Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
More ACCN/DirecTV
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
TIGER-PAUL Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,515
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 34
I Root For: PITT
Location:
Post: #1
More ACCN/DirecTV
(This post was last modified: 03-12-2019 12:58 PM by TIGER-PAUL.)
03-12-2019 12:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

TopperCard Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 586
Joined: Oct 2012
Reputation: 80
I Root For: UofL & WKU
Location: Louisville
Post: #2
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
That seems to be a big deal
03-12-2019 01:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wolfman Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,215
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 161
I Root For: The Game
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post: #3
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
Especially considering DirecTV recently dropped the P12N.
03-12-2019 02:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Schema Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 240
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 24
I Root For: Clemson
Location: Easley, SC
Post: #4
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
I don't believe they have ever carried the P12N. The belief is that they are not interested in offering the six regional channels and if the conference let them get away with only carrying the national channel, they'd have to go back and offer the same with everyone else who has already agreed to a carriage deal.
03-12-2019 02:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lou_C Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,386
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Florida State
Location:
Post: #5
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-12-2019 01:32 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  That seems to be a big deal

It is a big deal. The biggest in fact.

Nothing's over until it's over, but this pretty much the nail in the coffin for anyone hoping/predicting an ACCN failure as far as rollout and carriage goes. Yes, Comcast and others are still on the clock, and that matters, but DirectTV is the big one.

It's essential to get DirectTV (as the PAC has found out), because DirectTV is a competitor everywhere. It's nice to have the Verizon and Altice deals in your pocket when you go to Comcast, but at the end of the day, if Comcast plays hardball, nobody in Comcast's footprint can threaten to jump to Verizon.

DirectTV, and to a lesser extent Hulu and Vue, changes that completely. Now ACC fans in any remaining service's footprint can threaten to jump to DirectTV (or Hulu or Vue). Totally changes the position. It's really hard to imagine any way that Comcast or ATT will really hold out, with so many deals established, and alternatives for their customers.

Dish might be different I suppose, if they're differentiating with DirectTV on price, but I expect they'll fall in.
03-12-2019 02:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 21,714
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1908
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #6
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-12-2019 02:45 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 01:32 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  That seems to be a big deal

It is a big deal. The biggest in fact.

Nothing's over until it's over, but this pretty much the nail in the coffin for anyone hoping/predicting an ACCN failure as far as rollout and carriage goes. Yes, Comcast and others are still on the clock, and that matters, but DirectTV is the big one.

It's essential to get DirectTV (as the PAC has found out), because DirectTV is a competitor everywhere. It's nice to have the Verizon and Altice deals in your pocket when you go to Comcast, but at the end of the day, if Comcast plays hardball, nobody in Comcast's footprint can threaten to jump to Verizon.

DirectTV, and to a lesser extent Hulu and Vue, changes that completely. Now ACC fans in any remaining service's footprint can threaten to jump to DirectTV (or Hulu or Vue). Totally changes the position. It's really hard to imagine any way that Comcast or ATT will really hold out, with so many deals established, and alternatives for their customers.

Dish might be different I suppose, if they're differentiating with DirectTV on price, but I expect they'll fall in.

This is nothing but good news for the ACC & the ACCN. As to whether it is a home run or a nice double will be in the rate that was negotiated. But either way it's huge!
03-12-2019 03:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lou_C Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,386
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Florida State
Location:
Post: #7
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-12-2019 03:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 02:45 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 01:32 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  That seems to be a big deal

It is a big deal. The biggest in fact.

Nothing's over until it's over, but this pretty much the nail in the coffin for anyone hoping/predicting an ACCN failure as far as rollout and carriage goes. Yes, Comcast and others are still on the clock, and that matters, but DirectTV is the big one.

It's essential to get DirectTV (as the PAC has found out), because DirectTV is a competitor everywhere. It's nice to have the Verizon and Altice deals in your pocket when you go to Comcast, but at the end of the day, if Comcast plays hardball, nobody in Comcast's footprint can threaten to jump to Verizon.

DirectTV, and to a lesser extent Hulu and Vue, changes that completely. Now ACC fans in any remaining service's footprint can threaten to jump to DirectTV (or Hulu or Vue). Totally changes the position. It's really hard to imagine any way that Comcast or ATT will really hold out, with so many deals established, and alternatives for their customers.

Dish might be different I suppose, if they're differentiating with DirectTV on price, but I expect they'll fall in.

This is nothing but good news for the ACC & the ACCN. As to whether it is a home run or a nice double will be in the rate that was negotiated. But either way it's huge!

Yep, just have to wait and see.

The most positive way to look at it though is that all the vague projections have been more bullish than what one would expect...a lot of talk about "closing the gap" and "competitive with the B1G and SEC." But they've always been framed as "potentially" depending on how successful it is.

Now, I'm not sure how to read that. Not many thoughtful analysts really consider that there is potential in the ACC Net to put the ACC in B1G/SEC territory. So what does that mean?

1) Overall revenue parity? No, nobody could mean this, that would mean making so much that you're overcoming 25k+ fewer fans in seats, booster donations, better bowl payouts, etc. That's ridiculous, nobody could think that.

2) Media revenue parity? The B1G and SEC are making so much more from Tier 1/Tier 2 and championship game rights, this seems nearly as absurd. I suppose the most rainbow and unicorn speculation would be that in the new deal ESPN increased their Tier 1/2 revenue to close to the SEC/B1G, got almost as much per household as the SEC/B1G, and then the larger footprint brings media up to near parity. Ratings would make that sound silly, along with the fact that the ACC had absolutely no leverage for that kind of deal. Had the ACC been a free agent and made that deal in a competitive environment, I could buy it, but no way the ACC had that kind of leverage for a raise when they were already beholden to ESPN.

3) Conference network parity? This is the most optimistic realistic view of such claims. There's a scenario I suppose where ESPN got closer than we would expect to the per household money of the B1G and SEC, and along with the slightly bigger footprint, the conference network revenue becomes similar. The thing that makes this not absurd, if still unlikely, is that unlike point 2, at least the ACC and ESPN would be aligned on this. If ESPN thought they could do this, they most definitely would. Do they legit have that kind of clout in the current environment? Seems unlikely.

4) The conference spokespeople, ADs, etc are just talking out their butt and don't really know what the differences in conference disbursement are actually like, and are comparing like ACC 2021 projections to B1G and SEC reported disbursements from 2017 or something, as if those aren't going to grow.

But anyway, let's say that we take all those comments in the most generous (realistic) light...that they aren't just nonsense, and somehow "if successful" it's going to put the ACC somewhere between points 2 and 3...what I would call "Not equal, but a very meaningful cut into the gap." I don't know...something like 85%+ of those conferences?

Let's say that was true...it then begs the question...what is "if successful". The measure of conference networks has always been carriage and households. I think it's safe to assume at this point that carriage is going very well, and the ACCN is likely to have full carriage at launch, which was always the plan. I've always thought about the "if successful" that way.

What other measures could there be? Advertising rates? Viewer number accelerators?

Now that the the carriage seems like it's coming together, it's going to be very interesting to see how "successful" and "competitive with the B1G and SEC" end up being defined. For all the faults I have with the ACC, the one thing they aren't known for is being off message, leaking nonsense, or making fanciful claims. If anything they sandbag. And yet they've kind of put the bar out there to compare to the SEC and B1G, when they could have talked a more conservative game about "securing themselves solidly in the middle class of conference disbursements" and passing the PAC and B12 (what I consider the best realistic outcome), but they didn't message that way.

Really curious how this shakes out.
03-12-2019 04:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hallcity Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,057
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 38
I Root For: Duke
Location:
Post: #8
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-12-2019 04:51 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 03:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 02:45 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 01:32 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  That seems to be a big deal

It is a big deal. The biggest in fact.

Nothing's over until it's over, but this pretty much the nail in the coffin for anyone hoping/predicting an ACCN failure as far as rollout and carriage goes. Yes, Comcast and others are still on the clock, and that matters, but DirectTV is the big one.

It's essential to get DirectTV (as the PAC has found out), because DirectTV is a competitor everywhere. It's nice to have the Verizon and Altice deals in your pocket when you go to Comcast, but at the end of the day, if Comcast plays hardball, nobody in Comcast's footprint can threaten to jump to Verizon.

DirectTV, and to a lesser extent Hulu and Vue, changes that completely. Now ACC fans in any remaining service's footprint can threaten to jump to DirectTV (or Hulu or Vue). Totally changes the position. It's really hard to imagine any way that Comcast or ATT will really hold out, with so many deals established, and alternatives for their customers.

Dish might be different I suppose, if they're differentiating with DirectTV on price, but I expect they'll fall in.

This is nothing but good news for the ACC & the ACCN. As to whether it is a home run or a nice double will be in the rate that was negotiated. But either way it's huge!

Yep, just have to wait and see.

The most positive way to look at it though is that all the vague projections have been more bullish than what one would expect...a lot of talk about "closing the gap" and "competitive with the B1G and SEC." But they've always been framed as "potentially" depending on how successful it is.

Now, I'm not sure how to read that. Not many thoughtful analysts really consider that there is potential in the ACC Net to put the ACC in B1G/SEC territory. So what does that mean?

1) Overall revenue parity? No, nobody could mean this, that would mean making so much that you're overcoming 25k+ fewer fans in seats, booster donations, better bowl payouts, etc. That's ridiculous, nobody could think that.

2) Media revenue parity? The B1G and SEC are making so much more from Tier 1/Tier 2 and championship game rights, this seems nearly as absurd. I suppose the most rainbow and unicorn speculation would be that in the new deal ESPN increased their Tier 1/2 revenue to close to the SEC/B1G, got almost as much per household as the SEC/B1G, and then the larger footprint brings media up to near parity. Ratings would make that sound silly, along with the fact that the ACC had absolutely no leverage for that kind of deal. Had the ACC been a free agent and made that deal in a competitive environment, I could buy it, but no way the ACC had that kind of leverage for a raise when they were already beholden to ESPN.

3) Conference network parity? This is the most optimistic realistic view of such claims. There's a scenario I suppose where ESPN got closer than we would expect to the per household money of the B1G and SEC, and along with the slightly bigger footprint, the conference network revenue becomes similar. The thing that makes this not absurd, if still unlikely, is that unlike point 2, at least the ACC and ESPN would be aligned on this. If ESPN thought they could do this, they most definitely would. Do they legit have that kind of clout in the current environment? Seems unlikely.

4) The conference spokespeople, ADs, etc are just talking out their butt and don't really know what the differences in conference disbursement are actually like, and are comparing like ACC 2021 projections to B1G and SEC reported disbursements from 2017 or something, as if those aren't going to grow.

But anyway, let's say that we take all those comments in the most generous (realistic) light...that they aren't just nonsense, and somehow "if successful" it's going to put the ACC somewhere between points 2 and 3...what I would call "Not equal, but a very meaningful cut into the gap." I don't know...something like 85%+ of those conferences?

Let's say that was true...it then begs the question...what is "if successful". The measure of conference networks has always been carriage and households. I think it's safe to assume at this point that carriage is going very well, and the ACCN is likely to have full carriage at launch, which was always the plan. I've always thought about the "if successful" that way.

What other measures could there be? Advertising rates? Viewer number accelerators?

Now that the the carriage seems like it's coming together, it's going to be very interesting to see how "successful" and "competitive with the B1G and SEC" end up being defined. For all the faults I have with the ACC, the one thing they aren't known for is being off message, leaking nonsense, or making fanciful claims. If anything they sandbag. And yet they've kind of put the bar out there to compare to the SEC and B1G, when they could have talked a more conservative game about "securing themselves solidly in the middle class of conference disbursements" and passing the PAC and B12 (what I consider the best realistic outcome), but they didn't message that way.

Really curious how this shakes out.

I don’t want to waste my time responding to all this absurd negativity. I’ll just respond to a couple of points.

You think that ACC schools can’t compete with schools that have football stadiums that have 25,000 more seats. OK, let’s multiply 25,000 seats by $100 times seven home games. Less than $2 million a year and I’m giving the absolute best case. Doesn’t sound overwhelming to me. With decreasing football attendance everywhere, I’m beginning to wonder whether bigger stadiums may end up standing empty most of the time.

You think schools in other conferences get a lot more money from boosters. Sure, WFU isn’t getting much out of alums but I guarantee that Duke, UNC, Notre Dame and U.Va, at the least, get big bucks out of alumni. The word on the street is that the minimum cumulative contribution at Duke to get tickets downstairs for this year’s ACC tournament is $1 million. How much money are Arkansas and Vandy getting out of their alumni? Probably nothing like that.

From what I’ve seen bigger athletic department budgets lead to bloated staffs and bloated salaries for administrators more than improved competitiveness.
03-12-2019 08:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 888
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 62
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #9
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-12-2019 08:11 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 04:51 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 03:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 02:45 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 01:32 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  That seems to be a big deal

It is a big deal. The biggest in fact.

Nothing's over until it's over, but this pretty much the nail in the coffin for anyone hoping/predicting an ACCN failure as far as rollout and carriage goes. Yes, Comcast and others are still on the clock, and that matters, but DirectTV is the big one.

It's essential to get DirectTV (as the PAC has found out), because DirectTV is a competitor everywhere. It's nice to have the Verizon and Altice deals in your pocket when you go to Comcast, but at the end of the day, if Comcast plays hardball, nobody in Comcast's footprint can threaten to jump to Verizon.

DirectTV, and to a lesser extent Hulu and Vue, changes that completely. Now ACC fans in any remaining service's footprint can threaten to jump to DirectTV (or Hulu or Vue). Totally changes the position. It's really hard to imagine any way that Comcast or ATT will really hold out, with so many deals established, and alternatives for their customers.

Dish might be different I suppose, if they're differentiating with DirectTV on price, but I expect they'll fall in.

This is nothing but good news for the ACC & the ACCN. As to whether it is a home run or a nice double will be in the rate that was negotiated. But either way it's huge!

Yep, just have to wait and see.

The most positive way to look at it though is that all the vague projections have been more bullish than what one would expect...a lot of talk about "closing the gap" and "competitive with the B1G and SEC." But they've always been framed as "potentially" depending on how successful it is.

Now, I'm not sure how to read that. Not many thoughtful analysts really consider that there is potential in the ACC Net to put the ACC in B1G/SEC territory. So what does that mean?

1) Overall revenue parity? No, nobody could mean this, that would mean making so much that you're overcoming 25k+ fewer fans in seats, booster donations, better bowl payouts, etc. That's ridiculous, nobody could think that.

2) Media revenue parity? The B1G and SEC are making so much more from Tier 1/Tier 2 and championship game rights, this seems nearly as absurd. I suppose the most rainbow and unicorn speculation would be that in the new deal ESPN increased their Tier 1/2 revenue to close to the SEC/B1G, got almost as much per household as the SEC/B1G, and then the larger footprint brings media up to near parity. Ratings would make that sound silly, along with the fact that the ACC had absolutely no leverage for that kind of deal. Had the ACC been a free agent and made that deal in a competitive environment, I could buy it, but no way the ACC had that kind of leverage for a raise when they were already beholden to ESPN.

3) Conference network parity? This is the most optimistic realistic view of such claims. There's a scenario I suppose where ESPN got closer than we would expect to the per household money of the B1G and SEC, and along with the slightly bigger footprint, the conference network revenue becomes similar. The thing that makes this not absurd, if still unlikely, is that unlike point 2, at least the ACC and ESPN would be aligned on this. If ESPN thought they could do this, they most definitely would. Do they legit have that kind of clout in the current environment? Seems unlikely.

4) The conference spokespeople, ADs, etc are just talking out their butt and don't really know what the differences in conference disbursement are actually like, and are comparing like ACC 2021 projections to B1G and SEC reported disbursements from 2017 or something, as if those aren't going to grow.

But anyway, let's say that we take all those comments in the most generous (realistic) light...that they aren't just nonsense, and somehow "if successful" it's going to put the ACC somewhere between points 2 and 3...what I would call "Not equal, but a very meaningful cut into the gap." I don't know...something like 85%+ of those conferences?

Let's say that was true...it then begs the question...what is "if successful". The measure of conference networks has always been carriage and households. I think it's safe to assume at this point that carriage is going very well, and the ACCN is likely to have full carriage at launch, which was always the plan. I've always thought about the "if successful" that way.

What other measures could there be? Advertising rates? Viewer number accelerators?

Now that the the carriage seems like it's coming together, it's going to be very interesting to see how "successful" and "competitive with the B1G and SEC" end up being defined. For all the faults I have with the ACC, the one thing they aren't known for is being off message, leaking nonsense, or making fanciful claims. If anything they sandbag. And yet they've kind of put the bar out there to compare to the SEC and B1G, when they could have talked a more conservative game about "securing themselves solidly in the middle class of conference disbursements" and passing the PAC and B12 (what I consider the best realistic outcome), but they didn't message that way.

Really curious how this shakes out.

I don’t want to waste my time responding to all this absurd negativity. I’ll just respond to a couple of points.

You think that ACC schools can’t compete with schools that have football stadiums that have 25,000 more seats. OK, let’s multiply 25,000 seats by $100 times seven home games. Less than $2 million a year and I’m giving the absolute best case. Doesn’t sound overwhelming to me. With decreasing football attendance everywhere, I’m beginning to wonder whether bigger stadiums may end up standing empty most of the time.

You think schools in other conferences get a lot more money from boosters. Sure, WFU isn’t getting much out of alums but I guarantee that Duke, UNC, Notre Dame and U.Va, at the least, get big bucks out of alumni. The word on the street is that the minimum cumulative contribution at Duke to get tickets downstairs for this year’s ACC tournament is $1 million. How much money are Arkansas and Vandy getting out of their alumni? Probably nothing like that.

From what I’ve seen bigger athletic department budgets lead to bloated staffs and bloated salaries for administrators more than improved competitiveness.

You sure about that math?

I get $17 million.
(This post was last modified: 03-12-2019 09:13 PM by Statefan.)
03-12-2019 09:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Statefan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 888
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 62
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #10
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
Using some very rough math:

Average SEC stadium seats 85K
Average B10 stadium seats 71K
Average ACC/B12/Pac 12 stadium seats 59K

In the ACC only ND, FSU, and Clemson are in the range of 78K-82K
In the B12 Texas and OU are at 100K and 90K each
In the P12 USC and UCLA have access to 90K but not a demonstrated demand above 75K.

Anyone actually selling 90K or more (Texas, OU, Nebraska, PSU, OSU, Michigan, Bama, TAMU, LSU, TN, Georgia, and Florida) is selling almost 60K to 70K more tickets per game than Duke and WF, 40K to 50K more than BC, UNC, and Syracuse.

In football tickets sales plus concessions, the additional average revenue beyond WF and Duke is 40-50 million. It's 30 to 35 million beyond Syracuse, UNC, and BC.

Competing against the AVERAGE SEC or Big 10 school is one thing. Competing against a school that fills the 90K stadium is another matter.
03-12-2019 09:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,191
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 667
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Charlotte, NC
Post: #11
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-12-2019 09:12 PM)Statefan Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 08:11 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  I don’t want to waste my time responding to all this absurd negativity. I’ll just respond to a couple of points.

You think that ACC schools can’t compete with schools that have football stadiums that have 25,000 more seats. OK, let’s multiply 25,000 seats by $100 times seven home games. Less than $2 million a year and I’m giving the absolute best case. Doesn’t sound overwhelming to me. With decreasing football attendance everywhere, I’m beginning to wonder whether bigger stadiums may end up standing empty most of the time.

You think schools in other conferences get a lot more money from boosters. Sure, WFU isn’t getting much out of alums but I guarantee that Duke, UNC, Notre Dame and U.Va, at the least, get big bucks out of alumni. The word on the street is that the minimum cumulative contribution at Duke to get tickets downstairs for this year’s ACC tournament is $1 million. How much money are Arkansas and Vandy getting out of their alumni? Probably nothing like that.

From what I’ve seen bigger athletic department budgets lead to bloated staffs and bloated salaries for administrators more than improved competitiveness.

You sure about that math?

I get $17 million.

$17.5 million if you want to be precise.

That's enough of a difference to where they can hire assistants that are just as good as your head coach, and "analysts" as good as your assistants.

It may be negative, but it isn't absurd.
(This post was last modified: 03-12-2019 10:18 PM by Hokie Mark.)
03-12-2019 10:16 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 21,714
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1908
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #12
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-12-2019 10:16 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 09:12 PM)Statefan Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 08:11 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 04:51 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 03:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  This is nothing but good news for the ACC & the ACCN. As to whether it is a home run or a nice double will be in the rate that was negotiated. But either way it's huge!

Yep, just have to wait and see.

The most positive way to look at it though is that all the vague projections have been more bullish than what one would expect...a lot of talk about "closing the gap" and "competitive with the B1G and SEC." But they've always been framed as "potentially" depending on how successful it is.

Now, I'm not sure how to read that. Not many thoughtful analysts really consider that there is potential in the ACC Net to put the ACC in B1G/SEC territory. So what does that mean?

1) Overall revenue parity? No, nobody could mean this, that would mean making so much that you're overcoming 25k+ fewer fans in seats, booster donations, better bowl payouts, etc. That's ridiculous, nobody could think that.

2) Media revenue parity? The B1G and SEC are making so much more from Tier 1/Tier 2 and championship game rights, this seems nearly as absurd. I suppose the most rainbow and unicorn speculation would be that in the new deal ESPN increased their Tier 1/2 revenue to close to the SEC/B1G, got almost as much per household as the SEC/B1G, and then the larger footprint brings media up to near parity. Ratings would make that sound silly, along with the fact that the ACC had absolutely no leverage for that kind of deal. Had the ACC been a free agent and made that deal in a competitive environment, I could buy it, but no way the ACC had that kind of leverage for a raise when they were already beholden to ESPN.

3) Conference network parity? This is the most optimistic realistic view of such claims. There's a scenario I suppose where ESPN got closer than we would expect to the per household money of the B1G and SEC, and along with the slightly bigger footprint, the conference network revenue becomes similar. The thing that makes this not absurd, if still unlikely, is that unlike point 2, at least the ACC and ESPN would be aligned on this. If ESPN thought they could do this, they most definitely would. Do they legit have that kind of clout in the current environment? Seems unlikely.

4) The conference spokespeople, ADs, etc are just talking out their butt and don't really know what the differences in conference disbursement are actually like, and are comparing like ACC 2021 projections to B1G and SEC reported disbursements from 2017 or something, as if those aren't going to grow.

But anyway, let's say that we take all those comments in the most generous (realistic) light...that they aren't just nonsense, and somehow "if successful" it's going to put the ACC somewhere between points 2 and 3...what I would call "Not equal, but a very meaningful cut into the gap." I don't know...something like 85%+ of those conferences?

Let's say that was true...it then begs the question...what is "if successful". The measure of conference networks has always been carriage and households. I think it's safe to assume at this point that carriage is going very well, and the ACCN is likely to have full carriage at launch, which was always the plan. I've always thought about the "if successful" that way.

What other measures could there be? Advertising rates? Viewer number accelerators?

Now that the the carriage seems like it's coming together, it's going to be very interesting to see how "successful" and "competitive with the B1G and SEC" end up being defined. For all the faults I have with the ACC, the one thing they aren't known for is being off message, leaking nonsense, or making fanciful claims. If anything they sandbag. And yet they've kind of put the bar out there to compare to the SEC and B1G, when they could have talked a more conservative game about "securing themselves solidly in the middle class of conference disbursements" and passing the PAC and B12 (what I consider the best realistic outcome), but they didn't message that way.

Really curious how this shakes out.

I don’t want to waste my time responding to all this absurd negativity. I’ll just respond to a couple of points.

You think that ACC schools can’t compete with schools that have football stadiums that have 25,000 more seats. OK, let’s multiply 25,000 seats by $100 times seven home games. Less than $2 million a year and I’m giving the absolute best case. Doesn’t sound overwhelming to me. With decreasing football attendance everywhere, I’m beginning to wonder whether bigger stadiums may end up standing empty most of the time.

You think schools in other conferences get a lot more money from boosters. Sure, WFU isn’t getting much out of alums but I guarantee that Duke, UNC, Notre Dame and U.Va, at the least, get big bucks out of alumni. The word on the street is that the minimum cumulative contribution at Duke to get tickets downstairs for this year’s ACC tournament is $1 million. How much money are Arkansas and Vandy getting out of their alumni? Probably nothing like that.

From what I’ve seen bigger athletic department budgets lead to bloated staffs and bloated salaries for administrators more than improved competitiveness.

You sure about that math?

I get $17 million.

$17.5 million if you want to be precise.

That's enough of a difference to where they can hire assistants that are just as good as your head coach, and "analysts" as good as your assistants.

And that doesn't even take into consideration the difference in donations to purchase tickets and the difference in ticket prices.

The annual list of Total Revenue which covers all of this and more is real. The difference there between the ACC and the SEC did close some this year, but remained an average of 32 million per school difference between the two conferences.

https://csnbbs.com/thread-871659.html
(This post was last modified: 03-12-2019 10:25 PM by JRsec.)
03-12-2019 10:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,620
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 238
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #13
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
Many schools are now starting to "play up" to their larger contributors. It seems the old 80/20 rule is alive and well in college athletics.

Kentucky is reducing the size of Rupp Arena by about 3,000. The Dean Dome has plans to reduce the number of seats. Kenan Stadium has already reduced seating by almost 20%. The Greensboro Coliseum has reduced seating.
Why?
To make those venues "more comfortable for patrons" (not fans....patrons). In the coming attendance crisis, many schools are starting to circle their wagons and have decided to "take care" of those that truly support the program rather than trying to continue to attract the casual fan.
Luxury suites are starting to crop up everywhere. At Clemson and at Carolina the end zone premium seating that houses luxury suites, are not part of the state owned stadium in order to get around laws prohibiting the sale/consumption of alcohol on state owned property.

BTW don't let the size of the school or fan base fool you into thinking they don't contribute the same dollar as a school two the three times their size. The average Deacon Club member's annual contribution to Wake Forest is double that of Carolina's Rams Club. And you had better be able to write six figure checks if you ever dreamed of the right to buy season tickets at Cameron Indoor.
03-13-2019 05:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

orangefan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,316
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 224
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #14
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-12-2019 02:45 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 01:32 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  That seems to be a big deal

It is a big deal. The biggest in fact.

Nothing's over until it's over, but this pretty much the nail in the coffin for anyone hoping/predicting an ACCN failure as far as rollout and carriage goes. Yes, Comcast and others are still on the clock, and that matters, but DirectTV is the big one.

It's essential to get DirectTV (as the PAC has found out), because DirectTV is a competitor everywhere. It's nice to have the Verizon and Altice deals in your pocket when you go to Comcast, but at the end of the day, if Comcast plays hardball, nobody in Comcast's footprint can threaten to jump to Verizon.

DirectTV, and to a lesser extent Hulu and Vue, changes that completely. Now ACC fans in any remaining service's footprint can threaten to jump to DirectTV (or Hulu or Vue). Totally changes the position. It's really hard to imagine any way that Comcast or ATT will really hold out, with so many deals established, and alternatives for their customers.

Dish might be different I suppose, if they're differentiating with DirectTV on price, but I expect they'll fall in.

With DirecTV in the fold, U-Verse is either already signed or will be soon, as both are owned by AT&T. DirecTV Now will be also signed soon. It is probably only being held up because it is restructuring its programming tiers. Unfortunately, based on what I've seen, ACCN will likely be on DirecTV Now's new $70/month Max tier, which will also include Cinemax, BTN, SECN, ESPNU, ESPNews, CBS Sports Network, FS2, Golf Channel, LHN and those RSN with whom it has contracts. https://m.cordcutters.com/its-official-d...sive-plans
(This post was last modified: 03-13-2019 11:42 AM by orangefan.)
03-13-2019 07:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wolfman Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,215
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 161
I Root For: The Game
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post: #15
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-12-2019 02:42 PM)Schema Wrote:  I don't believe they have ever carried the P12N. The belief is that they are not interested in offering the six regional channels and if the conference let them get away with only carrying the national channel, they'd have to go back and offer the same with everyone else who has already agreed to a carriage deal.

I may be confusing ATT/Uverse dropping the P12N. Either way, DirecTV currently has the ACCN and not the P12N.
03-13-2019 11:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lou_C Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,386
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Florida State
Location:
Post: #16
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-13-2019 07:31 AM)orangefan Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 02:45 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 01:32 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  That seems to be a big deal

It is a big deal. The biggest in fact.

Nothing's over until it's over, but this pretty much the nail in the coffin for anyone hoping/predicting an ACCN failure as far as rollout and carriage goes. Yes, Comcast and others are still on the clock, and that matters, but DirectTV is the big one.

It's essential to get DirectTV (as the PAC has found out), because DirectTV is a competitor everywhere. It's nice to have the Verizon and Altice deals in your pocket when you go to Comcast, but at the end of the day, if Comcast plays hardball, nobody in Comcast's footprint can threaten to jump to Verizon.

DirectTV, and to a lesser extent Hulu and Vue, changes that completely. Now ACC fans in any remaining service's footprint can threaten to jump to DirectTV (or Hulu or Vue). Totally changes the position. It's really hard to imagine any way that Comcast or ATT will really hold out, with so many deals established, and alternatives for their customers.

Dish might be different I suppose, if they're differentiating with DirectTV on price, but I expect they'll fall in.

With DirecTV in the fold, U-Verse is either already signed or will be soon, as both are owned by AT&T. DirecTV Now will be also signed soon. It is probably only being held up because it is restructuring its programming tiers. Unfortunately, based on what I've seen, ACCN will likely be on DirecTV Now's new $70/month Max tier, which will also include Cinemax, BTN, SECN, ESPNU, ESPNews, CBS Sports Network, FS2, Golf Channel, LHN and those RSN with whom it has contracts. https://m.cordcutters.com/its-official-d...sive-plans

Yeah, I've had them all, and DTVNow jumped up the most to get the sports.

Funny, prices are going up on all these streaming things. Bundling isn't going away any time soon (ever). The big advantage is no BS fees for "dvr charge", additional receivers, equipment, etc plus no contract and the ease of switching. Love that I can decide "I want to switch from Hulu to YoutubeTV, and 10 minutes later it's done. And if I don't like it after a few days, I can switch back. Not quite the same as switching from Comcast to Dish Network LOL.
03-13-2019 12:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
orangefan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,316
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 224
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #17
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-13-2019 12:16 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-13-2019 07:31 AM)orangefan Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 02:45 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 01:32 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  That seems to be a big deal

It is a big deal. The biggest in fact.

Nothing's over until it's over, but this pretty much the nail in the coffin for anyone hoping/predicting an ACCN failure as far as rollout and carriage goes. Yes, Comcast and others are still on the clock, and that matters, but DirectTV is the big one.

It's essential to get DirectTV (as the PAC has found out), because DirectTV is a competitor everywhere. It's nice to have the Verizon and Altice deals in your pocket when you go to Comcast, but at the end of the day, if Comcast plays hardball, nobody in Comcast's footprint can threaten to jump to Verizon.

DirectTV, and to a lesser extent Hulu and Vue, changes that completely. Now ACC fans in any remaining service's footprint can threaten to jump to DirectTV (or Hulu or Vue). Totally changes the position. It's really hard to imagine any way that Comcast or ATT will really hold out, with so many deals established, and alternatives for their customers.

Dish might be different I suppose, if they're differentiating with DirectTV on price, but I expect they'll fall in.

With DirecTV in the fold, U-Verse is either already signed or will be soon, as both are owned by AT&T. DirecTV Now will be also signed soon. It is probably only being held up because it is restructuring its programming tiers. Unfortunately, based on what I've seen, ACCN will likely be on DirecTV Now's new $70/month Max tier, which will also include Cinemax, BTN, SECN, ESPNU, ESPNews, CBS Sports Network, FS2, Golf Channel, LHN and those RSN with whom it has contracts. https://m.cordcutters.com/its-official-d...sive-plans

Yeah, I've had them all, and DTVNow jumped up the most to get the sports.

Funny, prices are going up on all these streaming things. Bundling isn't going away any time soon (ever). The big advantage is no BS fees for "dvr charge", additional receivers, equipment, etc plus no contract and the ease of switching. Love that I can decide "I want to switch from Hulu to YoutubeTV, and 10 minutes later it's done. And if I don't like it after a few days, I can switch back. Not quite the same as switching from Comcast to Dish Network LOL.

My conclusion is that AT&T is revising DirecTV Now to require you to take HBO, and to require you to take Cinemax also if you want more specialized sport content. The $50 tier makes sense (making you take HBO). It's $10 more than the $40 price point that all providers seem to be moving up from anyway, but it provides value to a general programming bundle by including HBO. Since it's their channel, they can increase the margin they make on the bundle overall. It makes a lot less sense to me for them to bundle Cinemax with what then becomes an overpriced sports tier. $20 is way to much to pay if all you want is one or two of the specialized channels, for instance. They ought to separate them into two $10 choices with a discount if you take both.
(This post was last modified: 03-13-2019 01:40 PM by orangefan.)
03-13-2019 01:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
meyersnole Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 15
Joined: Mar 2016
Reputation: 6
I Root For: FSU
Location:
Post: #18
RE: More ACCN/DirecTV
(03-13-2019 07:31 AM)orangefan Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 02:45 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  
(03-12-2019 01:32 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  That seems to be a big deal

It is a big deal. The biggest in fact.

Nothing's over until it's over, but this pretty much the nail in the coffin for anyone hoping/predicting an ACCN failure as far as rollout and carriage goes. Yes, Comcast and others are still on the clock, and that matters, but DirectTV is the big one.

It's essential to get DirectTV (as the PAC has found out), because DirectTV is a competitor everywhere. It's nice to have the Verizon and Altice deals in your pocket when you go to Comcast, but at the end of the day, if Comcast plays hardball, nobody in Comcast's footprint can threaten to jump to Verizon.

DirectTV, and to a lesser extent Hulu and Vue, changes that completely. Now ACC fans in any remaining service's footprint can threaten to jump to DirectTV (or Hulu or Vue). Totally changes the position. It's really hard to imagine any way that Comcast or ATT will really hold out, with so many deals established, and alternatives for their customers.

Dish might be different I suppose, if they're differentiating with DirectTV on price, but I expect they'll fall in.

With DirecTV in the fold, U-Verse is either already signed or will be soon, as both are owned by AT&T. DirecTV Now will be also signed soon. It is probably only being held up because it is restructuring its programming tiers. Unfortunately, based on what I've seen, ACCN will likely be on DirecTV Now's new $70/month Max tier, which will also include Cinemax, BTN, SECN, ESPNU, ESPNews, CBS Sports Network, FS2, Golf Channel, LHN and those RSN with whom it has contracts. https://m.cordcutters.com/its-official-d...sive-plans

I am not as confident about UVerse being announced soon, as ATT seems to want to move its UVerse customers to DTV. You call and complain about this... and they sell you DTV.
03-13-2019 03:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.