(07-11-2022 11:21 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 12:46 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 10:51 AM)GreatDane96 Wrote:  I had done a back of the envelope calculation even before Dodd said $500 million.

Each ACC team gets about $30 million from the ESPN a year. The buyout for 14 years would be $420 million. Given that the contract is backloaded, $500 million seems reasonable to me.

No this is not going to be negotiated down. When your school fires a football coach, does your school negotiate or just buy out for the remaining contract period?

The exit fee is separate and can be negotiated down. UMCP paid over $30 million exit fee which was lower than the required exit fee of $50 million. The current exit fee is much larger by the way.

Yes, it is absurd but FSU and other schools signed the GoR fully knowing the consequences. Good luck.

The $30 million exit fee was the amount of the previous exit fee (MD voted against the new fee and left right after, and, from what I remember, there was some issue that they gave notice before the new fee was apparently legally implemented). The $30m was also what the ACC had already withheld from disbursements. "Negotiated down" isn't quite reflective of what happened.

New fee, completely separate from the GOR, is something like the 3 times the conference's operating budget, so it continues to rise over time but would currently be over $100m.

Keep in mind, the value of individual schools is not equal. Those schools most interested in leaving have values in excess of the average. It is not sufficient for these schools to simply pay the average price and leave. They would need to compensate the remaining schools for the value of those rights, which should be equal to the reduced value of the ACC contract without them. The GOR gives the remaining members the leverage to demand that level of compensation in any negotiated deal.

Contrary to the old saying, possession is not nine tenths of the law. However, it is nine tenths of the leverage in negotiations. The remaining members of the conference possess the rights to departing members' TV rights.

Agreed, and I wrote that down in my big post on the main board. Thing is, this again all reverts to ESPN. If ESPN want this, they will get it...and the "remedies" potentially available to the remaining teams aren't necessarily known until we see how they are impacted, directly, by the move...which is subject to mitigation efforts and the key point: what will ESPN pay the ACC to "get out" of the deal. Again, the GOR hinges SOLELY on having the ESPN Agreement in place.

(07-11-2022 11:37 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 07:51 PM)GreatDane96 Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 02:55 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 01:06 PM)GreatDane96 Wrote:  Soooooo....let me get this straight. You, for a fact, know there is nothing to negotiate...based on what experience with business and the law, an more specifically, licensing?

I have specific experience in media rights, specific experience in licensing, and nothing what you say "it's a transfer(grant) and the transfer is DONE", is accurate.

As for your last sentence, in fact...I do know of a league that is actually working with consultants and lawyers, that I personally know, to evaluate precisely the fact that the GOR may be challenged.

Things you should never do in life: SAY ABSOLUTES. Nothing is absolute.

Let’s look at the actual text.

1. Grant of Rights
Each of the Member Institutions hereby (a) irrevocably and exclusively grants to the Conference during the Term (as defined below) all rights (the "Rights") necessary for the Conference to perform the contractual obligations of the Conference expressly set forth in the ESPN Agreement, regardless of whether such Member Institution remains a member of the Conference during the entirety of the Term and (b) agrees to satisfy and perform all contractual obligations ofa Member Institution during the Term that-are expressly set forth in the ESPN Agreement.

Now tell me why this Grant of Rights agreement is not a transfer (grant) of rights.

I don’t care how much experience you have and who you are unless you give a compelling reason on how the ACC GoR can be challenged. Likewise I don’t care however many groups of lawyers “evaluate” whether the GoR can be challenged unless they actually challenge it successfully.

I don’t say anything is absolute, but again good luck with challenging the GoR.

I know the text well...you should go on the main board and see my analysis. This GOR is nothing new...many entities use similar language. Quite frankly, it's very boiler plate.

You are pulling out a minor portion of language that has limited value. Can't cherry pick.

Of course the GoR is nothing new. But how many times was a GoR successfully challenged?

I read the whole ACC GoR, which is only four pages, and cannot find any evidence showing this grant of rights agreement is not about.....transferring (granting) the rights.

Grant of rights are not new concepts in the world of licensing. There are precedents.

(07-11-2022 07:12 AM)GreatDane96 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 12:25 AM)tj_2009 Wrote:  My answer is that it depends. The chances are with the Grant of Rights not ending until 2036 means that schools will probably not be leaving until 2032 at the earliest.
Things are going to look a lot different in 2032 than they do in 2022. Here is what I mean. In 2022 College Football is number one in terms of revenue because we are still in the cable TV era. That is likely to change by 2032 in which we will be in the Streaming Era for sports, where content is streamed over Internet Protocol (IP) Networks like Apple TV, Amazon and Netflix are today.
We know a few things that College football has no interest outside of the US. We also know that basketball is the number 2 sport in the world after soccer. The one thing that streaming over IP networks means that the world is a possible market for sports content. This does not mean that there will be a big following around the world for basketball or any of the other sports, but there could be.
That is why it is so hard to predict things in 2032 as the game is changing when it comes to $$$ for different sports and the valuation of other sports will have to be considered in any of this conference re-alignment. I think we are probably at peak valuations for college football but I have no doubt that the B1G and SEC will be pro-active in identifying big brands that might help their conferences. I can't really say with certainty as to which schools will get into the B1G or SEC but I think Notre Dame, Virginia and North Carolina probably have nothing to worry about right now but things could change by 2032.

Can't give rep points yet...but would for this post, if I could. Whether it is 2028, 2032 or sometime earlier or between, this is an accurate assessment. I have former colleagues who are at Amazon already trying analyze bringing on college sports AFTER they learn lessons from the NFL season this year and thereafter. They are looking for a partner to make it work. They won't be the only platform to dip their toe in the waters...but they most certainly lead the pack financially.

I think Apple is also testing the waters with Sports as they have started doing Friday night baseball. Youtube (Google) has experimented with streaming of baseball as well so it would not surprise me if Amazon, Apple, Youtube and others join the sports streaming game as the one thing about sports, is that people want to see these things Live and will pay for that as well. I have also heard that these companies are also looking at music streaming. That is the future and its coming and the value of all of these other sports will be considered in the calculations as many sports are popular outside of the US but are not popular here. These sports could be sold to subscribers worldwide so more value will be given to these big brands in the calculations.

(07-09-2022 10:09 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-09-2022 06:42 PM)TerryD Wrote:  From David Teel yesterday:

"Notre Dame, the staunchest and most valuable football independent, is coveted by every league, and since the Fighting Irish receive only about $7 million a year in ACC television revenue, the grant of rights is far less onerous for them. Translation: If Notre Dame wants to join the Big Ten or SEC, the ACC is virtually powerless to stop the move.

The consensus is this latest round of realignment will pause until the Fighting Irish chart their course. If they remain independent, everyone might well stand down.

If they join a conference, the Richter scale will go haywire and movement will commence anew.

“We’re getting to a two solar system model here,” Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick said as he emerged from the final session of the ACC’s spring meetings in Florida. “You have two suns with all the gravitational pull — the Big Ten and the SEC. People are going to have to figure out how to align with one or the other.”

Yes, an ACC AD, mere moments after huddling with his colleagues on league business, essentially forecasted the group’s splintering. It was remarkable to hear and in no way coerced."

https://richmond.com/sports/college/teel...d22c9.html

…and Our Lady remains that elusive comet just outside the solar systems. Maybe one day it crashes down and destroys it all.

One can hope, I guess.

(07-11-2022 11:54 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 10:34 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 01:00 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 12:22 PM)GreatDane96 Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 12:15 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  Let me give it a go:

When people mention the “$500 Million buyout” they are most likely referring to the (exit fee) + (14 years of ACC tv media revenue) that a school would have to pay to leave the ACC before 2036. Now like everything when high powered lawyers get involved, that “buyout” figure will probably be negotiated down. Hope this clarifies the issue for you. Good luck everyone. Also, try to remember, our universities will still be there even if the ACC does not. It’s just a thought good people.

I wasn't focusing at all on the 500 million buyout; it wasn't even part of my thoughts.
I was specifically focusing on the posters language that I had bolded. The 500 million figure, in my opinion, is some hogwash that Dodd and his "source" came up with based on a multiple of the yearly media rights distribution and the years left on the GOR.

It's an absolutely absurd number, even with the exit fees, especially in light of the fact that it is unlikely a court would order specific performance (school staying in the league) and give full damages. Those are extraordinarily rare events in the legal world. To someone's point (the thread is quoting in a weird manner now), this will be negotiated down and it will be significant as it is unlikely a full disgorgement remedy would apply.

I had done a back of the envelope calculation even before Dodd said $500 million.

Each ACC team gets about $30 million from the ESPN a year. The buyout for 14 years would be $420 million. Given that the contract is backloaded, $500 million seems reasonable to me.

No this is not going to be negotiated down. When your school fires a football coach, does your school negotiate or just buy out for the remaining contract period?

The exit fee is separate and can be negotiated down. UMCP paid over $30 million exit fee which was lower than the required exit fee of $50 million. The current exit fee is much larger by the way.

Yes, it is absurd but FSU and other schools signed the GoR fully knowing the consequences. Good luck.

Quote:Yes, it will be negotiated down because of CONTRACT LAW. Remedies are never what they are on paper. There is the concept of actual damages, mitigation, consideration, etc.

Sorry, I've been around/practicing law since the 90's. I have only come across 1 case, in all that time, were damages were 100% the expected value...and the client never collected.

There is nothing to negotiate about. Your school had already GIVEN the right to the ACC. It’s not a promise to give the right; it is a transfer (grant) and the transfer is DONE.

I am sure you have tons of legal experence. But so do all the school lawyers and I am not aware of any school challenging the GoR. Do you know any case?

The school wanting to leave bribes, err, negotiates to buy back its transferred rights from the holder.

Everything in America is negotiable and has its price, including all contracts and all transfers of rights.

Sure, a member school can buy back the transferred rights and obviously the seller won’t sell the rights back unless the buy back price is better than the value of keeping them. If $500 million is the fair value, why would the ACC negotiate down to a substantially lower price? Would ND “negotiate” with the ACC about joining the ACC football if the ACC is unwilling to provide any additional consideration to ND?

That is not how litigation works, I am afraid.

The ACC will not end up selling rights back to ND for more than the value of keeping it.

It would be less. Statistics show that about 95-98% of all civil cases settle, due to a number of factors.

In my 32 year litigation career, I saw about the same percentage occur.

No case has ever settled for total value PLUS more.

Anyway, I think it is all relative as I believe ND will do nothing at all. Status quo.

It will be interesting to see what ND can get as a football independent after the 2025 deal expires.

(P.S. Do you really want me to answer your last question and say one more time that ND football is not going to join the ACC?)

(07-11-2022 05:14 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 11:54 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 10:34 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 01:00 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 12:22 PM)GreatDane96 Wrote:  I wasn't focusing at all on the 500 million buyout; it wasn't even part of my thoughts.
I was specifically focusing on the posters language that I had bolded. The 500 million figure, in my opinion, is some hogwash that Dodd and his "source" came up with based on a multiple of the yearly media rights distribution and the years left on the GOR.

It's an absolutely absurd number, even with the exit fees, especially in light of the fact that it is unlikely a court would order specific performance (school staying in the league) and give full damages. Those are extraordinarily rare events in the legal world. To someone's point (the thread is quoting in a weird manner now), this will be negotiated down and it will be significant as it is unlikely a full disgorgement remedy would apply.

I had done a back of the envelope calculation even before Dodd said $500 million.

Each ACC team gets about $30 million from the ESPN a year. The buyout for 14 years would be $420 million. Given that the contract is backloaded, $500 million seems reasonable to me.

No this is not going to be negotiated down. When your school fires a football coach, does your school negotiate or just buy out for the remaining contract period?

The exit fee is separate and can be negotiated down. UMCP paid over $30 million exit fee which was lower than the required exit fee of $50 million. The current exit fee is much larger by the way.

Yes, it is absurd but FSU and other schools signed the GoR fully knowing the consequences. Good luck.

Quote:Yes, it will be negotiated down because of CONTRACT LAW. Remedies are never what they are on paper. There is the concept of actual damages, mitigation, consideration, etc.

Sorry, I've been around/practicing law since the 90's. I have only come across 1 case, in all that time, were damages were 100% the expected value...and the client never collected.

There is nothing to negotiate about. Your school had already GIVEN the right to the ACC. It’s not a promise to give the right; it is a transfer (grant) and the transfer is DONE.

I am sure you have tons of legal experence. But so do all the school lawyers and I am not aware of any school challenging the GoR. Do you know any case?

The school wanting to leave bribes, err, negotiates to buy back its transferred rights from the holder.

Everything in America is negotiable and has its price, including all contracts and all transfers of rights.

Sure, a member school can buy back the transferred rights and obviously the seller won’t sell the rights back unless the buy back price is better than the value of keeping them. If $500 million is the fair value, why would the ACC negotiate down to a substantially lower price? Would ND “negotiate” with the ACC about joining the ACC football if the ACC is unwilling to provide any additional consideration to ND?

That is not how litigation works, I am afraid.

The ACC will not end up selling rights back to ND for more than the value of keeping it.

It would be less. Statistics show that about 95-98% of all civil cases settle, due to a number of factors.

In my 32 year litigation career, I saw about the same percentage occur.

No case has ever settled for total value PLUS more.

Anyway, I think it is all relative as I believe ND will do nothing at all. Status quo.

It will be interesting to see what ND can get as a football independent after the 2025 deal expires.

(P.S. Do you really want me to answer your last question and say one more time that ND football is not going to join the ACC?)

My last question was a rhetoric one. Just like ND won’t engage in negotiating with the ACC about joining the ACC football, the ACC will not engage in negotiating down the buyback price.

What you said about the civil case statistics makes sense although I was talking about the economic incentive about selling back vs keeping the rights. But, please let me know any case where a GoR was successfuly challenged and the buyout amount became substiantially lower than the fair value.

Let’s say I irreovocably sold a used minivan to you at $6,000. I want to buy back the minivan from you at $1000 while the fair value is $5000. If you say no, can I file a legal case and settle it at $3,000?

I really don’t think there is much room to negotiate here.

(07-11-2022 05:49 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 05:14 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 11:54 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 10:34 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 01:00 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  I had done a back of the envelope calculation even before Dodd said $500 million.

Each ACC team gets about $30 million from the ESPN a year. The buyout for 14 years would be $420 million. Given that the contract is backloaded, $500 million seems reasonable to me.

No this is not going to be negotiated down. When your school fires a football coach, does your school negotiate or just buy out for the remaining contract period?

The exit fee is separate and can be negotiated down. UMCP paid over $30 million exit fee which was lower than the required exit fee of $50 million. The current exit fee is much larger by the way.

Yes, it is absurd but FSU and other schools signed the GoR fully knowing the consequences. Good luck.

There is nothing to negotiate about. Your school had already GIVEN the right to the ACC. It’s not a promise to give the right; it is a transfer (grant) and the transfer is DONE.

I am sure you have tons of legal experence. But so do all the school lawyers and I am not aware of any school challenging the GoR. Do you know any case?

The school wanting to leave bribes, err, negotiates to buy back its transferred rights from the holder.

Everything in America is negotiable and has its price, including all contracts and all transfers of rights.

Sure, a member school can buy back the transferred rights and obviously the seller won’t sell the rights back unless the buy back price is better than the value of keeping them. If $500 million is the fair value, why would the ACC negotiate down to a substantially lower price? Would ND “negotiate” with the ACC about joining the ACC football if the ACC is unwilling to provide any additional consideration to ND?

That is not how litigation works, I am afraid.

The ACC will not end up selling rights back to ND for more than the value of keeping it.

It would be less. Statistics show that about 95-98% of all civil cases settle, due to a number of factors.

In my 32 year litigation career, I saw about the same percentage occur.

No case has ever settled for total value PLUS more.

Anyway, I think it is all relative as I believe ND will do nothing at all. Status quo.

It will be interesting to see what ND can get as a football independent after the 2025 deal expires.

(P.S. Do you really want me to answer your last question and say one more time that ND football is not going to join the ACC?)

My last question was a rhetoric one. Just like ND won’t engage in negotiating with the ACC about joining the ACC football, the ACC will not engage in negotiating down the buyback price.

What you said about the civil case statistics makes sense although I was talking about the economic incentive about selling back vs keeping the rights. But, please let me know any case where a GoR was successfuly challenged and the buyout amount became substiantially lower than the fair value.

Let’s say I irreovocably sold a used minivan to you at $6,000. I want to buy back the minivan from you at $1000 while the fair value is $5000. If you say no, can I file a legal case and settle it at $3,000?

I really don’t think there is much room to negotiate here.

I am bedrock certain that you are wrong, but don't care to argue about it any longer.

Its moot....for a few years....ND is likely staying independent.

(07-11-2022 09:33 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 05:49 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 05:14 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 11:54 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 10:34 AM)TerryD Wrote:  The school wanting to leave bribes, err, negotiates to buy back its transferred rights from the holder.

Everything in America is negotiable and has its price, including all contracts and all transfers of rights.

Sure, a member school can buy back the transferred rights and obviously the seller won’t sell the rights back unless the buy back price is better than the value of keeping them. If $500 million is the fair value, why would the ACC negotiate down to a substantially lower price? Would ND “negotiate” with the ACC about joining the ACC football if the ACC is unwilling to provide any additional consideration to ND?

That is not how litigation works, I am afraid.

The ACC will not end up selling rights back to ND for more than the value of keeping it.

It would be less. Statistics show that about 95-98% of all civil cases settle, due to a number of factors.

In my 32 year litigation career, I saw about the same percentage occur.

No case has ever settled for total value PLUS more.

Anyway, I think it is all relative as I believe ND will do nothing at all. Status quo.

It will be interesting to see what ND can get as a football independent after the 2025 deal expires.

(P.S. Do you really want me to answer your last question and say one more time that ND football is not going to join the ACC?)

My last question was a rhetoric one. Just like ND won’t engage in negotiating with the ACC about joining the ACC football, the ACC will not engage in negotiating down the buyback price.

What you said about the civil case statistics makes sense although I was talking about the economic incentive about selling back vs keeping the rights. But, please let me know any case where a GoR was successfuly challenged and the buyout amount became substiantially lower than the fair value.

Let’s say I irreovocably sold a used minivan to you at $6,000. I want to buy back the minivan from you at $1000 while the fair value is $5000. If you say no, can I file a legal case and settle it at $3,000?

I really don’t think there is much room to negotiate here.

I am bedrock certain that you are wrong, but don't care to argue about it any longer.

Its moot....for a few years....ND is likely staying independent.

No problem. We can revisit this if and when some schools actually challenge the GoR.

ND would be fine either way.

(07-11-2022 09:33 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Its moot....for a few years....ND is likely staying independent.

I have no inside information but I don't see why ESPN wouldn't offer ND a deal to stay independent along with their deal to go to the SEC.

ESPN gave Texas the LHN when it suited their interests. Well, ESPN certainly doesn't want ND to join the B1G and have no share of the B1G media package. So why not offer ND $80-$120 mil for their 7 home games and keep the status quo until 2036?

ND would rather have all their games on network TV but if they were going to join a conference that option was going away anyway. So ESPN asks for 1 game on ESPN+, 1 for the ACCN, and guarantees 5 others on ABC. I think ND would do that to preserve their independence and be the highest grossing program in college football.

(07-12-2022 12:21 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I have no inside information but I don't see why ESPN wouldn't offer ND a deal to stay independent along with their deal to go to the SEC.

ESPN gave Texas the LHN when it suited their interests. Well, ESPN certainly doesn't want ND to join the B1G and have no share of the B1G media package. So why not offer ND $80-$120 mil for their 7 home games and keep the status quo until 2036?

....

^ This. ESPN might do quite a few things it wouldn't "normally" do if those actions help ND remain in the Disney fold. ND, after all, was the catalyst that made it possible for the ACC to have an ACCN.