Tuesdays at midnight Pacific time! Think about it, there's no competition. Not even the MAC has though of it!
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 is restructuring
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
Tuesdays at midnight Pacific time! Think about it, there's no competition. Not even the MAC has though of it!
@TSchekler likes Wisconsin because if he didn’t his fiancé would beat him.
Aside from 2016, and this year for basketball, it’s also given me Championship and big game football to care about.
I heard pieces of that and read parts of it. Those concerns were expressed about 20th Century Fox's creative side (Movies, TV Shows, and the Library thereof) and not so much about the Fox TV Sports and News Networks;
- 21st Century Fox will spinoff Fox Broadcasting Co., Fox Sports, Fox News, Fox Television Stations and a handful of other assets into a new company
Frankly I am a little skeptical about the suggestion that they couldnt do it. Rather I think they concluded it wasnt in their wheel house so they decided to cash out rather than try and make a mistake (like they did with MySpace)
So Wilner's numbers just came out yesterday (SIAP) and the Pac-12 is $4 million behind the Big-12 and $4 million above the ACC. In reality the Pac-12 is around $6 million behind the Big-12 if you look at their average tier 3 rights and expenses.
That really isn't a huge gap to minimize if you ask me. It has been talked about over and over but you cut your costs (which are absolutely huge for the Pac-12 network) by limiting the non revenue sports coverage and focusing on football and men's basketball and moving the conference/network office to Phoenix or Vegas. Women's basketball and baseball can be used for filler or to try and boost streaming numbers. After that you hope that gets you a spot on DirecTV estimated at $2-2.5 million per school. I would estimate the increase in distributions to be around $3.5-4 million based on the expenses being cut and increased revenues.
That is where is gets interesting and puts the Pac-12 right back in the mix though. No one is going to catch the Big-10, their deal is absolutely crazy but then the conference has leverage to try and grab Texas and OU to take that next step in the money race because they provide a ton to the Pac-12 in terms of tier 1 negotiations and increasing the rate the conference network charges to providers. After that, the conference can try to be bold for the last two spots by trying to go after Kansas and Nebraska, go after rivals like OSU and TTU, or add new members in big population centers like Houston or TCU.
That really isn't a huge gap to minimize if you ask me. It has been talked about over and over but you cut your costs (which are absolutely huge for the Pac-12 network) by limiting the non revenue sports coverage and focusing on football and men's basketball and moving the conference/network office to Phoenix or Vegas. Women's basketball and baseball can be used for filler or to try and boost streaming numbers. After that you hope that gets you a spot on DirecTV estimated at $2-2.5 million per school. I would estimate the increase in distributions to be around $3.5-4 million based on the expenses being cut and increased revenues.
That is where is gets interesting and puts the Pac-12 right back in the mix though. No one is going to catch the Big-10, their deal is absolutely crazy but then the conference has leverage to try and grab Texas and OU to take that next step in the money race because they provide a ton to the Pac-12 in terms of tier 1 negotiations and increasing the rate the conference network charges to providers. After that, the conference can try to be bold for the last two spots by trying to go after Kansas and Nebraska, go after rivals like OSU and TTU, or add new members in big population centers like Houston or TCU.
BlackNGold
Club Member
It is good you are trying to put a positive spin on things but the Big 12 numbers did not include local rights which are owned by the individual schools.
(Amounts are per school)
Fiscal year 2017
SEC: $41 million (actual)
Big Ten: $38.5 million (reported)
Big 12: $34.3 (actual)
Pac-12: $30.5 million (projected)
ACC: $26 million (projected)
Fiscal Year 2018
Big Ten: $50+ million (projected)
SEC: $43 million (projected)
Big 12: $36.5 million (projected)
Pac-12: $32 million (projected)
ACC: $28 million (projected)
We are trailing the Big 12 - a conference that has been totally screwed up.
I don't see much difference between the Pac-12 and ACC based on how the presidents run those conferences. The ACC at least has a strong basketball brand. The Pac-12 very easily could have a strong basketball brand but it hasn't been evident since the Buffs joined the conference.
I have no doubts that the Pac-12 will rebound in both sports but it's evident that the fans of the older Pac schools already know what we are now figuring out about the Pac and that is if the presidents are not going to give a hoot about sports like the other P5 conferences, why should the fans bother? I have noticed with myself that I used to watch the other Big 12 schools when CU wasn't playing at the time and I do not have that same motivation to do so.
New ESPN+ is launching on April 12th by the way.
I have no doubts that the Pac-12 will rebound in both sports but it's evident that the fans of the older Pac schools already know what we are now figuring out about the Pac and that is if the presidents are not going to give a hoot about sports like the other P5 conferences, why should the fans bother? I have noticed with myself that I used to watch the other Big 12 schools when CU wasn't playing at the time and I do not have that same motivation to do so.
New ESPN+ is launching on April 12th by the way.
I thought the Big 12 was an average, meaning UT and OU were getting a bigger payout with the rest of the schools getting below the reported average?
That's exactly what it is. LHN goes into that 3rd tier number to create the average. No one should get deluded into thinking that the ISUs and KSUs are making much north of zero.
BlackNGold
Club Member
Those are Wilner's numbers and he states they are a per school number but it does not include the 3rd tier rights - LHN is not included.
Here is a footnote I did not include - * Big 12 figures do not include local media rights, which are owned by the schools (i.e., The Longhorn Network).
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03...-the-big-12-in-distributions-to-the-campuses/
There are several reports online that the $34.8 million was distributed to each school except Baylor got less because of the sex scandal.
http://www.lubbockonline.com/news/s...unces-record-revenue-distribution-348-million
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
No, that’s the Big XII’s distributions before their tier 3 cut. UT makes over ten million on that, OU makes near 8-10, KU does well and even Baylor and ISU make more than a couple million.
I should have read the link.
Seems like the big problem with the Pac-12 is that PACN isn't paying any money.
Another issue is that the performance of the conference in the NCAA MBB tourney hasn't been good so we're not seeing a large share there.
Seems like the big problem with the Pac-12 is that PACN isn't paying any money.
Another issue is that the performance of the conference in the NCAA MBB tourney hasn't been good so we're not seeing a large share there.
Texas, OU, KU and WVU get quite a bit of money from their tier 3 rights but the rest of them really don't. Even those 4 report those tier 3 distributions as revenue only when their campus and AD has to spend quite a bit of money to broadcast all of their live events (outside of Texas and the longhorn network). I am not counting Texas and OU as those are pretty big outliers in terms of comparing the Pac-12 distributions. As I said earlier, right now the difference between us and the Big-12 is about $6 million, which could be reduced if the conference got their **** together and started worrying about the distributions instead of thinking of the network and conference as a pure marketing arm.
Fair enough when it comes to the NCAA tourney credits and that is something that the PAC needs to shore up big time.
ESPN+ is going to be attractive if the conferences & their schools determine the times & dates of games instead of the networks. That is something that the Pac-12 Network could end up on. The future of the P12N should be more clear beginning this year to two years from now on. At this point, I'm ready for the P12N to be sold to ESPN.
I can't believe the Ivy League folks are too stupid to realize the value of not partnering with a sports broadcaster. Morons.
It's like they don't even care about China.
This made my day
buffalo30
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't care if the Pac 12 network collapsed into oblivion. Then maybe someone could start over, do it right, and the endless blather might actually end. The Pac 12 does not get the national exposure it should have because of late night west coast games and lack of directv. The back and forth with this, that and everything else is a waste of time to discuss. It's a DCF. Kill it and start over.
How many people are actually going to subscribe to ESPN+? It's initial lineup doesn't interest me in the least.
ESPN to launch streaming service ESPN+ on April 12
ESPN to launch streaming service ESPN+ on April 12
Considering that I never find a reason to watch ESPNews or ESPN Classic, I'm not sure why I'd pay for the overflow that doesn't make it onto their broadcast networks.
pcbuff
Well-Known Member
The local MLS, USL and NWSL teams stream for free. So no, the content they want me to pay for is already available to me. ESPN has become more about politics of sports than watching games for me. They’ve lost me.
ESPNews actually has a lot of content. They have a lot of the live radio broadcasts and a ton of the highlights people actually like.
So I’m paying carriage fees for radio programs?
You pay to get streams of non-P5 sporting events along with the ability to get highlight shows and radio (news) without having to pay for cable. That doesn't seem that bad to me.
BlackNGold
Club Member
This is just a starting point. With existing distribution agreements they cannot stream directly some of their channels. This is evolving. Comcast has been clear their future focus is going to be more on Internet Access then Cable TV. ESPN+ gets ESPN a streaming platform. Over time expect the content to get better. Also expect major changes when distribution contracts get renegotiated.