ACC's Tier 3 rights

[TuxedoYoda]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissm...ghts-and-why-theyre-killing-the-conference/2/

Best part:

What’s more, this isn’t the first time that ACC Commissioner John Swofford has left media rights money on the table. When the ACC signed its previous ESPN contract a few years ago, Swofford insisted on maintaining a partnership with syndicator Raycom Sports, possibly​

​

giving away increased media rights revenue​

in the process:​

Swofford let the strongest bidders, ESPN and Fox, know that he wanted to include Raycom, which went into the talks as a partner to both networks, rather than trying to bid against their deeper pockets.​

The ACC television rights that Raycom secured are credited with keeping the syndicator alive: “company executives acknowledged that keeping a piece of the ACC’s business was the only way the small, regional TV syndicator and production company could stay relevant.” Raycom pays $50 million annually in a sublicense agreement with ESPN; ACC schools see none of that money.​

It’s rather surprising that a conference would so willingly take less TV money – the core source of revenue in collegiate athletics – just to keep a broadcast company from folding. There are, of course, plenty of conspiracy theories to explain Swofford’s irrational decision. Raycom Sports is based in North Carolina, and the ACC is often accused of favoring its four NC schools. Then there’s Swofford’s son, Chad Swofford, who is the​

​

Senior Director of New Media and Business Development​

​

at Raycom Sports (he was also​

​

employed by Boston College athletics​

​

when the school received an invite from the ACC).​

​

 

[mattp]

interesting. so the ACC may be having all of this trouble as a result of good old fashioned nepotism? they wouldn't be the first organization to be sunk by it.

now if i'm reading this correctly, does Raycom pay ESPN 50 mil/year for their 3rd tier rights, so ESPN in effect gets to sell the ACC's 3rd tier rights? that means ESPN is in essence only paying about $105 m/year for the first and second(155m-50m), which would value the 3rd(50m) to be on par with the first and second(105m combined). these numbers either don't seem right at all, or justify why FSU would be looking elsewhere.

 

[RS9999X]

interesting. so the ACC may be having all of this trouble as a result of good old fashioned nepotism? they wouldn't be the first organization to be sunk by it.

now if i'm reading this correctly, does Raycom pay ESPN 50 mil/year for their 3rd tier rights, so ESPN in effect gets to sell the ACC's 3rd tier rights? that means ESPN is in essence only paying about $105 m/year for the first and second(155m-50m), which would value the 3rd(50m) to be on par with the first and second(105m combined). these numbers either don't seem right at all, or justify why FSU would be looking elsewhere.

They are correct. Raycom pays each team nearly $5 mil a team for the Tier 3 Regional Television ad to manage the ACC Network site. Corporate Conference support, and to market the digital replay rights. The 2010 deal was for $4.2 mil a team: the 2012 number os closer to $5 mil per team.

Those are not bad numbers for the Big 12: with the exception of Oklahoma and Texas most of the Big 12 would be happy with that and have the conference office handle it

The real issue is the Tier I and II money which is about $12.3 ml a team per year compared to the Big12 claims of $20 mil plus they get their Tier 3 that is at least equal to the ACCs $4.75 mil a team.

I think Forbes is looking at it wrong. The Tier 3 is acceptable . I puled down the Raycom foorball games last year, Here's the joke and the joke i s not on ESPN:

8 Duke games (out of 27 Raycom games) and 1 FSU.
2 Miami and 2 Clemson (Includung their Duke games).
Wake and Maryland get 6 games each (including their Duke games), etc.
What is that dreck content worth?
The ACC Duke football game of the week?
2 Virgina Tech games (Both are Div II games against Southern Hairdressing Schools)

The real issue is the ABC part of the contract . The ABC ACC Game of the week? When hell freezes over. More like the ESPN2 Friday Holiday Week Football at Happy Hour for the Desperate and Lonely Carrier Domers.

 

[auggie22]

This bit of news is almost beyond belief. Now I get all of the Maryland message board chatter that spits venom on Raycom, Bojangles and every other bit of Carolina culture.

 

[The Funster]

Nothing new in the article until you get to the Swofford connection and that connection will be problematic going forward. It's just one more situation that makes one question Swofford's fitness to run a major conference.

 

[RS9999X]

Nothing new in the article until you get to the Swofford connection and that connection will be problematic going forward. It's just one more situation that makes one question Swofford's fitness to run a major conference.

If you go back 2 years ago to May 2010 the Swofford/Raycom connection was well known. When the ACC signed in 2010 and the contract was considered a coup for the ACC whe it doubled revenues the Swofford connection was considered part of the ACC's brilliance. As was the Randy Edsall hiring at Maryland. Brilliant!


Chad Swofford

Senior Director, New Media and Business Development

Joined Raycom in 2007 as Manager of ACC Marketing and was named Director of New Media & Marketing in 2009. He currently oversees all web and mobile initiatives for Raycom and the ACC Network, in addition to managing the ACC Digital Network. He is a graduate of the University of North Carolina and is an alumnus of Ohio University’s School of Sports Management graduate program. He worked at Boston College prior to joining Raycom

 

[RS9999X]

If you ask FSU fans where their problems are they will tell you: Chad Swofford.

There are saner heads at FSU but the typical fanboy is the typical helmet head. FSU = good; Not FSU = bad. The sane heads will tell you the FSU AD sucks and the on-field performance sucked by FSU standards. FSU has opportunities within the contract to improve their Tier 3 but they really don't have any content left to sell. IMG has the coaches show and no one's paying $10 mil for FSU women's basketball. The fact is FSU isn't Ohio State or Texas and isn't mentioned in that top tier any more.

 

[TuxedoYoda]

Not only will Clemson & FSU not have to pay an exit fee from the ACC because of Swofford's shenanigans but they are both probably entitled to damages. They will be the first 2 schools to make money when they lave a conference.

 

[The Funster]

Damages? Based on what?

 

[mattp]

They are correct. Raycom pays each team nearly $5 mil a team for the Tier 3 Regional Television ad to manage the ACC Network site. Corporate Conference support, and to market the digital replay rights. The 2010 deal was for $4.2 mil a team: the 2012 number os closer to $5 mil per team.

The real issue is the Tier I and II money which is about $12.3 ml a team per year compared to the Big12 claims of $20 mil plus they get their Tier 3 that is at least equal to the ACCs $4.75 mil a team.

I think Forbes is looking at it wrong. The Tier 3 is acceptable . I puled down the Raycom foorball games last year, Here's the joke and the joke i s not on ESPN:
.

the Tier 3 isn't acceptable b/c it isn't paid to the ACC, but to ESPN according to how i read this. so really ESPN pays each ACC team 12.3m and then ESPN gets reimbursed 5m/team by Raycom. if Raycom were paying the 5m to the ACC teams, they'd add up to 17.3m which would put them within spitting distance of the top leagues, but according to this, that's not the case.

 

[RS9999X]

the Tier 3 isn't acceptable b/c it isn't paid to the ACC, but to ESPN according to how i read this. so really ESPN pays each ACC team 12.3m and then ESPN gets reimbursed 5m/team by Raycom

Every one of the schools had an opportunity to break the contracts apart to market an ACC Network. They agreed on the RayCom/ESPN structure. RayCom owned the ACC before 2010. The relationship isn't new. What is new is the way rights are legally handled to ease the flow fo programs between ESPN and Raycom and the digital world for reruns and streaing at the ACC site.

The schools weren't blind-sided or surprised. Sports Consultatns were involved. University Presidents involved. FSU had plenty of opportunity to create an FSU Network to make it viable. They still have plenty of opportunity to create an FSU Network. No carrier wants it. They don't want the ACC Network. The ACC Network is like UConn's Channel or SNY agreement/ Hell, they don't want the Longhorn Network either.

The real problem is the ACC ratings are not great They are the 5th wheel. The top team in the 5th wheel has fans and boosters who want out of the ACC. That's the real issue. Greener Pastures.

 

[TuxedoYoda]

Damages? Based on what?

The ACC getting suckered into a revenue structure that is substantially less than market value so that the ACC Commissioner can save the company who is employing his son in a well paying position.

 

[RS9999X]

The ACC getting suckered into a revenue structure that is substantially less than market value so that the ACC Commissioner can save the company who is employing his son in a well paying position.

What market value? Have you seen the ratings of the ACC Conference game and Orange Bowl? ESPN has . IF FSU and Clemson leave ESPN will pass the ACC CCG down to RayCom rather than ruin its good name

 

[The Funster]

The ACC getting suckered into a revenue structure that is substantially less than market value so that the ACC Commissioner can save the company who is employing his son in a well paying position.

If they knew his son was in that position and signed the agreement knowing the Raycom provisions then how did they get suckered? Also, how is the deal less than market value? Look, I don't like Swofford. I thought he jumped the gun when he raided the BE this last time and I think he panders to Tobacco Road and covered his son's ass but I don't think he suckered anyone and there are no damages that can be had for that deal. However, the only thing preventing Swofford from being the 6th best conference commissioner was that fact that Marinatto was running the BE.

 

[observer]

What market value? Have you seen the ratings of the ACC Conference game and Orange Bowl? ESPN has . IF FSU and Clemson leave ESPN will pass the ACC CCG down to RayCom rather than ruin its good name

You mean these viewership ratings:

Here are the average football viewership totals by conference according to Nielsen:

1. SEC – 4,447,000
2. Big Ten – 3,267,000
3. ACC – 2,650,000
4. Big 12 – 2,347,000
5. Pac-12 – 2,108,000
6. Big East – 1,884,000

 

[Carl Spackler]

Raycom research into sports marketing is the origin of the 16 team superconference concept. Raycom had broadcasting arrangements in the early 1990's with three separate conferences that all ceased existing by the mid 1990s (Metro, Big 8, and Southwest) and the Big 10, and ACC. They lost the Big 10 too. They have had a death grip on the ACC since.

 

[Carl Spackler]

FYI - In summer 1990, there was a meeting in Dallas of the AD's of the following 1-A football playing schools - most of which were independants, and a handful in the Metro conference - discussing the formation of a 16 team conference.
Cincinatti
Florida State
Louisville
Memphis
South Carolina
Southern Miss
Tulane
Virginia Tech
Boston College
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
Rutgers
Temple
West Virginia
Miami
East Carolina

The big east conference formed it's football league in spring 1991, got it's seat at the bowl alliance table, which would eventually become the BCS, and took the place of this proposed conference in the bowl alliance, and began play formally in 1992.

 

[WallStreetHusky]

You mean these viewership ratings:

Here are the average football viewership totals by conference according to Nielsen:

1. SEC – 4,447,000
2. Big Ten – 3,267,000
3. ACC – 2,650,000
4. Big 12 – 2,347,000
5. Pac-12 – 2,108,000
6. Big East – 1,884,000

Wrong once again Obs, I believe RS is talking about these ratings:

http://weblogs.dailypress.com/sports/teelblog/2011/01/more_low_orange_bowl_ratings_f.html

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2011/12/ratings-acc-pac-12-and-big-ten-championship-overnights/

 

[WallStreetHusky]

Sorry, here is the most recent Orange Bowl ratings, a much better story for the ACC....

http://content.usatoday.com/communi...pns-orange-bowl-gets-lowest-bcs-rating-ever/1

Anyone out there in the 'Yard want to explain to Obs what a "trend" means?

Also, before anyone (Obs!) gets hysterical about how cable gets lower ratings than broadcast, lets remember that we are talking about ESPN here, they are available in over 100,000,000 households country wide, very close to the penetration that the networks have.

 

[observer]

Sorry, here is the most recent Orange Bowl ratings, a much better story for the ACC....

http://content.usatoday.com/communi...pns-orange-bowl-gets-lowest-bcs-rating-ever/1

Anyone out there in the 'Yard want to explain to Obs what a "trend" means?

Also, before anyone (Obs!) gets hysterical about how cable gets lower ratings than broadcast, lets remember that we are talking about ESPN here, they are available in over 100,000,000 households country wide, very close to the penetration that the networks have.

ROTFLMAO. Can anyone say 'selective" as in let's pick the most minute statistics and then harumph that those somehow prove anything?

Wow, maybe I should look for the TV ratings for Providence-Seton Hall hoops and then use that to argue that the BE basketball ratings are lousy.

 

[WallStreetHusky]

ROTFLMAO. Can anyone say 'selective" as in let's pick the most minute statistics and then harumph that those somehow prove anything?

Wow, maybe I should look for the TV ratings for Providence-Seton Hall hoops and then use that to argue that the BE basketball ratings are lousy.

Minute stats? Like how the ACC owns the worst conference championship ratings and that they have turned the Orange Bowl so off by their crappy teams that no one watches that the OB will run from them the minute their contract is over? It is exactly those minute stats that are the reasons why the ACC is in the position they are in.....oh, I forgot, all that is the result of nefarious Internet posters. I guess their crappy TV contract relative to the Big 4 isnt proof of those minute stats either.

Do you work for Raycom and have a last name of Swofford?????

 

[pj]

You mean these viewership ratings:

Here are the average football viewership totals by conference according to Nielsen:

1. SEC – 4,447,000
2. Big Ten – 3,267,000
3. ACC – 2,650,000
4. Big 12 – 2,347,000
5. Pac-12 – 2,108,000
6. Big East – 1,884,000

Cool. On a per-team basis, the Big East beats the Pac-12 and Big 12. I assume that means we'll get $20 mn a year per team if we can keep the band together ... oops.

 

[observer]

Minute stats? Like how the ACC owns the worst conference championship ratings and that they have turned the Orange Bowl so off by their crappy teams that no one watches that the OB will run from them the minute their contract is over? It is exactly those minute stats that are the reasons why the ACC is in the position they are in.....oh, I forgot, all that is the result of nefarious Internet posters. I guess their crappy TV contract relative to the Big 4 isnt proof of those minute stats either.

Do you work for Raycom and have a last name of Swofford?????

Making the same silly argument over and over again does not make it less silly. OK, so the ACC CCG has had some poor ratings. I guess in a silly mind that negates the ratings they have had in dozens of games through the whole season. Of cousrse it does. Why did I ever think otherwise. One game means everything; Nielsen is putting an asterisk on the TV ratings for the ACC as we speak.

As far as the Orange Bowl the last time I looked there were two teams playing but of course the low ratings are solely the fault of the ACC team. I mean when Kansas played there a few years ago everyone in the US stopped what they were doing for a few hours to watch the Jayhawks just like they do every Saturday when KU is playing. Ditto when those ratings magnets from the BE, Louisville, Cincinnati and WVU were in the game.

 

[docsu]

Frankly I'm shocked. SHOCKED. That a game that ended with a final score of 70-33 got low ratings.