Non-Key Tweets | Page 739 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Tweets

Mark Kochenderfer‏ @MarkKochenderfe 4h4 hours ago
It’s not exposure if nobody’s watching. And it would appear from the Nielsens nobody is. The whole purpose of these tier 3 net worth was to harvest carriage fees in a carriage fee cable model system. Without being able to collect those fees they really don’t make sense.

Doug‏ @NebGradDubDub 4h4 hours ago
Replying to @MarkKochenderfe @flugempir[B]e[/B] and 4 others
You realize digital subscriptions are the next pay per view? That the NFL is headed down the same path? The B10 is cutting edge and leading. Everyone else has been reacting and grabbing the cash without future investment.

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 4h4 hours ago
And of course there are people watching these other events. Not in the numbers which would be profitable on another network...but when you own half the network with zero debt..well..it’s not an albatross.

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 3h3 hours ago
The Big Money will always be in Tier 1 & 2 arena. Big Ten Conference current payouts are the following:

Tier 1&2 = 33-34 mil
BTN = 9 mil
NCAA Tourny Credits+Bowls= 10-11 mil

The 9 mil from BTN is pure profit...without touching other 3T items each school sells independently

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 3h3 hours ago
Because of cutting of cable & streaming not being as profitable...will BTN payouts remain flat? Sure. But at some point more fans of Big Ten & SEC...and possibly of Big 12 will pay premium prices for content they want in 3T. BTN is all set to accommodate. Investments been paid.

Mark Kochenderfer‏ @MarkKochenderfe 3h3 hours ago
I don’t think revenue will Remain flat. I think payments will decline for this stuff if you have to ask people to actively buy it. Because even hard-core fans can live without tier 3 content. The whole model for these stations was to harvest carriage fees. Without those fees ?

Mark Kochenderfer‏ @MarkKochenderfe 3h3 hours ago
Replying to @NebGradDubDub @flugempire and 4 others
Agree on the NFL subscription service that’s already been proven by DIRECTV. But that is because the NFL is so unbelievably popular. College football Isn’t let alone tier 3 college stuff. Take away the carriage fees and it’s not economically viable.

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 3h3 hours ago
BTN had 60 million subscriptions in 2014. It now has 59 million and the subs are lot more diversed in nature because of the chord cutting. Big Ten fanbase is already starting to pay for higher services..such as BTN Plus. The Network is popular.

Mark Kochenderfer‏ @MarkKochenderfe 3h3 hours ago
The Nielsen ratings tell us it is not popular at all. In fact The numbers are so low that they don’t even register. How many of those 59 million subscribers would actually pay for that station? Since so few of them are watching it.

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 3h3 hours ago
Mark,

What happened when Comcast threaten to pull BTN within Big Ten Country? The Big Ten fanbase rose up and told Comcast they will drop them if you drop BTN.

You greatly underestimate the popularity of the Network.

Mark Kochenderfer‏ @MarkKochenderfe 3h3 hours ago
Numbers don’t lie. Not my opinion.

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 3h3 hours ago
Ownership doesn’t lie either. BTN does not produce ratings in public. Nielsen doesn’t have those numbers. Advertising are buying up slots on BTN..money is rolling in.

BTN is not on some death bed. 49% Ownership makes it profitable.

Mark Kochenderfer‏ @MarkKochenderfe 2h2 hours ago
Sorry just have to agree to disagree. There’s nothing I see here that changes the fundamental economics that in a carriage fee free future this is viable. Of course the nature of the content could adapt and maybe enough carriage fees will still be around to make a go of it. ?

Doug‏ @NebGradDubDub 2h2 hours ago
Replying to @MarkKochenderfe @flugempire and 4 others
Because BTN is tier 1 in B10 states. That’s what the $ from adds are primarily generated from. Think your local regional MLB teams network. Look at the cash they bring in and what they are worth

Mark Kochenderfer‏ @MarkKochenderfe 2h2 hours ago
Replying to @MarkKochenderfe @flugempire and 5 others
Let’s talk about the real money. How much do you think the tier 1 and tier 2 deals for the Big Ten in the SEC will be worth in a few years? That’s what really matters.

Doug‏ @NebGradDubDub 2h2 hours ago
Much more than they are now. Live content is king, especially when it involves legendary teams and larger markets/fan bases

Mark Kochenderfer‏ @MarkKochenderfe 2h2 hours ago
It would have to be Worth a lot more than now.especially for the SEC CBS package which is grossly under valued.

Doug‏ @NebGradDubDub 2h2 hours ago
You realize just last year the B10 was on a contract for tier 1 signed in 2006?

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 2h2 hours ago
Both SEC & Big Ten will receive good jumps in their next Tier 1&2 Media negotiations. FOX ratings have skyrocketed since they acquired 1/2 the package. FOX Sports President Mark Silverman just stepped down as BTN President.

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 2h2 hours ago
The Question is where does FOX focus on after Big Ten? It will be either PAC or Big 12. And it will be secondary focus after Big Ten...much like ACC is secondary after SEC for Disney/ESPN. PAC and/or Big 12 might need new distributor to step up..which might be a good thing.

Mark Kochenderfer‏ @MarkKochenderfe 1h1 hour ago
Replying to @flugempire @NebGradDubDub and 4 others
Do you think the Big Ten will have a game of the week tier one package like the SEC does on CBS? It always seem kind a odd to me that they didn’t have that their ratings would seem to support it.

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 56m56 minutes ago
Big Ten has weekly games on ABC as part of their Disney deal.

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 4h4 hours ago
Replying to @MarkKochenderfe @theDudeofWV and 4 others
You can’t have a network and only put on live content for 6 months of the year. The Big Ten Network still is producing revenue above costs to the tune of 9 mil per school + 9 mil to B1G Conference with live content year round.

Doug‏ @NebGradDubDub 4h4 hours ago
That revenue is also doubled since half goes to FOX

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 3h3 hours ago
True. It’s why FOX is all in on Big Ten. FOX paid a monster price for 1/2 package for Big Ten Tier 1&2. FOX put pressure on ESPN to follow suit and pay high price for 2nd half of Big Ten Tier 1&2.

Doug‏ @NebGradDubDub 3h3 hours ago
The B10 owns its own network free and clear with controlling stake and did that while the cost was a fraction of what it is today to start one. No other league has that ownership and they can't afford to. P12 tried and is nearly bankrupt.

Doug‏ @NebGradDubDub 3h3 hours ago
While everyone else will rely on Google, Amazon or Apple to sell its secondary and tertiary content in the future at reduced prices, BTN will be doing the same at double or triple the profit because they have no middleman needed to distribute that content. B10 is 10 years ahead.

Greg Flugaur‏ @flugempire 3h3 hours ago
Its why when you check on Forbes lists of most valued Football Programs it’s dotted with Big Ten schools because of their slices of ownerships of BTN. Even with carriage fees going away Network is all paid by millions of dollars of investments from each school through the years.

Mark Kochenderfer‏ @MarkKochenderfe 1h1 hour ago
Interesting to see where this goes. I would agree with you about the conferences and TV stations. There’s only so many prime windows in a college football Saturday. I guess that is why the Pac 12 consistently relegated to that 1015 slot.
 
conorg223 said:
February was Aresco’s month to meet exclusively with ESPN brass. One would believe that the agreement is sizable and to the liking of Aresco for him to not even shop beyond ESPN for our tier 1 rights. Encouraging.
Expand ...

there was never going to be another bidder.

hopefully the deal is good - but it was always going to be espn.

there isnt even a second company to float.
 
whaler11 said:
there was never going to be another bidder.

hopefully the deal is good - but it was always going to be espn.

there isnt even a second company to float.
Expand ...
There was unlikely to be a better bidder, particularly on cable. That's why Aresco was touting alternative broadcast partners like Amazon. Plus if we learned nothing from the evisceration of the Big East we learned that you don't F with ESPN. They are the Don Corleone of broadcast partners.

I'm curious to see the terms. If they cement our "P6" position, being I'll be happy. Of course the further they are from the next highest paid G5 league the happier I will be. Wouldn't mind the opportunity to sell our Tier 3 rights. We are one of the few American teams (only one?) that can get value for that.
 
Slasher said:
Not a credible source. He spouts all sorts of nonsense that never comes to fruition.
Expand ...

He’s definitely a doofus; however, he does have legit contacts within the conference.

His lack of excitement in the above tweet signals to me that the deal isn’t looking good.
 
whaler11 said:
there was never going to be another bidder.

hopefully the deal is good - but it was always going to be espn.

there isnt even a second company to float.
Expand ...

The deal is not going to be good one way or the other.

If the money is good; I can almost guarantee that means a large presence on ESPN+
 
Guapo said:
If the money is good; I can almost guarantee that means a large presence on ESPN+
Expand ...
I worry about this. What makes you think so, other than they need content.
 
I hear the new TV deal money won't be that great. However, ESPN will be providing ESPN tee shirts and hats to each school in the conference. So, at least we have that going for us.
 
CL82 said:
I worry about this. What makes you think so, other than they need content.
Expand ...

I think you said it. If they are willing to pay more to park significant games on the ESPN+ platform it puts Aresco in a difficult spot.

Since he was unable to get any real money from ESPN with the last deal he touted the visibility he was able to negotiate. Does he now do a complete 180 & say "we got more money but, nobody will be able to see our games"?

Have I said recently how much i hate this bleepin' conference?
 
bobbyinaz said:
I think you said it. If they are willing to pay more to park significant games on the ESPN+ platform it puts Aresco in a difficult spot.

Since he was unable to get any real money from ESPN with the last deal he touted the visibility he was able to negotiate. Does he now do a complete 180 & say "we got more money but, nobody will be able to see our games"?

Have I said recently how much i hate this bleepin' conference?
Expand ...

I would suspect it’s ESPN+ to replace CBSSN and ESPN3.

Since they are going to lose some ACC content to that network there will probably be more AAC games on ESPN/2/U.
 
If Aresco was touting Amazon as a potential partner then I doubt there was much effort in avoidance of ESPNs streaming network.
 
Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 3h3 hours ago
Some great discussion about the Pac 12 & B12 lately. I thought I would go over some basics about expansion.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 3h3 hours ago
1. Realignment is only posdible if the move: A. makes the network more $; B. Makes the Conf more $ & C. The school is in distress, usually financial, and the move cures the problem for the school. All three must be true for a move to be possible.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 3h3 hours ago
The SEC has the most undervalued OTA TV deal. When the SEC signed the deal with CBS it wasn't the SEC we know today. CBS got the SEC on the super cheap. It's going to take a huge leap.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 3h3 hours ago
An SEC regular season football game is the most valuable commodity in sports. The only reason the B1G is even close to the SEC in earnings is the super cheap CBS deal.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 3h3 hours ago
The ACC is the only conference to have money added to its OTA the TV deal for expansion and that was an accounting trick requiring years added onto the base contract with a lump payout at the end. That deal was what angered FSU and Clemson.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 3h3 hours ago
Neither the SEC or B1G had money added to their primary TV deals for expansion. The reason is that OTA networks have limited slots available for broadcast. Thus more inventory does not equal more money.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
The carriage fee model was the reason for B1G expansion. The SEC had a chance to add TAMU and did. Mizzou was added because of carriage fees, but TAMU technically was not.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
(Although TAMU added huge carriage fees for SECN.)

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
The B1G and SEC are making so much money under the carriage fee model that only two school would add enough value to justify expansion: Texas and Notre Dame. OU does not have enough cable subscribers in Oklahoma to provide enough profit under that model.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
ESPN owns an option on all of the Longhorns media rights until 2035. That means UT cannot leave the Big 12 and join another conf. without ESPN's permission.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
The networks want the p5 conferences to remain as they are. They don't want to see a consolidation of rights that would reduce available inventory and increase exponentially the rights fees paid. That's why they are willing to overpay to keep the Big 12 and ACC intact.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
The Pac 12 could lose two programs to the Big 12 and both would be more profitable as long as the Pac 12 doesn't lose a tentpole program.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
Expansion was a mistake for the Pac 12. 14 teams just cut into the conference pie. Losing two would mean the pie is divided by 12 pieces instead of 14.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
I don't see how the math works for the Pac 12 with the $500M for 10% idea. The pie is already divided into 15 slices... add a 16th and everyone's slice gets smaller. The $5 billion valuation is likely to get shot down.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
According to people I talk to the SEC has a $5 billion valuation. The Big 12 and B1G are around $3.1 to $3.5 billion. The ACC is next and the Pac 12 dead last. Who's going to invest $500M in a business worth $3 billion at the most?

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
The Pac 12's current TV deal is worth a total of $3 billion. That's the current valuation. A $5 billion valuation is a 60% increase!

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
My guess is that if the Pac 12 is serious about the bridge loan & investor it will further fracture the Pac 12 and almost push programs to consider leaving.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
The Pac 12 has time to fix it. They could be sitting pretty in five years, but right now they are in trouble.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
The very fact the Pac 12 is considering a bridge loan is testament to their issues. The conf is telling programs with revenue issues they have a plan to bridge the gap to the next TV contract in the hopes those programs don't look elsewhere.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
And I believe three or four of them have to be looking at the Big 12 and thinking they will get a better deal.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
The Pac 12 knows that networks have overpaid to keep conferences viable before. That's a safe bet, but the bridge loan idea is risky.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 2h2 hours ago
This is just me but if WVU were to go to the ACC and the Big 12 dropped Baylor and merged with the Pac 12 the new 18 member conf would have two 9 team divisions and immediately rival the SEC & B1G.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 57m57 minutes ago
Only 1 ACC program bested WVU in actual game attendance in 2018 - Clemson.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 49m49 minutes ago
WVU averaged 58,157 for six home games equalling 97% capacity.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 47m47 minutes ago
Only Clemson & NCST had a greater % of capacity for attendance than WVU and both had 7 home games to WVU's 6.

Christopher Lambert‏ @theDudeofWV 43m43 minutes ago
9 of 14 ACC programs averaged less than 55K fans for home games. 11 of 14 averaged less than 90% total capacity. 9 averaged less than 45K home attendance.



ME: Wow! Arithmetic is not his strong suit. :confused::rolleyes:
 
Am I understanding this correctly? ACC media structure grows with more inventory? With their network set to launch, wouldn’t it make sense to add more content/schools while also increasing the size of their TV deal? “The ACC is the only conference to have money added to its OTA the TV deal for expansion and that was an accounting trick requiring years added onto the base contract with a lump payout at the end. That deal was what angered FSU and Clemson.”
 
whaler11 said:
I would suspect it’s ESPN+ to replace CBSSN and ESPN3.

Since they are going to lose some ACC content to that network there will probably be more AAC games on ESPN/2/U.
Expand ...

They normally farm out the games they don't want to CBSSN & ESPN3.

If the goal is to drive behavior and get people to start watching ESPN+ regularly I wouldn't be surprised if they actually put more marquee games on the platform. When they launched ESPN2, the first event was Carolina/Duke, and they regularly aired ACC & Big East games on the "deuce" and reminded you to complain to your cable provider if they didn't offer it.

Even with the ACC Network coming, I'm concerned that the AAC will be the ESPN+ guinea pig
 
Carriage fees are important, but theyre not everything.

A strong program (like Okla) increases the quality of matchups which raises ratings. This is valuable both to the networks but also to future suitors like Amazon or Netflix.

Carriage fees will not be enough if no one is watching your product. And, again, with the rise of streaming, who knows how much longer carriage fee revenue will exist.
 
vowelguy said:
Carriage fees are important, but theyre not everything.

A strong program (like Okla) increases the quality of matchups which raises ratings. This is valuable both to the networks but also to future suitors like Amazon or Netflix.

Carriage fees will not be enough if no one is watching your product. And, again, with the rise of streaming, who knows how much longer carriage fee revenue will exist.
Expand ...

That's my point.

If they are trying to drive new viewers to the ESPN+ streaming platform, they are not going to put games on that they have traditionally dumped to CBSSN or ESPN3. They are more likely to put better quality matchups on ESPN+.

With the ACC Network launch coming, the next best product that ESPN can put on their streaming platform is the American Conference. If the trade off is a few less dollars for being on the traditional TV platform vs being the test crash dummy for a few extra bucks, I would take the less money option.

While money is crucial to our survival, being cast off to a platform where the casual fan can never find a UConn game is, IMO, a true death sentence. I believe that streaming or some other way of delivering content is absolutely coming, I'm just not ready to the 1st one in the pool.
 
For a person that spends as much time talking complete nonsense about potential conference realignment like The Dude does, you would think that he might occasionally read the garbage he was spewing before he hit send.

Expansion was a mistake for the Pac 12. 14 teams just cut into the conference pie. Losing two would mean the pie is divided by 12 pieces instead of 14.

Um... Last I checked there were 12 teams in THE PAC 12.

This is just me but if WVU were to go to the ACC and the Big 12 dropped Baylor and merged with the Pac 12 the new 18 member conf would have two 9 team divisions and immediately rival the SEC & B1G.

10-2=8
8+12=20

I bet if he was calculating caps of Meth or jugs of moonshine he wouldn't be this far off.
 
A few years I suggested that OK did not have enough households to be able to meet minimum financial requirements for carriage fees to join another conference. FTT killed that theme. Why would ESPN increase the payout per school or why would schools take a cut for OK.

We have more households in our DMA and we don’t have competition from other schools. You would think we might be attractive to the acc network. Unfortunately, we have to stop sucking at men’s bball and football.
 

Online statistics

Members online
111
Guests online
2,456
Total visitors
2,567
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,277
Messages
4,390,113
Members
10,197
Latest member
Whizzlerr


.
..
Top Bottom