Sling TV is available nationwide. So is Dish.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Pac 12 network / direct tv (PACN now on fuboTV streaming)
- Thread starter absinthe
- Start date
Sling TV is available nationwide. So is Dish.
I also noticed that BTN is on satellite in Canada through Shaw Direct. Why not PACN up there? Sure, we don't have hockey like the Big Ten does, which hurts. But Vancouver is the 3rd largest city up there and it's a Pac-12 neighbor. This should be possible to work out. And since it's not in competition with the US providers, I bet there's a way to do rate cutouts for Canada the same way PACN has done them with Alibaba Group.
On the same note, the Pac-12 is in Arizona and California. Is there any reason our executives can't get a deal done with providers in Mexico like SKY?
But, but, but - NFL Sunday Ticket!!
Interesting note from Wilner's newsletter this week:
• A development that's way, way off the field but no less significant to the future of the Pac-12: Facebook bid $600 million for cricket, according to Recode. Can the NFL … and eventually college football … be all that far behind for the social media colossus? The conference needs FAANG (Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google) -- or some combination of the quintet -- to be deeply involved in live sports when the Pac-12's Tier 1 right are up for bid in six years.
• A development that's way, way off the field but no less significant to the future of the Pac-12: Facebook bid $600 million for cricket, according to Recode. Can the NFL … and eventually college football … be all that far behind for the social media colossus? The conference needs FAANG (Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google) -- or some combination of the quintet -- to be deeply involved in live sports when the Pac-12's Tier 1 right are up for bid in six years.
Pac-12 Networks and the Pac-12 conference are being sued by EMG for not paying a marketing fee for the AT&T deal
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/13/pac-12-2/
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/13/pac-12-2/
Yeah. Pac-12 will win this one. Suing on an oral contract is nearly impossible to win.
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
I'm beginning to give up hope on the PACN ever being the profitable venture it should have been. The PAC's continued financial failings to the rest of the country - and the accumulated money we've lost while other conference networks have been up and profitable - is increasingly alarming.
Just so everyone's clear... this lawsuit has zero to do with the relationship between the Pac-12 and AT&T.
It's only some firm that's out of business but still a paper company that tried to get the gig as an agent for the PACN, failed, went bankrupt, and the remaining owner hired an attorney to see if they can sue their way to a windfall.
It's only some firm that's out of business but still a paper company that tried to get the gig as an agent for the PACN, failed, went bankrupt, and the remaining owner hired an attorney to see if they can sue their way to a windfall.
Failure. Theirs no doubt.
Nfl sunday ticket = total failure?
pac 12 is basically "blacked out" in most sports bars in the country....its like asking to get a big sky game on
Good course correction sir... Please keep going.
yup. The presidents wanted what Larry Scott sold them, and it was dumb.
What I've been saying:
The conference has devoted immense resources to a business model (six regional feeds) designed showcase Olympic sports that are drawing zero ratings, instead of pursuing a model that would surely be more lucrative and visible.
Had the Olympic sports not been at the center of the business model, the conference could have created a traditional structure, like the Big Ten Network, with a single national network that featured football and men’s basketball, with Olympic sports scattered throughout.
There is zero doubt — and I’ve asked several analysts about this issue — that the single national network would have generated greater distribution and revenue.
Basically, what this means is that Olympic sports are worth exactly $0 for advertising revenue.
I actually think this could change if we had 1 national network and they were able to do a spotlight game for each Olympic sport. Make 1 matchup a week in each of the Olympic sports the "Game of the Week". Have a "Soccer Night" with a studio show and a featured women's and men's game. Same with a "Volleyball Night", etc. The rest should be available streaming via app subscriptions or PPV.
I actually think this could change if we had 1 national network and they were able to do a spotlight game for each Olympic sport. Make 1 matchup a week in each of the Olympic sports the "Game of the Week". Have a "Soccer Night" with a studio show and a featured women's and men's game. Same with a "Volleyball Night", etc. The rest should be available streaming via app subscriptions or PPV.
Hard to know. But I think it's a damn good bet that if you give your customer what it wants then you're more likely to make a sale.
As much as the Pac 12 prides itself on being such a prestigious academic conference, the Presidents sure are a bunch of morons. They thought they were playing chess, while everybody else was playing checkers. Turns out they were actually playing hungry, hungry hippos. Idots.
The problem with Olympic shorts is outside of CU, I couldn't care less about them. Even when CU does get a soccer or volleyball match on the national net live, most of the time I have other things going on. I suspect 90% of the people who watch P12N are the same. I will watch football and that is pretty much it if CU isn't involved. All the Olympic sports should be online streams only except for the occasional spotlight games.
DTV has said they want P12N as purely an add on. P12N has said they want to be as close to the basic package as possible. Thats how you get millions from people that never watch your channel. DTV then counters that they will accept what P12N wants for a lower price than they are getting from Dish and others. Which means going back to Dish and Co and lowering your price. Without an ESPN to do your negotiating for you, you lose either on price or access or both. And the stalemate continues.
On the other hand, DTV has been demonstrated to be a declining business model. At the end of the day there are millions of us that have cut our cable bill by 75% that are never going to go back to that arrangement. Everyday high speed connections get closer and closer to reaching everyone. And when they do people that had only sat or cable as an option now have choices.
So, do we cut our price in half for what may only be a temporary bump in revenue?
“For people to be critical because we don’t have DirecTV,” [Arizona State’s Michael] Crow said, “that’s not an unfair criticism … There’s a complicated pricing equation.” He added that the contract proposal was “at price point that we can’t accept.”
Last edited:
Another thing to continue to consider is that this might be what the 12 Presidents want. They dont really seem to care that were not earning SEC money (and all the problems that come with it like low standards, bad behavior from athletes, and dirty coaches). They may have an interest in highlighting to the title ix audience that their athletes WILL be on tv.
Originally published August 29, 2017
[Oregon State’s Ed] Ray shared [Arizona State’s Michael] Crow’s general sentiment — “I feel good about Larry’s efforts to position us for the future” — and noted that the conference should use the Pac-12 Networks and any other mechanism available to broaden its reach, not just nationally but worldwide.
College athletic administrators inside and outside the Pac-12, have questioned the overseas initiatives (for example: the men’s basketball games in China), especially with the networks lagging in distribution and income. But the presidents clearly share Scott’s view — they helped set that agenda, in fact.
“The goal going forward is to reach as broad and deep an audience as possible,” Ray said. “We see ourselves as part of the Pacific Rim, and we’ve made connections there. There’s a global market to tap.
“As I look two decades from now, I think schools in the east will wonder, ‘Why were we not doing more abroad?”’ The Pac-12 Networks are a means to that end.
“We a have 24-by-7 channel pushing out Pac-12 sports content, pushing out profiles of Pac-12 athletes, pushing out the kinds of things that we want to project,” Crow said.
“The network doesn’t just break even. It provides returns to the schools” — approximately $2.5 million per school in FY17, per Hotline research — “so we have a better-than-break-even enterprise that does something we couldn’t do before, which is project our identity to millions of people across all sports …
“Even without that, I’m of the view that the network has been successful. And it also has value.
“But more important than that, it’s getting visibility to women’s volleyball and beach volleyball and all these sports that lots of kids are interested in. And we’re projecting high-quality competitiveness of college students going to highly competitive universities, and I think there’s a huge amount of social good associated with that.
“Without the network, we don’t have that. It’s a fantastic asset.”
“The presidents take a long-term view,” Crow said. “We definitely want to see the revenue numbers enhanced at some point. We’re not overly interested in comparisons with the SEC and Big Ten. They live in their own worlds with their own areas of emphasis.”
“It’s highly, highly unlikely that you will see Pac-12 schools doing some of the things other schools have done in terms of coaches salaries. There’a belief that there needs to be some self-imposed limits to all this.”
http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/...of-the-pac-12-networks-its-a-fantastic-asset/
That all says to me that things are where they want them to be. Many of these schools looking at state funding of higher ed and know in part, to survive, they need to attract customers that can pay out of state tuition. I think thats why they look at the Pacific Rim as way to reel some of that money in.
USC's Max Nikias is now CEO of the Pac 12 group. If there is any one school that could come close to having a Texas sized appetite or influence over the conference's direction its USC. So far he appears to be playing along with the status quo.
High falutin ideas, ideals, and goals are good. The facts are bad: no one watches these games. It's not broadening reach or making money. It may be helping recruitment to a few olympic sports. That's it.
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
This statement concerns me:
“It’s highly, highly unlikely that you will see Pac-12 schools doing some of the things other schools have done in terms of coaches salaries. There’a belief that there needs to be some self-imposed limits to all this.”
“It’s highly, highly unlikely that you will see Pac-12 schools doing some of the things other schools have done in terms of coaches salaries. There’a belief that there needs to be some self-imposed limits to all this.”
The presidents, like anyone else, will make decisions based on the money.
And at the end of the day, even if Larry Scott did what they wanted, they will position it as they bought into his vision and supported it (not that he implemented their vision).
The main reason that you hire a commissioner and pay all that money to the post is do a better job than they could do themselves as a committee while also giving the committee cover for any mistakes.
They'll support whatever vision of Scott's will be the most lucrative.
And at the end of the day, even if Larry Scott did what they wanted, they will position it as they bought into his vision and supported it (not that he implemented their vision).
The main reason that you hire a commissioner and pay all that money to the post is do a better job than they could do themselves as a committee while also giving the committee cover for any mistakes.
They'll support whatever vision of Scott's will be the most lucrative.
Needs to happen though, coaching salaries have gotten out of control in an amateur sport.