ACC Network Dead? Is that the End of the ACC?

[PittMan 72]

Yes, but population growth in those states may or may not increase viewership of ACC programing [short term or long term]--which is/was my point. No doubt [and no argument] the ACC is important to ESPN based upon its present contractual relations. Hail to Pitt!

Certainly understand your point. And just to be clear on mine, sheer population numbers within the area comprising a conference's physical make up - current as well as the trends that point to the potential for growth in certain areas over others - can still remain a major factor when providers are negotiating future contracts with advertisers/investors.

So it would seem to be reasonable that there exists a potential attractiveness for the ACC that would be enhanced due to its geographic and demographic footprint, possibly more so than for others situated almost exclusively in Rust Belt or more sparsely populated primarily agricultural states in regions that are trending toward, and/or actually experiencing, population loss. Particularly when looking ahead and trying to gauge something in the future in an increasingly competitive environment in terms of profitability for providing sports content. Have to wait and see how it all plays out over time.

 

[Hotshoe]

Did you read the article? ACC generates more viewers for ESPN than anyone else.

Did you read the article? espn didn't say that, Swafford did.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Did you read the article? espn didn't say that, Swafford did.

Glad you are back, appreciate your football Views and Passion and hope MichNittLion, Mexidman, PSEngineer, Nittany97, WillieLump, KiJana, and others will comment on upcoming games in Big Ten, ACC, and others.

I am finishing an Analysis of Holgrosen, Franklin, and Narduzzi Coaching Wins & Losses, Recruiting, and Pitt's Program Rebuilding Challenges towards Top 25, WVU's Current Top 25 Program, and Penn State Top 10-25 Program now in Full Bloom with even higher expectations for 2017, 2018 and 2019!

Hope all join in with Lair & WVU & PSU Posters valuable insights, discussions and criticisms with analysis of your own views and knowledge on CFB.

Good luck in 2017 too!

 

[pittmeister]

SV Panther wants all posts on a free PITT sports message board " sourced" as if this is a formal hearning or discovery formum.
ITS A FREAKIN CHEAP FREE UNRELIABLE PITT MESSAGE BOARD.
And who knows where half these people are posting from. They have internet access in prision, in institutions, drug & alcohol rehab centers, even under bridges where people are working out of their stolen shopping carts if they get lucky!

Some of the best discussion threads have been those where someone says:
"IMO I think--------------------------------------------------.
And the post start flying! That's what a message board is its not a court proceeding!

Bingo! His opinions and speculations are not to be questioned. However, if you post something to the contrary, he demands links and sources.... What a buffoon...

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

It is not just a Sports Entertainment Problem it is a Media problem in General, Apple could buy them all:
LINK:
Entertainment Stocks Tumble on TV Sub Losses, Ad Trend Concerns
Big media conglomerates saw their shares sell off after Turner quarterly ad revenue disappointed and Hulu unveiled its live TV bundle and pricing.

Media stocks got crushed on Wednesday as Time Warner earnings beat Wall Street expectations, but its Turner TV network's advertising revenue disappointed, and Hulu unveiled its live TV bundle and pricing. With analysts warning new digital platforms like Netflix and Hulu were undercutting broadcast profits, 21st Century Fox saw its stock fall 5 percent to $28.35, Viacom was down 7.3 percent to $41.00 ahead of a second quarter earnings release on Thursday, and AMC Networks tumbled 6.7 percent to $55.24..................After Time Warner, the media giant behind Warner Bros., HBO and the Turner TV networks that has agreed to be acquired by AT&T for $85.4 billion, reported improved first-quarter earnings that exceeded Wall Street estimates, its shares emerged from the broad market decline relatively unscathed to close Wednesday down 28 cents at $99.0
LINK:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...ks-tumble-tv-losses-ad-trend-concerns-1000032

 

[pittmeister]

Did you read the article? espn didn't say that, Swafford did.

Speaking of reading articles... There were plenty of articles condemning PSU in regards to the scandal that nitters decided to ignore. In fact they created their own reality... So reading articles and comprehending is a subject that nitters have little credibility...

 

[Hotshoe]

Speaking of reading articles... There were plenty of articles condemning PSU in regards to the scandal that nitters decided to ignore. In fact they created their own reality... So reading articles and comprehending is a subject that nitters have little credibility...

What are you a 2 year old? Do everyone a favor, stay on subject. This is a free board. The post was about the ACC Network. Is it so difficult? Take your faux outrage and shove it.

 

[Hotshoe]

Glad you are back, appreciate your football Views and Passion and hope MichNittLion, Mexidman, PSEngineer, Nittany97, WillieLump, KiJana, and others will comment on upcoming games in Big Ten, ACC, and others.

I am finishing an Analysis of Holgrosen, Franklin, and Narduzzi Coaching Wins & Losses, Recruiting, and Pitt's Program Rebuilding Challenges towards Top 25, WVU's Current Top 25 Program, and Penn State Top 10-25 Program now in Full Bloom with even higher expectations for 2017, 2018 and 2019!

Hope all join in with Lair & WVU & PSU Posters valuable insights, discussions and criticisms with analysis of your own views and knowledge on CFB.

Good luck in 2017 too!

Appreciate it. I'm here everyday, mainly on the paid board.

 

[CrazyPaco]

Ok. Let's agree that I'm stupid and the guy who authored the definitive work on ESPN is stupid.

Disney's net last year was $9.4B. $50MM or $100MM is chump change. A decimal point, if you will.

I'm not sure what John Swofford is calling you both, but it's not "informed."

 

[PittMan 72]

Appreciate that information Paco. But as we all know it won't stop the agitators, contrarians and Pitt haters from their attempts at misinformation, disinformation or rank negative speculation.

Nevertheless thanks for sharing that. John Skipper, the President of ESPN, is about as solid a source as there can be on this issue.

 

[pitt-girl]

What could change things is if Apple ends up buying Disney, as has been rumored to be of interest. How Apple might change how Disney handles or delivers ESPN, especially with regards to streaming services and synergies with products such as Apple TV and Apple streaming media services, could be interesting.

Given the ENORMOUS cash that Apple has on hand, I could see this being on the table.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/02/apples-cash-hoard-swells-to-record-256-8-billion.html

 

[Pitt is #1]

Timely.
http://www.syracuse.com/axeman/index.ssf/2017/05/acc_network_john_wildhack_syracuse_university.html

The ACC Network won't be a casualty of the cost cutting. Cost Cutting in business is always geared in two specific directions. First you cut non revenue generating expenses. Then you cut cost you can control. In other words payroll. The ACC Network is an investment in something that will generate revenue. Which means it would be one of the last expenses ESPN would cut.

 

[PHATWOOD]

The ACC Network won't be a casualty of the cost cutting. Cost Cutting in business is always geared in two specific directions. First you cut non revenue generating expenses. Then you cut cost you can control. In other words payroll. The ACC Network is an investment in something that will generate revenue. Which means it would be one of the last expenses ESPN would cut.

This.

People need to calm down. It's going to happen. ESPN still makes (Dr. Evil voice) BILLIONS of dollars.

There will be a re-adjustment in the market between cable and streaming. People will still pay for their sports.

ESPN will still make BILLIONS.

The end.

 

[pittmeister]

What are you a 2 year old? Do everyone a favor, stay on subject. This is a free board. The post was about the ACC Network. Is it so difficult? Take your faux outrage and shove it.

Did I strike a nerve nitter? I just call it the way I see it. I despise a hypocrite. Eat sh*t, nit!

 

[pittmeister]

Appreciate it. I'm here everyday, mainly on the paid board.

Stay there....

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

The ACC Network won't be a casualty of the cost cutting. Cost Cutting in business is always geared in two specific directions. First you cut non revenue generating expenses. Then you cut cost you can control. In other words payroll. The ACC Network is an investment in something that will generate revenue. Which means it would be one of the last expenses ESPN would cut.

This.

People need to calm down. It's going to happen. ESPN still makes (Dr. Evil voice) BILLIONS of dollars.

There will be a re-adjustment in the market between cable and streaming. People will still pay for their sports.

ESPN will still make BILLIONS.

The end.

People don't realize that ESPN is simply getting slimmer. They employ far too many analysts and writers. As much as I like guys like Mark May and Andy Katz, they are 2 of too many analysts.

 

[pittmeister]

Some of my fellow posters don't understand the whole concept of expansion... Especially when it comes to WVU.

1. Expansion has nothing to do with attendance. It's about TV's and new markets. East Carolina has a great game day experience along with some loyal fans that travel everywhere. But they don't bring anything to the table. WVU is in the same boat.
2. It has nothing to do with how much success on the field and on the court you've had in recent years. Conferences understand that success for most schools is cyclical. So they look for what else do you bring to the table when you are in a down cycle in your major sports. Do you have TV's? Do you have a market? Do you have tradition to sell for the brand? Award winning athletes? Championships? Hall of Fame players? Pro players
3. Chancellors decide who joins the conferences, not AD's or TV networks. They want to know if your academics are up to standard with the rest of the members. Endowments are also VERY IMPORTANT to these egg heads.

Forget about WVU. They don't fit in today's world of college athletics...

Their only hope is to hook up with the AAC or the Sun Belt. Conference USA will not work. Marshall will block them..... Ha!

 

[CrazyPaco]

Some of my fellow posters don't understand the whole concept of expansion... Especially when it comes to WVU.

1. Expansion has nothing to do with attendance. It's about TV's and new markets. East Carolina has a great game day experience along with some loyal fans that travel everywhere. But they don't bring anything to the table. WVU is in the same boat.
2. It has nothing to do with how much success on the field and on the court you've had in recent years. Conferences understand that success for most schools is cyclical. So they look for what else do you bring to the table when you are in a down cycle in your major sports. Do you have TV's? Do you have a market? Do you have tradition to sell for the brand? Award winning athletes? Championships? Hall of Fame players? Pro players
3. Chancellors decide who joins the conferences, not AD's or TV networks. They want to know if your academics are up to standard with the rest of the members. Endowments are also VERY IMPORTANT to these egg heads.

Forget about WVU. They don't fit in today's world of college athletics...

Their only hope is to hook up with the AAC or the Sun Belt. Conference USA will not work. Marshall will block them..... Ha!

I can tell you with absolute certainty that endowments don't matter two sheets in conference expansion. Academics are a bonus because it's easier to sell the peer prestige narrative, but it really is just a matter of what options are there and a conference's needs. You take the best fit for your need. You weigh pluses and minuses but $ that can be added to the pot trumps all. If there aren't better options, you take a Louisville. The ACC had a need, and Louisville filled the need best despite it not being a good academic school. No Big Ten presidents were clamoring to increase institutional collaborations with Nebraska when they took them, inffact, most of the Big10 was trying to vote them out of the AAU. Chancellors alone don't decide who joins conferences either. It's a collaborative process.

 

[SVPanther]

I'm not sure what John Swofford is calling you both, but it's not "informed."

Hilarious! And where's Obama's birth certificate!
Look. Bullsh** sells. That's how Swofford makes millions!
Point is, according to broadcast experts, no way does ESPN go linier (TV) with the ACC. Sucks, but as DW says, "Is what it is."

 

[CrazyPaco]

Hilarious! And where's Obama's birth certificate!
Look. Bullsh** sells. That's how Swofford makes millions!
Point is, according to broadcast experts, no way does ESPN go linier (TV) with the ACC. Sucks, but as DW says, "Is what it is."

What broadcast experts?

You called it, you are stupid.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Given the ENORMOUS cash that Apple has on hand, I could see this being on the table.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/02/apples-cash-hoard-swells-to-record-256-8-billion.html

Someone is thinking and not sleeping, pretty good clue too, only a Woman's Institution thinks outside of the box and not afraid to say it, and a compliment in every way.

“Those Who Tell The Stories Rule Society.” ----Plato

Media Companies are Prey for a Bigger High Tech Buyout Day & Cheaper Way & More Profitable Way for Entertainment the Viewers & Consumers want, not what Corporate Media is losing due to lack of Poor Management & Judgments! There is a better way and it no longer resides in NYC, Chicago or LA!

Great Post!

 

[SVPanther]

Get a grip. Apple is not buying Disney. Not how we roll in Silicon Valley.
Next?

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Get a grip. Apple is not buying Disney. Not how we roll in Silicon Valley.
Next?

I respect your opinions in the discussion and bringing up the subject if ESPN continues to downsize it may affect ACCN but others counter it as well, but still a good discussion.

However, on Apple you revealed your Confirmation Bias Can Be Deadly to any arguments and doing a little background checks is not a vice a Forensic Experts Advice. For example, I do not need to refute your own....Absence Of Evidence Such As Your Opinion Is Not Evidence!

Your Opinion needs foundations not gripes and grips and Disney may be selling ESPN....Sometime context is necessary for some, with an Easy Link Check that can refute you!

Apple To Release Two Reality Shows This Year, Explore Entertainment Industry
Feb 14, 2017 @ 02:09 PM
Apple is gunning to be more than a hardware company--now, it's edging in on Netflix's turf by producing its own original video content to sell in the Apple Music store. Late Monday, Apple revealed trailers for two of its upcoming reality shows for 2017: Planet Of The Apps and Carpool Karaoke.

“There are a bunch of projects. We’re in it. This is what Apple Music is going to be,” Apple's Jimmy Iovine told The New York Times. “Apple Music will have video and other things that I can’t talk about. We’re going to be aggressive about it.”......................
LINK:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/shelby...-explore-entertainment-industry/#1047db2176f4

Additionally, Apple can buy anyone right now and a Link To Think!

Apple reportedly exploring big acquisition in Hollywood entertainment

Mar 3, 2017, 6:31am PST Updated Mar 3, 2017, 7:34am PST
Apple executives were again in Hollywood last week, this time meeting with top entertainment producers and executives from Paramount and Sony, about buying new original content, or buying entire production companies outright, the New York Post reports.


The Cupertino-based computing giant could be exploring a acquisition in the entertainment space, the Post said. The news follows unconfirmed reports last month that Apple had once considered buying Ron Howard’s production company, Imagine Entertainment.................Apple ended 2016 with $246 billion in cash, enough to buy Netflix four times over or HBO’s parent company, Time Warner, three times over. Apple has so much cash on hand it could conceivably buy both Netflix and Time Warner at today’s values and still have $110 billion in the bank.
LINK:
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/...production-paramount-sony-hollywood-deal.html

 

[SVPanther]

Your Opinion needs foundations not gripes and grips and Disney may be selling ESPN....Sometime context is necessary!

Because Silicon Valley doesn't do theme parks. I thought that would be intuitive.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/13/inve...ch-stock-in-the-appledisney-takeout-talk.html

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Because Silicon Valley doesn't do theme parks. I thought that would be intuitive.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/13/inve...ch-stock-in-the-appledisney-takeout-talk.html

Agree, Apple can find better content deals but I never posted they would buy Disney but I did point out Disney may sell ESPN! Again, you need to read better than being intuitive.

I posted that I enjoyed and respected your positions and still do because ESPN troubles could spell troubles for Sports Content and you brought up a great Topic.

On the other hand, Disney is also powerful enough to could buy a Company like NetFlixs that can transform ESPN to be better and more profitable to fix it. ESPN is still a major part of revenues for DMN, but cannot be ignored to increase stock valuations, dividends and remove Stake Holders fears over current ESPN issues.

But that would mean ESPN would still be in Business and maybe stop the bleeding and increase profits but then would still be a partner with ACCN and that would undercut your position as well.

Part Of The Link You Did Not Read:
“If Apple is fully committed … I don’t see them doing this as a startup. It’s too small. It’s too hard. I see them buying something first,” the Post reported, quoting an unnamed source.

Buying content, or the content creator itself, marks a departure for Apple, which has traditionally offered up the platform and marketplace for others to distribute content on. The company could be telegraphing that it isn’t content with taking the back seat in subscription-based content, and is willing to use its cash reserves to buy a seat at the table.
LINK:
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/...production-paramount-sony-hollywood-deal.html

I also like the Link you put up, it enhances sharing to learn on the Lair, defending and supporting your positions, and increasing the discussions, and I Thank You doing it!

 

[pittmeister]

I can tell you with absolute certainty that endowments don't matter two sheets in conference expansion. Academics are a bonus because it's easier to sell the peer prestige narrative, but it really is just a matter of what options are there and a conference's needs. You take the best fit for your need. You weigh pluses and minuses but $ that can be added to the pot trumps all. If there aren't better options, you take a Louisville. The ACC had a need, and Louisville filled the need best despite it not being a good academic school. No Big Ten presidents were clamoring to increase institutional collaborations with Nebraska when they took them, inffact, most of the Big10 was trying to vote them out of the AAU. Chancellors alone don't decide who joins conferences either. It's a collaborative process.

If none of what you say matters, how did Pitt and Syracuse get into the ACC? Strictly TV's and new markets??? If that's the case, Cincinnati, UConn, Temple, Memphis, Tulane ALL should have gotten in before Pitt & Suracuse... The Chancellors have the final word. It is up to everyone else to make a case to them...

As far as endowment is concerned, please google; endowment + conference expansion....

 

[DC_Area_Panther]

This.

People need to calm down. It's going to happen. ESPN still makes (Dr. Evil voice) BILLIONS of dollars.

There will be a re-adjustment in the market between cable and streaming. People will still pay for their sports.

ESPN will still make BILLIONS.

The end.

Of course, people will still pay for their sports--but only if they are sports fans. A very very large number of people are not sports fans. The bundled cable/satelite model makes these non-sports fans subsidize sports. In the future, unless the streaming services adopt a similar business model, this portion of the sports revenue stream will disappear.

The result, in the short term, will probably mean that sports fans will have to pay more to get the sports they want--probably via mostly a pay per view scenario. If this drives the price too high and revenues drop; then, ultimately, the new deals with the pro-sports leagues will get less for their product and pro-athlete salaries will drop in response. This will probably also drop revenues to the NCAA . The effect of getting less money that way could have a negative effect on Pitt if ACC revenues drop.

Whatever happens will unfold over time.

 

[CrazyPaco]

If none of what you say matters, how did Pitt and Syracuse get into the ACC? Strictly TV's and new markets??? If that's the case, Cincinnati, UConn, Temple, Memphis, Tulane ALL should have gotten in before Pitt & Suracuse... The Chancellors have the final word. It is up to everyone else to make a case to them...

As far as endowment is concerned, please google; endowment + conference expansion....

Pitt and Syracuse got in because of the potential to bring additional money to the ACC members and because they fit the ACC's decade-old strategy of moving into the Northeast in order to become the conference of the entire east coast. Their invite was due to markets, the ability to draw tv ratings, combined with football pedigree. A comfort level with the institutional values and stability were a plus for institutional fit, but not the overarching reason they got an invite. Football pedigree, tv ratings, and proper geography is a combination that none of the other schools you listed had.

Endowments are nothing more than one, often misused, component of a measure of an institutions' financial strength, with which you have to also factor in with public subsidization, research income, and demand and number of undergraduate slots because that speaks to what is typically the largest source of income for a school, tuition $. Endowments are also largely restricted to specific purposes, most of which are not athletics, and generate a small % of a school's overall operating revenue (at Pitt it is about 5.6% of the overall budget). The credit rating of a school is a much better indicator of overall financial strength and stability, as these are produced by people that know what the hell they are talking about, but really conferences will be more interested at looking at athletic revenues and budgets. You know that Tulane and Cincinnati have larger endowments than Syracuse (and a large chunk of the rest of the ACC)? The endowment specific to Maryland-College Park is less than them too, and also is less than Temple's & UConn's.

Let me guess, what comes up when you google expansion and endowment sites are blogger sites that speculate based on other blogger sheet. Don't be a Dude. Endowments values in isolation have absolutely zip to do with it. It is non-nonsensical. And anyone that says that they do, and produce a comparison table with endowment size suggesting it as some sort of college dick measuring indicator, even if they are an actual professional journalist (several of which were revealed as lazy hacks copying blog drivel), can be discredited as not knowing what they were writing about on the subject. It's the same idiotic way the urban myth of AAU membership, or the using the CIC, as sort of driving factor in expansion, was spread by those that have no idea what AAU or CIC membership actually means for an institution. When you see those buzz acronyms in relation to conference expansion, 9 out of 10 times you quit reading immediately.

 

[Jpripper88]

Right, and "in jeopardy of being supported" has a clear meaning.

For success. That doesn't mean there won't be a network. There are plenty of networks (and especially streaming options) which survive, but do not thrive.

Reading the entire sentence (not even the post, but just the whole sentence you are quoting and trying to extrapolate meaning from) is very key. Work on it a little longer and you just might get it. I wish you good luck.

 

[topdecktiger]

For success. That doesn't mean there won't be a network. There are plenty of networks (and especially streaming options) which survive, but do not thrive.

Reading the entire sentence (not even the post, but just the whole sentence you are quoting and trying to extrapolate meaning from) is very key. Work on it a little longer and you just might get it. I wish you good luck.

Yeah, I read your whole sentence, your whole post, and the whole posts prior.

The only way ESPN can inadequately support the network is not to air it. For some reason, people can't grasp the concept of how this works. ESPN owns the ACC rights to begin with. They already broadcast all these games. For example, let's take your typical Miami-Duke game that usually goes on ESPNU. What ESPN does is send a crew up from Charlotte to Raleigh to broadcast the game. For the ACCN........ESPN will send a crew up from Charlotte to Raleigh to broadcast the game. Basically, the only difference is they flip a different switch. Same show, different channel.

Point being, there really isn't a way for ESPN to inadequately support the network. They are just taking content they already produce, and switch it to a different platform. They don't even have to invest in new facilities, because they already have them (conveniently located in Charlotte) for ESPNU and SECN.

Aside from that, the topic wasn't how well the ACCN would do. The topic was whether or not it would get on the air.

 

[Jpripper88]

Yeah, I read your whole sentence, your whole post, and the whole posts prior.

The only way ESPN can inadequately support the network is not to air it. For some reason, people can't grasp the concept of how this works. ESPN owns the ACC rights to begin with. They already broadcast all these games. For example, let's take your typical Miami-Duke game that usually goes on ESPNU. What ESPN does is send a crew up from Charlotte to Raleigh to broadcast the game. For the ACCN........ESPN will send a crew up from Charlotte to Raleigh to broadcast the game. Basically, the only difference is they flip a different switch. Same show, different channel.

Point being, there really isn't a way for ESPN to inadequately support the network. They are just taking content they already produce, and switch it to a different platform. They don't even have to invest in new facilities, because they already have them (conveniently located in Charlotte) for ESPNU and SECN.

Aside from that, the topic wasn't how well the ACCN would do. The topic was whether or not it would get on the air.

1. They weren't already producing the content, which is why the ACC institutions are in the process of establishing their infrastructure for it. There will be a lot, lot more content to produce and essentially act as dead air filler to most viewers.
2. Carriage, bundling, and revenue could absolutely be an issue and ESPN plays an enormous part in that.
3. They have already announced reductions in ESPNU operations in Charlotte.
4. Yes, the OP asked: "Is the ACCN dead?" I was responding that it wouldn't be dead, but there are valid concerns over whether it would be supported in a way to make sure it was successful.

This shouldn't be hard to follow.

 

[HailToPitt71]

Timely.
http://www.syracuse.com/axeman/index.ssf/2017/05/acc_network_john_wildhack_syracuse_university.html

Your source concedes to the Syracuse AD.

 

[topdecktiger]

1. They weren't already producing the content, which is why the ACC institutions are in the process of establishing their infrastructure for it. There will be a lot, lot more content to produce and essentially act as dead air filler to most viewers.
2. Carriage, bundling, and revenue could absolutely be an issue and ESPN plays an enormous part in that.
3. They have already announced reductions in ESPNU operations in Charlotte.
4. Yes, the OP asked: "Is the ACCN dead?" I was responding that it wouldn't be dead, but there are valid concerns over whether it would be supported in a way to make sure it was successful.

This shouldn't be hard to follow.

1. They were already producing the football and basketball content, which is all that matters for the network. You just said yourself that the olympic sports and filler content will be produced by the individual schools. Well, there you go. ESPN doesn't have to do anything differently than they are already doing to support the network.

2. Again, that has nothing to do with support. If ESPN didn't support that network, that would mean they don't even air it. How much they get for carriage fees, which bundle includes the network isn't even ESPN decision. That ultimately comes down to the cable providers.

3. Right. And again, I'll point out, it's the same either way, whether a game is on ESPNU or ACCN.

4. Yet again, the success of the network has nothing to do with the OP's point. He's arguing it won't even get off the ground. The relative success of the network is a moot point in that discussion.

 

[Pitt4Life34]

The ACC Network does not go live until 2019. With the continuing deterioration of ESPN's subscriber base, it would not be unreasonable for ESPN to junk the idea and not move forward.
In that event, the whole "Grant of Rights" become problematic. After all, the intent was more to leverage the conference negotiating as a block on the theory that the revenue yield would be greater than if schools negotiated separately.
So, if ESPN puts the kybosh to the ACC Network, then the conference is left negotiating a much smaller package.
So what's a reasonable AD to do? Look to see what better deal might be had with another conference or, some ACC schools banding together to do their own network thing which obviously works against the interest of schools with less of a following.
Just throwing it out there, but the cost cutting at ESPN shows no end and the ACC Network would be a prime target to cut.

Report this please. You're an idiot that lessons the integrity of this site. Your thread is an embarrassment to by the moderators every minute it stays up. Not even a good quality funny troll. Chris it's this stuff that makes good long term members sake their heads.

 

[Pitt4Life34]

Well, that's not quite how it works.
There is a concept called "efficient breach of contract" which holds that in cases where you can avoid prospective losses, or make more profit on another opportunity compared to the one you are presently engaged in, the economically efficient thing to do is breach the contract and pay damages on the theory you'll come out better in the long run. So to say "ESPN can't get out of its contract" is patently wrong. Either party has the power to breach and it often makes sense to do so.
So what damages would ESPN have to pay? Different formulations, by generally it would be the difference between the ESPN/ACC contract and what another broadcaster would pay the ACC. That's the battle of expert witnesses.
Another intreaguing idea would be just to put ESPN in Chapter 11 thereby opening up renegotiation of all their broadcast contracts (the NBA one is an albatross).
Who know what happens but as others have posted, events are moving rapidly. I presume that the conferences have contingency plans in place. Would be prudent under the circumstances, no?

The ACC has the TVs so alls good pal. Thanks for your concerns but time to move along son.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

The ACC has the TVs so alls good pal. Thanks for your concerns but time to move along son.

SVPanther is a Lame PSU Fan and they are Chicken Little's Cult Dolts that trace back their Brain Pains when Pitt won a National Championship before Paterno. Patreno whine about that too, when Johnny & Jackie took enough Recruits from Penn State until Ref Guman gave them some games as his Son's Played on PSU Scholarship while his Father Ref the Games.

Now Pitt is stopping Penn State from competing with BIG TEN TWO just like Paterno could not beat them without Athletic Integrity. Franklin is trying to do it under Athletic Integrity and doing a better job right now but he was brought in by Erickson and Joyner the very people that fired and replaced Paterno!

Go check his posts and look at his logo, it fits him, and he cries like a Cowardly Lion Lacking Courage to be just himself and that is fine and dandy now that he exposed himself on the Lair!

In 1976 he despised Pitt winning the NCS and 2016 he is upset Pitt beat Big Ten Champion Penn State and kept them out of the CFB Playoffs where they would have been beaten badly by Clemson that Pitt beat too.

SVPee is even more envious that Pitt is in the ACC and they won Football and Basketball National Championships as Big Ten was exposed as weak and overrated league in both sports.

So he runs around like the Boy Calling Wolf and Chicken Little upset with ACCN and only Silly Valley produces Cult Dolts Fans like SVPee,

SUCCESS BUILT ON SCANDAL!

SVP Crybabies are not men just babies!

 

[phxpanther]

Ok. Let's agree that I'm stupid and the guy who authored the definitive work on ESPN is stupid.

Disney's net last year was $9.4B. $50MM or $100MM is chump change. A decimal point, if you will.

Finally, you got something right. You are stupid. And sound like a fool this entire thread. ACCN is a go, according to none other than John Skipper.

 

[Begbie_Nole]

Well, that's not quite how it works.
There is a concept called "efficient breach of contract" which holds that in cases where you can avoid prospective losses, or make more profit on another opportunity compared to the one you are presently engaged in, the economically efficient thing to do is breach the contract and pay damages on the theory you'll come out better in the long run. So to say "ESPN can't get out of its contract" is patently wrong. Either party has the power to breach and it often makes sense to do so.
So what damages would ESPN have to pay? Different formulations, by generally it would be the difference between the ESPN/ACC contract and what another broadcaster would pay the ACC. That's the battle of expert witnesses.
Another intreaguing idea would be just to put ESPN in Chapter 11 thereby opening up renegotiation of all their broadcast contracts (the NBA one is an albatross).
Who know what happens but as others have posted, events are moving rapidly. I presume that the conferences have contingency plans in place. Would be prudent under the circumstances, no?

ESPN makes tons of cash.. just less then they want and lower then projections. They are going bankrupt