConn sports are not even in the AAC becasue we dont sponsor those sports. ODU travel expenses went up about a million when they moved from the CAA to CUSA. I suspect thats closer to the savings UConn will see.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2019 02:08 PM by Attackcoog.)
07-05-2019 02:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
scoscox Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 106
Joined: Mar 2019
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Xavier
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
(07-05-2019 02:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  How do figure? Half the travel is no different. Cinci, Temple, ECU, Memphis, Tulsa are little differnt. You dont know three quarters of the football schedule. Football travel costs eat up the lions share of the travel budget. If you dont know the football schedule--how can you possibly know the savings? Additionally, much of the team travel is out of conference--so that doesnt change. Also, some UConn sports are not even in the AAC becasue we dont sponsor those sports. ODU travel expenses went up about a million when they moved from the CAA to CUSA. I suspect thats closer to the savings UConn will see.

It's probably safe to assume they'll be filling up the schedule with more lower level local football teams, but, you're right, we don't know that for sure yet.

I don't know what you mean when you say half the travel is no different and that those other programs are little different. Regardless of that, total travel as a member of the big east is about half the mileage for UConn that it was in the AAC. Their travel expenses were reportedly a little over 7 million last year. It seems reasonable that could decrease to about 5 million in the Big East.

That makes perfect sense for ODU. They're in Norfolk and the CAA is basically an east coast league. They have to travel more in the C-USA, which has teams in florida, texas, etc. That actually supports my estimate. BTW that's not my personal estimate. That was the estimate given by UConn's president in their press conference at MSG
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2019 02:58 PM by scoscox.)
07-05-2019 02:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 30,487
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 744
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #17
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
This guy is a former high-up at ABC, so i tend to take his word over that of forum jockeys.

07-coffee3
07-05-2019 03:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 29,044
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1264
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
(07-05-2019 03:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  This guy is a former high-up at ABC, so i tend to take his word over that of forum jockeys.

07-coffee3

And when he speaks about how much it costs ABC to send a production truck, cameras, board engineers, set up crew, and on air talent to a venue for a game (and house and feed them while they are there)—-his estimate is probably quite valid. But if your using a few students, a staff board engineer, an intern, a computer guy from campus IT, and a staff producer—-all who sleep in their own beds and eat their own food—-using equipment already permanently installed in the venue—the price will be completely different.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2019 04:20 PM by Attackcoog.)
07-05-2019 04:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kit-Cat Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,580
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 17
I Root For: Championships
Location:

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #19
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
There is the money but the quality of exposure at this level is more important and the AAC has that with its ABC/CBS TV deal.
07-05-2019 04:38 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,448
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 156
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #20
RE: Sports media expert Joel Lulla "AAC contract a little misleading"
(07-05-2019 04:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(07-05-2019 03:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  This guy is a former high-up at ABC, so i tend to take his word over that of forum jockeys.

07-coffee3

And when he speaks about how much it costs ABC to send a production truck, cameras, board engineers, set up crew, and on air talent to a venue for a game (and house and feed them while they are there)—-his estimate is probably quite valid. But if your using a few students, a staff board engineer, an intern, a computer guy from campus IT, and a staff producer—-all who sleep in their own beds and eat their own food—-using equipment already permanently installed in the venue—the price will be completely different.

yea because ABC does not know how much streaming cost and ABC that is a part of ABC/Disney/ESPN never talks with Disney or ESPN about what streaming cost

and his current employer IMG is not aggressively looking to expand in all area of sports and they have never signed any deals with ESPN or other broadcasters or streamers that involve streaming live sports and the production cost and the shared (or possible shared) cost of that streaming on behalf or universities that they represent

you know things like the LHN, Kansas, Baylor....and they don't run any major events like The Rose Bowl or The Red River Shootout or any major arenas or any services for any conference like the MAC

and even if they do not provide any or all of the production for that they never pay any attention to the number of people and amount of equipment involved so they can use that for their major expansion plans into more aspects of sports
07-05-2019 04:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2019 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, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.