(02-12-2013 11:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  attackcoog and billings nailed it. NBC is cheap. They won't pony up anything if they don't have to. Unless the look ins are specifically tied to ratings measures, the deal won't get any better as NBC has no incentive to increase the deal on their own. As for why 6 years, that's probably what it took to get to $20M/year. I'd almost wonder if the BE could be getting $15M/year if it went year-to-year.

But with this low of a deal, is it still fair that the incoming schools have to pay ANYTHING for an entrance fee? $2.5M seems awful steep to only get about $700K more per year.

Have we forgotten what NBC-SN was willing to pay for the Pac-12?

It may not be NBC-SN that's the problem.

(02-15-2013 03:13 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 11:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  attackcoog and billings nailed it. NBC is cheap. They won't pony up anything if they don't have to. Unless the look ins are specifically tied to ratings measures, the deal won't get any better as NBC has no incentive to increase the deal on their own. As for why 6 years, that's probably what it took to get to $20M/year. I'd almost wonder if the BE could be getting $15M/year if it went year-to-year.

But with this low of a deal, is it still fair that the incoming schools have to pay ANYTHING for an entrance fee? $2.5M seems awful steep to only get about $700K more per year.

Have we forgotten what NBC-SN was willing to pay for the Pac-12?

It may not be NBC-SN that's the problem.

No, they were not willing to pay for the Pac12. That negotiation was a normal free market bidding situation. They had an opportunity to raise ther bid after the combined Fox/ESPN bid. NBC passed.

(02-15-2013 09:17 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 03:13 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 11:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  attackcoog and billings nailed it. NBC is cheap. They won't pony up anything if they don't have to. Unless the look ins are specifically tied to ratings measures, the deal won't get any better as NBC has no incentive to increase the deal on their own. As for why 6 years, that's probably what it took to get to $20M/year. I'd almost wonder if the BE could be getting $15M/year if it went year-to-year.

But with this low of a deal, is it still fair that the incoming schools have to pay ANYTHING for an entrance fee? $2.5M seems awful steep to only get about $700K more per year.

Have we forgotten what NBC-SN was willing to pay for the Pac-12?

It may not be NBC-SN that's the problem.

No, they were not willing to pay for the Pac12. That negotiation was a normal free market bidding situation. They had an opportunity to raise ther bid after the combined Fox/ESPN bid. NBC passed.

Yeah, but they did bid a LOT.

(02-15-2013 09:17 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 03:13 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 11:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  attackcoog and billings nailed it. NBC is cheap. They won't pony up anything if they don't have to. Unless the look ins are specifically tied to ratings measures, the deal won't get any better as NBC has no incentive to increase the deal on their own. As for why 6 years, that's probably what it took to get to $20M/year. I'd almost wonder if the BE could be getting $15M/year if it went year-to-year.

But with this low of a deal, is it still fair that the incoming schools have to pay ANYTHING for an entrance fee? $2.5M seems awful steep to only get about $700K more per year.

Have we forgotten what NBC-SN was willing to pay for the Pac-12?

It may not be NBC-SN that's the problem.

No, they were not willing to pay for the Pac12. That negotiation was a normal free market bidding situation. They had an opportunity to raise ther bid after the combined Fox/ESPN bid. NBC passed.

You're contradicting yourself.

Yes they were willing to pay for the Pac-12. They just weren't willing to outbid the combined ESPN/FOX bid of $21 mil per school.

They're not cheap. The NBE product just wasn't worth more than $2 mil per school to them. Apparently, the BE isn't worth over $2 mil to any carrier. Hence NBC-SN is the high bidder.

It's not the bidder that's the problem.

(02-15-2013 09:40 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 09:17 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 03:13 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 11:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  attackcoog and billings nailed it. NBC is cheap. They won't pony up anything if they don't have to. Unless the look ins are specifically tied to ratings measures, the deal won't get any better as NBC has no incentive to increase the deal on their own. As for why 6 years, that's probably what it took to get to $20M/year. I'd almost wonder if the BE could be getting $15M/year if it went year-to-year.

But with this low of a deal, is it still fair that the incoming schools have to pay ANYTHING for an entrance fee? $2.5M seems awful steep to only get about $700K more per year.

Have we forgotten what NBC-SN was willing to pay for the Pac-12?

It may not be NBC-SN that's the problem.

No, they were not willing to pay for the Pac12. That negotiation was a normal free market bidding situation. They had an opportunity to raise ther bid after the combined Fox/ESPN bid. NBC passed.

Yeah, but they did bid a LOT.

They were the high bid, but they bid less than the Pac12 was expecting to get.

(02-15-2013 10:15 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 09:17 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 03:13 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 11:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  attackcoog and billings nailed it. NBC is cheap. They won't pony up anything if they don't have to. Unless the look ins are specifically tied to ratings measures, the deal won't get any better as NBC has no incentive to increase the deal on their own. As for why 6 years, that's probably what it took to get to $20M/year. I'd almost wonder if the BE could be getting $15M/year if it went year-to-year.

But with this low of a deal, is it still fair that the incoming schools have to pay ANYTHING for an entrance fee? $2.5M seems awful steep to only get about $700K more per year.

Have we forgotten what NBC-SN was willing to pay for the Pac-12?

It may not be NBC-SN that's the problem.

No, they were not willing to pay for the Pac12. That negotiation was a normal free market bidding situation. They had an opportunity to raise ther bid after the combined Fox/ESPN bid. NBC passed.

You're contradicting yourself.

Yes they were willing to pay for the Pac-12. They just weren't willing to outbid the combined ESPN/FOX bid of $21 mil per school.

They're not cheap. The NBE product just wasn't worth more than $2 mil per school to them. Apparently, the BE isn't worth over $2 mil to any carrier. Hence NBC-SN is the high bidder.

It's not the bidder that's the problem.

Wrong again. McMurphy has already stated that NBC is not the highest bid. ESPN is. NBC is the preferred bid.

As for the PAC 12, your contradicting yourself. The market value is what someone is willing to pay for a product. In every negotiation, NBC has ultimately been out bid. So, in essence, they have not been willing to pay market value. The only exception were two properties of limited value--hockey that is a vey regional sport, and soccer that they got for a mere 83 million, chump change in the arena of professional sports. They lost out on the NFL Thursday night package and were outbid on MLB. Those were the sports that count. The C7 is out there, why are they not bidding on it? Its because NBC likes to pick up stuff cheap. The nBE is a distressed property due to its current instability. They can get it for less than market by offering extra exposure--exposure rather than money. They have plenty of empty worthless air time at NBC-Sports. They are trading worthless air time rather than money. Its actually a fairly smart idea for NBC in this case. If I were the Big East, I'd sign the deal, but I'd require an opt out clause ever 2 years. That would allow the nBE to go to another network as soon as they are healty rather than waiting the full 6 years for virtually nothing. If NBC balks, then sell a mid week package to ESPN and give the rights to the schools.

(02-15-2013 10:17 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 09:40 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 09:17 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 03:13 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 11:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  attackcoog and billings nailed it. NBC is cheap. They won't pony up anything if they don't have to. Unless the look ins are specifically tied to ratings measures, the deal won't get any better as NBC has no incentive to increase the deal on their own. As for why 6 years, that's probably what it took to get to $20M/year. I'd almost wonder if the BE could be getting $15M/year if it went year-to-year.

But with this low of a deal, is it still fair that the incoming schools have to pay ANYTHING for an entrance fee? $2.5M seems awful steep to only get about $700K more per year.

Have we forgotten what NBC-SN was willing to pay for the Pac-12?

It may not be NBC-SN that's the problem.

No, they were not willing to pay for the Pac12. That negotiation was a normal free market bidding situation. They had an opportunity to raise ther bid after the combined Fox/ESPN bid. NBC passed.

Yeah, but they did bid a LOT.

They were the high bid, but they bid less than the Pac12 was expecting to get.

Nope. The Pac-12 was ready to sign with NBC-SN. ESPN and FOX had to join forces to out-bid NBC-SN.

The problem isn't NBC-SN.

(02-15-2013 10:20 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 10:15 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 09:17 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 03:13 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 11:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  attackcoog and billings nailed it. NBC is cheap. They won't pony up anything if they don't have to. Unless the look ins are specifically tied to ratings measures, the deal won't get any better as NBC has no incentive to increase the deal on their own. As for why 6 years, that's probably what it took to get to $20M/year. I'd almost wonder if the BE could be getting $15M/year if it went year-to-year.

But with this low of a deal, is it still fair that the incoming schools have to pay ANYTHING for an entrance fee? $2.5M seems awful steep to only get about $700K more per year.

Have we forgotten what NBC-SN was willing to pay for the Pac-12?

It may not be NBC-SN that's the problem.

No, they were not willing to pay for the Pac12. That negotiation was a normal free market bidding situation. They had an opportunity to raise ther bid after the combined Fox/ESPN bid. NBC passed.

You're contradicting yourself.

Yes they were willing to pay for the Pac-12. They just weren't willing to outbid the combined ESPN/FOX bid of $21 mil per school.

They're not cheap. The NBE product just wasn't worth more than $2 mil per school to them. Apparently, the BE isn't worth over $2 mil to any carrier. Hence NBC-SN is the high bidder.

It's not the bidder that's the problem.

Wrong again. McMurphy has already stated that NBC is not the highest bid. ESPN is. NBC is the preferred bid.

What was ESPN's bid? Why would Aresco go with $2 mil a year per school if there's more money to be had?

And NBC's new owner Comcast tried to get third tier SEC and offered a dedicated channel with an equity stake for the SEC to create a BTN type network and the SEC rejected the offer to take less money to preserve their over-the-air syndicated network.

Comcast isn't cheap, they will pay fat money when there is profit in it.

(02-15-2013 10:25 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 10:17 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 09:40 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 09:17 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 03:13 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  Have we forgotten what NBC-SN was willing to pay for the Pac-12?

It may not be NBC-SN that's the problem.

No, they were not willing to pay for the Pac12. That negotiation was a normal free market bidding situation. They had an opportunity to raise ther bid after the combined Fox/ESPN bid. NBC passed.

Yeah, but they did bid a LOT.

They were the high bid, but they bid less than the Pac12 was expecting to get.

Nope. The Pac-12 was ready to sign with NBC-SN. ESPN and FOX had to join forces to out-bid NBC-SN.

The problem isn't NBC-SN.

Then why did Bevliqua approach both Fox and ESPN and ask them why they didnt bid more? Bevilaque was the one who convinced ESPN and Fox to work together--it wasnt the other way around. The Pac-12 was not happy with the NBC bid--despite it being the highest bid.

(02-15-2013 10:29 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 10:20 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 10:15 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 09:17 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-15-2013 03:13 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  Have we forgotten what NBC-SN was willing to pay for the Pac-12?

It may not be NBC-SN that's the problem.

No, they were not willing to pay for the Pac12. That negotiation was a normal free market bidding situation. They had an opportunity to raise ther bid after the combined Fox/ESPN bid. NBC passed.

You're contradicting yourself.

Yes they were willing to pay for the Pac-12. They just weren't willing to outbid the combined ESPN/FOX bid of $21 mil per school.

They're not cheap. The NBE product just wasn't worth more than $2 mil per school to them. Apparently, the BE isn't worth over $2 mil to any carrier. Hence NBC-SN is the high bidder.

It's not the bidder that's the problem.

Wrong again. McMurphy has already stated that NBC is not the highest bid. ESPN is. NBC is the preferred bid.

What was ESPN's bid? Why would Aresco go with $2 mil a year per school if there's more money to be had?

I dont know. McMurphy simply said that NBC wasnt the high bid, that ESPN was. There are rumors that ESPN's bid had far less exposure--there is talk that it only offered week night games.

(02-15-2013 11:53 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  And NBC's new owner Comcast tried to get third tier SEC and offered a dedicated channel with an equity stake for the SEC to create a BTN type network and the SEC rejected the offer to take less money to preserve their over-the-air syndicated network.

Comcast isn't cheap, they will pay fat money when there is profit in it.

Again, the money was not enough to get the SEC to move. If Fox made the offer, the offer would be high enough that it would be a no brainer for the SEC. Fox might lose money for a few years, but after several years, it would begin to pay off. Thats how Murddoch works. Its called investment. Its not like Fox News was profitable out of the gate. It was a money loser for several years.