I think the entrance fee is around 2 million. It is based on a percentage of real assets of the ACC. I think it was published in the Maryland court case documents.

The teams don't share NCAA credits from day 1. Those are phased in over time.

WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY?

(04-28-2013 05:35 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I think that elasticities are such that carriage rate payouts are maximized in a tier programming system when programming has high amount of overlapping interest. . .

*My reasoning has to do with the fact that uniform levels of interest maximize carriage rates, and the fact that random chance tends to balance out on the aggregate, so keeping variations in interest the result of random chance is more cost-effective than making variations in interest the result of design (i.e. adding dissimilar programming).

(04-28-2013 05:35 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-28-2013 02:36 PM)wildthing202 Wrote:  I actually emailed McMurphy about the addition of hockey teams but he said he never thought of it and would get back to me on this topic.

Aside I don't see how it would dilute the brand, C-USA has 12 going on 15 affiliate members, the MAC has 10 going on 11 affiliate members, and the PAC-12 has 5 going on 4 affiliate members. Even the non-football WAC has a bunch of affiliate members.

Besides the B1G just added hockey and if the ACC is going to crush them, what better way to do it than to absorb the best hockey conference in the nation.

I think that elasticities are such that carriage rate payouts are maximized in a tier programming system when programming has high amount of overlapping interest. Assuming that the vast majority of ACC fans don't care about Hockey East programming because 1) BC and ND aside, most ACC fans don't care about Hockey East schools, and 2) most ACC fans don't care about hockey to begin with (we are a southern conference), then adding Hockey East programming would dillute the channel and would not lead to income maximization of ACC programming and/or Hockey East programming.

Other conferences adding schools and/or sports is a different cup of tea.

*My reasoning has to do with the fact that uniform levels of interest maximize carriage rates, and the fact that random chance tends to balance out on the aggregate, so keeping variations in interest the result of random chance is more costeffective than making variations in interest the result of design (i.e. adding dissimialr programming).

You do realize if the did add Hockey East into the fold they would add about 8 million more people and 5 states into the max carriage rate category(people who live in a state with a team in the conference) right?

Not a lot of people are going to watch the channel anyway I would suspect that BC-BU in hockey is going to at least match what a UVA-VT basketball game would in terms of ratings. The network isn't going to get much in terms of marquee games so anything is in play when it comes to programming since most people aren't going to watch anything except stuff involving their team.

Aside from basketball what exactly is there to watch during the winter months on the proposed ACCN?

Also when it comes to programming it's not like people in the North are really going to give a damn about those ACC south vs. FCS football games, so you're going to have to have something that interests the northern folk to buy into the ACCN.

I would think adding 5 states and 8 million people to the ACCN footprint and getting more money in subscription fees outweighs any negative about adding hockey to the ACCN in this manner.

Also you could add some lacrosse content as Hockey East teams also field men's lacrosse teams which would allow for the better teams to beef up their record rather than beat each other up.

First, the acc is a membership of equal great academic institutions focused on joint successes in academic, research and athletic excellence. Therefore everything in the acc is shared equally. There is not a performance reward in anything.

Our acc meetings are not arguments and drama but rather collaborative working seasons . They include alot of networking between faculty reps athletic directors and presidents. Also there are working groups for research efforts, student research and sportsmanship.all revenue is distributed equally. Also acc pays for all acc related travel expenses for these acc meetings. This includes the winter and spring meetings and the football reception and golf tourney with the ad coaches and players as well as the same for basketball.

They are members for more than just the wealth of sports but institution shared visions. Schools that have been invited to join are advised on the different operation process. The ad's from louisville, cuse and pitt and simply amazed with the level of collaboration between the schools. Never happened in the big east.

Also acc is not transparent and all business is discussed in closed doors. All members honor this.

It's not a conference for the joe six pack fan who just cares about football.

(04-29-2013 07:37 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  

(04-28-2013 05:35 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-28-2013 02:36 PM)wildthing202 Wrote:  I actually emailed McMurphy about the addition of hockey teams but he said he never thought of it and would get back to me on this topic.

Aside I don't see how it would dilute the brand, C-USA has 12 going on 15 affiliate members, the MAC has 10 going on 11 affiliate members, and the PAC-12 has 5 going on 4 affiliate members. Even the non-football WAC has a bunch of affiliate members.

Besides the B1G just added hockey and if the ACC is going to crush them, what better way to do it than to absorb the best hockey conference in the nation.

I think that elasticities are such that carriage rate payouts are maximized in a tier programming system when programming has high amount of overlapping interest. Assuming that the vast majority of ACC fans don't care about Hockey East programming because 1) BC and ND aside, most ACC fans don't care about Hockey East schools, and 2) most ACC fans don't care about hockey to begin with (we are a southern conference), then adding Hockey East programming would dillute the channel and would not lead to income maximization of ACC programming and/or Hockey East programming.

Other conferences adding schools and/or sports is a different cup of tea.

*My reasoning has to do with the fact that uniform levels of interest maximize carriage rates, and the fact that random chance tends to balance out on the aggregate, so keeping variations in interest the result of random chance is more costeffective than making variations in interest the result of design (i.e. adding dissimialr programming).

You do realize if the did add Hockey East into the fold they would add about 8 million more people and 5 states into the max carriage rate category(people who live in a state with a team in the conference) right?

Not a lot of people are going to watch the channel anyway I would suspect that BC-BU in hockey is going to at least match what a UVA-VT basketball game would in terms of ratings. The network isn't going to get much in terms of marquee games so anything is in play when it comes to programming since most people aren't going to watch anything except stuff involving their team.

Aside from basketball what exactly is there to watch during the winter months on the proposed ACCN?

Also when it comes to programming it's not like people in the North are really going to give a damn about those ACC south vs. FCS football games, so you're going to have to have something that interests the northern folk to buy into the ACCN.

I would think adding 5 states and 8 million people to the ACCN footprint and getting more money in subscription fees outweighs any negative about adding hockey to the ACCN in this manner.

Also you could add some lacrosse content as Hockey East teams also field men's lacrosse teams which would allow for the better teams to beef up their record rather than beat each other up.

(04-29-2013 07:37 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  You do realize if the did add Hockey East into the fold they would add about 8 million more people and 5 states into the max carriage rate category(people who live in a state with a team in the conference) right?

Not a lot of people are going to watch the channel anyway I would suspect that BC-BU in hockey is going to at least match what a UVA-VT basketball game would in terms of ratings. The network isn't going to get much in terms of marquee games so anything is in play when it comes to programming since most people aren't going to watch anything except stuff involving their team.

Aside from basketball what exactly is there to watch during the winter months on the proposed ACCN?

Also when it comes to programming it's not like people in the North are really going to give a damn about those ACC south vs. FCS football games, so you're going to have to have something that interests the northern folk to buy into the ACCN.

I would think adding 5 states and 8 million people to the ACCN footprint and getting more money in subscription fees outweighs any negative about adding hockey to the ACCN in this manner.

Also you could add some lacrosse content as Hockey East teams also field men's lacrosse teams which would allow for the better teams to beef up their record rather than beat each other up.

It's a good idea... SO GOOD, in fact, that I'm guessing some existing network will offer Hockey East more money than the ACC Network ever could... but hey, it's worth a shot.

(04-29-2013 08:47 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 07:37 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  You do realize if the did add Hockey East into the fold they would add about 8 million more people and 5 states into the max carriage rate category(people who live in a state with a team in the conference) right?

Not a lot of people are going to watch the channel anyway I would suspect that BC-BU in hockey is going to at least match what a UVA-VT basketball game would in terms of ratings. The network isn't going to get much in terms of marquee games so anything is in play when it comes to programming since most people aren't going to watch anything except stuff involving their team.

Aside from basketball what exactly is there to watch during the winter months on the proposed ACCN?

Also when it comes to programming it's not like people in the North are really going to give a damn about those ACC south vs. FCS football games, so you're going to have to have something that interests the northern folk to buy into the ACCN.

I would think adding 5 states and 8 million people to the ACCN footprint and getting more money in subscription fees outweighs any negative about adding hockey to the ACCN in this manner.

Also you could add some lacrosse content as Hockey East teams also field men's lacrosse teams which would allow for the better teams to beef up their record rather than beat each other up.

It's a good idea... SO GOOD, in fact, that I'm guessing some existing network will offer Hockey East more money than the ACC Network ever could... but hey, it's worth a shot.

http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/men/media/nbcsn.php
http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/men/media/cbscs.php
http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/men/media/nesn.php

That's what's on cable for now. ND also has a separate deal with NBC to air their home games.

Plenty of unaired games to grab or the ACCN could take the CBSSN package when that runs out and add a few more games. 8-16 games a year would be fine even if it's mostly BC home games.

(04-29-2013 09:47 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 08:47 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 07:37 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  You do realize if the did add Hockey East into the fold they would add about 8 million more people and 5 states into the max carriage rate category(people who live in a state with a team in the conference) right?

Not a lot of people are going to watch the channel anyway I would suspect that BC-BU in hockey is going to at least match what a UVA-VT basketball game would in terms of ratings. The network isn't going to get much in terms of marquee games so anything is in play when it comes to programming since most people aren't going to watch anything except stuff involving their team.

Aside from basketball what exactly is there to watch during the winter months on the proposed ACCN?

Also when it comes to programming it's not like people in the North are really going to give a damn about those ACC south vs. FCS football games, so you're going to have to have something that interests the northern folk to buy into the ACCN.

I would think adding 5 states and 8 million people to the ACCN footprint and getting more money in subscription fees outweighs any negative about adding hockey to the ACCN in this manner.

Also you could add some lacrosse content as Hockey East teams also field men's lacrosse teams which would allow for the better teams to beef up their record rather than beat each other up.

It's a good idea... SO GOOD, in fact, that I'm guessing some existing network will offer Hockey East more money than the ACC Network ever could... but hey, it's worth a shot.

http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/men/media/nbcsn.php
http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/men/media/cbscs.php
http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/men/media/nesn.php

That's what's on cable for now. ND also has a separate deal with NBC to air their home games.

Plenty of unaired games to grab or the ACCN could take the CBSSN package when that runs out and add a few more games. 8-16 games a year would be fine even if it's mostly BC home games.

Wow, I'm shocked! Sure, if there are BC hockey games not being televised then ABSOLUTELY they should be picked up by the future ACC Network (even the current ACC Digital Network should show them, IMHO).

I don't know how many hockey fans there are scattered throughout the ACC footprint (there are more than you think in places like Florida and South Carolina!), but I think Eagle's Ice Hockey is something we can all get behind to some extent...

(04-29-2013 11:04 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Wow, I'm shocked! Sure, if there are BC hockey games not being televised then ABSOLUTELY they should be picked up by the future ACC Network (even the current ACC Digital Network should show them, IMHO).

I don't know how many hockey fans there are scattered throughout the ACC footprint (there are more than you think in places like Florida and South Carolina!), but I think Eagle's Ice Hockey is something we can all get behind to some extent...

I don't see much benefit in adding Hockey games. The NHL is a niche sport and for college, I don't expect non-followers of the teams involved to tune in. And it doesn't fill in a programming hole on the schedule. There's plenty of ACC basketball from November to March; which will be our cash cow for the network.

If anything we could use some live content to get through the summer months. Maybe minor league baseball or the LFL. :)

(04-29-2013 11:20 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 11:04 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Wow, I'm shocked! Sure, if there are BC hockey games not being televised then ABSOLUTELY they should be picked up by the future ACC Network (even the current ACC Digital Network should show them, IMHO).

I don't know how many hockey fans there are scattered throughout the ACC footprint (there are more than you think in places like Florida and South Carolina!), but I think Eagle's Ice Hockey is something we can all get behind to some extent...

I don't see much benefit in adding Hockey games. The NHL is a niche sport and for college, I don't expect non-followers of the teams involved to tune in. And it doesn't fill in a programming hole on the schedule. There's plenty of ACC basketball from November to March; which will be our cash cow for the network.

If anything we could use some live content to get through the summer months. Maybe minor league baseball or the LFL. :)

Again most everything on the channel is going to be niche outside of the some football, basketball, & baseball games. You won't be getting Duke-UNC basketball on the ACCN or most of the other marquee matchups since ESPN would be airing those games. You're not going to have enough games to fill out the winter especially since teams don't play every single day or play crap opponents like those in December.

The majority of ACC sponsored sports are played in the spring and only a few are played outside this window which means they'll have plenty of content for the spring and hardly anything in the winter which means you need something that isn't basketball in the winter.

I think the ACCN could spare 16-24 hours out of the 3624 hours of programming during hockey season for some hockey games. The BTN manages to air 29 men's hockey games and 8 women's hockey games. Also some of these guys are drafted while playing so you could end up with some Hurricane, Lightning, & Panther fans watching to see how their prospects are playing.

(04-29-2013 07:37 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  

(04-28-2013 05:35 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-28-2013 02:36 PM)wildthing202 Wrote:  I actually emailed McMurphy about the addition of hockey teams but he said he never thought of it and would get back to me on this topic.

Aside I don't see how it would dilute the brand, C-USA has 12 going on 15 affiliate members, the MAC has 10 going on 11 affiliate members, and the PAC-12 has 5 going on 4 affiliate members. Even the non-football WAC has a bunch of affiliate members.

Besides the B1G just added hockey and if the ACC is going to crush them, what better way to do it than to absorb the best hockey conference in the nation.

I think that elasticities are such that carriage rate payouts are maximized in a tier programming system when programming has high amount of overlapping interest. Assuming that the vast majority of ACC fans don't care about Hockey East programming because 1) BC and ND aside, most ACC fans don't care about Hockey East schools, and 2) most ACC fans don't care about hockey to begin with (we are a southern conference), then adding Hockey East programming would dillute the channel and would not lead to income maximization of ACC programming and/or Hockey East programming.

Other conferences adding schools and/or sports is a different cup of tea.

*My reasoning has to do with the fact that uniform levels of interest maximize carriage rates, and the fact that random chance tends to balance out on the aggregate, so keeping variations in interest the result of random chance is more costeffective than making variations in interest the result of design (i.e. adding dissimialr programming).

You do realize if the did add Hockey East into the fold they would add about 8 million more people and 5 states into the max carriage rate category(people who live in a state with a team in the conference) right?

Not a lot of people are going to watch the channel anyway I would suspect that BC-BU in hockey is going to at least match what a UVA-VT basketball game would in terms of ratings. The network isn't going to get much in terms of marquee games so anything is in play when it comes to programming since most people aren't going to watch anything except stuff involving their team.

Aside from basketball what exactly is there to watch during the winter months on the proposed ACCN?

Also when it comes to programming it's not like people in the North are really going to give a damn about those ACC south vs. FCS football games, so you're going to have to have something that interests the northern folk to buy into the ACCN.

I would think adding 5 states and 8 million people to the ACCN footprint and getting more money in subscription fees outweighs any negative about adding hockey to the ACCN in this manner.

Also you could add some lacrosse content as Hockey East teams also field men's lacrosse teams which would allow for the better teams to beef up their record rather than beat each other up.

"I would think adding 5 states and 8 million people to the ACCN footprint and getting more money in subscription fees outweighs any negative about adding hockey to the ACCN in this manner."

You do realize that it will lead to less money per team, right? The ACC can't get the same "in footprint" carriage rate for the ACC + Hockey East that it can for just the ACC. If "owning" "markets" and dissimilar programming that doesn't generate interest was profitable, then the AAC/old BIG EAST would have been loaded.

The ACCN would lose money by adding Hockey East content. I'm OK with adding Hockey East content so long as an ACC team (BC & ND) is playing in the game, but buying and airing a Vermont v. Marrimack college hockey game is a terrible idea.

"Also you could add some lacrosse content as Hockey East teams also field men's lacrosse teams which would allow for the better teams to beef up their record rather than beat each other up."

Or ACC teams could just play whoever they want OOC, which would do the same thing without strapping the ACC to another conference.

"Also when it comes to programming it's not like people in the North are really going to give a damn about those ACC south vs. FCS football games, so you're going to have to have something that interests the northern folk to buy into the ACCN."

I think that you're wrong. I would watch Clemson v. Furman. I would also watch FSU beat the snot out of _______, especially if FSU had just played SU, or was just about to play SU.

RE: Ice hockey - if BC has some 3rd-tier games they'd like to show on the ACC Network, I think that would be fine. Maybe FSU can toss in some women's diving, or maybe Louisville has some sport that no one else plays... but bringing in other schools is probably not a good idea (and that goes doubly for schools with dogs as their mascots)

(04-30-2013 01:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  RE: Ice hockey - if BC has some 3rd-tier games they'd like to show on the ACC Network, I think that would be fine. Maybe FSU can toss in some women's diving, or maybe Louisville has some sport that no one else plays... but bringing in other schools is probably not a good idea (and that goes doubly for schools with dogs as their mascots)

Turkeys and dogs don't get along?

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2004-05...ports-espn

BC, VT and Miami didn't receive a full TV revenue share until their third athletic year in the league. I want to say that they received 75% of a full share the 1st two years. Stuff like that gets drawn up as part of the agreement to join a conference. See the agreements Boise St. signed to return to the MW where the conference will pay most exit fees to the American & the one Maryland supposedly agreed to with the Big Ten to get full shares right away, with slightly smaller shares in the future.

Quote:Miami and Virginia Tech, which begin ACC play in 2004, will receive a full share of the television revenue in 2006, their third season in the league, Swofford said. Boston College will receive a full share of the television revenue in 2007, in its third ACC season.

(04-30-2013 02:30 PM)mattsarz Wrote:  http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2004-05...ports-espn

BC, VT and Miami didn't receive a full TV revenue share until their third athletic year in the league. I want to say that they received 75% of a full share the 1st two years. Stuff like that gets drawn up as part of the agreement to join a conference. See the agreements Boise St. signed to return to the MW where the conference will pay most exit fees to the American & the one Maryland supposedly agreed to with the Big Ten to get full shares right away, with slightly smaller shares in the future.

Quote:Miami and Virginia Tech, which begin ACC play in 2004, will receive a full share of the television revenue in 2006, their third season in the league, Swofford said. Boston College will receive a full share of the television revenue in 2007, in its third ACC season.

this is pretty much what i thought & gives even less incentive for any existing member to leave

(04-30-2013 02:13 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 01:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  RE: Ice hockey - if BC has some 3rd-tier games they'd like to show on the ACC Network, I think that would be fine. Maybe FSU can toss in some women's diving, or maybe Louisville has some sport that no one else plays... but bringing in other schools is probably not a good idea (and that goes doubly for schools with dogs as their mascots)

Turkeys and dogs don't get along?

HINT: Which former Big East team - who's mascot is a type of dog normally used to pull sleds in Alaska - do we NOT want to invite into the ACC?

(04-30-2013 02:39 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 02:13 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 01:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  RE: Ice hockey - if BC has some 3rd-tier games they'd like to show on the ACC Network, I think that would be fine. Maybe FSU can toss in some women's diving, or maybe Louisville has some sport that no one else plays... but bringing in other schools is probably not a good idea (and that goes doubly for schools with dogs as their mascots)

Turkeys and dogs don't get along?

HINT: Which former Big East team - who's mascot is a type of dog normally used to pull sleds in Alaska - do we NOT want to invite into the ACC?

The Boston University Terriers or the Northeastern University Huskies?

(04-30-2013 02:40 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 02:39 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 02:13 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 01:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  RE: Ice hockey - if BC has some 3rd-tier games they'd like to show on the ACC Network, I think that would be fine. Maybe FSU can toss in some women's diving, or maybe Louisville has some sport that no one else plays... but bringing in other schools is probably not a good idea (and that goes doubly for schools with dogs as their mascots)

Turkeys and dogs don't get along?

HINT: Which former Big East team - who's mascot is a type of dog normally used to pull sleds in Alaska - do we NOT want to invite into the ACC?

The Boston University Terriers or the Northeastern University Huskies?

Getting WARMER!

Another Hint: think UGLY helmets

(04-30-2013 02:30 PM)mattsarz Wrote:  http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2004-05...ports-espn

BC, VT and Miami didn't receive a full TV revenue share until their third athletic year in the league. I want to say that they received 75% of a full share the 1st two years. Stuff like that gets drawn up as part of the agreement to join a conference. See the agreements Boise St. signed to return to the MW where the conference will pay most exit fees to the American & the one Maryland supposedly agreed to with the Big Ten to get full shares right away, with slightly smaller shares in the future.

Quote:Miami and Virginia Tech, which begin ACC play in 2004, will receive a full share of the television revenue in 2006, their third season in the league, Swofford said. Boston College will receive a full share of the television revenue in 2007, in its third ACC season.

Thanks for the info, Matt...

...and thanks for the 25% TV shares, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Louisville!

(04-30-2013 03:08 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 02:30 PM)mattsarz Wrote:  http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2004-05...ports-espn

BC, VT and Miami didn't receive a full TV revenue share until their third athletic year in the league. I want to say that they received 75% of a full share the 1st two years. Stuff like that gets drawn up as part of the agreement to join a conference. See the agreements Boise St. signed to return to the MW where the conference will pay most exit fees to the American & the one Maryland supposedly agreed to with the Big Ten to get full shares right away, with slightly smaller shares in the future.

Quote:Miami and Virginia Tech, which begin ACC play in 2004, will receive a full share of the television revenue in 2006, their third season in the league, Swofford said. Boston College will receive a full share of the television revenue in 2007, in its third ACC season.

Thanks for the info, Matt...

...and thanks for the 25% TV shares, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Louisville!

Yeah, I'd wait to see if something comes out that the incoming schools don't start w/full shares. Don't know of anything that suggests otherwise, but things do get negotiated.

(04-30-2013 03:07 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 02:40 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 02:39 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 02:13 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 01:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  RE: Ice hockey - if BC has some 3rd-tier games they'd like to show on the ACC Network, I think that would be fine. Maybe FSU can toss in some women's diving, or maybe Louisville has some sport that no one else plays... but bringing in other schools is probably not a good idea (and that goes doubly for schools with dogs as their mascots)

Turkeys and dogs don't get along?

HINT: Which former Big East team - who's mascot is a type of dog normally used to pull sleds in Alaska - do we NOT want to invite into the ACC?

The Boston University Terriers or the Northeastern University Huskies?

Getting WARMER!

Another Hint: think UGLY helmets

They aren't THAT bad...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_9fNvtMyW7cE/Sw...Helmet.jpg