jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
No thanks, I'll stay right where I am. I hope you're standing because it probably hurts to sit with that stick up your ass.
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!
Larry Scott: Pac-12 in Great Shape
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
No thanks, I'll stay right where I am. I hope you're standing because it probably hurts to sit with that stick up your ass.
Deleted member 807
Guest
The anger vortex has now moved on to the political realm, where there is less of a backlash when throwing out ugly stereotypes based on party affiliation. But dont hate on the SEC.
Good points. Too little delivery and too much content. It makes it a hard sell to the delivery pipelines when they are required to take content beyond football and men's basketball.
How much of that $128m gets distributed vs re-invested?
Huh? As a not for profit I would assume it all gets reinvested after reserves.
In the past, they have claimed profit but re-invested a healthy portion "to set up the future of the network that will be even better".
Maybe we are past those days, but I would like to see a confirmation this is what is being distributed.
New revenue numbers are out: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/...e-to-sec-big-ten-is-real-and-its-spectacular/
Larry Scott needs to act. This is an unsustainable competitive disadvantage.
2016 (actual)
SEC: $40.5 million
Big Ten: $34.8 million
Pac-12: $28.7 million
Big 12: $28.45 million
(The ACC has not reported FY16.)
2017 (projected)
SEC: $44 million
Big Ten: $38 million
Big 12: $34 million (per commissioner Bob Bowlsby)
Pac-12: $29.5 million
2018 (projected)
SEC: $45+ million
Big Ten: $45 million (new Tier 1 deal)
Big 12: $37.5 million
Pac-12: $32.5 million
Larry Scott needs to act. This is an unsustainable competitive disadvantage.
2016 (actual)
SEC: $40.5 million
Big Ten: $34.8 million
Pac-12: $28.7 million
Big 12: $28.45 million
(The ACC has not reported FY16.)
2017 (projected)
SEC: $44 million
Big Ten: $38 million
Big 12: $34 million (per commissioner Bob Bowlsby)
Pac-12: $29.5 million
2018 (projected)
SEC: $45+ million
Big Ten: $45 million (new Tier 1 deal)
Big 12: $37.5 million
Pac-12: $32.5 million
How much is the break up fee on our current TV contracts?
We could sell the rights the P12N to the highest bidder too. You think ESPN is interested?
And don't forget, we control our TV rights! No ESPN telling us what to do, boy.
$84m shortfall, per school, over the next 7 years. One. Billion. Dollar. Gap.
And that is just from the tv contract distribution, imagine the shortfall when you take in ticket sales, donations and sponsorships from the SEC and Big-10. Obviously a lot of that is out of control from Scott but damn.
Yep. If the Pac isn't proactive about expanding with revenue generating programs soon, it will quickly become a 2nd tier conference, whose flagship members could look at jumping elsewhere, IMO.
Aren't we under contract until 2020 or 2022? If so, there isnt much we can do about this until then. Unless we try to break the contract and pay the break up fees.
The SEC is the high water mark of these kinds of deals right now. ESPN is the payer giving a guaranteed amount regardless of the success for the SEC Network. The deal was written at the time of peak TV which has since started to decline.
I believe the B1G just redid their TV rights and DID NOT get a better deal than the SEC has. At least in terms of the B1G Ten channel. My guess would be that we could get B1G level money (not SEC level) if we were redoing our rights today. Which we are not.
The SEC is the high water mark of these kinds of deals right now. ESPN is the payer giving a guaranteed amount regardless of the success for the SEC Network. The deal was written at the time of peak TV which has since started to decline.
I believe the B1G just redid their TV rights and DID NOT get a better deal than the SEC has. At least in terms of the B1G Ten channel. My guess would be that we could get B1G level money (not SEC level) if we were redoing our rights today. Which we are not.
Yeah, we will never jump ahead of the SEC in terms of overall conference revenue, nor should we, tbh. However, we shouldn't be $12m/year/school behind them.
Your answer seems to be "status quo". How's that working out?
That's not my answer and it never has been. I've always said Scott need to be looking at ways to expand the exposure of the conference and open up new revenue streams. That's his job. Expanding the number of schools in the desperate hope that ESPN and DTV will magically find money heretofore lost and throw it our way is naive at best.
There are some that justify the revenue gap as "no big deal" but they typically justify everything that CU or the Pac-12 does.
Your suggestion is absolutely the status quo. Scott and other Pac-12 execs are doing what you suggest: "looking at ways to expand the exposure of the conference and open up new revenue streams". That approach is failing.
What we don't know are two things:
1) If there are opportunities to add certain teams that would increase Pac-12 Networks distribution significantly from where it is currently. Could this revenue gap be alarming enough to bring BYU and Boise State into the conversation, for example? Could it cause a desperate move into Texas through Houston and SMU in order to get onto basic cable there?
2) Would a more aggressive move to destroy the Big 12 be the answer with a 4-team grab that broke that conference and its media deal, thereby diverting the value from ESPN/FOX into a renegotiated Pac-16 deal that paid more than anyone was getting from either the Big 12 or Pac-12?
One of the worst aspects of the Pac-12 Network is the massive amount of Olympic sports they broadcast. Virtually nobody watches that stuff and the carriers will not pay for that content. P12N needs streaming so that they can provide Olympic sport content so mom can watch her kids water polo matches and the rest of the world can get football and basketball.
I agree. PACN should significantly cut costs by eliminating all but conference championship events for most of these sports and have them available to subscribers as a streaming package if you want to watch through the conference website, twitter or whatnot. And that streaming option should be available if you have PACN as part of your cable/satellite package or if you want to purchase it separately. From a purely economic standpoint, the number of Olympic sports broadcasts is added costs without added value toward revenues.