(05-29-2023 12:20 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 05:12 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 02:26 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 01:42 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 01:10 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  You created a straw man argument. I never said Apple would overpay for the media rights, just that they have wanted the PAC for years now. Again, the PAC12NW broadcast facilities wold give Apple a capability they don't have. Bob Thompson made that point very early on. That is an asset that is attractive to both Apple and Amazon.

No, I'm afraid you created the strawman.

Earlier you said this:

Quote:That's because it appears that Apple will be the majority owner of the media rights, with other linear media partners getting games. Apple has coveted the PAC for years, and they have more money than Fox, Disney, NBC, CBS and ABC combined.

It's not relevant whether Apple has more money or not unless you're implying that Apple will spend what it takes to keep the PAC together and ensure it has a better contract than the Big 12. That is the context in which I responded. My point was that you can't guarantee the PAC will get a better contract. It's biased to assume otherwise. So yes, from that angle, you don't know what you don't know. I don't know either, but I'm not terribly confident in PAC success due to other factors we are aware of.

I don't have a dog in this hunt. I don't really care if the Big 12 expands or if the PAC survives. I'm just examining what I see and there are a lot of indicators that don't project a good future for the PAC.

Whether Apple wanted the PAC for years or not, I don't really see how that matters. The PAC composition that Apple wanted clearly included USC and UCLA so the nature of that negotiation would have changed once it was announced they were leaving.

(05-27-2023 01:23 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  Its funny, someone posts something positive about the PAC and get shouted down "you don't know that!!!" But anything negative about the PAC is the God's honest truth.

At this point, you're just exaggerating. I don't blame you for having passion about the topic for the reasons I stated earlier, but nobody is shouting you down...or at least I'm not. Disagreement does equate to denigration. To your point about negative news regarding the PAC, I would take the commentary more seriously if you weren't just completely ignoring all the negative.

That is no strawman argument, pointing out that is what we are hearing with regards to Apple. Again, I point out that Apple wants to expand its streaming service and getting the PAC content will do that. It does require them to partner with a linear producer so that is what they are doing. Again, they don't have the production capabilities currently so that is why the PAC and the PAC12NW is attractive to them. If Apple doesn't want to grow their business then why do it at all? Sports is a big part of doing that.

One poster on here basically said sports are dead in the west. Called people out here apathetic and yet the B1G grabbed USCLA. You want apathy, lose in LA and no one will show up. Sorry, but there is a market out here and there is less competition for it than East of the Rockies. There are 39M people in California alone. The B12 wants to grab western teams, why is that? I think it is because they compete against the SEC and B1G in every time zone they're in. The SEC won't expand west because they don't need to. B1G did to get into LA but there is no promise they will take any more western school. They value Notre Dame and some other ACC schools more. Given Oregon's research budget being ranked in the 140s, they are not going to take another school that will lose their AAU status. That happened with Nebraska.

According to one media guy, the PAC did a media valuation with two consultants in April and came with a range of $25.5M-34.5M. Even the low ball number won't kill the PAC but, down the middle you are at $30M. No PAC school is going to leave for the B12 with that number and the B1G looks to be done expanding for now.

I'm not saying Apple doesn't want to expand its operation or doesn't want to have the PAC as a partner. Not denying any of that at all. My only point is that there's no guarantee Apple is going to pay what it takes to keep the PAC together.

PAC officials have been stating for weeks and months that a finalized deal was just around the corner and it hasn't happened. That alone suggests whatever is going on behind the scenes isn't cut and dry. Given all the questions being asked of officials at individual universities, more than one has implied staying in the PAC is not a foregone conclusion. That to me is the biggest indicator of turmoil.

I don't know how much money the PAC is going to get, but remember that Apple is streaming only. Yes, I'm sure there will be simulcasts here and there or exclusive games on linear, but if the deal is anything like what MLS got then the PAC could have a nice payday on a platform that hardly anyone is watching. That's a problem...college sports maybe more than anyone needs exposure because philosophically that's a big part of how they justify the expenditures on non-academic endeavors.

I think you're also saying that the 4 Corner schools will stick around if Oregon and Washington do...and you're saying Oregon and Washington don't have anywhere else to go. That's fair and I don't believe Oregon and Washington will go to the Big 12, but that doesn't necessarily mean a couple of PAC schools won't leave for a better contract if what the PAC gets is not up to par. Or at least that's what some of the school leadership seems to be implying in some of their statements.

I fully believe the PAC schools want to stick together, but that doesn't mean they will. It's hard to quantify just how bad the loss of the LA market is for that conference.

We'll just have to see.

And one PAC president said a company wants to hold off announcing because of it being a bad visual spending that kind of money while laying off employees. The one person not really talking right now is Klavikoff. I've never heard him say a deal was imminent. I have heard some PAC presidents that have said they are "sticking together" and they expect a deal to be done "soon." I haven't heard one give a specific date. Again, the PAC media deal doesn't expire until June 30, 2024, 13 months from now. Whatever timeline people are talking about doesn't pertain to the people actually negotiating. Yes, the PAC knows there is a "deadline" come the end of June due to SDSU's increased exit fee. Not sure what SMU might have going on in that. But, that "deadline" can be managed.

Did you forget the February Pac-12 statement?
"The 10 Pac-12 universities look forward to consummating successful media rights deal(s) in the very near future."

Do you consider May 30, at the earliest, to be "the very near future" from February?

We haven't heard a specific date. But we've heard timeframes that have repeatedly failed to come true. 10 PResidents in mid-February said "very near future." Arizona President in March said "within the next couple of weeks".

So what grounds are there to believe that negotiations with Apple are going well?

(05-29-2023 12:48 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-29-2023 12:20 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 05:12 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 02:26 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 01:42 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  No, I'm afraid you created the strawman.

Earlier you said this:


It's not relevant whether Apple has more money or not unless you're implying that Apple will spend what it takes to keep the PAC together and ensure it has a better contract than the Big 12. That is the context in which I responded. My point was that you can't guarantee the PAC will get a better contract. It's biased to assume otherwise. So yes, from that angle, you don't know what you don't know. I don't know either, but I'm not terribly confident in PAC success due to other factors we are aware of.

I don't have a dog in this hunt. I don't really care if the Big 12 expands or if the PAC survives. I'm just examining what I see and there are a lot of indicators that don't project a good future for the PAC.

Whether Apple wanted the PAC for years or not, I don't really see how that matters. The PAC composition that Apple wanted clearly included USC and UCLA so the nature of that negotiation would have changed once it was announced they were leaving.


At this point, you're just exaggerating. I don't blame you for having passion about the topic for the reasons I stated earlier, but nobody is shouting you down...or at least I'm not. Disagreement does equate to denigration. To your point about negative news regarding the PAC, I would take the commentary more seriously if you weren't just completely ignoring all the negative.

That is no strawman argument, pointing out that is what we are hearing with regards to Apple. Again, I point out that Apple wants to expand its streaming service and getting the PAC content will do that. It does require them to partner with a linear producer so that is what they are doing. Again, they don't have the production capabilities currently so that is why the PAC and the PAC12NW is attractive to them. If Apple doesn't want to grow their business then why do it at all? Sports is a big part of doing that.

One poster on here basically said sports are dead in the west. Called people out here apathetic and yet the B1G grabbed USCLA. You want apathy, lose in LA and no one will show up. Sorry, but there is a market out here and there is less competition for it than East of the Rockies. There are 39M people in California alone. The B12 wants to grab western teams, why is that? I think it is because they compete against the SEC and B1G in every time zone they're in. The SEC won't expand west because they don't need to. B1G did to get into LA but there is no promise they will take any more western school. They value Notre Dame and some other ACC schools more. Given Oregon's research budget being ranked in the 140s, they are not going to take another school that will lose their AAU status. That happened with Nebraska.

According to one media guy, the PAC did a media valuation with two consultants in April and came with a range of $25.5M-34.5M. Even the low ball number won't kill the PAC but, down the middle you are at $30M. No PAC school is going to leave for the B12 with that number and the B1G looks to be done expanding for now.

I'm not saying Apple doesn't want to expand its operation or doesn't want to have the PAC as a partner. Not denying any of that at all. My only point is that there's no guarantee Apple is going to pay what it takes to keep the PAC together.

PAC officials have been stating for weeks and months that a finalized deal was just around the corner and it hasn't happened. That alone suggests whatever is going on behind the scenes isn't cut and dry. Given all the questions being asked of officials at individual universities, more than one has implied staying in the PAC is not a foregone conclusion. That to me is the biggest indicator of turmoil.

I don't know how much money the PAC is going to get, but remember that Apple is streaming only. Yes, I'm sure there will be simulcasts here and there or exclusive games on linear, but if the deal is anything like what MLS got then the PAC could have a nice payday on a platform that hardly anyone is watching. That's a problem...college sports maybe more than anyone needs exposure because philosophically that's a big part of how they justify the expenditures on non-academic endeavors.

I think you're also saying that the 4 Corner schools will stick around if Oregon and Washington do...and you're saying Oregon and Washington don't have anywhere else to go. That's fair and I don't believe Oregon and Washington will go to the Big 12, but that doesn't necessarily mean a couple of PAC schools won't leave for a better contract if what the PAC gets is not up to par. Or at least that's what some of the school leadership seems to be implying in some of their statements.

I fully believe the PAC schools want to stick together, but that doesn't mean they will. It's hard to quantify just how bad the loss of the LA market is for that conference.

We'll just have to see.

And one PAC president said a company wants to hold off announcing because of it being a bad visual spending that kind of money while laying off employees. The one person not really talking right now is Klavikoff. I've never heard him say a deal was imminent. I have heard some PAC presidents that have said they are "sticking together" and they expect a deal to be done "soon." I haven't heard one give a specific date. Again, the PAC media deal doesn't expire until June 30, 2024, 13 months from now. Whatever timeline people are talking about doesn't pertain to the people actually negotiating. Yes, the PAC knows there is a "deadline" come the end of June due to SDSU's increased exit fee. Not sure what SMU might have going on in that. But, that "deadline" can be managed.

Did you forget the February Pac-12 statement?
"The 10 Pac-12 universities look forward to consummating successful media rights deal(s) in the very near future."

Do you consider May 30, at the earliest, to be "the very near future" from February?

We haven't heard a specific date. But we've heard timeframes that have repeatedly failed to come true. 10 PResidents in mid-February said "very near future." Arizona President in March said "within the next couple of weeks".

So what grounds are there to believe that negotiations with Apple are going well?

"The very near future" isn't specific to me. Perhaps the deal is basically done, that is what I am hearing. The Wazzu president said one party wanted to wait 6 weeks to announce because it looks bad for them to spend money when laying workforce off. That would mean either ESPN or Amazon and put the announcement around mid June. Does he know any less than the Zona president?

There seems to be an assumption on here that the media negotiations are going poorly based on some made up timeline. Also, I have used the words "it appears" when talking about Apple obtaining the rights. I am not 100% certain that is the case.

(05-29-2023 02:20 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(05-29-2023 12:48 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-29-2023 12:20 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 05:12 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 02:26 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  That is no strawman argument, pointing out that is what we are hearing with regards to Apple. Again, I point out that Apple wants to expand its streaming service and getting the PAC content will do that. It does require them to partner with a linear producer so that is what they are doing. Again, they don't have the production capabilities currently so that is why the PAC and the PAC12NW is attractive to them. If Apple doesn't want to grow their business then why do it at all? Sports is a big part of doing that.

One poster on here basically said sports are dead in the west. Called people out here apathetic and yet the B1G grabbed USCLA. You want apathy, lose in LA and no one will show up. Sorry, but there is a market out here and there is less competition for it than East of the Rockies. There are 39M people in California alone. The B12 wants to grab western teams, why is that? I think it is because they compete against the SEC and B1G in every time zone they're in. The SEC won't expand west because they don't need to. B1G did to get into LA but there is no promise they will take any more western school. They value Notre Dame and some other ACC schools more. Given Oregon's research budget being ranked in the 140s, they are not going to take another school that will lose their AAU status. That happened with Nebraska.

According to one media guy, the PAC did a media valuation with two consultants in April and came with a range of $25.5M-34.5M. Even the low ball number won't kill the PAC but, down the middle you are at $30M. No PAC school is going to leave for the B12 with that number and the B1G looks to be done expanding for now.

I'm not saying Apple doesn't want to expand its operation or doesn't want to have the PAC as a partner. Not denying any of that at all. My only point is that there's no guarantee Apple is going to pay what it takes to keep the PAC together.

PAC officials have been stating for weeks and months that a finalized deal was just around the corner and it hasn't happened. That alone suggests whatever is going on behind the scenes isn't cut and dry. Given all the questions being asked of officials at individual universities, more than one has implied staying in the PAC is not a foregone conclusion. That to me is the biggest indicator of turmoil.

I don't know how much money the PAC is going to get, but remember that Apple is streaming only. Yes, I'm sure there will be simulcasts here and there or exclusive games on linear, but if the deal is anything like what MLS got then the PAC could have a nice payday on a platform that hardly anyone is watching. That's a problem...college sports maybe more than anyone needs exposure because philosophically that's a big part of how they justify the expenditures on non-academic endeavors.

I think you're also saying that the 4 Corner schools will stick around if Oregon and Washington do...and you're saying Oregon and Washington don't have anywhere else to go. That's fair and I don't believe Oregon and Washington will go to the Big 12, but that doesn't necessarily mean a couple of PAC schools won't leave for a better contract if what the PAC gets is not up to par. Or at least that's what some of the school leadership seems to be implying in some of their statements.

I fully believe the PAC schools want to stick together, but that doesn't mean they will. It's hard to quantify just how bad the loss of the LA market is for that conference.

We'll just have to see.

And one PAC president said a company wants to hold off announcing because of it being a bad visual spending that kind of money while laying off employees. The one person not really talking right now is Klavikoff. I've never heard him say a deal was imminent. I have heard some PAC presidents that have said they are "sticking together" and they expect a deal to be done "soon." I haven't heard one give a specific date. Again, the PAC media deal doesn't expire until June 30, 2024, 13 months from now. Whatever timeline people are talking about doesn't pertain to the people actually negotiating. Yes, the PAC knows there is a "deadline" come the end of June due to SDSU's increased exit fee. Not sure what SMU might have going on in that. But, that "deadline" can be managed.

Did you forget the February Pac-12 statement?
"The 10 Pac-12 universities look forward to consummating successful media rights deal(s) in the very near future."

Do you consider May 30, at the earliest, to be "the very near future" from February?

We haven't heard a specific date. But we've heard timeframes that have repeatedly failed to come true. 10 PResidents in mid-February said "very near future." Arizona President in March said "within the next couple of weeks".

So what grounds are there to believe that negotiations with Apple are going well?

"The very near future" isn't specific to me. Perhaps the deal is basically done, that is what I am hearing. The Wazzu president said one party wanted to wait 6 weeks to announce because it looks bad for them to spend money when laying workforce off. That would mean either ESPN or Amazon and put the announcement around mid June. Does he know any less than the Zona president?

There seems to be an assumption on here that the media negotiations are going poorly based on some made up timeline. Also, I have used the words "it appears" when talking about Apple obtaining the rights. I am not 100% certain that is the case.

Well the timelines are all coming from Kliavcoff and the presidents of the conference.

(05-29-2023 02:20 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(05-29-2023 12:48 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-29-2023 12:20 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 05:12 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 02:26 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  That is no strawman argument, pointing out that is what we are hearing with regards to Apple. Again, I point out that Apple wants to expand its streaming service and getting the PAC content will do that. It does require them to partner with a linear producer so that is what they are doing. Again, they don't have the production capabilities currently so that is why the PAC and the PAC12NW is attractive to them. If Apple doesn't want to grow their business then why do it at all? Sports is a big part of doing that.

One poster on here basically said sports are dead in the west. Called people out here apathetic and yet the B1G grabbed USCLA. You want apathy, lose in LA and no one will show up. Sorry, but there is a market out here and there is less competition for it than East of the Rockies. There are 39M people in California alone. The B12 wants to grab western teams, why is that? I think it is because they compete against the SEC and B1G in every time zone they're in. The SEC won't expand west because they don't need to. B1G did to get into LA but there is no promise they will take any more western school. They value Notre Dame and some other ACC schools more. Given Oregon's research budget being ranked in the 140s, they are not going to take another school that will lose their AAU status. That happened with Nebraska.

According to one media guy, the PAC did a media valuation with two consultants in April and came with a range of $25.5M-34.5M. Even the low ball number won't kill the PAC but, down the middle you are at $30M. No PAC school is going to leave for the B12 with that number and the B1G looks to be done expanding for now.

I'm not saying Apple doesn't want to expand its operation or doesn't want to have the PAC as a partner. Not denying any of that at all. My only point is that there's no guarantee Apple is going to pay what it takes to keep the PAC together.

PAC officials have been stating for weeks and months that a finalized deal was just around the corner and it hasn't happened. That alone suggests whatever is going on behind the scenes isn't cut and dry. Given all the questions being asked of officials at individual universities, more than one has implied staying in the PAC is not a foregone conclusion. That to me is the biggest indicator of turmoil.

I don't know how much money the PAC is going to get, but remember that Apple is streaming only. Yes, I'm sure there will be simulcasts here and there or exclusive games on linear, but if the deal is anything like what MLS got then the PAC could have a nice payday on a platform that hardly anyone is watching. That's a problem...college sports maybe more than anyone needs exposure because philosophically that's a big part of how they justify the expenditures on non-academic endeavors.

I think you're also saying that the 4 Corner schools will stick around if Oregon and Washington do...and you're saying Oregon and Washington don't have anywhere else to go. That's fair and I don't believe Oregon and Washington will go to the Big 12, but that doesn't necessarily mean a couple of PAC schools won't leave for a better contract if what the PAC gets is not up to par. Or at least that's what some of the school leadership seems to be implying in some of their statements.

I fully believe the PAC schools want to stick together, but that doesn't mean they will. It's hard to quantify just how bad the loss of the LA market is for that conference.

We'll just have to see.

And one PAC president said a company wants to hold off announcing because of it being a bad visual spending that kind of money while laying off employees. The one person not really talking right now is Klavikoff. I've never heard him say a deal was imminent. I have heard some PAC presidents that have said they are "sticking together" and they expect a deal to be done "soon." I haven't heard one give a specific date. Again, the PAC media deal doesn't expire until June 30, 2024, 13 months from now. Whatever timeline people are talking about doesn't pertain to the people actually negotiating. Yes, the PAC knows there is a "deadline" come the end of June due to SDSU's increased exit fee. Not sure what SMU might have going on in that. But, that "deadline" can be managed.

Did you forget the February Pac-12 statement?
"The 10 Pac-12 universities look forward to consummating successful media rights deal(s) in the very near future."

Do you consider May 30, at the earliest, to be "the very near future" from February?

We haven't heard a specific date. But we've heard timeframes that have repeatedly failed to come true. 10 PResidents in mid-February said "very near future." Arizona President in March said "within the next couple of weeks".

So what grounds are there to believe that negotiations with Apple are going well?

"The very near future" isn't specific to me.

It's not specific, but there's no way it means "90 days and counting before anything is announced."

Quote:Perhaps the deal is basically done, that is what I am hearing.

Perhaps. Or perhaps there is no deal, at least not one that delivers $250M a year for 10 schools plus some for SDsU and SMU and 50% or so on linear television.

Quote:The Wazzu president said one party wanted to wait 6 weeks to announce because it looks bad for them to spend money when laying workforce off. That would mean either ESPN or Amazon and put the announcement around mid June. Does he know any less than the Zona president?

Or it's what he knows that isn't so. ESPN had no problems signing PAt McAfee to a big fat contract. I think whoever told the WSU president that is being disingenuous.

Quote:There seems to be an assumption on here that the media negotiations are going poorly based on some made up timeline.

Yes. We're counting from last summer, and it's been I think 11 months since USC and UCLA announced they were leaving. the ESPN/Fox window expired in OCtober. It's been 8 months since then. And Pac-adjacent sources have been saying "in a few weeks / in the very near future" since at least February.

You know who was specific about a timeframe? Arizona President Robbins.

"Back during the holidays when I was sitting around contemplating life, I said April 15. … I think that is a pretty good time frame for me. Everybody else does not see it that way. They think it should have been yesterday. A couple of weeks from now is certainly better than a month ago."

Need I point out that April 15 has come and gone? But I would also point out that Arizona has not jumped to the Big 12.

So the PAC continues to be in limbo, a couple of weeks from securing its future with a TV contract, a couple of weeks from falling apart.

Quote:Also, I have used the words "it appears" when talking about Apple obtaining the rights. I am not 100% certain that is the case.

Well, for the PAC-12's sake, it better be Apple. Because nobody else is paying ACC/Big 12 type money for the PAC-12. [/i]

(05-29-2023 02:20 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(05-29-2023 12:48 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-29-2023 12:20 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 05:12 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 02:26 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  That is no strawman argument, pointing out that is what we are hearing with regards to Apple. Again, I point out that Apple wants to expand its streaming service and getting the PAC content will do that. It does require them to partner with a linear producer so that is what they are doing. Again, they don't have the production capabilities currently so that is why the PAC and the PAC12NW is attractive to them. If Apple doesn't want to grow their business then why do it at all? Sports is a big part of doing that.

One poster on here basically said sports are dead in the west. Called people out here apathetic and yet the B1G grabbed USCLA. You want apathy, lose in LA and no one will show up. Sorry, but there is a market out here and there is less competition for it than East of the Rockies. There are 39M people in California alone. The B12 wants to grab western teams, why is that? I think it is because they compete against the SEC and B1G in every time zone they're in. The SEC won't expand west because they don't need to. B1G did to get into LA but there is no promise they will take any more western school. They value Notre Dame and some other ACC schools more. Given Oregon's research budget being ranked in the 140s, they are not going to take another school that will lose their AAU status. That happened with Nebraska.

According to one media guy, the PAC did a media valuation with two consultants in April and came with a range of $25.5M-34.5M. Even the low ball number won't kill the PAC but, down the middle you are at $30M. No PAC school is going to leave for the B12 with that number and the B1G looks to be done expanding for now.

I'm not saying Apple doesn't want to expand its operation or doesn't want to have the PAC as a partner. Not denying any of that at all. My only point is that there's no guarantee Apple is going to pay what it takes to keep the PAC together.

PAC officials have been stating for weeks and months that a finalized deal was just around the corner and it hasn't happened. That alone suggests whatever is going on behind the scenes isn't cut and dry. Given all the questions being asked of officials at individual universities, more than one has implied staying in the PAC is not a foregone conclusion. That to me is the biggest indicator of turmoil.

I don't know how much money the PAC is going to get, but remember that Apple is streaming only. Yes, I'm sure there will be simulcasts here and there or exclusive games on linear, but if the deal is anything like what MLS got then the PAC could have a nice payday on a platform that hardly anyone is watching. That's a problem...college sports maybe more than anyone needs exposure because philosophically that's a big part of how they justify the expenditures on non-academic endeavors.

I think you're also saying that the 4 Corner schools will stick around if Oregon and Washington do...and you're saying Oregon and Washington don't have anywhere else to go. That's fair and I don't believe Oregon and Washington will go to the Big 12, but that doesn't necessarily mean a couple of PAC schools won't leave for a better contract if what the PAC gets is not up to par. Or at least that's what some of the school leadership seems to be implying in some of their statements.

I fully believe the PAC schools want to stick together, but that doesn't mean they will. It's hard to quantify just how bad the loss of the LA market is for that conference.

We'll just have to see.

And one PAC president said a company wants to hold off announcing because of it being a bad visual spending that kind of money while laying off employees. The one person not really talking right now is Klavikoff. I've never heard him say a deal was imminent. I have heard some PAC presidents that have said they are "sticking together" and they expect a deal to be done "soon." I haven't heard one give a specific date. Again, the PAC media deal doesn't expire until June 30, 2024, 13 months from now. Whatever timeline people are talking about doesn't pertain to the people actually negotiating. Yes, the PAC knows there is a "deadline" come the end of June due to SDSU's increased exit fee. Not sure what SMU might have going on in that. But, that "deadline" can be managed.

Did you forget the February Pac-12 statement?
"The 10 Pac-12 universities look forward to consummating successful media rights deal(s) in the very near future."

Do you consider May 30, at the earliest, to be "the very near future" from February?

We haven't heard a specific date. But we've heard timeframes that have repeatedly failed to come true. 10 PResidents in mid-February said "very near future." Arizona President in March said "within the next couple of weeks".

So what grounds are there to believe that negotiations with Apple are going well?

"The very near future" isn't specific to me. Perhaps the deal is basically done, that is what I am hearing. The Wazzu president said one party wanted to wait 6 weeks to announce because it looks bad for them to spend money when laying workforce off. That would mean either ESPN or Amazon and put the announcement around mid June. Does he know any less than the Zona president?

There seems to be an assumption on here that the media negotiations are going poorly based on some made up timeline. Also, I have used the words "it appears" when talking about Apple obtaining the rights. I am not 100% certain that is the case.

Right now, if there is a deal, Bigfoot is holding it. As much crap as has come down on the PAC 12 and its leadership, does anyone believe for a nanosecond that the PAC wouldn't trumpet success from every open media outlet if it was in hand, or about to be?

I feel nothing but sorrow for the PAC 12 schools and fans. But the lack of news in this case is anything but a good sign. If it was going to be raided, there was too much good there to leave them clinging to life and unassisted.