Non-Key Tweets

[RSTuthill]

If that’s the case then we should just start calling you Rip Van Winkle.

There is a bridge across the Hudson below Albany with that name.

 

[Drew]

Still dont see how PE makes money without absolutely gorking the fans in ways colleges dont have the leverage to do. For instance, ending students tickets or putting them up to an auction

If I had to guess (and its purely a guess) - the play essentially is:

Buy equity into league with some upside language around future league revenues (likely need an extended hold period to realize gains)

Finance expansion (in Big 12’s instance, add Clemson/FSU or something similar) or other similar initiative (pay $ to SEC/B1G teams for them to play on the road at Big 12 teams?) to increase media rights deal payout

Potential to add other “events” to conference schedules (mid-year conference tournament at MSG?) that would give them additional revenue streams. Maybe they create a separate media function or buy/leverage a streaming service for exclusive rights to showcase Big 12 games and other content?

Option to sell equity at some pre-determined rate back to the conference they buy into (or another buyer) after the hold period (typically 3-7 years)

Regardless, traditional PE investment models don’t make a ton of sense for college sports given their return requirements, traditional hold periods, and how they make money from deals. If you’re going to fund the Big 12 buying FSU and Clemson as an example, they can’t even join the league until 5 years from now, which more or less takes up the entirety of a traditional hold period before they’d exit. I just don’t see how it makes a ton of sense

 

[RSTuthill]

If I had to guess (and its purely a guess) - the play essentially is:

Buy equity into league with some upside language around future league revenues (likely need an extended hold period to realize gains)

Finance expansion (in Big 12’s instance, add Clemson/FSU or something similar) or other similar initiative (pay $ to SEC/B1G teams for them to play on the road at Big 12 teams?) to increase media rights deal payout

Potential to add other “events” to conference schedules (mid-year conference tournament at MSG?) that would give them additional revenue streams. Maybe they create a separate media function or buy/leverage a streaming service for exclusive rights to showcase Big 12 games and other content?

Option to sell equity at some pre-determined rate back to the conference they buy into (or another buyer) after the hold period (typically 3-7 years)

Regardless, traditional PE investment models don’t make a ton of sense for college sports given their return requirements, traditional hold periods, and how they make money from deals. If you’re going to fund the Big 12 buying FSU and Clemson as an example, they can’t even join the league until 5 years from now, which more or less takes up the entirety of a traditional hold period before they’d exit. I just don’t see how it makes a ton of sense

I was out in LA last week and the TV sports news personalities there are already talking about a P2 as if it was a done deal. I suspect that if that happens that only a few B12 and ACC are pulled into that.

Headed back to my nap now.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Still dont see how PE makes money without absolutely gorking the fans in ways colleges dont have the leverage to do. For instance, ending students tickets or putting them up to an auction

When all is said and done, if PE gets involved they'll end up bending the fans, the schools and anyone else with any interest in the games over and have their way with them.

I don't get why some of these schools think it won't happen to them but it will.

They'll be seduced by the idea of a massive amount of cash thrown their way and fall for a sales pitch on how the return to the PE firm will be based on revenue increases. What they'll gloss over will be preferred returns and accumulated interest, which benefits the PE firm greatly if initial payments are slow (which may be required as part of the agreement if revenue projections are set with a future spike).

The schools are hearing "here's a couple billion dollars because we are fans and we want to see you make more money!". They'll completely miss the part about the PE firm taking steps to ensure a return far above standard interest (as they would just execute secured loans if that was all they wanted as a return).

 

[Ha Who]

When all is said and done, if PE gets involved they'll end up bending the fans, the schools and anyone else with any interest in the games over and have their way with them.

I don't get why some of these schools think it won't happen to them but it will.

They'll be seduced by the idea of a massive amount of cash thrown their way and fall for a sales pitch on how the return to the PE firm will be based on revenue increases. What they'll gloss over will be preferred returns and accumulated interest, which benefits the PE firm greatly if initial payments are slow (which may be required as part of the agreement if revenue projections are set with a future spike).

The schools are hearing "here's a couple billion dollars because we are fans and we want to see you make more money!". They'll completely miss the part about the PE firm taking steps to ensure a return far above standard interest (as they would just execute secured loans if that was all they wanted as a return).

I really don’t care the P2 has already effed themselves. They just don’t know it yet.

 

[Patman]

I really don’t care the P2 has already effed themselves. They just don’t know it yet.

I think anybody who is paying attention realizes that the whole system is falling apart and its more a matter of "how long"

 

[CL82]

If I had to guess (and its purely a guess) - the play essentially is:

Buy equity into league with some upside language around future league revenues (likely need an extended hold period to realize gains)

Finance expansion (in Big 12’s instance, add Clemson/FSU or something similar) or other similar initiative (pay $ to SEC/B1G teams for them to play on the road at Big 12 teams?) to increase media rights deal payout

Potential to add other “events” to conference schedules (mid-year conference tournament at MSG?) that would give them additional revenue streams. Maybe they create a separate media function or buy/leverage a streaming service for exclusive rights to showcase Big 12 games and other content?

Option to sell equity at some pre-determined rate back to the conference they buy into (or another buyer) after the hold period (typically 3-7 years)

Regardless, traditional PE investment models don’t make a ton of sense for college sports given their return requirements, traditional hold periods, and how they make money from deals. If you’re going to fund the Big 12 buying FSU and Clemson as an example, they can’t even join the league until 5 years from now, which more or less takes up the entirety of a traditional hold period before they’d exit. I just don’t see how it makes a ton of sense

I feel as if you need to add something to that for example the creation of a big 12 network, which could then be monetized over a period of years. So you have the PE money going to build something which will produce a revenue stream that doesn't currently exist in potentially could be sold at some point in the future.

Just riffing on your post...

 

[uconnyankee]

Yep. The revenue growth is no longer able to sustain the expenses and capital needs.

 

[huskymedic]

If I had to guess (and its purely a guess) - the play essentially is:

Buy equity into league with some upside language around future league revenues (likely need an extended hold period to realize gains)

Finance expansion (in Big 12’s instance, add Clemson/FSU or something similar) or other similar initiative (pay $ to SEC/B1G teams for them to play on the road at Big 12 teams?) to increase media rights deal payout

Potential to add other “events” to conference schedules (mid-year conference tournament at MSG?) that would give them additional revenue streams. Maybe they create a separate media function or buy/leverage a streaming service for exclusive rights to showcase Big 12 games and other content?

Option to sell equity at some pre-determined rate back to the conference they buy into (or another buyer) after the hold period (typically 3-7 years)

Regardless, traditional PE investment models don’t make a ton of sense for college sports given their return requirements, traditional hold periods, and how they make money from deals. If you’re going to fund the Big 12 buying FSU and Clemson as an example, they can’t even join the league until 5 years from now, which more or less takes up the entirety of a traditional hold period before they’d exit. I just don’t see how it makes a ton of sense

 

[LetsGoUC]

yeah, we are officially cooked

 

[Rufus]

Media Exec on March Madness Expansion Idea: ‘Chump Change’

“I believe CBS and TNT will offer them zero–or a de minimis amount," another executive said about the NCAA potentially adding more schools.

frontofficesports.com

 

[UConnTrumbull]

yeah, we are officially cooked

Yormark used the same “for now/right now” comment as he did when they tabled the UConn conversations. He’s the ultimate wait and see guy. Him and Phillips are just trying to keep the P2 from kicking them off the adult table entirely right now.

 

[RSTuthill]

yeah, we are officially cooked

Why exactly? B12 was, and still is, not an affinity option. The ACC is, and B1G is, the latter being a bridge too far for UConn which has taken its time to get the proper academic credential.

 

[UConnJim]

Media Exec on March Madness Expansion Idea: ‘Chump Change’

“I believe CBS and TNT will offer them zero–or a de minimis amount," another executive said about the NCAA potentially adding more schools.

frontofficesports.com

That's not the play for expanding the NCAAT. If they expand the tournament, it means more P2/P4 schools get in and they get a larger share of the revenue pie.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Media Exec on March Madness Expansion Idea: ‘Chump Change’

“I believe CBS and TNT will offer them zero–or a de minimis amount," another executive said about the NCAA potentially adding more schools.

frontofficesports.com

That's not the play for expanding the NCAAT. If they expand the tournament, it means more P2/P4 schools get in and they get a larger share of the revenue pie.

Exactly. More participating schools without an increased payout means each share will be slightly smaller. As basically all of the additional participants will be P level schools, each P level conference will get an additional few shares.

 

[jostar1]

Why exactly? B12 was, and still is, not an affinity option. The ACC is, and B1G is, the latter being a bridge too far for UConn which has taken its time to get the proper academic credential.

Why? Because at least the Big 12 was talking to us and Yormark wanted us. That was confirmed by UConn. That's more than the ACC and B1G. There is nothing going on with them.

 

[ZooCougar]

Why? Because at least the Big 12 was talking to us and Yormark wanted us. That is public knowledge. That's more than the ACC and B1G. There is nothing going on with them.

Tuthill is lost and out of his depth as usual. The whole AAU thing is a thing of the past like the contiguous thing. And AAU isn’t what is keeping us.

The ACC hasn’t been interested since 2012. I can’t fathom how much brain rot it takes to have his opinion.

 

[huskymedic]

 

[Rufus]

 

[Kolumbo]

UConn and USF really stand out. P4 programs who spend in the same neighborhood as these 2 should be relegated. P2 programs spending < $120 million are just riding the coattails.

 

[NowInStorrs]

UConn's numbers would not be out of place in the B12, although I'd imagine if UConn were in the B12 it'd be spending more than it currently is.

 

[uconnric]

I'm sure Yormark values us as a member now more than ever. That league really needs a team in the NE and the NY market. The B1G, ACC and SEC have expanded their footprints, I would think that us and USF would be attractive additions for that B12, depending of course on tv revenues. And Yormark also values basketball.

I'm sure that there still is a lot of unhappiness at FSU, Miami and Clemson (and UNC) unless they can get something close to a B1G or SEC disbursement from the ACC. We'll see how that works out. But that probably won't affect us.

 

[CL82]

I'm sure Yormark values us as a member now more than ever. That league really needs a team in the NE and the NY market. The B1G, ACC and SEC have expanded their footprints, I would think that us and USF would be attractive additions for that B12, depending of course on tv revenues. And Yormark also values basketball.

I'm sure that there still is a lot of unhappiness at FSU, Miami and Clemson (and UNC) unless they can get something close to a B1G or SEC disbursement from the ACC. We'll see how that works out. But that probably won't affect us.

Big Ten presidents have expressed their preference for adding "an existing P4 team" so as long as the ACC remains in flux they won't pull the trigger on us. Just my opinion.

 

[jostar1]

Big Ten presidents have expressed their preference for adding "an existing P4 team" so as long as the ACC remains in flux they won't pull the trigger on us. Just my opinion.

I agree. I think that the Big 12 is going to wait to see if ACC schools become available. Those schools will be ahead of UConn. Maybe we can hitch a ride with a couple of them.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

That's not the play for expanding the NCAAT. If they expand the tournament, it means more P2/P4 schools get in and they get a larger share of the revenue pie.

You don’t have to expand the tourney to get more money
!. Reduce the Autobids from 32 to 20 conferences
2. Simply increase the per unit amount .
i prefer 2 if you really want to make more money
The power conferences currently earn the lions share of the distribution and increasing the teams only marginally affects the payout