Let's Talk TV

[macphisto]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/fox-cable-sports-network-plan-espn-competition/2012/03/29/gIQAI8J1iS_video.html

They're coming after ESPN. This is why the Big East told them, "Thanks, but no thanks."

Looks like Fox is looking to compete directly against ESPN. NBC is already moving forward to do so and, as the guy in this interview stated, is the one most likely to take on ESPN. CBS is out there in third, most likely looking to prop up its cable offering.

As I've noted elsewhere, NBC has no consistent prime time college football for their main network and would like to expand on the cable side of things. The Big East is the only game in town for the next five years or so when it comes to acquisition of rights (other than the combined MWC-CUSA, maybe).

Now Fox clearly wants to expand its cable presence in addition to the Fox Sports Net. They've got football on the network and could move some of it to the cable channel probably, but they'd likely want more. And CBS primarily is looking for cable content as they have SEC exclusivity on the network.

Then there's ESPN, who is the king but now appears to have Fox and Comcast deciding to go after them.

Enter The Big East's contract bidding war. ESPN has no interest in losing ground here and they may not have an interest in paying too high a price BUT they will have an interest in driving up the price for their competition to reduce their ability to compete for other items (like the upcoming +1 playoff format). They have to play carefully, but I'd guess the per school average from their initial offer would be the starting point, probably slightly higher - so above $13M a year.

But I also expect us to divide the pie to get more out of it. The ACC made a horrible error by selling everything to one entity. The other conferences divided up their packages and increased their payout.

I also expect us to get extra money by partnering with one of the networks for them to manage a Big East Network to add extra advertising revenue and cable fees. To do so, Big East teams will have to give up control of all their TV rights to the conference - so any games not covered in the national packages would go to the BE Network.

[bullwark]

Interesting Assessment. The fact that the New Big East will consist of two time zones, major TV markets, and teams with good brand recognition (primarily basketball driven) will aid any sports network looking for content to attract viewers. I could realistically envision NBC expanding their college sports offering by adding the Big East which will allow them to bracket college football games around the ND game and providing great basketball content due to the sheer size of the basketball side of the Big East. I don't see Fox Sport Net a viable player yet and they may wait to make a bigger splash by signing a conference with teams that have greater brand recognition in football, which has been Murdoch's M.O., bold moves that make a big impact such as Fox and the NFL.

[macphisto]

Interesting Assessment. The fact that the New Big East will consist of two time zones, major TV markets, and teams with good brand recognition (primarily basketball driven) will aid any sports network looking for content to attract viewers. I could realistically envision NBC expanding their college sports offering by adding the Big East which will allow them to bracket college football games around the ND game and providing great basketball content due to the sheer size of the basketball side of the Big East. I don't see Fox Sport Net a viable player yet and they may wait to make a bigger splash by signing a conference with teams that have greater brand recognition in football, which has been Murdoch's M.O., bold moves that make a big impact such as Fox and the NFL.

Fox already has a portfolio, but would probably look to expand it. I don't know if they have the flexibility to move PAC-12, Big XII stuff to the cable network from Fox or Sports Net.

I still believe NBC is the best out there to partner with. Notre Dame has an in there and they do have an interest in keeping the conference alive to maintain their football independence. But NBC also wants to build their brand - just as we do. NBC is headquartered at Rockefeller Center and ComCast is a New York centric company. I believe that we should divide up our football programming, but I'd like to see NBC get the first tier and our championship game - putting us on NBC in prime time on Saturday nights throughout the season. That is something they don't have right now.

The one correction I'd offer of your assessment is that we are in three time zones, not two. And we do have the largest market footprint of any league. That doesn't mean we'll get top ratings, but it does mean that the potential is great as the brand grows for football. If NYC gets interested in Rutgers or UConn football then we're a plus in NYC. Navy is national. There's great potential.

The key is having a media partner that can help develop a positive image with us and has a vested interest in that. ESPN has no such interest. We're part of their stable, but not a cornerstone. I doubt they feel any one asset is a cornerstone for them right now. I think we have the most potential for greater earnings with NBC and CBS, CBS picking up games from us on their cable network and getting more basketball games.

NBC has great experience in the past with basketball, so I could see them taking an interest in taking BE basketball away from ESPN and broadcasting the BE tournament.

[206BULL]

We are actually in all 4 time zones with BSU bieng in the Mountain time zone, SDSU in Pacific, and then the rest in the Central and Eastern time zones...

[FutureUSFstudent]

It would be cool to see FSN get the rights to the Big East so we could have USF and UCF split on SUN Sports and FsFlorida like the Margins and Rays are

Dibs on Sun Sports could you imagine their logo tinted green SUNBulls with the ironic u in bulls on the top right of my hd screen

[Triple B]

It would be cool to see FSN get the rights to the Big East so we could have USF and UCF split on SUN Sports and FsFlorida like the Margins and Rays are

Dibs on Sun Sports could you imagine their logo tinted green SUNBulls with the ironic u in bulls on the top right of my hd screen

Pretty sure UF and FSU already split those two and I doubt they give them up for us ....

[macphisto]

FSN is not what is being talked about. I'd guess that the regional Fox Sports Net will continue to exist, but Murdoch wants to create a national channel ala ESPN to compete against said network. We're not speaking about regional entities. They would play a part, especially outside of football.

[FutureUSFstudent]

FSN is not what is being talked about. I'd guess that the regional Fox Sports Net will continue to exist, but Murdoch wants to create a national channel ala ESPN to compete against said network. We're not speaking about regional entities. They would play a part, especially outside of football.

Anything to fix our Bright House Sports Network and FiOS problem will work fo me.

[Joe]

1) Fox invested billions into a failed network in the mid-00s. Turner invested billions in the late 90s-early 2000s. OLN/Versus/NBC Sports has been rebranded/relaunched 4 times now with billIons of dollars lost. NONE have even been a fly in the face of the ESPN monster. I don't think any of the new networks do anything, conferences know that ESPN is college football. It will forever be college football. Gameday is how college football starts its day, and ends it. My point is, no new network is taking down ESPN. Not now. Not in the future.

2) The Big East would be damned fools to take ALL of their product off ESPN. Let's be serious, as I stated above ESPN is college football. While the SEC, PAC-12, Big-12, and Big Ten all have TV deals with separate networks, they keep a presence on ESPN for that very reason.

3) "We're in big TV markets" - lets backup there. USF is a prime example. We're in a big TV market but we're at best the second most popular college football team in the market (and that is being generous). Florida and Florida State are still the big dogs, and TV execs aren't stupid to that fact. You think SMU controls Dallas/Houston? No! Texas and Texas A&M do. Temple in Philly? That's a Penn State town. Temple can't get 10,000 real bodies into their games regularly. TV markets help, because they don't completely push us into that irrelevant range, by the same token, the execs aren't stupid. They know what games are watched where.

4) This is probably the most devasting fact. The BCS is getting rid of auto-bids. We don't stand a chance to survive as a "big boy" in that scenario. ESPECIALLY if we go running off the network that has the Multi-Billion dollar rights to the games. We'll officially take our spot next to the Mountain West and Conference-USA. Network execs know that. (I'll wait for someone to scream for a merited as antitrust claim)

5) We will get a nice TV deal. Somewhere in the 10-12 range. We'll probably split it up.

I hate ESPN, but it's a harsh reality that you aren't looking at in your analysis. No ESPN = No chance for the Big East. We have zero leverage as a power broker in college football without that auto-bid

[macphisto]

1) Fox invested billions into a failed network in the mid-00s. Turner invested billions in the late 90s-early 2000s. OLN/Versus/NBC Sports has been rebranded/relaunched 4 times now with billIons of dollars lost. NONE have even been a fly in the face of the ESPN monster. I don't think any of the new networks do anything, conferences know that ESPN is college football. It will forever be college football. Gameday is how college football starts its day, and ends it. My point is, no new network is taking down ESPN. Not now. Not in the future.

OLN and Versus did not have a major network backing them that had name recognition itself. NBC Sports is six months into its rebranding with the Olympics coming up to bolster the network.

It's not about taking down ESPN, but about eroding their marketshare. Fact is, ESPN is losing college football slowly. FOX runs the Big Ten Network, not ESPN. They've still got plenty of programming, but the SEC game of the week went to CBS. The Pac-12 and Big XII have concurrent deals with Fox. The Big Ten airs games on their own network that used to be carried by ESPN.

I don't disagree that it would be wise to keep some games on ESPN, but it all does ultimately come down to money. ESPN is highly profitable. A big part of the reason why they are is because they underpay for quite a bit of their sports programming compared to their intake from advertising and cable fees. I do prefer having NBC airing a weekly primetime game due to exposure and a couple games on their cable network in a split deal. ESPN was trying to avoid having us split the TV deal up. That's why the ACC's deal is so cheap. They just took what ESPN gave them without testing the market. That's plain dumb.

2) The Big East would be damned fools to take ALL of their product off ESPN. Let's be serious, as I stated above ESPN is college football. While the SEC, PAC-12, Big-12, and Big Ten all have TV deals with separate networks, they keep a presence on ESPN for that very reason.

The key reason is not because they need ESPN, but because ESPN needs them. The Big East is not in the same position, this is true. But the Big Ten will get viewers wherever it is. Same for the SEC. That's why ESPN had to increase their payouts to those conferences in order to keep them. How great would ESPN be for college football if the Big Ten and SEC skived off? And Fox or NBC will make a serious play for both when their contract is out.

3) "We're in big TV markets" - lets backup there. USF is a prime example. We're in a big TV market but we're at best the second most popular college football team in the market (and that is being generous). Florida and Florida State are still the big dogs, and TV execs aren't stupid to that fact. You think SMU controls Dallas/Houston? No! Texas and Texas A&M do. Temple in Philly? That's a Penn State town. Temple can't get 10,000 real bodies into their games regularly. TV markets help, because they don't completely push us into that irrelevant range, by the same token, the execs aren't stupid. They know what games are watched where.

You fail to grasp that their is no other football to bid on. And the large markets allow for the prospect of growth. True, we may not be the top draw in a market, but we're in the market. Execs are not stupid, but execs can get desperate for programming. The thing about college football is that it's advertizing rates are higher than the rates paid for comedies or dramas because those viewers have a greater tendency of responding to the ad. In a market where all conferences are up for bid, we don't do well.

This is why ESPN doesn't care as much to pay too much for content. They already have a stable. NBC has Notre Dame and some lesser games on cable. They also have a greater incentive to promote the product than ESPN does. Execs don't just look at current numbers, they also look at future potential. The large markets have an incredible potential for large growth in ratings. But the key driver is ultimately that NBC and all the others have nothing to add to their programming lineup for five years.

As I've said numerous times, NBC will be the lone network without primetime college football. I doubt they like that prospect.

4) This is probably the most devasting fact. The BCS is getting rid of auto-bids. We don't stand a chance to survive as a "big boy" in that scenario. ESPECIALLY if we go running off the network that has the Multi-Billion dollar rights to the games. We'll officially take our spot next to the Mountain West and Conference-USA. Network execs know that. (I'll wait for someone to scream for a merited as antitrust claim)

ESPN does not have the rights to the games. They will have to bid on whatever the BCS successor is. They have no rights beyond the bowl games played in January of 2014. Fox, ESPN, CBS, and NBC will all enter a bidding war for the +1 format. There is no guarantee that ESPN will win that war.

And if someone else wins it, they might pull an ESPN and disallow anyone else from using highlights of the game for a set period of time. ESPN did that on the current BCS deal. Imagine Sportscenter talking about the BCS title game but unable to show you any clips from it. That's what they did to everyone else.

ESPN isn't going to just die soon, but they can be dented and a strong revenue stream can be had for another alternative sports network. It takes time and capital, but it can be done. But execs need programming to do it and we're the only game in town.

5) We will get a nice TV deal. Somewhere in the 10-12 range. We'll probably split it up.

I hate ESPN, but it's a harsh reality that you aren't looking at in your analysis. No ESPN = No chance for the Big East. We have zero leverage as a power broker in college football without that auto-bid

We have plenty of leverage because there's no one else on the market. We also have a team going forward in Boise State that will have qualified for one of those big bowls on several occasions in the recent past. But the key is the bidding market. We'll do substantially better than 10-12. We'll do better than the ACC deal that averages 13. If you look at our football and basketball ratings, we tend to outperform the ACC, especially in larger markets. We'll do better than 13. I think we'll get around 18 a year.