Yeah hopefully there is just more to go through with the privately owned networks and that is the holdup, this would be a disaster.
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
downthefield
New Member
Yep...
Texas has never been in a conference with members that had ego's as large as theirs. USC, UCLA, and UO would take care of that.
Oh, really?
Arkansas, A&M, Nebraska and Oklahoma dont have egos?
But by all means, let's pretend that it'll all be different next time. Hit me again Ike, and this time put some stank on it!!!
Not nearly at the level of the Whorns.
Neither are USC, UCLA and UO. Not even close. This idea that the PAC 12 will somehow not allow UT to get away with stuff they got away with before is comical. They'd waltz in here fully believing they "saved" the conference.
I want absolutely no part of any conference that has Texas as a member.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
+1 for the Jim Carrey classic.
Texas is a non starter because, like Notre Dame, they will never agree to equal revenue sharing. Giant Egos like USC were at least smart enough to recognize the importance of equal share.
With California all the big fish programs are also already in the Pac. Even if UT was let in I am still not convinced they move the needle enough because Texas has multiple FBS/G5 programs that divide the TV market.
With California all the big fish programs are also already in the Pac. Even if UT was let in I am still not convinced they move the needle enough because Texas has multiple FBS/G5 programs that divide the TV market.
ACC Network set to launch in 2 years. much discussion around scheduling, particularly the front-loading of the schedules with FCS games. this is causing the ACC to put pressure on member schools to move those games later in the season in order to provide better matchups for the network to carry each week.
apparently that's why more SEC teams are now playing FCS schools mid-season.
mixed blessing. better coverage is good, more conference money is good, but moving an FCS game to the middle of the season sucks. from my POV, P5 schools play those games for the primary reason of tuning up for conference play, and having one in the middle of the conference season serves no benefit to teams still contending for the playoffs. every important decision is a trade-off of something.
apparently that's why more SEC teams are now playing FCS schools mid-season.
mixed blessing. better coverage is good, more conference money is good, but moving an FCS game to the middle of the season sucks. from my POV, P5 schools play those games for the primary reason of tuning up for conference play, and having one in the middle of the conference season serves no benefit to teams still contending for the playoffs. every important decision is a trade-off of something.
Aren't there rumors that ESPN is going to delay the launch of the ACC network?
Probably, given espn's financial issues. But I haven't heard
Looks like she was a content producer more than anything else....
Partner All-Access Media Partners
Dates EmployedJan 2010 – Dec 2011
MSG Media
Executive Vice President Programming & Production
Dates EmployedJun 2006 – Jun 2009
Oxygen Media
Executive Vice President of Production
Dates EmployedAug 2002 – Oct 2003
Oxygen Media
President & Executive Producer Oxygen Sports
Dates EmployedJun 1999 – Aug 2002
ABC Sports
Vice President, Programming & Acquisitions
Dates Employed1993 – 1999
ABC Television
Various Positions at ABC Sports
Dates EmployedAug 1986 – 1993
WLUC-TV (CBS Affiliate)
Senior News Producer
Company NameWLUC-TV (CBS Affiliate)
Dates Employed1985 – 1986
Dates EmployedJan 2010 – Dec 2011
MSG Media
Executive Vice President Programming & Production
Dates EmployedJun 2006 – Jun 2009
Oxygen Media
Executive Vice President of Production
Dates EmployedAug 2002 – Oct 2003
Oxygen Media
President & Executive Producer Oxygen Sports
Dates EmployedJun 1999 – Aug 2002
ABC Sports
Vice President, Programming & Acquisitions
Dates Employed1993 – 1999
ABC Television
Various Positions at ABC Sports
Dates EmployedAug 1986 – 1993
WLUC-TV (CBS Affiliate)
Senior News Producer
Company NameWLUC-TV (CBS Affiliate)
Dates Employed1985 – 1986
Last edited:
More bad news for these kinds of channels....
Remember, the P12N is dependent on a business model where millions of households, some that never watch the channel, blindly pay their $1 a month to our bottom line.
So, the P12N probably needs to make the decision to sell itself to a major player that can get them in the door on whats left of the Multi Channel industry. Even though that industry may actually be in a death spiral. Under such an arrangement the P12N would most assuredly see the regional feeds reduced down to just two channels at most. As well as a reduction in televised events (The P12N produces more content than ant of the other networks).
Or, they can wait it out until the dust settles.
Pay TV’s Pain Point Gets Worse: Cord-Cutting Sped Up in 2016
The cord-cutting storm continues to gather momentum, and the forecast is bad news for traditional cable, satellite and telco TV operators — and their programming suppliers.
U.S. pay-TV providers lost around 1.9 million subscribers last year, according to the latest research from Kagan, a unit of S&P Global Market Intelligence.
Overall, Kagan tallied 94.7 million residential pay-TV subscribers in the U.S. as of the end of 2016, down 2% from 96.6 million a year earlier. That decline of 1.9 million is substantially worse than the drop of 1.1 million in 2015 across American pay-TV providers, according to the research firm’s estimates.
At the same time, American broadband-only homes grew much faster in 2016 — increasing by more than 2 million. Kagan estimated the U.S. had 15.4 million non-multichannel broadband homes at the end of last year, up from 13.3 million end of 2015. That suggest that 13% of the country’s occupied households make the decision not to take a traditional multichannel TV package [DTV, Dish, Cable].
And broadband-only households are expected to nearly double over a five-year period, according to Kagan, which forecasts 28 million non-multichannel broadband homes by 2021. And that projection could end up being conservative, given the speed at which cord-cutting has accelerated in just the last year.
http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/cord-cutting-2016-pay-tv-research-ott-1202030814/
The cord-cutting storm continues to gather momentum, and the forecast is bad news for traditional cable, satellite and telco TV operators — and their programming suppliers.
U.S. pay-TV providers lost around 1.9 million subscribers last year, according to the latest research from Kagan, a unit of S&P Global Market Intelligence.
Overall, Kagan tallied 94.7 million residential pay-TV subscribers in the U.S. as of the end of 2016, down 2% from 96.6 million a year earlier. That decline of 1.9 million is substantially worse than the drop of 1.1 million in 2015 across American pay-TV providers, according to the research firm’s estimates.
At the same time, American broadband-only homes grew much faster in 2016 — increasing by more than 2 million. Kagan estimated the U.S. had 15.4 million non-multichannel broadband homes at the end of last year, up from 13.3 million end of 2015. That suggest that 13% of the country’s occupied households make the decision not to take a traditional multichannel TV package [DTV, Dish, Cable].
And broadband-only households are expected to nearly double over a five-year period, according to Kagan, which forecasts 28 million non-multichannel broadband homes by 2021. And that projection could end up being conservative, given the speed at which cord-cutting has accelerated in just the last year.
http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/cord-cutting-2016-pay-tv-research-ott-1202030814/
Remember, the P12N is dependent on a business model where millions of households, some that never watch the channel, blindly pay their $1 a month to our bottom line.
So, the P12N probably needs to make the decision to sell itself to a major player that can get them in the door on whats left of the Multi Channel industry. Even though that industry may actually be in a death spiral. Under such an arrangement the P12N would most assuredly see the regional feeds reduced down to just two channels at most. As well as a reduction in televised events (The P12N produces more content than ant of the other networks).
Or, they can wait it out until the dust settles.
I bet the numbers are even worse than that when you consider homes like ours. I was going to sign up for internet only with Comcast, but it was cheaper to get the exact same package along with a package of local channels in SD. I basically never watch these channels, but I assume we would be counted as a home that still has a cable package.
That's the strategy that's not working that Scott is constantly lambasted for even though he has the unanimous support of the Presidents. If they want to move the needle they are going to need to decide to give up something. The question is wether the 12 decision makers really even care at all. I think they dont and their vote to change is tied to significant dollar signs.
ATT, by the way, is converting its Uverse customers to DirecTV customers. Since the one offers the P12N and the other does not P12N viewer ship will likely erode further.
I believe our deal runs until 2020 or 2022. And thats where I think things get interesting; do we put a stand alone P12N owned and operated streaming option into negotiations and still expect to get a chart topping TV contract? Or do we sell? Tier 1 would probably not be impacted. But direct streaming options hurt Tier 2 and Tier 3 values. T3 might be dead by then anyways. There are no easy answers here.
You are probably right. Investors are getting spooked because as these skinny bundles rise and rise whole Networks are not included in them. Fox is not on Sling. Viacom is left out of several of them. DirecTV is letting customers cut Disney/ESPN out of their packages.
There are a lot of older folks like my dad that have DTV with auto bill and just dont give a rip. But you cant count on them forever. I heard a report the other day about Amex and the CC industry where Millenials are causing them huge headaches because they refuse to carry a balance. Can you say skinny bundle? Or YouTube is free?
I think one of the big things is that the regional networks don't work. Pac-12 Mountain almost never has anything different than the national channel. It's a waste. Would make much more sense if anything not on a Tier 1 network or PACN was locally produced at lower cost to be available via youtube and twitter streams and the like. Cut costs while continuing to make these "Tier 3" broadcasts available to fans. Something I do believe that the Pac-12 has gotten right is the volume of games and the conference website. What limits that, though, is that the ability to watch is tied to whether you get PACN with your cable package. That needs to be divorced so that I could maybe just buy a subscription to pac-12.com for all my Tier 3 viewing (which could also be sold through the university AD websites for single game, monthly and annual plans). Cable & satellite companies get one Pac-12 Network and the rest should be through a direct subscription service. Maybe that's what will happen in your 2020 timeline.
Something I can also see happening as the cord cutting continues and people buy "bundles of interest" is that the P5 (maybe P4 eventually) will create a national NCAA bundle. ACCN, BTN, SECN & PACN. Within something like that, the Pac-12 would only have to get half as much as every other conference to make equal money since they're all 50% owned by others.
We finally cut the cord. Feels nice not sending $150 to DTV. I miss some of the programming, but not enough to want to go back. The bundles intrigue me for the upcoming season. Only need Sling for 2 months and I will get the majority of the Buff's games. If the Buffs are relevant, I will keep it a 3rd month, if not, extra beer money. Not too shabby.
PAC needs to figure out how to get a streaming only option. Offer up to dump some of the regional channels for such or something.
I like the idea of non-national or regional games being televised locally via web or even local network OTA channels. probably much more exposure for us locally than being buried on an obscure PAC network channel few have or know about anyway.
I like the idea of non-national or regional games being televised locally via web or even local network OTA channels. probably much more exposure for us locally than being buried on an obscure PAC network channel few have or know about anyway.
Come on PS VUE!
Would you as a multi channel provider agree to pay money for something where the viewers could go around you? I dont think you would. The basic idea here, for the multi channel provider, is that by picking up someone's network and paying fees for them you will gain X number of new subscribers.
I dont see fans being too excited when "cut costs" means one camera in the press box giving you a birds eye view only and Plati's assistant doing play by play. You want replay? HD? Multiple camera's? Competent operators? Those are professionals and it comes with a cost.
Selling the plans thru the ADs website invites schools to keep money. Thus USC, UCLA, and UW would sell a lot more than the rest. Conferences are a marketing and revenue sharing device. Keep it in the conference website.
I think in the end the P12N becomes more widely available on an add on cost service like HBO for providers like Vue and DTV Now services. Is that worth $10-15 a month?
Pac-12 Networks is also available on the Sling Blue Sports Extra, priced at $10 per month for new Sling Blue Sports Extra subscribers. Existing Sling Blue Sports Extra customers will receive the additional Pac-12 Networks channels automatically, and their price will remain $5 per month with their current subscription. Link
I think that this is the most likely future for the network.
Lots of different groups own or bought those rights. And they all expire at different times. You'd have to get a lot of different people with widely different priorities to sit down and agree. And it was tried once before. You can go here and read why failed.