Stole this from PSU's site. B1G revs... | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Stole this from PSU's site. B1G revs...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Funster,I hope your wrong or whats that say for us in the AAC?These predictions are probably coming straight from FOXN to Delany!!Im sure Delany didnt pull those figures from a hat??After all he never claimed to be a network spokesmen...just passing on the info he got from them I'd guess!What the heck do we know about the inside financial scoop?
 
NickyNewark said:
Funster,I hope your wrong or whats that say for us in the AAC?These predictions are probably coming straight from FOXN to Delany!!Im sure Delany didnt pull those figures from a hat??After all he never claimed to be a network spokesmen...just passing on the info he got from them I'd guess!What the heck do we know about the inside financial scoop?
Expand ...

The B1G has provisions in the deal that even though Fox owns 51% the B1G still has control over ad content. And the B1G wants a lot of school related adverts and no advertising involving alcohol or gambling. Beer ads = big (not B1G) money.

And no, Delany didn't pull those figures out of a hat. He pulled them out of his ass.
 
Thanks Funster for your eloquent response!But truthfully I'd doubt Delanys posterier is loose enough for those acrobatics!
 
Thanks Funster for your eloquent response!But truthfully I'd doubt Delanys posterier is loose enough for those acrobatics!
 
I just don't see the B1G getting 45M/team. If someone were stupid enough to stand in line and pay that, they'd take a bath. There are enough hints beginning to float out that the $ are reaching the peak. I could see 30M for either the B1G or the SEC, though. That's still pretty impressive.
 
.-.
Fishy said:
He doesn't. Trust me.

Ever see a guy marching with a sandwich board announcing the end of the world? Do you ever ask that guy for more detail?

Well, here, that guy is Dan.
Expand ...
Actually that's you. Your the one marching around here playing negative nancy about uconn conference future. I like to speculate and enjoy making shit up. But I have hope. You have already had your tubes tied.
 
B1GALUM said:
I am curious. Any further details you can offer?
Expand ...
There are no further details. A lot of SEC fans don't much care for Missou but the SEC front office really likes the St. Louis and KC markets. They were the reason for bringing them in in the first place.

As far as projecting conference TV deals out to 2017 or later be very careful. At present there is growing talk of expanding the "playoff" to at least 8 teams from a lot of quarters. Within the SEC, both in the conference office and in some individual AD's, they are starting to ask at what point does the "playoff" become a tournament and what does that do to the value of the regular season. Not just TV rights but other revenue as well. For most SEC teams with huge stadiums, steep priority points programs, and substantial ancillary revenue on game day, anything that lowers the value of the regular season is a big problem. Attendance has fallen at most SEC schools the last two years by a couple of thousand per game, even for schools that were not struggling like Tenn & Auburn. They don't like that.
 
The Funster said:
When the B1G gets 45M per team, remind me I was wrong. No way, no how.

Tell me how Fox, as a majority owner of the BTN, is going to help DOUBLE what the BiG is getting for teams already. The B1G's rights are up in what, 2017? A lot can can happen in 3 years that will affect the money that is poured into college sports. Some is negative, some is positive. Everything possible would have to go right for the B1G to get 45M per team.
Expand ...

You're right. Everything does have to go right for B1G schools to earn in the $40-45m range in 2017, which is probably why Delany has many times expressly cited those figures as being on the higher end.

This is all about beating the bubble. The current income models the B1G uses won't burst until a) a la carte tv pricing becomes mainstream or b) web-based platforms become more mainstream. There's nothing I've seen or read which indicates either of those things will happen before 2017.

There are two basic ways the Big Ten has approached realignment with Nebraska, Maryland, and Rutgers. Nebraska was added to provide value to its national package. Big time winners with big time national followings (i.e. Neb., tOSU, U-M, PSU) move the needle nationally and will earn the conference cash from its national tv contract.

Maryland and Rutgers weren't added to move the needle in that regard. Those schools were added to milk BTN for more cash. One misnomer is that neither team has great football (Maryland's AD is actually quite strong with 25 national titles in 7 sports...Rutgers Athletics is, well....Rutgers Athletics), so no one will watch, therefore neither team will monetize well. The BTN model largely ignores ratings. They just care that you pay for it.

Actual professionals who get paid to analyze actual numbers predict the B1G's two newest properties will be worth an additional $100-200m annually for BTN. Why? Because they're two flagship schools (each with no in-state BCS vis-a-vis) from two very densely populated states that offer access to two of the top-5 most populated CMSAs in the country in the New York and Baltimore-Washington media markets. This isn't about UMD or RU suddenly becoming Oregon, this is about snatching two of the biggest markets with lots of tvs and absolutely no Big-5 competition in sight.
 
bingethinker said:
Those schools were added to milk BTN for more cash. One misnomer is that neither team has great football (Maryland's AD is actually quite strong with 25 national titles in 7 sports...Rutgers Athletics is, well....Rutgers Athletics), so no one will watch, therefore neither team will monetize well. The BTN model largely ignores ratings. They just care that you pay for it. Actual professionals who get paid to analyze actual numbers predict the B1G's two newest properties will be worth an additional $100-200m annually for BTN. Why? Because they're two flagship schools (each with no in-state BCS vis-a-vis) from two very densely populated states that offer access to two of the top-5 most populated CMSAs in the country in the New York and Baltimore-Washington media markets. This isn't about UMD or RU suddenly becoming Oregon, this is about snatching two of the biggest markets with lots of tvs and absolutely no Big-5 competition in sight.
Expand ...

Gordon Gee audio
On the BTN and the appeal of Rutgers and Maryland:
• 4:56: "[The addition of Maryland and Rutgers to the Big Ten] gives us 40 to 50 million more viewers, makes the BTN worth more money than God. I did say that. It’s a very powerful instrument for us."
http://www.landgrantholyland.com/20...t-ii-dissing-cincinnati-bret-bielema-and-more
 
Fishy said:
Your correlation between ESPN layoffs and some television bubble popping is a stretch.

Second, you are clearly unaware that Fox is the majority owner of the Big Ten Network. Third, you're also apparently unaware that the Big Ten's first tier rights are up for renewal in a few years. That number will knock the cover off the ball.

The Big Ten is well-positioned to start printing money.
Expand ...
Wow, I've been wondering if the migration from the Rust Belt will trash the B1G in the next decade and you think they'll be stronger?
 
.-.
Overall migration is up - it's just not growing as fast as certain Southern states. Connecticut's population growth is pretty much on par with the Rust Belt, btw.
 
The Funster said:
I just don't see the B1G getting 45M/team. If someone were stupid enough to stand in line and pay that, they'd take a bath. There are enough hints beginning to float out that the $ are reaching the peak. I could see 30M for either the B1G or the SEC, though. That's still pretty impressive.
Expand ...

It's not an unreasonable amount. Remember that separate from the BTN, the Big Ten has its rights package up for open bid in 2016. The Pac-12, which draws much lower ratings nationally compared to the B1G, received over $20 million per year per team for the same package that the Big Ten is going to the open market with. So, if the Big Ten merely matches what the Pac-12 received and added on BTN money, they're already at $30 million per team per year just for TV money. And trust me, the Big Ten is going to be worth substantially more than the Pac-12. If the Big Ten gets around $30 million per team per year for that first tier package (and that is NOT a stretch and, in fact, might be on the low end), they can clear $40 million quite easily when the BTN revenue is added in. This doesn't even include the postseason money - the Big Ten is getting its guaranteed cut of the Rose Bowl, a regular cut of the Orange Bowl, will be receiving a power 5 share of the other playoff money, and (believe it or not) has even been at the top for NCAA Tournament basketball revenue credits, too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,326
Messages
4,564,182
Members
10,462
Latest member
Liam Rainst


Top Bottom