I predict Pac-12 signs deal with Turner

[HailToPitt725]

It makes sense and checks off a lot of boxes:

- ABC, CBS, FOX, and NBC are already committed to other power conferences. NBC also has Notre Dame while ABC has been ruled out as a result of ESPN not in active talks with the Pac-12.

- Turner (TNT, TBS, TruTV) is already involved with the NCAA via March Madness and has grown their sports package with the MLB, NBA, and now NHL. This also means they could show games on multiple channels while having contingencies for games running over.

- Turner/Warner Bros recently rebranded HBO Max to just Max as a way to advertise their additional content. A sports streaming package would be a perfect complement to the rest of the service, and HBO could do a weekly series surrounding the league like it has with the NHL’s Road to the Winter Classic.

Just a hunch.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Maybe the ACC can ink a deal with Turner and get that per school revenue up .. oh wait .. some dumbass commissioner locked everyone into the worst deal since the Louisiana Purchase.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Maybe the ACC can ink a deal with Turner and get that per school revenue up .. oh wait .. some dumbass commissioner locked everyone into the worst deal since the Louisiana Purchase.

Just so we are all on the same page, you mean the deal that is the entire reason why the ACC exists in anything resembling it's current form today, that deal?

 

[pittchagg]

I could see it. I think Turner’s going to lose the NBA in a few years as they shift away from cable and more towards an OTA and streaming model. And even if they don’t lose out entirely, I think they’ll get way less inventory than they have now. So they’re going to have inventory to fill.

 

[HailToPitt725]

I could see it. I think Turner’s going to lose the NBA in a few years as they shift away from cable and more towards an OTA and streaming model. And even if they don’t lose out entirely, I think they’ll get way less inventory than they have now. So they’re going to have inventory to fill.

This is a good point. Lots of stuff going on behind the scenes with the NBA (and MLB, and NHL). Looks like they want to buy the RSN rights and create a D2C streaming platform.

I could see the NBA going a split OTA deal with ABC and CBS/NBC while turning League Pass into something similar to what the MLS has with Apple TV.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Just so we are all on the same page, you mean the deal that is the entire reason why the ACC exists in anything resembling it's current form today, that deal?

What?

 

[JD1976]

Turner puts out the best live sports programming in my opinion. Their NHL and NBA coverage is way ahead of anyone else.

 

[pittdan77]

Maybe the ACC can ink a deal with Turner and get that per school revenue up .. oh wait .. some dumbass commissioner locked everyone into the worst deal since the Louisiana Purchase.

That's beautifully ironic. Almost like the long-term aspects of a deal probably are what matters.

 

[pittchagg]

This is a good point. Lots of stuff going on behind the scenes with the NBA (and MLB, and NHL). Looks like they want to buy the RSN rights and create a D2C streaming platform.

I could see the NBA going a split OTA deal with ABC and CBS/NBC while turning League Pass into something similar to what the MLS has with Apple TV.

Yeah, I’m really interested by what the Suns did: basically abandoning the RSN/cable model for local broadcasts and implementing their own OTA model on their local CBS channel and their affiliates, so that every Suns and Mercury game that used to be on their RSN will now be free over the air. And if you’re out of market, they’re building their own streaming service. They’re basically betting on raw access and viewership rather than the higher upfront payment that they might get through a media rights deal with a subscriber-only RSN. Like if every Penguins game that’s on Root Sports was on KDKA instead, but if it’s all produced by the Penguins in-house.

From what I’ve read, the NBA apparatus at large is pushing for something similar across the board. They want to be over the air as much as possible, and streaming for most of the rest. It’s why I wouldn’t be surprised if the NBA’s new deal is something like a combo of ABC/ESPN and NBC in largely OTA deals (NBC apparently wants the NBA back badly), and I wouldn’t be surprised to see someone like Amazon Prime pay an absolute bundle for the international rights and some domestic streaming. They lost out on the Big Ten deal late in the process, and that money’s burning a hole in their pocket.

 

[pittdan77]

Yeah, I’m really interested by what the Suns did: basically abandoning the RSN/cable model for local broadcasts and implementing their own OTA model on their local CBS channel and their affiliates, so that every Suns and Mercury game that used to be on their RSN will now be free over the air. And if you’re out of market, they’re building their own streaming service. They’re basically betting on raw access and viewership rather than the higher upfront payment that they might get through a media rights deal with a subscriber-only RSN. Like if every Penguins game that’s on Root Sports was on KDKA instead, but if it’s all produced by the Penguins in-house.

From what I’ve read, the NBA apparatus at large is pushing for something similar across the board. They want to be over the air as much as possible, and streaming for most of the rest. It’s why I wouldn’t be surprised if the NBA’s new deal is something like a combo of ABC/ESPN and NBC in largely OTA deals (NBC apparently wants the NBA back badly), and I wouldn’t be surprised to see someone like Amazon Prime pay an absolute bundle for the international rights and some domestic streaming. They lost out on the Big Ten deal late in the process, and that money’s burning a hole in their pocket.

Suppose that would be comparable to Tier 3, in NCAA football terms?

 

[pittchagg]

Suppose that would be comparable to Tier 3, in NCAA football terms?

A little, but it’s more extensive than that. So for the Sixers, for example - who, because they’re good with marketable personalities were picked up for national broadcasts more often - 70 of their 82 regular season games were broadcast over NBC Sports Philadelphia. So even for the good teams, a HUGE amount of inventory goes to the RSN’s under the current deal.

That’s not really an issue for a team like the Sixers, because NBC Sports Philadelphia is pretty healthy - the Phillies own 25% and the rest is owned by NBC Sports/Comcast, so it’s essentially their flagship station, and they have the local inventory for the Sixers and Flyers, on top of the Phillies and Union. But given the overall uncertainty about RSN’s in the smaller markets, Phoenix being one of them, the NBA has gotten a little nervous and they’re trying to stay ahead of what they see as a downward trend for RSN’s. And an OTA/streaming model is the more ironclad solution.

 

[HailtoPitt]

That's beautifully ironic. Almost like the long-term aspects of a deal probably are what matters.

I was talking about the bad end of that deal.

 

[pittdan77]

I was talking about the bad end of that deal.

I think the perceived "bad" of the deal is more bluster than anything. Yes, we all know it's not SEC/B1G money but I don't know who thought it would be. If you look at what it has accomplished and compare it to what the Pac12 is dealing with, it's pretty good. The Big12 probably isn't going to be in a great spot either. If the ACC is firmly sitting in third in a few years, that might be pretty good considering they got a network out of it and could have others clamoring to join. Right now, the length of the deal is holding things together which is also good news.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

What?

What do you mean, what? If they ACC hadn't signed that deal years ago along with the accompanying GOR that came along with it, the ACC would not exist in anything resembling it's current form today. Several of the schools, including all of the most valuable ones, would have already left. Just like Oklahoma and Texas left the Big 12 and USC and UCLA left the PAC12. If the ACC still existed it would be a pale imitation of what it actually is now.

So yeah, maybe we could have made a few million extra dollars years ago. Maybe. But we'd be in a much, much worse place today. We'd be making far, far fewer dollars today in a conference that no one cares about.

 

[HailtoPitt]

What do you mean, what? If they ACC hadn't signed that deal years ago along with the accompanying GOR that came along with it, the ACC would not exist in anything resembling it's current form today. Several of the schools, including all of the most valuable ones, would have already left. Just like Oklahoma and Texas left the Big 12 and USC and UCLA left the PAC12. If the ACC still existed it would be a pale imitation of what it actually is now.

So yeah, maybe we could have made a few million extra dollars years ago. Maybe. But we'd be in a much, much worse place today. We'd be making far, far fewer dollars today in a conference that no one cares about.

Or, the ACC would be gearing up to negotiate a new tv deal, say in 2026, where the per schools revenue would be quite a bit higher and Clemson and FSU would be happier.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Or, the ACC would be gearing up to negotiate a new tv deal, say in 2026, where the per schools revenue would be quite a bit higher and Clemson and FSU would be happier.

If you think that the ACC would be gearing up to sign a deal for anything close to what the SEC and the Big Ten are getting then you simply have no idea what you are talking about.

Under your scenario we would also be making less money per year on our "current" deal, and there almost certainly wouldn't be an ACC Network (or we'd have had to go it alone like the PAC12 did) and that would cost us even more money (in either scenario).

So less money in the past, less money now, and with the best teams gone less money in the future. The perfect lose, lose, lose scenario!

 

[HailtoPitt]

If you think that the ACC would be gearing up to sign a deal for anything close to what the SEC and the Big Ten are getting then you simply have no idea what you are talking about.

Under your scenario we would also be making less money per year on our "current" deal, and there almost certainly wouldn't be an ACC Network (or we'd have had to go it alone like the PAC12 did) and that would cost us even more money (in either scenario).

So less money in the past, less money now, and with the best teams gone less money in the future. The perfect lose, lose, lose scenario!

Wrong. Swofford made a guess that the 20 year deal would be good in he long run, thinking that cable networks would have less to spend as people pulled the plug. He was wrong, as the new BIG real demonstrated.

 

[Gep Dawg]

I think the ACC deal would have been fine if it wasn't so long. Or at least had some sort of kicker in their that ESPN had to at least keep annual TC payout within 25% of other big conference payouts or allow the league to opt out as a whole if the deal became so uncompetitive. 20 years is a long time to not be able to go to fair market and get a fair deal.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Wrong. Swofford made a guess that the 20 year deal would be good in he long run, thinking that cable networks would have less to spend as people pulled the plug. He was wrong, as the new BIG real demonstrated.

The fact that you think it's wrong doesn't mean it is, it simply means that you don't know what's gone on.

They would absolutely not have an ACC Network if everyone didn't sign a long term grant of rights. Or if they did it would be a half-assed one like the PAC Network. Or something that was only available on ESPN+, like the Big 12 (not really a) Network. ESPN wanted assurances that all the schools, especially the most valuable ones, were going to be sticking around long term, because the first years of the network incur more costs while bringing in less money. They make more money, for instance, in year five or year eight then they do in year one or year two. When they get to the point that they are going to be really making money they can't have the top two or three or four or six ratings draws leaving to go someplace else.

If it isn't completely obvious to you that the one and only thing that is keeping the ACC in tact right now is the long term grant of rights, which is inextricably linked to the current television deal, then you have absolutely not been paying attention to what has gone on the last couple of years.

 

[pittchagg]

The fact that you think it's wrong doesn't mean it is, it simply means that you don't know what's gone on.

They would absolutely not have an ACC Network if everyone didn't sign a long term grant of rights. Or if they did it would be a half-assed one like the PAC Network. Or something that was only available on ESPN+, like the Big 12 (not really a) Network. ESPN wanted assurances that all the schools, especially the most valuable ones, were going to be sticking around long term, because the first years of the network incur more costs while bringing in less money. They make more money, for instance, in year five or year eight then they do in year one or year two. When they get to the point that they are going to be really making money they can't have the top two or three or four or six ratings draws leaving to go someplace else.

If it isn't completely obvious to you that the one and only thing that is keeping the ACC in tact right now is the long term grant of rights, which is inextricably linked to the current television deal, then you have absolutely not been paying attention to what has gone on the last couple of years.

Just to drive this point home, here’s the ACC’s TV revenue per year in each year of the current TV deal. Look at the big, sustained jumps in annual revenue each year after the ACC Network launches about a month into the 2019-20 fiscal year.

2015-16: $226M (last year of old deal)
2016-17: $236M (+$10M, 4.4%)
2017-18: $277M (+$41M, 17%)
2018-19: $288M (+$11M, 3.9%)

ACC Network launches 8/2019

2019-20: $333M (+$45M, 15.6%)
2020-21: $398M (+$65M, 19.5%)
2021-22: $443M (+$45M, 11.3%)

It’s reasonable to project a similar 10-15% jump in 2022-23 (the fiscal year that ends in a month) - so let’s say that the ACC reports $500M in TV revenue this time next year. Notre Dame got $17M from the ACC this year, so let’s call that $20M next year. $480 divided between the other 14 schools is just over $34M. That, plus the other distributions from the ACC (including the $25M from the Orange Bowl, which wasn’t part of the newest numbers because it was a playoff game), and you get to $45M or more next year pretty easily.

 

[pittdan77]

I think the ACC deal would have been fine if it wasn't so long. Or at least had some sort of kicker in their that ESPN had to at least keep annual TC payout within 25% of other big conference payouts or allow the league to opt out as a whole if the deal became so uncompetitive. 20 years is a long time to not be able to go to fair market and get a fair deal.

If the deal wasn't so long, the ACC wouldn't exist. It's sort of silly to think that when all of this was going on, ESPN wasn't looking at all of their conference TV deals and not thinking about how to maximize value. Of course they were going to pay big for the SEC and their Big12 money wasn't performing as well as it could because the Longhorn Network was such a failure. The ACC was underperforming because they didn't have anywhere to broadcast most of their games. They could have easily tried to break the conference up right there but they didn't. Big12 wasn't as lucky.

I think what everyone misses is that the deal was constructed to create the ACCN as much as anything. It was ESPN throwing their weight around that got the network on every cable package in the country. That "cost" is really an investment. It doesn't show up on the bottom line but it's very real to the conference. The deal needed a longer period to make that investment worth it.

Look, the Pac12 and Big12 need to get their deals done to provide perspective but that's where it stands. I doubt anyone is sitting on their hands in Charlotte, either. It's not realistic to think there is as much value in the ACC as the SEC or B1G but the situation could be infinitely worse.

 

[Gep Dawg]

Hey if the deal keeps increasing like it has since the launch of ACC Network than that's fine. And I'm totally ok with the long GOR agreement its great for the conference as a whole. I never had a problem with that part of the deal. My point was that the TV contract didn't have to be 20 years as well. That's an insane and unprecedented capitulation to a major network. 10 years would have been more than long enough for ESPN to recoup their investment. At least have some sort of opt out or renegotiating window for the conference after 10-15 years because the deal might and very well could be obsolete by 2036. It doesn't help ESPN if the conference falls too far behind either. I'm assuming ACC and ESPN maybe thought ACC would recruit more schools or Notre Dame would join to open up the window that way. But with other 4 conferences making more money per team now on TV that might not be possible anymore.

 

[pittchagg]

Hey if the deal keeps increasing like it has since the launch of ACC Network than that's fine. And I'm totally ok with the long GOR agreement its great for the conference as a whole. I never had a problem with that part of the deal. My point was that the TV contract didn't have to be 20 years as well. That's an insane and unprecedented capitulation to a major network. 10 years would have been more than long enough for ESPN to recoup their investment. At least have some sort of opt out or renegotiating window for the conference after 10-15 years because the deal might and very well could be obsolete by 2036. It doesn't help ESPN if the conference falls too far behind either. I'm assuming ACC and ESPN maybe thought ACC would recruit more schools or Notre Dame would join to open up the window that way. But with other 4 conferences making more money per team now on TV that might not be possible anymore.

The deal has three windows where the ACC and ESPN review the contract: 2021, 2026, and 2031.

And the ACC’s deal makes more TV money than the Big 12 and the Pac 12.

 

[Gep Dawg]

The deal has three windows where the ACC and ESPN review the contract: 2021, 2026, and 2031.

And the ACC’s deal makes more TV money than the Big 12 and the Pac 12.

If true, that's great. I'd like to see that. I haven't read that anywhere but I'll take it to be true if you have.

Also, I know ACC deal makes more money now but we probably won't when those current conference deals expire and the negotiate new ones. Hence why if they do have ability to renegotiate with ESPN in good faith that's a really good thing.

 

[pittchagg]

If true, that's great. I'd like to see that. I haven't read that anywhere but I'll take it to be true if you have.

Also, I know ACC deal makes more money now but we probably won't when those current conference deals expire and the negotiate new ones. Hence why if they do have ability to renegotiate with ESPN in good faith that's a really good thing.

I haven’t seen it reported widespread. Here’s a reference to it in an article that was published shortly after the deal was signed in 2016. https://floridastate.rivals.com/news/acc-network-contract-look-ins-provide-comfort-to-fsu-s-thrasher

 

[ThePanthers]

Hey if the deal keeps increasing like it has since the launch of ACC Network than that's fine. And I'm totally ok with the long GOR agreement its great for the conference as a whole. I never had a problem with that part of the deal. My point was that the TV contract didn't have to be 20 years as well. That's an insane and unprecedented capitulation to a major network. 10 years would have been more than long enough for ESPN to recoup their investment. At least have some sort of opt out or renegotiating window for the conference after 10-15 years because the deal might and very well could be obsolete by 2036. It doesn't help ESPN if the conference falls too far behind either. I'm assuming ACC and ESPN maybe thought ACC would recruit more schools or Notre Dame would join to open up the window that way. But with other 4 conferences making more money per team now on TV that might not be possible anymore.

You realize the sec deal to create the sec network is 20 years as well. The portion espn owned when the secn was created ends in 2034. What went in the sec favor was the game of the week CBS owned. Espn bought that up for a premium. But to get the secn the sec had to sign a 20 year contract as well.

 

[Gep Dawg]

I haven’t seen it reported widespread. Here’s a reference to it in an article that was published shortly after the deal was signed in 2016. https://floridastate.rivals.com/news/acc-network-contract-look-ins-provide-comfort-to-fsu-s-thrasher

I'm glad to see this. I have a feeling both sides have to agree to make changes. But realized that ESPN might also need to rethink the deal as well considering the changing landscape of cable TV

What I would like to see is ESPN do a better job promoting the ACC with its gameday locations and games of the week. I thought they could have done a better job with that last year especially after they knew B10 was leaving. SEC is obviously going to always be number one. By why not start running ACC exclusively at the noon window on ABC. Maybe they were limited contractually but hopefully we see more of that this year.

 

[pittchagg]

I'm glad to see this. I have a feeling both sides have to agree to make changes. But realized that ESPN might also need to rethink the deal as well considering the changing landscape of cable TV

What I would like to see is ESPN do a better job promoting the ACC with its gameday locations and games of the week. I thought they could have done a better job with that last year especially after they knew B10 was leaving. SEC is obviously going to always be number one. By why not start running ACC exclusively at the noon window on ABC. Maybe they were limited contractually but hopefully we see more of that this year.

We’ll definitely see more ACC games on ABC and the primary ESPN channel this year. ABC/ESPN won’t have any Big Ten inventory, and the 3:30 SEC on CBS spot still exists for this year. It’ll only be a temporary boost because I’m sure that ESPN will move a lot of SEC inventory to ABC when they get the full inventory next year, but it’ll be a solid bump for a year!

 

[cashisking884]

I'm glad to see this. I have a feeling both sides have to agree to make changes. But realized that ESPN might also need to rethink the deal as well considering the changing landscape of cable TV

What I would like to see is ESPN do a better job promoting the ACC with its gameday locations and games of the week. I thought they could have done a better job with that last year especially after they knew B10 was leaving. SEC is obviously going to always be number one. By why not start running ACC exclusively at the noon window on ABC. Maybe they were limited contractually but hopefully we see more of that this year.

If you have something, even if just for one year, and it’s your money maker, you’re going to take advantage of it.

There just wasn’t much to promote in the ACC last year. The problem with ACC viewership is that the built in audience isn’t great. So you need the bandwagon fans from the school, and the casual CFB fan, to draw an audience. Whereas with the Big Ten and SEC, there’s a much higher viewership floor.