Tv Contract vs Expansion

[Bull94]

ESPN and the networks are concerned with how many will watch. That's why I don't think the SEC and ACC will jump to expand right away. It may not add value.

the big 10 network is more concerned with getting onto basic cable systems in their expansion markets. They are paid .85c on average(I think) for every basic cable subscriber in big ten territory. Rutgers might bring 5M basic subscribers at .85c each per month would be $4.25M per month in fees alone. That's 51M dollars a year no matter how many people watch.

if big ten expands or any bcs conference expands acc will immediately expand

there is no financial incentive for the ACC to expand.

they have a tv contract with espn.

ESPN is on basic cable in almost every household. They don't need the ACC to expand to collect anymore subscribers.

The ACC will not collect those subscriber fees as the big ten will.

the big ten gets paid .85c per month for every basic cable package they can get on. they are in partnership with Fox. by adding programs, they can expand into their markets and get paid .85c per subscriber. There is a financial incentive for them to expand up to a certain point.

[SRQ]

That's why when someone on another thread suggested USF to the Big 10, for the tv market only, it's not such a bad idea.

There are lots of Big 10 alumni in this area.

They would love to be able to catch a conference game at RayJay.

They would love to come down here when it's freezing cold up there and we're still in the 80's.

miami makes far more sense in big11 wants to come to fl

[Guest]

ESPN and the networks are concerned with how many will watch. That's why I don't think the SEC and ACC will jump to expand right away. It may not add value.

the big 10 network is more concerned with getting onto basic cable systems in their expansion markets. They are paid .85c on average(I think) for every basic cable subscriber in big ten territory. Rutgers might bring 5M basic subscribers at .85c each per month would be $4.25M per month in fees alone. That's 51M dollars a year no matter how many people watch.

if big ten expands or any bcs conference expands acc will immediately expand

there is no financial incentive for the ACC to expand.

they have a tv contract with espn.

ESPN is on basic cable in almost every household. They don't need the ACC to expand to collect anymore subscribers.

The ACC will not collect those subscriber fees as the big ten will.

the big ten gets paid .85c per month for every basic cable package they can get on. they are in partnership with Fox. by adding programs, they can expand into their markets and get paid .85c per subscriber. There is a financial incentive for them to expand up to a certain point.

The ACC shares ESPN with other conferences - and will continue to do so. But an "ACC Network" would provide 24-7 coverage for ACC schools ... and they don't need BTN fees even 50 cents per subscriber could be millions of dollars.

Published reports said the BTN only gets 5 cents per subscriber outside of their footprint (like, oh, Bright House in Tampa or Time Warner in New York/New Jersey) and published reports have said they get 70 to 80 cents per subscriber inside their footprint (PA, OH, IN, MI, IL, WI, MN and IO).

The hard part is that many schools have their own side deals (like FSU with Sun Sports), but there will be a lot of programming ESPN just can offer because it is not the ACC Network (Raycom, FSN, and others can buy them - but there are still programs that could be combined into ACC Network). The Big Ten combined all of the individual school and Olympic sport programming into a single source.

The ACC and the Big East could make money with their own network because of the markets they already have - even at 40-50 cents per subscriber.

[Bull94]

ESPN and the networks are concerned with how many will watch. That's why I don't think the SEC and ACC will jump to expand right away. It may not add value.

the big 10 network is more concerned with getting onto basic cable systems in their expansion markets. They are paid .85c on average(I think) for every basic cable subscriber in big ten territory. Rutgers might bring 5M basic subscribers at .85c each per month would be $4.25M per month in fees alone. That's 51M dollars a year no matter how many people watch.

if big ten expands or any bcs conference expands acc will immediately expand

there is no financial incentive for the ACC to expand.

they have a tv contract with espn.

ESPN is on basic cable in almost every household. They don't need the ACC to expand to collect anymore subscribers.

The ACC will not collect those subscriber fees as the big ten will.

the big ten gets paid .85c per month for every basic cable package they can get on. they are in partnership with Fox. by adding programs, they can expand into their markets and get paid .85c per subscriber. There is a financial incentive for them to expand up to a certain point.

The ACC shares ESPN with other conferences - and will continue to do so.  But an "ACC Network" would provide 24-7 coverage for ACC schools ... and they don't need BTN fees even 50 cents per subscriber could be millions of dollars.

Published reports said the BTN only gets 5 cents per subscriber outside of their footprint (like, oh, Bright House in Tampa or Time Warner in New York/New Jersey) and published reports have said they get 70 to 80 cents per subscriber inside their footprint (PA, OH, IN, MI, IL, WI, MN and IO).

The hard part is that many schools have their own side deals (like FSU with Sun Sports), but there will be a lot of programming ESPN just can offer because it is not the ACC Network (Raycom, FSN, and others can buy them - but there are still programs that could be combined into ACC Network).  The Big Ten combined all of the individual school and Olympic sport programming into a single source.

The ACC and the Big East could make money with their own network because of the markets they already have - even at 40-50 cents per subscriber.

I totally agree that they could make more by starting their own network. I said months ago that the ACC and BE should form a football only alliance. 20 teams, 2 divisions. That's big time leverage. Keep all other sports separate and combine to start their own network. They would control the whole eastern seaboard.

The ACC just signed a huge TV deal with ESPN. ESPN is paying out huge dollars now because they don't want conferences starting their own networks. They know it would financially benefit them to do so. I'm not sure if the ACC can break that contract to start their own network though.

The Big ten is in a unique position. They can  keep adding programs until they no longer pay for themselves in subscriber fees and additional advertising revenue. They could call it the NCAA network if they wanted to and they could go after the top 50 programs in the country and literally control the market. Imagine getting $1 per subscriber(like ESPN) per month in 60 million households. That's 60 million dollars per month in subscriber fees alone. The advertisers would love it too because 85% of the people who watch college sports are college graduates(just guestimating).

Delaney is a bright business man and he is tired of seeing ESPN and the other networks make a mint off of college programming. He is doing for the big ten what somebody needs to do for all the AQ conferences. Oh and they should give a cut of all that money to the revenue producing athletes.