Pac-12 set to announce $2.7 bil media deal

#51
#51
droski said:
fox



nope. 3 pac-12 football games a week. and it's not about viewers, it's about subscribers. the pac-12 wont get as much per subscriber as the big-10, but it will have many multiple of the subscribers. remember LA, SF, seattle, denver, salt lake city, pheonix, portland are all fairly major media markets.
Click to expand...
The Big Ten network is part of the sports package in places like New York and Chicago. Good luck to the PAC 12 getting on those systems.
 
#52
#52
it isn't the size of the deal that makes scott brilliant it's the way he structured it. the $250 mil a year is just the beginning. the network and media rights portion could be big for future earnings. will the big-12 make more per team than the pac-12? maybe. but that's obviously with texas. add texas to the pac-12 and you'll see the per team payout go up big too.
 
#53
#53
hatvol96 said:
That's speculative BS. The ridiculous euphoria of PAC 10 fans the last couple of days is funny. Even the coaches in that league know the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 will make that deal look like chicken feed as soon as they get around to reworking their deals. Further, as a Big 10 basketball coach told me today, "We're not in bed with a company that couldn't run the Dodgers. That's like running Wal Mart into the ground." I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone get more praise for doing nothing than Larry Scott has gotten the last couple of days.
Click to expand...

U mad bro?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#54
#54
hatvol96 said:
The Big Ten network is part of the sports package in places like New York and Chicago. Good luck to the PAC 12 getting on those systems.
Click to expand...

it wont be on the basic sports package outside of pac-10 country, but it will be in the higher tier sports package.
 
#55
#55
droski said:
it isn't the size of the deal that makes scott brilliant it's the way he structured it. the $250 mil a year is just the beginning. the network and media rights portion could be big for future earnings. will the big-12 make more per team than the pac-12? maybe. but that's obviously with texas. add texas to the pac-12 and you'll see the per team payout go up big too.
Click to expand...
Yeah, all the folks who don't show up to watch games at the Coliseum, Rose Bowl, Galen Center, and Pauley Pavilion are going to be all camping outside their their cable and satellite providers begging for the PAC 12 Network.
 
#57
#57
hatvol96 said:
Yeah, all the folks who don't show up to watch games at the Coliseum, Rose Bowl, Galen Center, and Pauley Pavilion are going to be all camping outside their their cable and satellite providers begging for the PAC 12 Network.
Click to expand...

SC actually gets pretty big ratings in LA. I don't see the core markets being a problem at all. it's outside the core markets that is an issue. remember fox already has regional sports networks in those areas that show pac-10 football and are on all the basic tier cable systems. look i'm not arguing that this makes the pac-12 #1 in revenues forever or some other stupidity, only that it closes the gap considerably.
 
#58
#58
hatvol96 said:
Yeah, all the folks who don't show up to watch games at the Coliseum, Rose Bowl, Galen Center, and Pauley Pavilion are going to be all camping outside their their cable and satellite providers begging for the PAC 12 Network.
Click to expand...

They won't have to beg for it. If they live in AZ, CA, OR, WA, UT, or CO, I'm pretty sure they'll get it if they have cable or satellite.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#61
#61
droski said:
SC actually gets pretty big ratings in LA. I don't see the core markets being a problem at all. it's outside the core markets that is an issue. remember fox already has regional sports networks in those areas that show pac-10 football and are on all the basic tier cable systems. look i'm not arguing that this makes the pac-12 #1 in revenues forever or some other stupidity, only that it closes the gap considerably.
Click to expand...
SC gets big numbers because they're always on ESPN, ABC, or the Fox Sports Net national game. Let's see what the noon kickoff between Cal and Utah on the PAC 10 network draws in Los Angeles.
 
#63
#63
hatvol96 said:
SC gets big numbers because they're always on ESPN, ABC, or the Fox Sports Net national game. Let's see what the noon kickoff between Cal and Utah on the PAC 10 network draws in Los Angeles.
Click to expand...

the ratings aren't as relavant. but scott specifically said they will show some higher tier games to force distribution. think what the NFL network did on a much lower level. you should have seen teh s- fit usc fans threw when their game was on versus and direct tv was in a contract dispute.
 
#65
#65
droski said:
the ratings aren't as relavant. but scott specifically said they will show some higher tier games to force distribution. think what the NFL network did on a much lower level.
Click to expand...
If he thinks putting USC-Arizona State on the PAC 12 Network is going to bully Cablevision and Comcast into adding his product, he needs to be drug tested.
 
#66
#66
droski said:
yup. that is valid. of course this is with much much larger markets.
Click to expand...

Which is the whole crux of the matter. Compare the populations of the media markets in the Pac-12 to those in the SEC. It's almost unfair.

I'd love to break down how much each deal is making per capita, but I'm too lazy.
 
#67
#67
hatvol96 said:
If he thinks putting USC-Arizona State on the PAC 12 Network is going to bully Cablevision and Comcast into adding his product, he needs to be drug tested.
Click to expand...

:lolabove:

i guarantee you comcast adds it in los angeles and san francisco (basic premium package) and direct tv and dish most definetely add it (maybe part of the sports pack).
 
#68
#68
My honest question to you, hatvol, is why would someone br willing to shell out so much for broadcast rights to Pac-12 games if no one cared about them?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#69
#69
droski said:
:lolabove:

i guarantee you comcast adds it in los angeles and san francisco (basic premium package) and direct tv and dish most definetely add it (maybe part of the sports pack).
Click to expand...
So? Congratulatons to the PAC 12 for showing their product to their existing audience. DirecTV and DISH would add a feed showing the contents of my refrigerator if it were available. At the end of the day, the PAC 12 will wake up five years from now and be no more relevant nationally than they are now.
 
#70
#70
MaehlMan said:
My honest question to you, hatvol, is why would someone br willing to shell out so much for broadcast rights to Pac-12 games if no one cared about them?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
It's relatively cheap programming to produce and it'll always be there. Also, I don't think anyone is going to confuse FOX Sports as a model of financial responsibility.
 
#71
#71
MaehlMan said:
My honest question to you, hatvol, is why would someone br willing to shell out so much for broadcast rights to Pac-12 games if no one cared about them?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

an excellent question. big-12 just did this months ago and didn't get nearly this kind of money.

hatvol96 said:
So? Congratulatons to the PAC 12 for showing their product to their existing audience. DirecTV and DISH would add a feed showing the contents of my refrigerator if it were available. At the end of the day, the PAC 12 will wake up five years from now and be no more relevant nationally than they are now.
Click to expand...

disagree. the money will close the gap. SEC/Big-10 will get more, but there wont nearly be the same $$$ gap as before.
 
#72
#72
I can't wait til the PAC 12 goes to the providers in Dallas, Houston and San Antonio to sell their network. The look on their faces when they hear "We'd love to, but there's a problem. The Big 12 and The Longhorn Network have informed us that they won't give us access to their programming if we put you on as anything but a straight HBOesque subscription basis."
 
#73
#73
droski said:
an excellent question. big-12 just did this months ago and didn't get nearly this kind of money.

disagree. the money will close the gap. SEC/Big-10 will get more, but there wont nearly be the same $$$ gap as before.
Click to expand...

And that's the really significant thing. Of course we won't be able to top what the SEC (and probably Big 10) will get. However, Scott made the gap much smaller, and for the time being, we have the most expensive deal.

Compare that to the previous arrangement. It's so much better for the conference financially and for the fans of the conference. Kudos to Scott.

You've got to start somewhere. Hopefully this will aid the Pac-12 in becoming a bigger, more national brand.
 
#74
#74
droski said:
an excellent question. big-12 just did this months ago and didn't get nearly this kind of money.
Click to expand...
Think that has anything to do with the fact that both of the league's football goliaths reserved the right to start their own networks and retained the rights to any of their games not televised nationally for said networks?
 
#75
#75
I actually think this will accelerate Texas A&M's move to the SEC. The SEC can renegotiate their deal with CBS/ESPN if they add a member. The SEC will not stand for being behind the Pac-12 for long.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top