On my cable package I get the B1G, SEC and ACC networks. The PAC12 channels are there but I don't have it.

Why? I dunno. Don't care, either.

(08-11-2023 12:06 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  I think OP is missing the point...

The Pac-12 fans are going to find a way to watch their team. The FINANCIAL WINDFALL IS NOT FROM THE FANS. The financial windfall is from the millions of cable subscribers who's monthly cable bill includes carriage fees for the network whether they watch the channel or not.

Pac-12 network was AVAILABLE TO 90 million homes. But it wasn't CARRIED by 90 million homes. It was actually carried by 12 million homes.

Because the Pac-12 didn't have the leverage to get carriage deals that forced cable providers to put it on basic outside of Pac-12 markets and generate revenue from non-viewers in a way that the Big Ten did.

Big Ten Network by comparison is CARRIED in 60 million homes, because FOX was bundling the network with all their other channels and had leverage to make that happen.


The Pac-12 also lost money operationally -- because Larry Scott put Pac-12 Network and conference HQ in downtown San Francisco where they paid $696,000 in rent per month. And because they didn't have a partner like Fox to share infrastructure/reduce costs. AND the Pac-12 ordered their schools to fork over all their content even if they had existing local contracts at Pac-12 Network's launch.

A number of schools had to buy out existing contracts, so they started in the hole even before mediocre revenues from P12N came back.


And the premise of the thread title is just silly. Who cares if there's a lie over availability or not? Are you saying the Pac-12 DIDN'T DIE OVER LOW TV REVENUES? Because they clearly did. It sounds like you're trying to pin the death of the Pac-12 on fans not caring about the Pac-12 for them to get large enough TV revenues to survive. But that clearly doesn't matter because that's just not how carriage fees work.

The P12N trying to go alone was a huge mistake during the era when cable /satellite bundles were king and were printing money. But that era is coming to a close.

The P12 should have been well-positioned to transition to a streaming option like Apple+ but that option was completely poisoned by the false narrative I’m describing. The “Nobody can get the P12N and now nobody will get Apple+” was THE dominant discourse around this potential deal.

But Apple had to lowball the offer because of how PAC fans behaved with respect to the P12N and how the accessibility alarm concerning a streaming deal was already incredibly high and largely an extension of the existing false narrative about P12N accessibility.

(08-11-2023 11:22 AM)PlayBall! Wrote:  What's needed to revive people being sports fans on the West Coast? Long term.

Better football. The product just wasn't very appealing.

(08-11-2023 11:57 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 11:22 AM)PlayBall! Wrote:  What's needed to revive people being sports fans on the West Coast? Long term.

People in the west are sports fans. But not primarily college sports fans.

Not only can’t be undone, it will likely be the norm for the rest of the country in 20 years.

College sports are intrinsically worse than professional sports as a game/competition. The level of play is lower and the mechanisms that pro sports use to introduce parity and level playing field are lacking.

But what college sports has, in contrast to the sort of sterile composers world of pro sports, is an intense personal connection, often generational, to a school and often to its rivals as well. That connection is really based on people staying in the same place for generations.

The Rust Belt and rural south have had the least amount of in-migration of anywhere in the states while the West, Southwest have had the highest. The West no longer has a critical mass of people with generational ties to a place with which to sustain college sports fervor. The increase in immigration to the South in recent years is going to introduce the same dilution of fandom which we already see in the urban schools of the ACC.

It’s just a matter of time before the same factors can hat hit the west early take hold elsewhere. Which is why CFB sort of has to replicate the sterile NFL approach because historic fandom is gradually eroding everywhere.

Laughs in Houston. Get real.

(08-11-2023 10:44 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  The biggest lie in college football, and the single greatest contributor to the PAC’s demise was mostly spread by PAC fans.

“I can’t even get the PAC12 network”.

Was that true? No. It was a lie, as we’ll see below. And we can speculate as to why this lie was so prevalent especially on places like this sub.

Some key time points for expanding access to the PAC12 include:

Summer 2011 DISH.

August, 2014 YouTube International.

February 2015 Sling.

**DISH**
In the Summer of 2011, prior to the inaugural PAC12 kickoff, DISH was added as a PAC partner. This made the P12N available nationally. So what were the barriers to adoption for PAC fans?

1) Don’t have my own roof. Renters, apartment dwellers, and other people who literally could not place a dish on a roof did not have access.
2) NFL Sunday ticket. The only reason why DTV was a sticking point was that DTV was the home of NFL Sunday Ticket. Any PAC fan who chose DTV (and the choice was aided by the fact that if you called DTV to cancel and mentioned the P12N they would offer you free Sunday Ticket) obviously had a roof and the opportunity to get DISH. Although this segment of NFL-first fans had the opportunity to get DISH and P12N, they seem almost universally to have made the false claim/lie that “I can’t even get the P12N”. This lie served the purpose of protecting their egos as fans, because to say that I chose not to get the P12N would accurately characterize this segment as fair-weather fans.

**YouTube International**
The PAC12 network became available on YouTube International for $10 month. In August 2014. As an a la carte option this was the dream of early adopter cord-cutters. All that stood in their path was a $10 subscription and a VPN to spoof their location. I think a lot of early core-cutters had the VPN issue solved. So why didn’t they do this? Likely lack of awareness. Any positive mention of P12N access on any forum, including this one, was completely drowned out be the DTV-subscribing “I can’t get the P12N” fans noted above.

**Sling**
For people without roofs, Sling became an option in February 2015. For the 98% of American households with broadband Internet access, getting the PAC12N was a few mouse clicks away.

Now for 98% of the population “I can’t get the P12N” was an outright lie. So why is this narrative so pervasive on r/CFB?

Because P12 fans suck. Not because they didn’t pay for a service that might make them chose against another interest like the NFL. But because overwhelmingly people who made this choice outright will lied about it to cover the fact that they are fair-weather fans. And in doing so they completely undermined the financial viability of the conference by destroying its public perception and creating a barrier of misinformation that kept potential new subscribers and revenue from being realized by the conference.

It seems to be important to some people to find the 'moral' in a story.

It seems important to feel that 'deserving' decides outcomes.

“We don’t need to expand now.”
—USC president to Pac-12 office, July 2021

(08-11-2023 11:40 AM)CAJUNNATION Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 11:04 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  ....Instead they doubled down on the issues of PAC Net, and thought streaming was a viable solution which would have brought on a “I don’t want PAC subscription” response

This is really a symptom of a societal sickness. People became fascinated with streaming when cord cutting looked like a cheaper option. It was always a sucker bet. The networks were NEVER going to allow the public to get the milk for free.

The sad thing is that streaming will always be a lesser quality way to view content. Also, no streaming platform will ever deliver the quantity nor the quality of Satellite or Cable packages.

Now, we have the destruction of the legendary PAC due to the obsession with streaming.

Nice job morons.

What?? Especially the quantity, I've never had so much access to content for anything...well aside from porn.

(08-11-2023 11:55 AM)unalions Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 11:22 AM)PlayBall! Wrote:  What's needed to revive people being sports fans on the West Coast? Long term.

It won’t happen. They have lives which don’t revolve around some false sense of self worth that comes from attachment to the athletic teams of a college they probably didn’t attend. (Looking at most Bama/SEC fans)

It’s really hot and boring in the south. Hence, rabid college fans. Lol.

Truth.

Where 'rabid' is a compliment, life can use more variety.

For me, most of the cable plans I had put the P-12 network (along with the B1G, FS2, Mav, Longhorn and Red Zone Channel, and a few others) into the $10 a month sports tier. What people wanted was having it in a channel under 200 or so.

(08-11-2023 11:40 AM)CAJUNNATION Wrote:  This is really a symptom of a societal sickness. People became fascinated with streaming when cord cutting looked like a cheaper option. It was always a sucker bet. The networks were NEVER going to allow the public to get the milk for free.

The sad thing is that streaming will always be a lesser quality way to view content. Also, no streaming platform will ever deliver the quantity nor the quality of Satellite or Cable packages.

Now, we have the destruction of the legendary PAC due to the obsession with streaming.

Nice job morons.

Streaming is not the symptom of societal weakness. It's air-conditioning.

Ever since people started putting that technological mystery gizmo in their homes because they were too high-falutin' and full of themselves to sweat like good honest primates with fully functioning armpits, everything's gone to Hoboken in a handcart.

(08-11-2023 12:06 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  I think OP is missing the point...

The Pac-12 fans are going to find a way to watch their team. The FINANCIAL WINDFALL IS NOT FROM THE FANS. The financial windfall is from the millions of cable subscribers who's monthly cable bill includes carriage fees for the network whether they watch the channel or not.

Pac-12 network was AVAILABLE TO 90 million homes. But it wasn't CARRIED by 90 million homes. It was actually carried by 12 million homes.

Because the Pac-12 didn't have the leverage to get carriage deals that forced cable providers to put it on basic outside of Pac-12 markets and generate revenue from non-viewers in a way that the Big Ten did.

Big Ten Network by comparison is CARRIED in 60 million homes, because FOX was bundling the network with all their other channels and had leverage to make that happen.


The Pac-12 also lost money operationally -- because Larry Scott put Pac-12 Network and conference HQ in downtown San Francisco where they paid $696,000 in rent per month. And because they didn't have a partner like Fox to share infrastructure/reduce costs. AND the Pac-12 ordered their schools to fork over all their content even if they had existing local contracts at Pac-12 Network's launch.

A number of schools had to buy out existing contracts, so they started in the hole even before mediocre revenues from P12N came back.


And the premise of the thread title is just silly. Who cares if there's a lie over availability or not? Are you saying the Pac-12 DIDN'T DIE OVER LOW TV REVENUES? Because they clearly did. It sounds like you're trying to pin the death of the Pac-12 on fans not caring about the Pac-12 for them to get large enough TV revenues to survive. But that clearly doesn't matter because that's just not how carriage fees work.

Basic tier coverage in the Midwest and NY/PA area > Basic tier coverage in the West

(08-11-2023 01:05 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 12:06 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  I think OP is missing the point...

The Pac-12 fans are going to find a way to watch their team. The FINANCIAL WINDFALL IS NOT FROM THE FANS. The financial windfall is from the millions of cable subscribers who's monthly cable bill includes carriage fees for the network whether they watch the channel or not.

Pac-12 network was AVAILABLE TO 90 million homes. But it wasn't CARRIED by 90 million homes. It was actually carried by 12 million homes.

Because the Pac-12 didn't have the leverage to get carriage deals that forced cable providers to put it on basic outside of Pac-12 markets and generate revenue from non-viewers in a way that the Big Ten did.

Big Ten Network by comparison is CARRIED in 60 million homes, because FOX was bundling the network with all their other channels and had leverage to make that happen.


The Pac-12 also lost money operationally -- because Larry Scott put Pac-12 Network and conference HQ in downtown San Francisco where they paid $696,000 in rent per month. And because they didn't have a partner like Fox to share infrastructure/reduce costs. AND the Pac-12 ordered their schools to fork over all their content even if they had existing local contracts at Pac-12 Network's launch.

A number of schools had to buy out existing contracts, so they started in the hole even before mediocre revenues from P12N came back.


And the premise of the thread title is just silly. Who cares if there's a lie over availability or not? Are you saying the Pac-12 DIDN'T DIE OVER LOW TV REVENUES? Because they clearly did. It sounds like you're trying to pin the death of the Pac-12 on fans not caring about the Pac-12 for them to get large enough TV revenues to survive. But that clearly doesn't matter because that's just not how carriage fees work.

Basic tier coverage in the Midwest and NY/PA area > Basic tier coverage in the West

Yes. I'm betting that goes a long way to account for a practical effect of the PAC breakup. We're seeing distribution of western schools into multiple leagues headquartered farther east.

(08-11-2023 12:06 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  I think OP is missing the point...




And the premise of the thread title is just silly. Who cares if there's a lie over availability or not?

(08-11-2023 12:12 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  It wasn’t surprising that people didn’t opt to get it. What was surprising was how many people joined in to spreading lie that it was unavailable. It’s basically accepted as fact, when virtually anyone who wanted the P12N had the option of getting it.

Would things be different if cf podcasts and message fans always complained "it is more difficult to get the Pac-12 Network than the effort and cost is worth" instead of "I can't get it?"

Or to have qualified every time with "PAC-12 fans can't get the PAC-12 network easily enough or broadly enough for the casual fans to bother?"

I mean, in theory nobody can ever really say that they can't get any channel/televised event if they're REALLY willing to do anything to see it. At what point is "I can't even get that" cover all the efforts you'd have to go through past the minimum?

(08-11-2023 11:22 AM)PlayBall! Wrote:  What's needed to revive people being sports fans on the West Coast? Long term.

People attaching self-worth to sports teams?

(08-11-2023 02:08 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 12:06 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  I think OP is missing the point...




And the premise of the thread title is just silly. Who cares if there's a lie over availability or not?

(08-11-2023 12:12 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  It wasn’t surprising that people didn’t opt to get it. What was surprising was how many people joined in to spreading lie that it was unavailable. It’s basically accepted as fact, when virtually anyone who wanted the P12N had the option of getting it.

Would things be different if cf podcasts and message fans always complained "it is more difficult to get the Pac-12 Network than the effort and cost is worth" instead of "I can't get it?"

Or to have qualified every time with "PAC-12 fans can't get the PAC-12 network easily enough or broadly enough for the casual fans to bother?"

I mean, in theory nobody can ever really say that they can't get any channel/televised event if they're REALLY willing to do anything to see it. At what point is "I can't even get that" cover all the efforts you'd have to go through past the minimum?

Getting sling was no harder than ordering a Dominos pizza online. If that’s a big effort for someone who calls themselves a fan, they’re not a fan. Seriously, under one minute from google to checkout for Sling. I can’t do that with a pizza.

Edit: A higher proportion of the US has access to broadband than they do to Dominos delivery service. So it is in fact easier to get the P12N than a Dominos pizza.

(08-11-2023 03:12 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 02:08 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 12:06 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  I think OP is missing the point...




And the premise of the thread title is just silly. Who cares if there's a lie over availability or not?

(08-11-2023 12:12 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  It wasn’t surprising that people didn’t opt to get it. What was surprising was how many people joined in to spreading lie that it was unavailable. It’s basically accepted as fact, when virtually anyone who wanted the P12N had the option of getting it.

Would things be different if cf podcasts and message fans always complained "it is more difficult to get the Pac-12 Network than the effort and cost is worth" instead of "I can't get it?"

Or to have qualified every time with "PAC-12 fans can't get the PAC-12 network easily enough or broadly enough for the casual fans to bother?"

I mean, in theory nobody can ever really say that they can't get any channel/televised event if they're REALLY willing to do anything to see it. At what point is "I can't even get that" cover all the efforts you'd have to go through past the minimum?

Getting sling was no harder than ordering a Dominos pizza online. If that’s a big effort for someone who calls themselves a fan, they’re not a fan. Seriously, under one minute from google to checkout for Sling. I can’t do that with a pizza.

Edit: A higher proportion of the US has access to broadband than they do to Dominos delivery service. So it is in fact easier to get the P12N than a Dominos pizza.

This is like the SDSU fan going on and on about how easy it would have been to get a million or million and a half subscribers to an app service because cable is outdated.


If it was as easy/clear as y'all make it out to be, wouldn't people do it?

(08-11-2023 03:41 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 03:12 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 02:08 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 12:06 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  I think OP is missing the point...




And the premise of the thread title is just silly. Who cares if there's a lie over availability or not?

(08-11-2023 12:12 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  It wasn’t surprising that people didn’t opt to get it. What was surprising was how many people joined in to spreading lie that it was unavailable. It’s basically accepted as fact, when virtually anyone who wanted the P12N had the option of getting it.

Would things be different if cf podcasts and message fans always complained "it is more difficult to get the Pac-12 Network than the effort and cost is worth" instead of "I can't get it?"

Or to have qualified every time with "PAC-12 fans can't get the PAC-12 network easily enough or broadly enough for the casual fans to bother?"

I mean, in theory nobody can ever really say that they can't get any channel/televised event if they're REALLY willing to do anything to see it. At what point is "I can't even get that" cover all the efforts you'd have to go through past the minimum?

Getting sling was no harder than ordering a Dominos pizza online. If that’s a big effort for someone who calls themselves a fan, they’re not a fan. Seriously, under one minute from google to checkout for Sling. I can’t do that with a pizza.

Edit: A higher proportion of the US has access to broadband than they do to Dominos delivery service. So it is in fact easier to get the P12N than a Dominos pizza.

This is like the SDSU fan going on and on about how easy it would have been to get a million or million and a half subscribers to an app service because cable is outdated.


If it was as easy/clear as y'all make it out to be, wouldn't people do it?

The point is that it wasn’t hard to get. People claiming to be PAC fans chose not to get it, and then lied about the reason. That whole public perception that it was hard to get was a smokescreen for PAC fan apathy.

If the barrier had really been that it was unavailable, then someone like Apple or Amazon likely would have made a harder push or offered more.

But Apple and Amazon knew that the barrier wasn’t access; it was interest. And that’s why they didn’t come in with firm financials.

So many PAC fans ***** about GK, but the reason he couldn’t deliver an offer is because the fans already proved to Apple that not very many of them would actually subscribe given the opportunity.

(08-11-2023 10:44 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  The biggest lie in college football, and the single greatest contributor to the PAC’s demise was mostly spread by PAC fans.

“I can’t even get the PAC12 network”.

Was that true? No. It was a lie, as we’ll see below. And we can speculate as to why this lie was so prevalent especially on places like this sub.

It was true. I have Charter Spectrum and they did not make the Pac-12 network available until September of 2017. That was after Charter's purchase of Time Warner Cable went through in the summer of 2017. Time Warner Cable had an agreement with the Pac-12 Network. I could not go to any sports bars in the area to watch a Pac-12 game because they all had DIRECTV.

I missed the first five seasons of the Pac-12 network. But the Big Ten Network and the SEC Network were available on Charter Spectrum. It was common to go to a sports bar or stay in a hotel room without access to the Pac-12 Network. It was not a big lie.

I'm in CA and don't get P12 network. I had to watch Fresno St. vs PAC games on reddit streams

(08-11-2023 05:13 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 10:44 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  The biggest lie in college football, and the single greatest contributor to the PAC’s demise was mostly spread by PAC fans.

“I can’t even get the PAC12 network”.

Was that true? No. It was a lie, as we’ll see below. And we can speculate as to why this lie was so prevalent especially on places like this sub.

It was true. I have Charter Spectrum and they did not make the Pac-12 network available until September of 2017. That was after Charter's purchase of Time Warner Cable went through in the summer of 2017. Time Warner Cable had an agreement with the Pac-12 Network. I could not go to any sports bars in the area to watch a Pac-12 game because they all had DIRECTV.

I missed the first five seasons of the Pac-12 network. But the Big Ten Network and the SEC Network were available on Charter Spectrum. It was common to go to a sports bar or stay in a hotel room without access to the Pac-12 Network. It was not a big lie.

You talk like having Charter/Spectrum was a terminal illness outside your control. Were you locked into a 5-year contract where they’d repossess your home if you changed providers?

Be real. It wasn’t that you couldn’t get the PACN. You could, but instead you opted to remain with a provider that didn’t offer the P12N.

What you and so many PAC fans did was to use your money to pay a provider to not carry the P12N. That’s on you not Larry Scott. And now you’re acting like you had no agency in the matter which is some serious BS self-delusion and very common among PAC fans.