New AAC ESPN Contract Value Poll | Page 2 | The Boneyard

New AAC ESPN Contract Value Poll

What will be the per school annual value of the purported new AAC deal with ESPN

  • Slightly less than we are getting now. ($1M - $2M)

  • About what we are getting now ($2M)

  • Well it's a good deal so ... uh twice what we are getting now. ($3M-$4M)

  • >$4M but < $10M

  • $10M

  • >$10M but < $15M

  • SEC money

Results are only viewable after voting.
Guapo said:
I’m interested in @Dooley ’s prediction for the TV deal
Expand ...

My guess: $9M-$10M/yr per school. It'll definitely be north of what the Big East schools make, that's for sure. Football is still king - below average NCAAF games still outdraw the majority of NCAAB regular season games. And to be honest, all of our games are considered well below average. :(
 
.-.
Biggest problem with the AAC contract is that there really is only one buyer for the content.

There’s no one in the open market. Fox isn’t looking for content, the streaming services can’t do anything with it and the networks will show infomercials on weekend afternoons rather than increase their costs these days.

Realistically, it’s just ESPN bidding a number that is as low as they can get away with while still maintaining the conference as a somewhat viable provider of content for their platform. Expect plenty of + games in our future.
 
Is there anyway we can hang onto of our non-conf games for SNY / CBS or do all the games remain under espn control to do with as they wish?
 
Fishy said:
Biggest problem with the AAC contract is that there really is only one buyer for the content.

There’s no one in the open market. Fox isn’t looking for content, the streaming services can’t do anything with it and the networks will show infomercials on weekend afternoons rather than increase their costs these days.

Realistically, it’s just ESPN bidding a number that is as low as they can get away with while still maintaining the conference as a somewhat viable provider of content for their platform. Expect plenty of + games in our future.
Expand ...

Yep. The second most viable partner is Stadium. Which you can find on your OTA antennae as the third or fourth sub-station on your local Sinclair affiliate.

In Connecticut it’s Channel 20.4 out of Waterbury.

They have Brett McMurphy writing and have rights to MWC, WCC and the Patriot.

If you can’t get them OTA download the Pluto TV app to watch for free.
 
Remember that Navy resigned with CBS for nothing in lieu of being part of this transaction. If it turns out it’s 10 mil lol then we’ll see some court martials
 
.-.
ESPN will be careful about putting content on ESPN+. Why? They have to maintain the premium pricing of the current ESPN channels. What they want to do is put a couple of games per team on ESPN+ (as well as other non-game content) to entice fans to subscribe to both the ESPN channels and ESPN+ to increase revenues during a period of declining subscribers.

I would imagine that current games being only shown on ESPN3 will all go to ESPN+. Thus, if you are an avid fan, you will subscribe to ESPN+. For UConn, maybe a couple of football games and a handful of men's basketball games.
 
whaler11 said:
I hate to break it y’all. There is no market.

This is a one bidder situation - I can’t even kill Aresco for it - there just isn’t another viable partner than ESPN.

Take it to market lol.
Expand ...

This is not really true. The reality of media in 2019 is that the cable companies are losing subscribers to streaming services like Hulu, YouTube, etc. In 10 years I don’t think the cable tv market will look anything like what it is today. If Aresco was smart he went to streaming services like Hulu and YouTube or even someone like Amazon and kicked the tires only if to drive the price up. If you don’t think this scares the hell out of ESPN, think again. Amazon and some of these other companies can throw way more money at content than ESPN can. And yes I realize the argument that ESPN still provides the best exposure to the conference and they have their own streaming service. I don’t think ESPN wants to open the floodgates or even let these other streaming services taste the product, so here’s hoping Aresco negotiated well and bumped up the price. If you’re ESPN you also have to realize that there are 3-4 schools in the AAC that are worth $30 M/year if the conference breaks up and they get pulled into P5 conferences. I would imagine they have to realize they’re saving $$ by locking the conference in to a mediocre media deal (like I said I think it’ll be between $10-14M/ year per school) vs. paying more for just a fraction of the schools. My point is, it’s in ESPN’s best interest to keep the AAC together vs. having it picked apart. The only way that happens is with a good enough media deal that teams will sign a GOR.
 
.-.
Disney owns Hulu...

And is pumping major money into Disney company streaming.

Moreover...Disney owns content.

No matter how that content is transmitted, the content owner gets paid.

Yes...more competition to bid up content is good for the universities, but ESPN is, and I think will remain, the primary sports televiser.
 
Hurleyman216 said:
This is not really true. The reality of media in 2019 is that the cable companies are losing subscribers to streaming services like Hulu, YouTube, etc. In 10 years I don’t think the cable tv market will look anything like what it is today. If Aresco was smart he went to streaming services like Hulu and YouTube or even someone like Amazon and kicked the tires only if to drive the price up. If you don’t think this scares the hell out of ESPN, think again. Amazon and some of these other companies can throw way more money at content than ESPN can. And yes I realize the argument that ESPN still provides the best exposure to the conference and they have their own streaming service. I don’t think ESPN wants to open the floodgates or even let these other streaming services taste the product, so here’s hoping Aresco negotiated well and bumped up the price. If you’re ESPN you also have to realize that there are 3-4 schools in the AAC that are worth $30 M/year if the conference breaks up and they get pulled into P5 conferences. I would imagine they have to realize they’re saving $$ by locking the conference in to a mediocre media deal (like I said I think it’ll be between $10-14M/ year per school) vs. paying more for just a fraction of the schools. My point is, it’s in ESPN’s best interest to keep the AAC together vs. having it picked apart. The only way that happens is with a good enough media deal that teams will sign a GOR.
Expand ...

and which of those companies is going to invest the tens of millions of dollars required to build out a live sports production arm so they can own the rights to tulane and memphis?

maybe someday they will be players but they clearly aren’t today. they have never done anything but acquire streaming rights to things produced by others

when people start throwing around $10 million a team... it’s just going to lead to a hilarious set of meltdowns next week

the idea that the p5 are going to expand with these teams - those days are over. nobody is going to add more mouths to feed until they figure out how the revenue to replace carriage fees gets generated.
 
whaler11 said:
I hate to break it y’all. There is no market.

This is a one bidder situation - I can’t even kill Aresco for it - there just isn’t another viable partner than ESPN.

Take it to market lol.
Expand ...

Why would you kill Aresco for ‘it’. ESPN was always the preferred partner.

This was a situation where the Presidents were pleased with the offer. Speculation beyond that is moot.

 
StunningSteve said:
Why would you kill Aresco for ‘it’. ESPN was always the preferred partner.

This was a situation where the Presidents were pleased with the offer. Speculation beyond that is moot.

Expand ...


yes mrs aresco weve seen the tweet like that matters at all
 
whaler11 said:
yes mrs aresco weve seen the tweet like that matters at all
Expand ...

I just don’t see the relevance of what other offers would’ve been out there if they went beyond the exclusive negotiating window.
The point of the window is to broker the best deal for the parties involved. Both parties are compelled knowing what may or may not be on the other side of that.
They obviously got the offer they liked.
 
.-.
StunningSteve said:
I just don’t see the relevance of what other offers would’ve been out there if they went beyond the exclusive negotiating window.
The point of the window is to broker the best deal for the parties involved. Both parties are compelled knowing what may or may not be on the other side of that.
Expand ...

this completly contradicts itself
 
whaler11 said:
and which of those companies is going to invest the tens of millions of dollars required to build out a live sports production arm so they can own the rights to tulane and memphis?

maybe someday they will be players but they clearly aren’t today. they have never done anything but acquire streaming rights to things produced by others

when people start throwing around $10 million a team... it’s just going to lead to a hilarious set of meltdowns next week

the idea that the p5 are going to expand with these teams - those days are over. nobody is going to add more mouths to feed until they figure out how the revenue to replace carriage fees gets generated.
Expand ...

Saying that these companies haven’t done this before so won’t do it in the future is just ignorant. 5 years ago these streaming services weren’t creating their own content, now they are. Some of the best content is now original content created by Amazon and Netflix. They aren’t investing millions, they’re investing billions. They very much have the resources to get into sports and at some point they will. Companies like Amazon have so much $$ they don’t even know what to do with it. They will eventually get into the game and when they do ESPN might be in trouble. Obviously we signed a deal with ESPN, but if you think Aresco didn’t leverage the future of sports media to get a higher price then you’re fooling yourself. ESPN is still king as of 2019 (just like MTV was king in 1995). The times are changing so buckle up. Might be a shocking next 10 years for people like yourself who can’t see past what might happen tomorrow.
 
Hurleyman216 said:
Saying that these companies haven’t done this before so won’t do it in the future is just ignorant. 5 years ago these streaming services weren’t creating their own content, now they are. Some of the best content is now original content created by Amazon and Netflix. They aren’t investing millions, they’re investing billions. They very much have the resources to get into sports and at some point they will. Companies like Amazon have so much $$ they don’t even know what to do with it. They will eventually get into the game and when they do ESPN might be in trouble. Obviously we signed a deal with ESPN, but if you think Aresco didn’t leverage the future of sports media to get a higher price then you’re fooling yourself. ESPN is still king as of 2019 (just like MTV was king in 1995). The times are changing so buckle up. Might be a shocking next 10 years for people like yourself who can’t see past what might happen tomorrow.
Expand ...

lol i didnt say it wasnt going to happen. i said they aint gonna kick it off with second rate college sports. maybe espn is afraid amazon is going to swoop in and steal the american... buy if they or others were legitimate players why would they not leave exclusive window?

i dont think much of aresco but he doesnt seem quite that bad

i love when the by flips to what i want to be true is true no matter the complete lack of evidence
 
whaler11 said:
lol i didnt say it wasnt going to happen. i said they aint gonna kick it off with second rate college sports. maybe espn is afraid amazon is going to swoop in and steal the american... buy if they or others were legitimate players why would they not leave exclusive window?

i dont think much of aresco but he doesnt seem quite that bad

i love when the by flips to what i want to be true is true no matter the complete lack of evidence
Expand ...

I think you missed my point. I agree that the AAC is a 2nd rate conference, but it’s exactly the type of flier a streaming media company may take before going all in on a conference like the ACC or SEC. Think of the American as a gateway drug. All Aresco has to do is dangle that carrot that we’re exploring options with Amazon, etc. ESPN should be smart enough to know that once the floodgates open they’re in serious trouble.

You clearly aren’t well-versed in contract negotiations. I sure hope Aresco is a bit more savvy than some of our BY posters.
 
whaler11 said:
lol i didnt say it wasnt going to happen. i said they aint gonna kick it off with second rate college sports. maybe espn is afraid amazon is going to swoop in and steal the american... buy if they or others were legitimate players why would they not leave exclusive window?

i dont think much of aresco but he doesnt seem quite that bad

i love when the by flips to what i want to be true is true no matter the complete lack of evidence
Expand ...

LOL. The Presidents know that there is innate value in being on the WWL. They struck the deal they wanted and used the window like it was meant to be used.
Whether it’s 2nd rate or not, it is about to take a couple steps up my friend.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,263
Messages
4,560,456
Members
10,452
Latest member
WashingtonH


Top Bottom