ACC channel likely delayed

[ThePanthers]

http://www.myajc.com/news/sports/co...rnallink_referralbox_free-to-premium-referral

I guess the GT president mentioned this at a quarterly meeting with his board. Said ESPN has asked that the project be delayed so that when they launch it can be when other properties contracts are negotiated and it can gain larger distribution.

To me, there is some good, and some bad here.

The good, it sounds like both sides want to do a channel.

The bad, the additional revenue will have to wait a little longer, although the compromise is additional rights fees until channel is launched. This will also cause angst among some school leaders and is a PR hit.

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-blog/dp-teel-time-acc-channel-delay-swofford-post.html

Here is the Teel article following up on this.

 

[Pghfan]

LOL, I've been hearing about this channel for about 1/2 a decade now.. We will sooner see killer bees flying up from mexico before this alleged acc channel.

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

Oh boy, Florida St gonna go off. Rumors of ACC demise to follow......

 

[ThePanthers]

Oh boy, Florida St gonna go off. Rumors of ACC demise to follow......

Yep.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

ESPN is having problems right now if yinz aren't aware. Hemorrhaging money and laid off a lot of people. They way overbid Monday Night Football and NBA.

They are probably investigating all of their holdings and evaluating all their packages right now.

 

[PSU_Nut]

Swofford sold out the ACC to help his son at Raycom. That is why there is no ACC network. How long are you going to buy the check is in the mail line? If the ACC wanted a network then they should have bid it out. Instead Swofford let the networks know that Raycom had to be part of the deal. This costs the schools millions. It not the first time he done that. Do you think it just a coincidence that his son was working for BC athletic department when they got added. There is no reason why the ACC deal should pay $3 million a year less per school then the Big 12 while the Big 12 keeps the rights to more content.

 

[ThePanthers]

Swofford sold out the ACC to help his son at Raycom. That is why there is no ACC network. How long are you going to buy the check is in the mail line? If the ACC wanted a network then they should have bid it out. Instead Swofford let the networks know that Raycom had to be part of the deal. This costs the schools millions. It not the first time he done that. Do you think it just a coincidence that is sone was working for BC athletic department when they got added. There is no reason why the ACC deal should pay $3 million a year less per school then the Big 12 while the Big 12 keeps the rights to more content.

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

How much are the additional rights fees?

 

[ThePanthers]

How much are the additional rights fees?

Rumor was $2MM per year per team, but that is all it is, a rumor.

Here is another article from Joe Ovies in Raliegh and his take. Good read.

http://www.wralsportsfan.com/espn-s-acc-channel-still-in-limbo/15043414/

 

[Pittx9]

Oh boy, Florida St gonna go off. Rumors of ACC demise to follow......

Hopefully the garbage officiating crews they employ will be out of work also.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Lets remember that this is a business negotiation. Both sides are trying to get the best deal possible. The good news is that it seems like the network has already been agreed to. Not if, but when. ACC wants it in 2017, which BTW, I missed the memo that said the channel was imminent in 2017. ESPN wants it later.

"ACC, we ran the numbers and the revenue projections dont look as good. We're going to have to delay this a few years so we can make a profit out of the gate."

Translation: if the ACC wants a network sooner rather than later, they have to take on more of the upfront cost and bear more risk. Its all bidness.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

Swofford sold out the ACC to help his son at Raycom. That is why there is no ACC network. How long are you going to buy the check is in the mail line? If the ACC wanted a network then they should have bid it out. Instead Swofford let the networks know that Raycom had to be part of the deal. This costs the schools millions. It not the first time he done that. Do you think it just a coincidence that his son was working for BC athletic department when they got added. There is no reason why the ACC deal should pay $3 million a year less per school then the Big 12 while the Big 12 keeps the rights to more content.

So, so dumb.

So the ACC presidents - who would have been the people responsible for voting for such a thing - all failed to read the deal and voted the way Swofford wanted them to vote to protect his son's job at Raycom?

Who do you think is going to staff the ACC Network?

This was a dumb rumor when it started and it is amazing that it has persisted. This is a deal worth hundreds of millions of dollars. They are not going to jeopardize that over some dude making $200,000 per year. Seriously, come brother. That's just dumb.

 

[ThePanthers]

So, so dumb.

So the ACC presidents - who would have been the people responsible for voting for such a thing - all failed to read the deal and voted the way Swofford wanted them to vote to protect his son's job at Raycom?

Who do you think is going to staff the ACC Network?

This was a dumb rumor when it started and it is amazing that it has persisted. This is a deal worth hundreds of millions of dollars. They are not going to jeopardize that over some dude making $200,000 per year. Seriously, come brother. That's just dumb.

Doc, what are your thoughts on this article?

I know the timing has to be right to get the proper distribution. Do you think it's still a matter of when, not if?

Always look forward to your insight.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Swofford sold out the ACC to help his son at Raycom. That is why there is no ACC network. How long are you going to buy the check is in the mail line? If the ACC wanted a network then they should have bid it out. Instead Swofford let the networks know that Raycom had to be part of the deal. This costs the schools millions. It not the first time he done that. Do you think it just a coincidence that his son was working for BC athletic department when they got added. There is no reason why the ACC deal should pay $3 million a year less per school then the Big 12 while the Big 12 keeps the rights to more content.

Yep, and shame on him and his Conflict of Interest to save his Alumnus Friend too that hire his son, and why a another UNC Graduate cannot become the Next ACC Commissioner?

The Big East Basketball League way back in 1980s created the First Independent College Sports Network and made more money than any League doing it with Ownership Partners. They attracted Networks paying to show them. The Network that did that for The Big East Basketball was ESPN a little known Sports Group!

The Big Ten followed when a Dumb & Young ESPN Executive that upset Commissioner Delany daring him to set up the B1G Network? Delany partnered with Fox Sports and ESPN fired that Dumb but Young Kid?

Now the ACC has to put up with both Swofford and ESPN holding up money for the ACC Schools while Big Ten, PAC-12, and SEC have the jump on the ACC due to Swofford's Conflicts of Interests!

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

So, so dumb.

So the ACC presidents - who would have been the people responsible for voting for such a thing - all failed to read the deal and voted the way Swofford wanted them to vote to protect his son's job at Raycom?

Who do you think is going to staff the ACC Network?

This was a dumb rumor when it started and it is amazing that it has persisted. This is a deal worth hundreds of millions of dollars. They are not going to jeopardize that over some dude making $200,000 per year. Seriously, come brother. That's just dumb.

It is no rumor, there was an article written on how Thankful Raycom President was to Swofford, saying they would be bankrupted since SEC dropped them and they needed the ACC to give them Third Party Rights to save them when the ACC went solely with ESPN! Both the Raycom President and Swofford were close UNC Alumni!

Today Swofford Son works on High Level of Raycom!

Forbes Article Link:
I wrote last week that the ACC is currently on its deathbed, largely because of the conference’s poorly renegotiated TV deal with ESPN. My claim provoked an impassioned reaction from commenters on both sides of the debate, and many readers offered detailed and thoughtful responses. But some of those comments also made it apparent that there is a fair amount of confusion regarding the details of the conference’s television rights, particularly third tier rights, and what impact they will likely have on the conference’s future.


It ultimately comes down to the fact that ACC schools do not retain third tier rights for football or basketball games, a sacrifice that was not rewarded with comparable rights fees to those paid to the other “major” conferences. That does not mean that ACC schools are entirely without valuable media rights, but it puts the conference at a significant disadvantage and has led schools like Florida State and Clemson to consider leaving the ACC for another conference.

To quickly cover the basics: there are three tiers of media rights. The first and second tiers are generally controlled by the conferences, which sell them – either separately or combined – to national networks like ABC/ESPN, CBS and Fox. The first tier rights holder gets first pick of the conference’s televised sporting events, usually for over-the-air broadcasts. The unselected games then pass to the second tier rights holder, and games chosen at that level are generally aired on cable networks. The technical definition of “third tier” varies from conference to conference, but it mostly consists of what remains after the first two tier selections have been made. For most conferences, third tier rights belong to the conference members, who are free to monetize them as they see fit.


The most valuable football and basketball telecasts are obviously snatched up by the national networks. What usually remains in the third tier is a few football and basketball games, plus the vast majority of non-revenue sports like baseball, lacrosse and soccer. Third tier rights can also include schools’ multimedia rights for things like radio broadcasts, coaches’ shows, arena/stadium signage and website advertising.


All of these details are important because the ACC included its first, second and a significant portion its third tier rights in the recently signed contract with ESPN. There was some initial confusion about how much the conference actually gave away, but Burke Magnus, Senior Vice President of ESPN’s College Sports Programming, thankfully broke down the details of the new contract a few weeks ago:


Recommended by Forbes

ESPN retains exclusive rights to all football and men’s basketball games. Additionally, ESPN retains the first selection rights to women’s basketball and all other ACC sports such as baseball, softball, soccer, lacrosse, etc. Whatever is not selected for coverage and distribution by ESPN from these sports is retained by the member institutions.


In other words, ESPN has the rights to every valuable piece of ACC television property. Especially troubling for ACC schools is that they don’t retain rights to football and basketball games, the primary drivers behind television rights fees. The Big 12, by contrast, guarantees each member school third tier rights to one football game and several basketball games each year. ACC schools may be able to monetize the remaining non-revenue games, but the income from third tier live telecasts will be stunted without football or basketball games to help buoy the rights fees.


When I predicted that the conference’s days are numbered, the crux of my argument was that the ACC gave away its members’ most valuable televised properties but accepted sub-par rights fees (the ACC’s deal is worth an average $17 million per school annually; the Big 12′s is worth $20 million). In short, the ACC is giving away more and getting back less.


What’s more, this isn’t the first time that ACC Commissioner John Swofford has left media rights money on the table. When the ACC signed its previous ESPN contract a few years ago, Swofford insisted on maintaining a partnership with syndicator Raycom Sports, possibly giving away increased media rights revenue in the process:


Swofford let the strongest bidders, ESPN and Fox, know that he wanted to include Raycom, which went into the talks as a partner to both networks, rather than trying to bid against their deeper pockets.


The ACC television rights that Raycom secured are credited with keeping the syndicator alive: “company executives acknowledged that keeping a piece of the ACC’s business was the only way the small, regional TV syndicator and production company could stay relevant.” Raycom pays $50 million annually in a sublicense agreement with ESPN; ACC schools see none of that money.


It’s rather surprising that a conference would so willingly take less TV money – the core source of revenue in collegiate athletics – just to keep a broadcast company from folding. There are, of course, plenty of conspiracy theories to explain Swofford’s irrational decision. Raycom Sports is based in North Carolina, and the ACC is often accused of favoring its four NC schools. Then there’s Swofford’s son, Chad Swofford, who is the Senior Director of New Media and Business Development at Raycom Sports (he was also employed by Boston College athletics when the school received an invite from the ACC). But regardless of what theory you choose to believe, the ultimate conclusion is that the ACC has not been the best at negotiating its TV rights contracts.


That’s not to say that ACC schools are without any media rights. As multiple commenters on Tuesday’s story rightly pointed out, conference members retain their non-televised third tier media rights. Sources at Clemson and North Carolina do not expect that the new TV deal will change any of the schools’ multimedia rights.


I reached out to IMG College, a sports marketing subsidiary of IMG that has agreements with ten ACC schools, and the company is quite pleased with the TV deal. George Pyne, President of IMG Sports and Entertainment, responded that, “The exposure the ACC gets via ESPN enhances the value of our rights. We are very happy with their agreement. The better the ACC does, the better we do.” IMG doesn’t foresee any negative impacts from the new deal, though the company would seem to have little to lose if one of its schools were to change conferences.

Raycom CEO Ken Haines (left) and ACC Commissioner John Swofford. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissm...rights-and-why-theyre-killing-the-conference/

 

[PSU_Nut]

So, so dumb.

So the ACC presidents - who would have been the people responsible for voting for such a thing - all failed to read the deal and voted the way Swofford wanted them to vote to protect his son's job at Raycom?

Who do you think is going to staff the ACC Network?

This was a dumb rumor when it started and it is amazing that it has persisted. This is a deal worth hundreds of millions of dollars. They are not going to jeopardize that over some dude making $200,000 per year. Seriously, come brother. That's just dumb.

He sold them on the deal. Of course he did not sell it as help my son. As a leader you can frame offers and deals however you want. He told the networks bid with raycom and then passed those bids on to the presidents saying these are the best deals we have on the table. Why else do you think the ACC has the lowest media rights deal of the Power 5. Why was the Big 12 able to get a bigger deal while offering less games? The ACC is making 2 million less per school then the Big 12 giving the rights up to all basketball and football games while the Big 12 retained rights to sell individually for a few basketball and foodball games.

 

[ThePanthers]

He sold them on the deal. Of course he did not sell it as help my son. As a leader you can frame offers and deals however you want. He told the networks bid with raycom and then passed those bids on to the presidents saying these are the best deals we have on the table. Why else do you think the ACC has the lowest media rights deal of the Power 5. Why was the Big 12 able to get a bigger deal while offering less games? The ACC is making 2 million less per school then the Big 12 giving the rights up to all basketball and football games while the Big 12 retained rights to sell individually for a few basketball and foodball games.

Big XII got to keep the same contract that had 12 teams, and only split it by 10 teams.

As for the ACC vs other P5, they are well within the ballpark.

That whole Swofford saves his son thing is dumb.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

It was poor judgment on Swofford part anyway one looks at it and Swofford should have avoided it, by refusing higher bidders, and knowing his son was employed there, but it can be argued he saved a local NC business.

Another Aritcle & View Link:
History with ACC secures future for Raycom!

The survival of Raycom Sports hinged on its 31-year relationship with the ACC.

As long as two years before it started negotiating with the conference in earnest, company executives acknowledged that keeping a piece of the ACC’s business was the only way the small, regional TV syndicator and production company could stay relevant in the burgeoning multibillion-dollar college marketplace.

The problem was that Raycom couldn’t compete financially with bigger national TV networks, like ESPN and Fox, who also wanted the ACC’s rights. So Raycom decided to rely on the deep, personal relationships it developed over its three-decade relationship with the conference.


ESPN’s John Skipper recognized the power of those ties early in his talks with Commissioner John Swofford last spring.


Skipper, ESPN’s executive vice president for content and a North Carolina graduate, recalled sitting with Swofford on the brick patio outside the stately Washington Duke Inn, just hours before tip-off of the Duke-North Carolina basketball game.

JEFF WILLIAMS
Raycom CEO Ken Haines (right, with Charlotte
Regional Visitors Authority CEO Tim Newman)
says, “We really are the marketing and corporate
relationship arm of the conference.”


Underneath the swaying pine trees, Skipper asked Swofford what ESPN could do to secure a deal.

“It would be our preference,” Swofford told Skipper, “if ESPN could construct something that would keep us in business with Raycom.”

“So we did,” Skipper said.

STAYING IN BUSINESS
Raycom executives concede that the company’s existence depended on staying in the game with the ACC. While it manages the Meineke Car Care Bowl, and has managed golf tournaments and syndicated other programming, 80 percent of Raycom’s annual revenue comes from its business with the ACC.

Without the ACC, Raycom’s future would be bleak. CEO Ken Haines felt the pressure, as did his 50 employees, most of whom described it as a tense two years that led up to the ACC talks.

What emerged, though, was a 12-year, $1.86 billion contract between the ACC and ESPN that was finalized over the summer and goes into effect for 2011-12.

Raycom signed a sublicensing arrangement with ESPN for $50 million a year, providing the company with more marketing and media rights than it had before, including syndication, ACC Properties and all digital rights.

Everyone involved with the negotiations cited Raycom’s 31-year history as the main reason it was able to strike a deal.

“It tugged at me,” Swofford said. “We wanted to keep Raycom as a partner, but we had to do what was in the ACC’s best interests. That we got the deal we got and kept Raycom involved was icing on the cake.”

Not only did Raycom have the deep ties with the ACC, it also had a relationship with ESPN that went back 30 years. Some of ESPN’s first live programming came from ACC basketball games that were purchased from Raycom Sports, which has had the ACC’s basketball rights since 1979. And Raycom boldly agreed to sell ESPN2 a Duke-Carolina basketball game in the mid-1990s that helped give the new channel — which launched in 1993 — a level of credibility with cable operators that it didn’t previously have.

Those moves preceded Skipper, but Haines felt it was a worthy talking point.

Through its new sublicensing agreement with ESPN, Raycom will continue to syndicate ACC football and basketball games. Raycom’s syndicated games will be branded as the ACC Network, meaning that the Raycom brand no longer appears on the TV screen, a move that has already been implemented this season a year ahead of the new contract.

The Charlotte-based company also manages the corporate partner program, ACC Properties; the official website, TheACC.com; and other digital rights, including the conference’s new iPhone and iPad application.

“We were able to not only retain, but to add to the touch points we had with the ACC already,” said Haines, who has been with Raycom since it was founded in 1979. “The new agreement expands and deepens our relationship with the conference because we really are the marketing and corporate relationship arm of the conference, exclusively. We’re more involved now than we were in the past.”

A SHELL OF ITSELF

Just two years earlier, Raycom’s future didn’t look so bright. In August 2008, ESPN won the rights for all SEC content, meaning ESPN, not Raycom, would manage the conference’s syndicated product through its Charlotte-based ESPN Regional Television.

Raycom, which had handled the SEC’s syndicated rights since 1986, believed its history with the conference would be enough to carve out a package of games. Haines and his staff were stunned to learn that they had been cut out of the deal between the conference and ESPN.

The outcome took its toll on Raycom as 20 employees were cut. Once a giant in the college sports media business, Raycom was just a shell of its old self.

Long gone were the days when Raycom produced and distributed games for the ACC, SEC, Pac-10, Metro, Big Eight, Southwest and eventually the Big 12 conferences. Through the years, Raycom’s advertising-based business model struggled to compete against the dual revenue streams that competitors like ESPN and Fox’s regional channels have. Gradually, it lost much of its conference rights through the 1990s and early 2000s.

Raycom Sports, a unit of Raycom Media, the Alabama-based company that owns 40-plus TV stations, was left squarely in need of keeping the ACC to stay alive.

In the expiring media contract with the ACC, which granted Raycom the rights to all basketball games, the company paid about $35 million a year. It sold a number of those games to ESPN, Fox and CBS, while syndicating the rest to local broadcast stations and regional sports networks.

Knowing that the ACC planned to combine football and basketball in the new contract, Raycom resigned itself to the fact that it couldn’t compete with bigger national sports networks for an all-in deal that ended up costing $155 million a year.

But it also figured that ESPN, which already syndicates SEC games, wanted to use an outside company to syndicate ACC programming to avoid conflicts of interest that would go along with selling both conferences into the same market.

Swofford let the strongest bidders, ESPN and Fox, know that he wanted to include Raycom, which went into the talks as a partner to both networks, rather than trying to bid against their deeper pockets.

The back-and-forth conversations with both bidders put Haines in the middle of the negotiations. ESPN and Fox knew how close Raycom was to the ACC. For example, Swofford’s son, Chad, is Raycom’s director of new media and has been with the company five years.

Throughout the negotiations, the networks often turned to Haines for progress reports on the bidding.

“It was awkward,” Haines admitted. “But it was also important for us to keep the communications as open as possible.”
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...story-With-ACC-Secures-Future-For-Raycom.aspx

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

FINDING JUICE
What Haines found, as he re-focused his efforts on the ACC, was that Raycom still had plenty of juice with the conference in its own backyard. Raycom’s syndication efforts currently take ACC football and basketball into 28 million homes and eight of the top 25 markets, or about 25 percent of the country.

Beginning next year, Raycom, for the first time, will be able to syndicate games outside of the league’s seven-state footprint. The conference hopes that move will help expand the audience and extend the ACC’s brand.

Raycom also will continue to sell and manage ACC Properties, the conference’s corporate partnership arm. The ACC has nine partners since recently adding AT&T, Havoline and BB&T.

Raycom is targeting a partner list that maxes out at 12. Those deals go for the high six figures to low seven figures, depending on the assets. They typically include ad units on Raycom’s broadcasts, space on TheACC.com and mobile, which Raycom also manages, and a presence at the league’s championship events.

Raycom also is creating a new lower-cost promotional partners program that doesn’t include TV advertising, but offers signage at championship events, hospitality and promotional rights.

Raycom’s digital rights will include the website, a recently launched app for iPhones and iPads, and a new ACC Vault, an online product in the works that will enable fans to access old games and highlights. Thought Equity Motion, which also manages the NCAA’s digital archives, will work with Raycom on the ACC Vault.

The final pieces to Raycom’s rights include the fan fests for both the championship football game and basketball tournament.

“It’s unique to the ACC to have all of these rights under one cohesive umbrella,” Haines said. “It makes it easier for us to manage and it makes it easier for a company to deal with one rights holder on all of these fronts rather than trying to coordinate with several different entities.”
Hmmnnnn...then go get the ACC Network deal done since you are such chums?

Other conferences typically have different companies run the website, sell corporate partnerships and hold the TV rights. Outside of the ACC, the Pac-10 probably has the most consolidated arrangement, with Fox owning TV cable rights and managing the corporate partner program, while also having access to ad inventory on Pac-10.org, the conference site managed by XOS.

On corporate deals, Learfield Sports sells for the Big Ten, IMG College represents the SEC, ESPN Regional has the Big 12 and ISP Sports, which is being bought by IMG College, sells the Big East.

“The consolidation in our deal with Raycom is important,” Swofford said. “It simplifies things in a way that seems to be very effective. … ESPN and Raycom have found that they’ll be beneficial for each other. The most important thing in all of this was doing what’s best for the conference, and ultimately that meant keeping Raycom as a very important player.”
Good then the ACC Network for ACC Schools payouts should be forthcoming since it is so easy?

Haines acknowledges with a wry grin that Raycom’s new best friend, ESPN, is the same company that almost put him out of business. But he clearly hopes they’ll find more ways to work together.
DUMB!

“To be recognized for 30 years of a very positive relationship is a good feeling,” Haines said.
DUMBER! It is business get it done!

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...story-With-ACC-Secures-Future-For-Raycom.aspx

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

"ThePanthers, post: 467138, member: 3098"]Big XII got to keep the same contract that had 12 teams, and only split it by 10 teams.
A big obstacle towards expansion too and kept them from a Championship Game?

As for the ACC vs other P5, they are well within the ballpark.
Yeah, the ACC have 3rd most Viewers but no Network? P-12 has less Viewers but has a Network?

That whole Swofford saves his son thing is dumb.
The Artcles give both views and from good sources and journals, and it doesn't matter. I think it was dumb of Swofford saving his friends business while SEC did not do it? Guess that makes SEC smarter again!

Others can think otherwise, but the smartest move having your son be part of a Business the ACC saved them as you are Commissioner and the ACC still doesn't have a Network?

If Swofford, Raycom, and ESPN are so tight and together and and has his son working at Raycom saved by Swofford and ESPN, why can't they get the Network off the ground and just show working together and show the ACC Schools the Money, nothing Dumb about that, but they have their Money?

ESPN is right there running SEC games from Charlotte, open a ACC Joint Operation, and get the ACC Network started and lower the costs by operating together and sharing the same expenses! Oh, that may mean some employees at Raycom will no longer have such duplicate jobs?

I call that Dumb and Dumber!