ACC Net Oddity | Page 3 | The Boneyard

ACC Net Oddity

TerryD said:
From the AT&T forum regarding the ACC Network and DirecTV:

Which package has ACCN?
  • Available with CHOICE and above packages in the following states: Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Virginia.
  • Other areas: Available with SPORTS PACK.
It costs $13.95 a month for the Sports Pack
Expand ...

Hahahahaha - I'd be royally pissed if i lived outside the 95 corridor in MA and paid for this crap. I'd be interested in how much the RSN fee goes up.
 
TerryD said:
From the AT&T forum regarding the ACC Network and DirecTV:

Which package has ACCN?
  • Available with CHOICE and above packages in the following states: Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Virginia.
  • Other areas: Available with SPORTS PACK.
It costs $13.95 a month for the Sports Pack
Expand ...

Best example so far - an SU fan living in NJ. $13 / month for you. LOL. This "network" is a disaster.
 
Dean Wormer said:
Reading is fundamental. “IF we were in their position”....
Maybe I’m just not as irrationally fanatical as to totally lose perspective on this, so I’ll plead mea culpa. Time will tell if this ACCN will be a bust or not. But to suggest that after 24 hours the thing is a “joke” or failure, is being immature, irrational, and just plain dumb.
Expand ...
I tend to carry grudges. I think the ACCN will succeed as they have CT taxpayers dollars helping to fund them.
 
Not to stoke a fire, but...

The ACCN's stupid carriage actually helps any realignment case, because it shrinks the barrier to entry.

If the ACC adds a state, that state immediately goes from, essentially no revenue, to full-on. It's much more drastic than the other networks, because they get at least *something* from a national audience.
 
.-.
pepband99 said:
I'm a DBS/OTA enthusiast and a former staff member at one of the leading sites on the subject.
Expand ...
Satelliteguys by chance? Used to frequent it years ago.
 


>>Georgia Tech completed its $10 million renovation in April of a building adjacent to the McCamish Pavilion basketball arena as a video operations center, while Virginia Tech had $10 million to set up its facility in the end zone of football’s Lane Stadium.

Louisville spent $8 million on its facility that was a former home to university offices in a one-time waterbed warehouse within walking distance of campus and fiber-connected to athletics venues, while Clemson spent about $7.5 million in the McFadden Building once home to football and other athletics offices.

North Carolina State spent nearly $7 million to create space in the Murphy Center football building at Carter-Finley Stadium, incorporating a largely unused racquetball court requested by former coach Chuck Amato when Murphy opened. The court’s hardwood floor is visible now in offices and rooms housing computer equipment for the network project.<<

ROI appears there @ this point for ACC but translate those costs to AAC campuses.
 
huskymedic said:
ROI appears there @ this point for ACC but translate those costs to AAC campuses.
Expand ...
This. The bulk of the talk about AAC vs. the NBE avoided production infrastructure issue. The move makes fiscal sense without considering that capital outlay. It makes even more when you do consider it.
 
CL82 said:
This. The bulk of the talk about AAC vs. the NBE avoided production infrastructure issue. The move makes fiscal sense without considering that capital outlay. It makes even more when you do consider it.
Expand ...
Every school that wants to have high quality broadcasts of their games in the future will have to build these types of facilities. Don't believe the crap that production costs and facilities were a factor for leaving the AAC because UConn will face these costs in the future. They just deferred them for a few years moving to the BE.
 
UConnJim said:
Every school that wants to have high quality broadcasts of their games in the future will have to build these types of facilities. Don't believe the crap that production costs and facilities were a factor for leaving the AAC because UConn will face these costs in the future. They just deferred them for a few years moving to the BE.
Expand ...
Disagree. Paying them in 2020 for a contract that gives them dramatically reduced visibility and pays about $5M made no fiscal sense whatsoever.
 
.-.
CL82 said:
Disagree. Paying them in 2020 for a contract that gives them dramatically reduced visibility and pays about $5M made no fiscal sense e whatsoever.
Expand ...
I agree that the contract wasn’t lucrative enough for UConn to stay in the AAC, but my point is UConn will face the production cost and facility issue in the future anyway.
 
UConnJim said:
I agree that the contract wasn’t lucrative enough for UConn to stay in the AAC, but my point is UConn will face the production cost and facility issue in the future anyway.
Expand ...
Maybe but spending $15M to get a return of $35M/yr over a longer makes sense. Spending $15M of get what works out to maybe $2M net makes considerably less sense.
 
CL82 said:
Maybe but spending $15M to get a return of $35M/yr over a longer makes sense. Spending $15M of get what works out to maybe $2M net makes considerably less sense.
Expand ...
Unfortunately, streaming and spending on production costs and facilities is where college sports is going, especially for smaller sports. Down the road, UConn will have a choice, spend the money or have fewer games available for viewing, but that will impact the teams. For example, if the ACC is streaming all BC men's soccer games and UConn is not streaming their men's soccer games, who will have the recruiting advantage?

UConn is hoping to make more money by going independent in football and to the BE is most other sports. I get it and support it. But, UConn can't ignore the shift that is happening in the broadcast of sports.
 
.-.
pepband99 said:
Not to stoke a fire, but...

The ACCN's stupid carriage actually helps any realignment case, because it shrinks the barrier to entry.

If the ACC adds a state, that state immediately goes from, essentially no revenue, to full-on. It's much more drastic than the other networks, because they get at least *something* from a national audience.
Expand ...
Serious question; How does the deal announced today with Dish and Sling Tv, change the prospects for this network being a success, IYO? They’re calling it the 2nd best launch ever, behind the SECN.
 
Dean Wormer said:
Serious question; How does the deal announced today with Dish and Sling Tv, change the prospects for this network being a success, IYO? They’re calling it the 2nd best launch ever, behind the SECN.
Expand ...

It definitely helps, but the questions aren't really about launch - it's about placement. When someone living in NJ, surrounded by ACC states, has to pay $14 / month extra, because of the ACCN basically being an RSN, it's bad.
 
If you are an FSU fan you might not want to be able to find your team on cable.

This season is off to a start that looks like more of the same. Losing. In this weekend’s case, to a former 1-AA champ with a true freshman quarterback. At home.

Well, at least there’s basketball season. Oops, unless you are the DePaul of the ACC.
 
I live in Northern Virginia -- UVa and VaTech turf -- and have Comcast. No ACCN. As far as I can tell not even an option to add it via a sports package.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
167,635
Messages
4,530,965
Members
10,404
Latest member
RussellHall


Top Bottom