Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Drew, post: 2243432, member: 3723"] reading [URL='http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2017/06/26/Media/ESPN-main.aspx']this article[/URL], this section below most interested me regarding the future of the AAC TV deal: [I]To keep these competitors at bay, ESPN decided to, as Skipper put it, build a deeper moat. And that was when rights really began to get pricey. In the spring of 2011, months before ESPN completed its NFL deal, NBC thought it had a deal with the Pac-10 worth $225 million per year. NBC already carried Notre Dame football, and the deal would have given the network’s sports channel a foothold in the college marketplace. Before NBC and the Pac-10 signed their contract, Skipper, who ran ESPN’s programming group at the time, called Fox Sports’ Randy Freer and came up with a unique and rarely seen bid — a combined offer of $250 million per year. The Pac-10 ended up spurning NBC and signed a deal with ESPN and Fox. A year later, ESPN beat NBC Sports to the punch again — this time with MLB. While NBC Sports executives were in London for the Olympics, ESPN and MLB executives met privately to cement a deal that NBC wanted. Skipper, who had become ESPN’s president by then, agreed to double the annual rights fee, from $350 million per year to $700 million. The huge increase came without significant postseason games — ESPN has the rights to one wild-card game. In fact, MLB officials were surprised that ESPN didn’t push harder for postseason rights. But ESPN executives said postseason baseball did not work for its fall schedule because it was filled with college football, which generally brings in higher ratings. Even though national MLB ratings had been dropping significantly leading up to the deal, Skipper again saw an opportunity to keep a marquee package away from a competitor. Plus, he liked the sheer number of hours MLB provided, especially in the summer months. The deals kept adding up. In May 2013, it signed an 11-year, $825 million deal to take the U.S. Tennis Association’s U.S. Open from CBS. In April 2014, ESPN agreed to pay $100 million for one NFL wild-card playoff game. In May 2014, it committed at least $37.5 million per year for Major League Soccer (up dramatically from its previous annual payout of $8 million per year). But it wasn’t just about sports rights where ESPN committed the cash. The network’s reaction to competition also led to significant pay increases for several on-air personalities — paying some studio hosts well into seven figures — to keep them from going to Fox Sports 1 or NBC Sports Network. ESPN insiders acknowledge those deals overvalued some of their on-air personalities and played a big part in ESPN’s decision to lay off more than 100 hosts, analysts and reporters earlier this spring.[/I] 1. Will ESPN continue to "build a deeper moat" despite their declining subscriber base? The article notes that even without as many traditional cable subscriptions, the value of sports rights might not decrease in the future. Will ESPN continue to pay more than necessary to keep the rights they feel are so important to their network? If so, does the AAC benefit from this style of negotiating/management? 2. Its interesting to see that NBC has tried on numerous occasions now to grow their portfolio of sports broadcasting rights. They put in unsuccessful bids for the AAC, PAC 12, and MLB. Will NBC be a player in the next AAC tv deal, especially since the ESPN "right to match" clause is gone? Getting 2-3 AAC games a week on NBC, say we get 2 slots of Friday night, 12ET and a 730/8ET slot on Saturdays, would be a major major accomplishment. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach