http://www.vuhoops.com/2012/10/18/352357...ll-as-espn

Excerpt:

"There are two [negotiating windows], but they're both concurrent and they both end around the end of the month," he noted.

Aresco was confident that he could negotiate with those two partners during the exclusive negotiating window, without necessarily needing the rights to hit the open market. If a deal can be struck in the next couple of weeks with ESPN and CBS (or presumably either one) that the Big East schools believe is fair and valuable, it remains possible that they may never get to the point of speaking to NBC or Fox.

"[W]e resolved early on that we weren't going to be worried about whether other networks had an interest - and they do, they obviously do, in our product - but look, we have great partners and lets see what we can get done with them and that's what we're going to do."

If that happens, we need to be getting ACC money, or better.

Maybe it just the basketball side of the deal will be early or that we happy with money and exposure. CBS has CBS College Sports but are they willing to put a Big East football game on TV before or after an SEC game?

(10-19-2012 08:47 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  Maybe it just the basketball side of the deal will be early or that we happy with money and exposure. CBS has CBS College Sports but are they willing to put a Big East football game on TV before or after an SEC game?

No way to tell. And of course, this isn't necessarily final, but it's interesting that Aresco is saying publicly, this close to open bidding, that a deal could get done before then.

(10-19-2012 08:42 AM)TripleA Wrote:  http://www.vuhoops.com/2012/10/18/352357...ll-as-espn

Excerpt:

"There are two [negotiating windows], but they're both concurrent and they both end around the end of the month," he noted.

Aresco was confident that he could negotiate with those two partners during the exclusive negotiating window, without necessarily needing the rights to hit the open market. If a deal can be struck in the next couple of weeks with ESPN and CBS (or presumably either one) that the Big East schools believe is fair and valuable, it remains possible that they may never get to the point of speaking to NBC or Fox.

"[W]e resolved early on that we weren't going to be worried about whether other networks had an interest - and they do, they obviously do, in our product - but look, we have great partners and lets see what we can get done with them and that's what we're going to do."

Aresco is smart....that's all CYA....pretending to negotiate in good faith...while secretly (for football), you know he can't wait for Nov 1st to get here...so he can start openly negotiating with others.

Now in regards to basketball...I wouldn't be surprised if CBS/ESPN have a pretty good shot at keeping Big East Hoop TV rights.

Is it just me or does it seem CBS has covered the Big East quite a bit lately,more than frankly I can ever recall (particularly on the radio and whatnot with Tim Brando, etc.).

(10-19-2012 08:50 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 08:47 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  Maybe it just the basketball side of the deal will be early or that we happy with money and exposure. CBS has CBS College Sports but are they willing to put a Big East football game on TV before or after an SEC game?

No way to tell. And of course, this isn't necessarily final, but it's interesting that Aresco is saying publicly, this close to open bidding, that a deal could get done before then.

He is just covering his bases. He now has it on record in a published interview that the conference would sign during the exclusive window if it received a fair offer. If he said they had no intention of doing so in a public interview he would be handing ESPN a bad faith law suit. He has to say that. There will be no agreement prior to open market bidding.

KL, and AC, you both could be right, but why does he have to say it publicly? No need, really. There is no way to prove that the BE is bargaining in bad faith, whether he says anything publicly, or not.

Saying it won't matter one bit in court. That's exactly why I found the comment intriguing.

(10-19-2012 08:58 AM)TripleA Wrote:  KL, and AC, you both could be right, but why does he have to say it publicly? No need, really.

He does it because he is smart....plus, he is working with an entity (ESPN) that recently SUED and won in a settlement their case vs CUSA/FOX. (CUSA/FOX "gave" ESPN the CUSA Conf Championship Game TV rights for "free" for compensation to their unfair negotiation lawsuit).

(10-19-2012 09:02 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 08:58 AM)TripleA Wrote:  KL, and AC, you both could be right, but why does he have to say it publicly? No need, really.

He does it because he is smart....plus, he is working with an entity (ESPN) that recently SUED and won in a settlement their case vs CUSA/FOX. (CUSA/FOX "gave" ESPN the CUSA Conf Championship Game TV rights for "free" for compensation to their unfair negotiation lawsuit).

I don't disagree he is smart, but I bet you any amount that SAYING it doesn't mean a damn, if it ever went to court.

I tend to agree with KnightLight's thought that these public comments are really more CYA for Aresco.

Now, I do think Aresco is being since that it shouldn't be a foregone conclusion that the Big East will hit the open market. The purpose of these exclusive negotiating windows is to put pressure on the parties to get a deal done ASAP if they legitimately want to keep working together. Otherwise, no one would ever bother agreeing to putting these exclusive negotiating windows into the contracts in the first place (and Aresco knows this well since he has been on the other side of the negotiating table representing the TV industry for the past three decades).

he also probably has knowledge of the rough amount the BE will get on the open market. ESPN can probably come in with less than the others, but because of their reach, may be preferable.

Just my opinion.

(10-19-2012 08:58 AM)TripleA Wrote:  KL, and AC, you both could be right, but why does he have to say it publicly? No need, really. There is no way to prove that the BE is bargaining in bad faith, whether he says anything publicly, or not.

Saying it won't matter one bit in court. That's exactly why I found the comment intriguing.

Exactly, but if you want to hit the open market in a position of strength it makes sense to me to increase the anxiety/interest of those waiting to get in on the negotiations by issuing comments like these. Aresco is a dealer and he's dealing!

----------------
RU ready for Primetime!!!

(10-19-2012 08:58 AM)TripleA Wrote:  KL, and AC, you both could be right, but why does he have to say it publicly? No need, really. There is no way to prove that the BE is bargaining in bad faith, whether he says anything publicly, or not.

Saying it won't matter one bit in court. That's exactly why I found the comment intriguing.

I'm guessing he was simply asked the question. It's possible Aresco is sending out the subtle message to fans and other bidders that the numbers are getting pretty high. However, my guess is that he was asked the question in such a way that he had to cover his behind. They may have specifically asked if he would sign in the exclusive period.

(10-19-2012 08:42 AM)TripleA Wrote:  http://www.vuhoops.com/2012/10/18/352357...ll-as-espn

Excerpt:

"There are two [negotiating windows], but they're both concurrent and they both end around the end of the month," he noted.

Aresco was confident that he could negotiate with those two partners during the exclusive negotiating window, without necessarily needing the rights to hit the open market. If a deal can be struck in the next couple of weeks with ESPN and CBS (or presumably either one) that the Big East schools believe is fair and valuable, it remains possible that they may never get to the point of speaking to NBC or Fox.

"[W]e resolved early on that we weren't going to be worried about whether other networks had an interest - and they do, they obviously do, in our product - but look, we have great partners and lets see what we can get done with them and that's what we're going to do."

Not surprised by this at all.

(10-19-2012 09:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 09:02 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 08:58 AM)TripleA Wrote:  KL, and AC, you both could be right, but why does he have to say it publicly? No need, really.

He does it because he is smart....plus, he is working with an entity (ESPN) that recently SUED and won in a settlement their case vs CUSA/FOX. (CUSA/FOX "gave" ESPN the CUSA Conf Championship Game TV rights for "free" for compensation to their unfair negotiation lawsuit).

I don't disagree he is smart, but I bet you any amount that SAYING it doesn't mean a damn, if it ever went to court.

Its pretty obvious that you aren't aware of how many times people "use" the press to relay their messages (i.e. let the press carry the buckets of water for them).

Aresco is being open...negotiating openly in private sessions and now stating publicly their good faith in negotiating ONLY with their current TV partners during this exclusive window.

I'm sorry you are bothered by Aresco even talking about it...but that's what he does...he's not dumb.

Aresco is certainly trying (and succeeding) to being a "friend of the press" as he has done more interviews in just 2 months that his predecessor ever did in his last 2 years.

(10-19-2012 09:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I tend to agree with KnightLight's thought that these public comments are really more CYA for Aresco.

Now, I do think Aresco is being since that it shouldn't be a foregone conclusion that the Big East will hit the open market. The purpose of these exclusive negotiating windows is to put pressure on the parties to get a deal done ASAP if they legitimately want to keep working together. Otherwise, no one would ever bother agreeing to putting these exclusive negotiating windows into the contracts in the first place (and Aresco knows this well since he has been on the other side of the negotiating table representing the TV industry for the past three decades).

Frank, as an attorney, if ESPN ever sued the BE for bargaining in bad faith, would the fact that Aresco said publicly he was trying, really hold any water in court? I would think not, but I'm not an attorney.

(10-19-2012 09:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 09:02 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 08:58 AM)TripleA Wrote:  KL, and AC, you both could be right, but why does he have to say it publicly? No need, really.

He does it because he is smart....plus, he is working with an entity (ESPN) that recently SUED and won in a settlement their case vs CUSA/FOX. (CUSA/FOX "gave" ESPN the CUSA Conf Championship Game TV rights for "free" for compensation to their unfair negotiation lawsuit).

I don't disagree he is smart, but I bet you any amount that SAYING it doesn't mean a damn, if it ever went to court.

True....but a public statement saying you won't sign would sure as hell hurt you.

(10-19-2012 09:07 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 09:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 09:02 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 08:58 AM)TripleA Wrote:  KL, and AC, you both could be right, but why does he have to say it publicly? No need, really.

He does it because he is smart....plus, he is working with an entity (ESPN) that recently SUED and won in a settlement their case vs CUSA/FOX. (CUSA/FOX "gave" ESPN the CUSA Conf Championship Game TV rights for "free" for compensation to their unfair negotiation lawsuit).

I don't disagree he is smart, but I bet you any amount that SAYING it doesn't mean a damn, if it ever went to court.

Its pretty obvious that you aren't aware of how many times people "use" the press to relay their messages (i.e. let the press carry the buckets of water for them).

Aresco is being open...negotiating openly in private sessions and now stating publicly their good faith in negotiating ONLY with their current TV partners during this exclusive window.

I'm sorry you are bothered by Aresco even talking about it...but that's what he does...he's not dumb.

Aresco is certainly trying (and succeeding) to being a "friend of the press" as he has done more interviews in just 2 months that his predecessor ever did in his last 2 years.

It's obvious that I'm not aware? WTH, do you think I'm an idiot? I just have a different opinion from you, that's all. I know as much as you do about this, Mr. Know-It-All. I have negotiated dozens of multi-million dollar contracts in my life, thanks.

And I'm not "bothered" by what Aresco said at all. Damn, you are annoying. I thought it was intriguing, not bothersome.

I was simply trying to debate the reasons why he would feel a need to state this publicly. These are OPINIONS, not facts, as none of us are in Aresco's head.

But of course, as usual, you think you're right and anybody else who has a different opinion is wrong. Bite me and my 65 years and my Ph.D and my Mensa membership.

(10-19-2012 09:09 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 09:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 09:02 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(10-19-2012 08:58 AM)TripleA Wrote:  KL, and AC, you both could be right, but why does he have to say it publicly? No need, really.

He does it because he is smart....plus, he is working with an entity (ESPN) that recently SUED and won in a settlement their case vs CUSA/FOX. (CUSA/FOX "gave" ESPN the CUSA Conf Championship Game TV rights for "free" for compensation to their unfair negotiation lawsuit).

I don't disagree he is smart, but I bet you any amount that SAYING it doesn't mean a damn, if it ever went to court.

True....but a public statement saying you won't sign would sure as hell hurt you.

Right. But that's not what he did. Saying this publicly doesn't matter. That's why it is so intriguing. I do agree that it's for good PR, but NOT for CYA.