Non-Key Tweets

[kyleslamb]

When you SELL exclusive usage for a set period...you do exactly as I related...."sold their media rights for a period of time". Any sale of exclusive usage for a set period is like a lease.

You are repeating what I said..in different words. A lease of rights is the same as a sale of time limited rights....just different words.

ESPN purchased the rights to ACC sports televising..and the GOR and the ESPN agreement are, like the Big 12 GOR, intertwined and reference each other.

No surprise since the Big 12 assisted the ACC to fashion the GOR.. from Bowlsby's reporting.

Sale:

1
: the act of selling; specifically : the transfer of ownership of and title to property from one person to another for a price

With the Grant of Rights, ownership is not changing hands, and does not meet the definition of a sale. What you described is exactly like a lease...

1.
a contract by which one party conveys land, property, services, etc., to another for a specified time, usually in return for a periodic payment.

 

[TerryD]

Perhaps, but the likelihood would increase at the GOR term nears the end.

Besides a "buyout" of a GOR, Virginia Tech would also be faced with the separate ACC exit fee. How much would both cost the school and would it be worth it (assuming without evidence that Virginia Tech is even interested in changing conferences in the next ten years or so) ?

 

[Seaa Blue]

If you want into the Big Ten you bury the evidence and hope for a "cash retained" settlement. So clearly the best evidence we have is that there is no evidence. What evidence were you expecting?

On the other hand, since Twitterland obviously reads this board, all one has to do is say it on this board for much anything to become "a source"

p.s. I knew this legal talk would get you back on this board.

 

[billybud]

I agree that one would call a time limited purchase of rights a lease....but when one purchases an item, you have, in our common parlance..a sale.

We could accurately say that ESPN subleased ACC content to Raycom and Fox...but we would probably refer to it, on a message board, as selling games.

 

[Seaa Blue]

From what I gather, ESPN and other networks like to refer to their acquired rights as "properties".

Can anyone provide some legal insight as to the origin of the term in relation to rights?

 

[pj]

From what I gather, ESPN and other networks like to refer to their acquired rights as "properties".

Can anyone provide some legal insight as to the origin of the term in relation to rights?

"as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights."
-- James Madison, http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s23.html

 

[TerryD]

If you want into the Big Ten you bury the evidence and hope for a "cash retained" settlement. So clearly the best evidence we have is that there is no evidence. What evidence were you expecting?

On the other hand, since Twitterland obviously reads this board, all one has to do is say it on this board for much anything to become "a source"

p.s. I knew this legal talk would get you back on this board.

I only said that I was done commenting on the other thread about ND, not leaving the board.

Virginia Tech better have a lot of "cash retained" if it hopes to skate on both a GOR and an exit fee.

The "evidence" I was talking about would be anything more substantial than this Minnesota guy in his basement.

 

[Seaa Blue]

Stumbled across this FAQ page on the Big 12 football rights.

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=204969096

Q. What are the appearance requirements? A. No institution may appear in more than six games under Big 12 control per season on ABC, but that provision is eliminated starting in 2016 when ABC/ESPN and FOX will begin altering picks through a draft process.

So, one way the Big 12 is maximizing revenue is by dropping the requirement to spread the air time amongst the institutions.

Q. What does owning the rights entail? A. At the most basic level it means that the telecast partners control the right to televise games live on all existing and future platforms whether linear (traditional cable or over-the-air distribution) or digital (Internet-based). ABC has the right to televise up to 19 home games involving Big 12 teams, but that number increase to 23 starting with the 2016 season. FOX has the rights to all remaining games, except that each institution may retain one game for distribution on a permitted member institution outlet, or it can provide the game back to FOX for telecasts on one of its platforms.

With a firm number of games that will receive national air time, I'm sure that plays into not wanting the slice the pie into smaller pieces.

 

[Seaa Blue]

Virginia Tech better have a lot of "cash retained" if it hopes to skate on both a GOR and an exit fee.
.

With that I was getting at Maryland's settlement. It seems easier for both sides to say "just keep whatever you/we already have" because "a check will not be in the mail".

 

[Seaa Blue]

Virginia Tech better have a lot of "cash retained" if it hopes to skate on both a GOR and an exit fee.
.

With that I was getting at Maryland's settlement. It seems easier for both sides to say "just keep whatever you/we already have" because "a check will not be in the mail".

 

[Seaa Blue]

Virginia Tech better have a lot of "cash retained" if it hopes to skate on both a GOR and an exit fee.

I've thinking about the GoR thing. Seems to me that the exit fee in itself is less defensible with the GoR in place. That is, if the GoR is supposed to handle the TV rights issue, how can an exit fee of $60+ million be justified (without TV money factored in)? Just a thought.

 

[kyleslamb]

I've thinking about the GoR thing. Seems to me that the exit fee in itself is less defensible with the GoR in place. That is, if the GoR is supposed to handle the TV rights issue, how can an exit fee of $60+ million be justified (without TV money factored in)? Just a thought.

Great point. And we already know that the exit fee can't simply be punitive. It's hard to justify having both. There would be *some* loss in value even if the Grant of Rights continued beyond a school's exit because a few additional out-of-conference games would be lost, but $60 million? Not even close.

 

[pj]

I've thinking about the GoR thing. Seems to me that the exit fee in itself is less defensible with the GoR in place. That is, if the GoR is supposed to handle the TV rights issue, how can an exit fee of $60+ million be justified (without TV money factored in)? Just a thought.

Great point. And we already know that the exit fee can't simply be punitive. It's hard to justify having both. There would be *some* loss in value even if the Grant of Rights continued beyond a school's exit because a few additional out-of-conference games would be lost, but $60 million? Not even close.

I think you are overlooking some potential termination scenarios here.

First, although the GoR is from school to conference, it inures primarily to the benefit of the networks, to whom the conferences have assigned the rights. The purpose of the GoR is to give the network security that even if a school leaves a conference, it will retain the broadcast rights or at least get compensation for the lost rights (which didn't happen when e.g. schools left the B12, devaluing the rights but with no drop in compensation).

But, if a school leaves, and the conference ceases to compensate it for its rights as the B12 bylaws provide, why should the school allow the former conference's network to come on campus to film events? A natural termination/breach outcome, unless contracts specify otherwise, is for the two to part ways with neither rights nor compensation continuing. This was in fact the outcome of the Maryland-ACC dispute.

If that's how a GoR agreement terminates, then the conference is stuck. It owes rights to the network (presumably this is enshrined in a contract, e.g. ESPN gave ACC schools an extra $2 mn per year per school or so in exchange for their GoR agreement, so there must be a pass-through agreement between the conference and ESPN). But it doesn't have the school's media rights if the school has breached/terminated. Now the conference is in breach of its agreement with the network. In fact there might be a risk that its whole TV deal could be terminated or radically renegotiated as a result of the departure. If not, presumably the network is entitled to financial compensation.

The network might have a right to sue the school for its failure to provide the rights through the GoR, if the conference had simply re-assigned rights originating with the school to the network. But to secure the rights contained in the GoR, the network would presumably have to compensate the school. You can't have a contract that terminates with one set of obligations continuing but the other side's obligations ending. So maybe the GoR is supposed to continue in some fashion after a school's exit from the conference, but with the conference cut out of its intermediary position.

Now, we haven't seen the agreements, especially the conference-network agreements, so we don't know what the termination provisions are. But it's quite likely that the termination of the GoR leads to a situation where the conference suffers significant financial losses. The only way to compensate the conference for those losses is with an exit fee.

 

[billybud]

Looks expensive...Maryland, with no GOR, paid $31 million...

The GOR is much more complex...and add the Exit Fee on top of the GOR and we may be talking a triple digit figure.

 

[FDNY99]

Looks expensive...Maryland, with no GOR, paid $31 million...

The GOR is much more complex...and add the Exit Fee on top of the GOR and we may be talking a triple digit figure.

$31 Million is $19 million less than the $50 million the ACC told MD they were going to pay!

 

[billybud]

Yep...but still a record exit payment. I think a GOR break could go double that.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Yep...but still a record exit payment. I think a GOR break could go double that.

Not necessarily.

If it comes to judgement the the cost of breaking a GOR will be compensation if monetary damages. If school X leaves a conference and is replaced by school Y with no change to the in place contracts, there are no damages.

Also, I could well be wrong but wasn't the GOR a replacement of an exit payment?

 

[billybud]

1...No...the Exit Fee still stands

2...And damages are not really as simple as you describe....Maryland was replaced by Louisville...but there are many variables to damages...even if the ACC makes as much with Louisville.

 

[billybud]

Maryland never voted for the Exit Fee increase and put forth that the ACC did not follow their own internal procedures as outlined in the Bylaws. A fairly strong position to take going into a contract breach fight....and they still paid a record fee.

All current ACC programs voluntarily signed an individual contract and part of that contract is a statement that they are signing the GOR to add value to the conference. ESPN, the media partner, advises on the value of current members and potential members to a media contract. If the value of the conference is determined to be less after a breach..loss of market, loss of desirable match ups, etc., there will be dozens of lawyers dancing on the heads of pins.

No one has tested the valuation of damages under a GOR. If that ever happens, it will inspire 1000's of internet hits, 100's of rumors. Until that time...we just do not know how it will fall out.

 

[CoastAtlantic]

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 8h 8 hours ago
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2015/02/06/big-12-not-considering-expansion-title-game-after-college-football-playoff-snubs/… “We’re distributing about 25 million per school, which is going to ramp up over the next 13 years to 40 mil" Bowlsby

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 8h 8 hours ago
So in 2028 The Big 12 will be distributing 40 Million per school...correct? And this is the positive news on staying at 10 schools?

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 8h 8 hours ago
The Big 12 with its current roster of schools is not built for long term. Not expanding has to with certain schools looking for the exits..

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 3h 3 hours ago
So let ask this question: Who will get more $ from their tier 1 tv contracts.. Indiana in 2018 vs West Virginia in 2028?

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 3h 3 hours ago
Who will make more $ in all their tier 2&3 agreements... 2018 Indiana or 2028 West Virginia?

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 2h 2 hours ago
Conference health is not about the top $ schools of the P5...buts it's about the middle and bottom of each conference

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 2h 2 hours ago
Big 12 has a passionate fan bases with great quality of football but it's shrinking themselves off the stage. Many Big 12 supporters....

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 2h 2 hours ago
...believe expansion should happen right before new tv contract negotiations happen to max out tv value of next contract..but..

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 2h 2 hours ago
...if Big 12 waits too long they will not have enough time to help build up the perceived value of their 11th and 12th additions

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 2h 2 hours ago
Does Bowlsby actually believe the Big 12 can add a UCF and Cincture in year 2024 and the poof...big tv tier 1 contract happens in next year?

Doug ‏@NebGradDubDub 2h2 hours ago
@flugempire bottom line is the B12 has to take a pay cut in the short term by adding teams for long term gain.

Greg Flugaur‏@flugempire 19m19 minutes ago
@NebGradDubDub And that is exactly what they should do....but it must be Texas and Oklahoma wanting an easier exit years down the road.

Daniel Mountcastle ‏@expansion_crush 2h2 hours ago
@flugempire They can't add $$ by adding a school outside the current P5.

Daniel Freer ‏@DWFreer 1h1 hour ago
@expansion_crush @flugempire Actually...there are G5 schools that bring in more FB TV ratings than current B XII members.

Greg Flugaur‏@flugempire 19m19 minutes ago
@DWFreer @expansion_crush Its not about adding $$$ in the short term. Its about adding value in the long term by extending needed footprint

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 11m 11 minutes ago
Big Ten schools took less BTN $ last year b/c UMD & RUT additions.. will do so again next year. Taking less $ short term for long term gain

Greg Flugaur @flugempire · 10m 10 minutes ago
If OU & UT were truly committed to the Big 12 long term they would lead the conference into expanding into larger committed CF markets.

 

[Seaa Blue]

If the value of the conference is determined to be less after a breach..loss of market, loss of desirable match ups, etc., there will be dozens of lawyers dancing on the heads of pins.

So far no one has ever been paid less because of a loss. I think that's about the only way to determine loss of value.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

2...And damages are not really as simple as you describe....Maryland was replaced by Louisville...but there are many variables to damages...even if the ACC makes as much with Louisville.

Tell me how anyone can possibly quantify anything (in terms of damages) beyond a change in television revenues in the scenario we are discussing.

 

[tzznandrew]

Tell me how anyone can possibly quantify anything (in terms of damages) beyond a change in television revenues in the scenario we are discussing.

There isn't. That's why I'm not convinced a GOR is all that meaningful. I'm not sure they'll be challenged, but I don't think they would hold up if they were.

 

[jostar1]

Christopher Lambert @theDudeofWV · 11h 11 hours ago
Next Wednesday I will have an expansion update concerning the future of the Big 12. It’s not conjecture. It’s what was agreed to in Dallas.

Christopher Lambert @theDudeofWV · 11h 11 hours ago
So why Wednesday? I have to write it. I have to find time to process what I learned today. And I want to verify what I’ve learned.

Christopher Lambert @theDudeofWV · 11h 11 hours ago
I’ll say this. What you think you know about Texas & Oklahoma & their commitment to the Big 12 is wrong. Details Wednesday morning.

Christopher Lambert @theDudeofWV · 11h 11 hours ago
It was ESPN who insisted the Big 12 add WVU.

Christopher Lambert @theDudeofWV · 11h 11 hours ago
It was ESPN who demanded WVU when OU pushed for UL at the last moment because of McConnell’s relationship with OU’s prez.

Christopher Lambert @theDudeofWV · 11h 11 hours ago
My point is TV partners can dictate expansion moves. Remember what BC’s AD said?

Christopher Lambert ‏@theDudeofWV · 11h11 hours ago
I’ll say this. What you think you know about Texas & Oklahoma & their commitment to the Big 12 is wrong. Details Wednesday morning.

Christopher Lambert ‏@theDudeofWV · 11h11 hours ago
@BaylorFight It is true. The Big 12 is in a position to clean up.

Christopher Lambert ‏@theDudeofWV · 11h11 hours ago
@BaylorFight I thought the opposite too.

david_gibson ‏@BaylorFight · 11h11 hours ago
@theDudeofWV I'm skeptical, man. Big12 has major PR problem with ESPN. Those guys are running the show.

Christopher Lambert ‏@theDudeofWV · 11h11 hours ago
@BaylorFight Fox is running the show now.

Christopher Lambert @theDudeofWV · 11h 11 hours ago
One more note. Cincy did meet with the B12 in NY right after the playoff teams were announced.

Christopher Lambert @theDudeofWV · 11h 11 hours ago
The meeting was an informal one at the request of Ono. Ono was told the Big 12 has no plans to expand in the near future.

Christopher Lambert @theDudeofWV · 11h 11 hours ago
The Big 12 denied that meeting to protect Cincy.

 

[Husky92]

Can't wait 'till Wednesday!