Get out your tomatoes ... | The Boneyard

Get out your tomatoes ...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pudge

Pudge

Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
6,370
Reaction Score
16,540
You can't value the Programs the way you are doing.

It's not some linear equation. The MAJOR factor I see is the fact that any one of these Programs (UConn specifically ... but also Cincinnati; and maybe others) would leave given the current environment. How do you create any value or TV watching destination if you start losing your most watchable players? You basically have your Grocery anchored shopping center with the Market and the CVS Pharmacy on month-to-month leases (UConn & Cincy). Because of that, all the other shops in the center are risky. Who can blame NBC for doing a "Structured" deal? This is NOT $17m for a 10 year commitment for all your Tiers. This is a short term - with lots of Look-ins - as Blaudschun described it.

You cannot possibly equate this to the $14m the CUSA has (mostly because ... NONE of those valuable pieces are going anywhere); nor the MWC's newly restructured deal.

Get out your tomatoes: I don't think it is a bad structure for what we are. No terms that tie us down; gives all the Football programs the ability to grow and build. And, we get great exposure whilst we are involved next year with Louisville, ND and the C-7. You simply cannot value it to comparables. Go ahead and toss some at me.
 
Pudge said:
You can't value the Programs the way you are doing.

It's not some linear equation. The MAJOR factor I see is the fact that any one of these Programs (UConn specifically ... but also Cincinnati; and maybe others) would leave given the current environment. How do you create any value or TV watching destination if you start losing your most watchable players? You basically have your Grocery anchored shopping center with the Market and the CVS Pharmacy on month-to-month leases (UConn & Cincy). Because of that, all the other shops in the center are risky. Who can blame NBC for doing a "Structured" deal? This is NOT $17m for a 10 year commitment for all your Tiers. This is a short term - with lots of Look-ins - as Blaudschun described it.

You cannot possibly equate this to the $14m the CUSA has (mostly because ... NONE of those valuable pieces are going anywhere); nor the MWC's newly restructured deal.

Get out your tomatoes: I don't think it is a bad structure for what we are. No terms that tie us down; gives all the Football programs the ability to grow and build. And, we get great exposure whilst we are involved next year with Louisville, ND and the C-7. You simply cannot value it to comparables. Go ahead and toss some at me.
Expand ...

Pudge, yes you can value the way we are because that is how our leadership is establishing the contract. There is no reason that the contract can't be structured so that if team X leaves then you reduce the payout by Y. There is no reason each team cannot be given a value within the contract, and upon their exit / entrance the contract gets amended. The fact that it hasn't been done this way doesn't mean it can't.

Also, a look-in has value when you have teams likes FSU, UNC that might bolt - it has not value to this contract and is a feel good provision in a contract. What in NBC's history has shown you a reason they will just voluntarily open their wallet?
 
where the kid from the cam newton commercial. "i'm just warming up my arm"
 
No Comparables. You don't know all the terms. That's what's implied in the Blaudschun article.

I am going to laugh all the time as many of you wait for every ACC or B1G tidbit. It's going to be a slog. And, we need to build the Program - that's the only answer.
 
Pudge said:
You can't value the Programs the way you are doing.

It's not some linear equation. The MAJOR factor I see is the fact that any one of these Programs (UConn specifically ... but also Cincinnati; and maybe others) would leave given the current environment. How do you create any value or TV watching destination if you start losing your most watchable players? You basically have your Grocery anchored shopping center with the Market and the CVS Pharmacy on month-to-month leases (UConn & Cincy). Because of that, all the other shops in the center are risky. Who can blame NBC for doing a "Structured" deal? This is NOT $17m for a 10 year commitment for all your Tiers. This is a short term - with lots of Look-ins - as Blaudschun described it.

You cannot possibly equate this to the $14m the CUSA has (mostly because ... NONE of those valuable pieces are going anywhere); nor the MWC's newly restructured deal.

Get out your tomatoes: I don't think it is a bad structure for what we are. No terms that tie us down; gives all the Football programs the ability to grow and build. And, we get great exposure whilst we are involved next year with Louisville, ND and the C-7. You simply cannot value it to comparables. Go ahead and toss some at me.
Expand ...

We didn't move to Conference USA. They moved to us.

And now we are a strip mall.
 
Not sure how looks in make a ton of sense on that deal. If it was higher and contained a lot of look ins because UConn, Cincy and USF might bail that would be a positive. What good is a look-in on a deal where things are almost certain to never get better?
 
Enticed? I think we are the ones trying to attract a suitor, not the other way around. I guess that was a polite way of saying were gone at the first opportunity.
 
ZooCougar said:
Enticed? I think we are the ones trying to attract a suitor, not the other way around. I guess that was a polite way of saying were gone at the first opportunity.
Expand ...

Polite? I thought it was pretty sarcastic, or at best, sardonic.
 
lol "enticed". since the nbc contract came out, everyone all of a sudden is willing to hint at whats really going on from JC to espn.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
300
Guests online
3,461
Total visitors
3,761
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
164,527
Messages
4,400,076
Members
10,214
Latest member
illini2013


.
..
Top Bottom