Possible economics of ESPN/ACC:
1) ESPN can force ESPNU to basic cable within the ACC footprint (I live between Clemson and Charlotte and it isn't on Charter Basic!).
2) ESPN can have the ACC earn equity by producing the content themselves, thus saving Disney a boat-load of production costs; ESPN becomes the silent partner while the ACC is the "working" partner, in effect
3) Advertising can be more focused, and it becomes easier to track ratings of ACC games on a consistent platform.

QUESTIONS:
* What becomes of Raycom Sports and the over-the-air ACC Network?
* How does the ACC Digital Network tie-in with this?
* How much money are we talkin', anyways?

This is very exciting.

With these exclusive networks acc is really working the Espn partnership and transforming Espn u with its directv dish access is huge. Acc is working out of the box solutions. Other conferences are locking up their properties into closed subscription based models and it looks like acc is really molding into owning a open sports network, with all properties offered and strategic partnership with Espn.

Sec CBS/ abc/Espn acc abc Espn big 10 big 12 PAC 12 fox. What You might see is less fox properties on Espn or vice versus. Ruthless

(04-12-2013 03:02 PM)westmc9th Wrote:  Just got off the phone with my contact and while this is preliminary, how do you guys feel about ESPNU becoming ESPNACC or something to that matter? this is something the two are discussing, not a done deal or anything near that, but it would be IMMEDIATELY PROFITABLE are the words used. If a deal is done where ESPNU is converted into solely ACC property, it could begin the year after the deal is complete, already be on directv and other major networks so there will have to be no hassling with Directv or cable to take the product. Either way it looks like ESPN is warm to the idea of an ACC "network"....

(04-12-2013 04:00 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Actually, if y'all had been reading my blog, you'd know that I told you this could happen back on 12/19/2012.

I will go on the record and say that your blog is great. I go through it when I have to kill some time. I haven't commented on anything yet, but I've been meaning to.

(04-12-2013 04:10 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Possible economics of ESPN/ACC:
1) ESPN can force ESPNU to basic cable within the ACC footprint (I live between Clemson and Charlotte and it isn't on Charter Basic!).
2) ESPN can have the ACC earn equity by producing the content themselves, thus saving Disney a boat-load of production costs; ESPN becomes the silent partner while the ACC is the "working" partner, in effect
3) Advertising can be more focused, and it becomes easier to track ratings of ACC games on a consistent platform.

QUESTIONS:
* What becomes of Raycom Sports and the over-the-air ACC Network?
* How does the ACC Digital Network tie-in with this?
* How much money are we talkin', anyways?

1. I think that point #1 is overblown. I'm sure it will happen, but I think that the benefits are way overstated, because people tend to ignore the costs. I think that the bigger issue is that forming a joing-owned ESPN-ACC network is a signal of an intent to build a lasting and committed relationship between the two parties. This is important, because ESPN knows that they can build the ACC up without incurring the risk of the ACC jumping to Fox in 11 years, and costing ESPN all of their investment in the conference. Hopefully that will translate into more ACC love on ESPN and thus more interest in ACC athletics.

2. ESPN could, and there might be tax considerations that would make that make sense, but I would imagine that ESPN is better at producing TV content than schools. If that's the case, then it would make sense for ESPN to produce the content and for the schools to pay ESPN, unless the schools can incorporate the production process into the curriculum. If that's the case, then the academic advantages would offset many of the costs.

3. I guess it depends on what the alternative is, which depends on what content is aired. Content from regional networks (i.e. coach's shows) could be moved. If that's the case, then the advertising might not necessarily be more focused. To use an extreme example, snow gear applies to everyone who watches programming, whether it is MTV, CSPAN, or ESPN. That isn't true throughout the ACC empire, I don't see too many convicts (aka Miami football players ZING!) worrying about getting rid of snow as quickly as possibly.* Conversely, Chicago-style deep dish "pizza" might be popular in the southern parts of our glorious empire, but the Papa ain't popula in Cuse country.**

*By "snow" I mean white frozen water, not...well...nevermind. (ZING!)
**I'm really, really sorry for the forced pun-like group of words. I couldn't resist. Btw, I hope you appreciated the reference to our earlier discussion abotu pizza and "pizza."

(04-12-2013 10:02 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-12-2013 04:10 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Possible economics of ESPN/ACC:
1) ESPN can force ESPNU to basic cable within the ACC footprint (I live between Clemson and Charlotte and it isn't on Charter Basic!).
2) ESPN can have the ACC earn equity by producing the content themselves, thus saving Disney a boat-load of production costs; ESPN becomes the silent partner while the ACC is the "working" partner, in effect
3) Advertising can be more focused, and it becomes easier to track ratings of ACC games on a consistent platform.

QUESTIONS:
* What becomes of Raycom Sports and the over-the-air ACC Network?
* How does the ACC Digital Network tie-in with this?
* How much money are we talkin', anyways?

1. I think that point #1 is overblown. I'm sure it will happen, but I think that the benefits are way overstated, because people tend to ignore the costs. I think that the bigger issue is that forming a joing-owned ESPN-ACC network is a signal of an intent to build a lasting and committed relationship between the two parties. This is important, because ESPN knows that they can build the ACC up without incurring the risk of the ACC jumping to Fox in 11 years, and costing ESPN all of their investment in the conference. Hopefully that will translate into more ACC love on ESPN and thus more interest in ACC athletics.

2. ESPN could, and there might be tax considerations that would make that make sense, but I would imagine that ESPN is better at producing TV content than schools. If that's the case, then it would make sense for ESPN to produce the content and for the schools to pay ESPN, unless the schools can incorporate the production process into the curriculum. If that's the case, then the academic advantages would offset many of the costs.

3. I guess it depends on what the alternative is, which depends on what content is aired. Content from regional networks (i.e. coach's shows) could be moved. If that's the case, then the advertising might not necessarily be more focused. To use an extreme example, snow gear applies to everyone who watches programming, whether it is MTV, CSPAN, or ESPN. That isn't true throughout the ACC empire, I don't see too many convicts (aka Miami football players ZING!) worrying about getting rid of snow as quickly as possibly.* Conversely, Chicago-style deep dish "pizza" might be popular in the southern parts of our glorious empire, but the Papa ain't popula in Cuse country.**

*By "snow" I mean white frozen water, not...well...nevermind. (ZING!)
**I'm really, really sorry for the forced pun-like group of words. I couldn't resist. Btw, I hope you appreciated the reference to our earlier discussion abotu pizza and "pizza."

OK, I have to give you rep points for pizza reference AND the idea of incorporating TV production into the curriculum. ESPN 101?

You missed out on some rep points with the convicts - obvious opportunity to get bail bondsmen to sponsor the network!

I'll miss ESPNU but if it becomes ESPNACC, then fantastic! It's got to be easier to rename an existing network as opposed to starting a new one. I guess they're planning on not having enough interesting games for ESPNU so it's more cost effective to change it to ESPNACC.

(04-13-2013 02:07 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I'll miss ESPNU but if it becomes ESPNACC, then fantastic! It's got to be easier to rename an existing network as opposed to starting a new one. I guess they're planning on not having enough interesting games for ESPNU so it's more cost effective to change it to ESPNACC.

I think you nailed it, Chris. Move all SEC games off ESPNU (and ESPN3 and CSS, etc.) and pretty much all that left for ESPNU is ACC anyway.

(04-13-2013 05:37 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2013 02:07 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I'll miss ESPNU but if it becomes ESPNACC, then fantastic! It's got to be easier to rename an existing network as opposed to starting a new one. I guess they're planning on not having enough interesting games for ESPNU so it's more cost effective to change it to ESPNACC.

I think you nailed it, Chris. Move all SEC games off ESPNU (and ESPN3 and CSS, etc.) and pretty much all that left for ESPNU is ACC anyway.

YIKES! If ESPNU doesn't turn into the ACC Network, then we're going to be sharing ESPNU with "The American." That's just depressing.

Imagine basketball season! All those fantastic games!

ESPN 101
Carolina already operates a state wide television network known as WUNC-TV. http://www.unctv.org/content/

It's a state-of the-art production facility located in the Research Triangle Park with transmitters all over North Carolina. UNC-TV quite a bit of in-house production that is shown on its own network and also distributed through PBS.
The network is the outgrowth of the Radio/Television/Motion Picture program at Carolina.
This program is generally regarded as the top program of its kind in the US.

(04-13-2013 07:19 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-13-2013 05:37 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2013 02:07 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I'll miss ESPNU but if it becomes ESPNACC, then fantastic! It's got to be easier to rename an existing network as opposed to starting a new one. I guess they're planning on not having enough interesting games for ESPNU so it's more cost effective to change it to ESPNACC.

I think you nailed it, Chris. Move all SEC games off ESPNU (and ESPN3 and CSS, etc.) and pretty much all that left for ESPNU is ACC anyway.

YIKES! If ESPNU doesn't turn into the ACC Network, then we're going to be sharing ESPNU with "The American." That's just depressing.

Don't give them any ideas. "The ACC/AAC network presented by ESPN"

(04-13-2013 10:22 AM)XLance Wrote:  ESPN 101
Carolina already operates a state wide television network known as WUNC-TV. http://www.unctv.org/content/

It's a state-of the-art production facility located in the Research Triangle Park with transmitters all over North Carolina. UNC-TV quite a bit of in-house production that is shown on its own network and also distributed through PBS.
The network is the outgrowth of the Radio/Television/Motion Picture program at Carolina.
This program is generally regarded as the top program of its kind in the US.

In other words, yes, we could produce our own network (just leave the distribution up to ESPN, and split the profits)

(04-13-2013 09:28 AM)esayem Wrote:  Imagine basketball season! All those fantastic games!

That and the non-revenue sports are the 2 main reasons I want the ACC network. And with VT being at the bottom of the standings in basketball , think of all those great games that will fall to ESPNACC.

(04-13-2013 02:12 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2013 10:22 AM)XLance Wrote:  ESPN 101
Carolina already operates a state wide television network known as WUNC-TV. http://www.unctv.org/content/

It's a state-of the-art production facility located in the Research Triangle Park with transmitters all over North Carolina. UNC-TV quite a bit of in-house production that is shown on its own network and also distributed through PBS.
The network is the outgrowth of the Radio/Television/Motion Picture program at Carolina.
This program is generally regarded as the top program of its kind in the US.

In other words, yes, we could produce our own network (just leave the distribution up to ESPN, and split the profits)

Ready made to be morphed into or absorbed by the ESPNACC.

It seems like there two ways to go. One would be for ESPN to create the ACC Network. ESPN already owns all of the content, so under this model, it's not clear to me why ESPN would pay the ACC more money. One possibility would be through a long term rights extension for ACC Network package games.

The second model would be for ESPN to sell back a portion of its current rights to the ACC and possibly a TV partner such as Raycom or Fox. The ACC and its partner could take the risk of building the network, obtaining cable clearances, etc., and create value. ESPN already sells packages to Raycom and Fox, so it has demonstrated an interest in moving some of its inventory to third party outlets.

This link delves into how the SECN could be a model for the future ACCN:



http://allsportsdiscussion.com/2013/04/1...c-network/

I get how the ACCN would further equalize media money amongst the schools in the conference, which history has suggested is a good thing since the RoI for smaller schools is MUCH better than bigger schools, so a transfer of wealth from top schools to bottom schools helps the conference as a whole. I also get how the ACCN might have educational/marketing advantages. However, I still don't get how it magically increases total payouts. To clarify, I understand how it increases payouts from the conference, but I don't get how that increase isn't balanced out by private media deals.

Don't get me wrong. I am all for an ACCN. I just don't see how it's the end of the world if it doesn't materialize. I don't think that there will be a huge financial windfall in the short term. I honestly think that the academic advantages far outweigh the financial advantages. In my opinion, the worst aspect of the ACCN not materializing is it indicates that there is a very good chance that FSU doesn't want to play ball/share, which means that they feel like the ACC is in a weak place and/or they feel like they are in a vulnerable position when compared to other major programs.

(04-14-2013 03:45 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I get how the ACCN would further equalize media money amongst the schools in the conference, which history has suggested is a good thing since the RoI for smaller schools is MUCH better than bigger schools, so a transfer of wealth from top schools to bottom schools helps the conference as a whole. I also get how the ACCN might have educational/marketing advantages. However, I still don't get how it magically increases total payouts. To clarify, I understand how it increases payouts from the conference, but I don't get how that increase isn't balanced out by private media deals.

Don't get me wrong. I am all for an ACCN. I just don't see how it's the end of the world if it doesn't materialize. I don't think that there will be a huge financial windfall in the short term. I honestly think that the academic advantages far outweigh the financial advantages. In my opinion, the worst aspect of the ACCN not materializing is it indicates that there is a very good chance that FSU doesn't want to play ball/share, which means that they feel like the ACC is in a weak place and/or they feel like they are in a vulnerable position when compared to other major programs.

How will there not be serious new money for the ACC? The SEC just bought back all their Tier 3 stuff (most likely at a premium) and digital network in order to go "all in" with ESPN. Think about that for a moment. The SEC just sold EVERYTHING to ESPN. ESPN owns the SEC's Tier 1,2, and 3 as well as their digital rights. What is the difference between the SEC and ACC?

Who does the ACC have to buy their tier 3 stuff from? What relationships are there between ESPN and Raycom? What historical relationship exist between the ACC and Raycom? Who works at Raycom that has a connection with the ACC?

The way it looks to me and correct me if I'm wrong:

ESPN will own ALL the SEC, could own ALL the ACC and has the BEST inventory of the Pac 12, Big 12, until 2023. I know the B1G is going to market soon, but I wonder if that contract has similar language as the old BE contract that gives ESPN last offer to match? I also know the AAC contract is only for the next 6 years but they have the best inventory locked up in this conference as well (perhaps to fill the gaps).

(04-14-2013 04:30 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 03:45 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I get how the ACCN would further equalize media money amongst the schools in the conference, which history has suggested is a good thing since the RoI for smaller schools is MUCH better than bigger schools, so a transfer of wealth from top schools to bottom schools helps the conference as a whole. I also get how the ACCN might have educational/marketing advantages. However, I still don't get how it magically increases total payouts. To clarify, I understand how it increases payouts from the conference, but I don't get how that increase isn't balanced out by private media deals.

Don't get me wrong. I am all for an ACCN. I just don't see how it's the end of the world if it doesn't materialize. I don't think that there will be a huge financial windfall in the short term. I honestly think that the academic advantages far outweigh the financial advantages. In my opinion, the worst aspect of the ACCN not materializing is it indicates that there is a very good chance that FSU doesn't want to play ball/share, which means that they feel like the ACC is in a weak place and/or they feel like they are in a vulnerable position when compared to other major programs.

How will there not be serious new money for the ACC? The SEC just bought back all their Tier 3 stuff (most likely at a premium) and digital network in order to go "all in" with ESPN. Think about that for a moment. The SEC just sold EVERYTHING to ESPN. ESPN owns the SEC's Tier 1,2, and 3 as well as their digital rights. What is the difference between the SEC and ACC?

Who does the ACC have to buy their tier 3 stuff from? What relationships are there between ESPN and Raycom? What historical relationship exist between the ACC and Raycom? Who works at Raycom that has a connection with the ACC?

The way it looks to me and correct me if I'm wrong:

ESPN will own ALL the SEC, could own ALL the ACC and has the BEST inventory of the Pac 12, Big 12, until 2023. I know the B1G is going to market soon, but I wonder if that contract has similar language as the old BE contract that gives ESPN last offer to match? I also know the AAC contract is only for the next 6 years but they have the best inventory locked up in this conference as well (perhaps to fill the gaps).

I have no doubt that ESPN will have a lot of content on a bunch of different channels. What's your point? (This isn't rhetorical. I'm simply not sure that I follwo your train of thought.)

Also, to answer your rhetorical question, it might not make money, because ACC schools will be buying content back at FMV prices and then contributing them to the conference who will sell them to subscribers via a TV channel at FMV-based prices. How is that not an even trade? Where is value being generated?

The fact that the SEC did it doesn't mean that it will work, or that it will make money. On one side of the coin, the BIG EAST's contract was once thought to be good, and the SEC's current contract was once thought to be HUGE. On the other side of the coin, the LHN was once thought to be a future cash cow for ESPN. Anyway, even if it does work for the SEC, there is no guarantee that it will work for the ACC. The SEC thinks that their content is undervalued. That wouldn't necessarily apply to the ACC. The SEC might have also formed the network at a loss for academic reasons. I'm not saying that they did, but I haven't seen any evidence that they didn't. I haven't seen any evidence either way. Do you have any evidence that it will generate a financial boom for the ACC? Or, can you give me an explaination as to how it will create value that is in excess of its cost? (Those questions aren't rhetorical. I'm just curious.)

I'm also not sure what you mean by this:

(04-14-2013 04:30 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Who does the ACC have to buy their tier 3 stuff from? What relationships are there between ESPN and Raycom? What historical relationship exist between the ACC and Raycom? Who works at Raycom that has a connection with the ACC?

Help me out.

(04-14-2013 04:40 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 04:30 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 03:45 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I get how the ACCN would further equalize media money amongst the schools in the conference, which history has suggested is a good thing since the RoI for smaller schools is MUCH better than bigger schools, so a transfer of wealth from top schools to bottom schools helps the conference as a whole. I also get how the ACCN might have educational/marketing advantages. However, I still don't get how it magically increases total payouts. To clarify, I understand how it increases payouts from the conference, but I don't get how that increase isn't balanced out by private media deals.

Don't get me wrong. I am all for an ACCN. I just don't see how it's the end of the world if it doesn't materialize. I don't think that there will be a huge financial windfall in the short term. I honestly think that the academic advantages far outweigh the financial advantages. In my opinion, the worst aspect of the ACCN not materializing is it indicates that there is a very good chance that FSU doesn't want to play ball/share, which means that they feel like the ACC is in a weak place and/or they feel like they are in a vulnerable position when compared to other major programs.

How will there not be serious new money for the ACC? The SEC just bought back all their Tier 3 stuff (most likely at a premium) and digital network in order to go "all in" with ESPN. Think about that for a moment. The SEC just sold EVERYTHING to ESPN. ESPN owns the SEC's Tier 1,2, and 3 as well as their digital rights. What is the difference between the SEC and ACC?

Who does the ACC have to buy their tier 3 stuff from? What relationships are there between ESPN and Raycom? What historical relationship exist between the ACC and Raycom? Who works at Raycom that has a connection with the ACC?

The way it looks to me and correct me if I'm wrong:

ESPN will own ALL the SEC, could own ALL the ACC and has the BEST inventory of the Pac 12, Big 12, until 2023. I know the B1G is going to market soon, but I wonder if that contract has similar language as the old BE contract that gives ESPN last offer to match? I also know the AAC contract is only for the next 6 years but they have the best inventory locked up in this conference as well (perhaps to fill the gaps).

I have no doubt that ESPN will have a lot of content on a bunch of different channels. What's your point? (This isn't rhetorical. I'm simply not sure that I follwo your train of thought.)

Also, to answer your rhetorical question, it might not make money, because ACC schools will be buying content back at FMV prices and then contributing them to the conference who will sell them to subscribers via a TV channel at FMV-based prices. How is that not an even trade? Where is value being generated?

The fact that the SEC did it doesn't mean that it will work, or that it will make money. On one side of the coin, the BIG EAST's contract was once thought to be good, and the SEC's current contract was once thought to be HUGE. On the other side of the coin, the LHN was once thought to be a future cash cow for ESPN. Anyway, even if it does work for the SEC, there is no guarantee that it will work for the ACC. The SEC thinks that their content is undervalued. That wouldn't necessarily apply to the ACC. The SEC might have also formed the network at a loss for academic reasons. I'm not saying that they did, but I haven't seen any evidence that they didn't. I haven't seen any evidence either way. Do you have any evidence that it will generate a financial boom for the ACC? Or, can you give me an explaination as to how it will create value that is in excess of its cost? (Those questions aren't rhetorical. I'm just curious.)

I'm also not sure what you mean by this:

(04-14-2013 04:30 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Who does the ACC have to buy their tier 3 stuff from? What relationships are there between ESPN and Raycom? What historical relationship exist between the ACC and Raycom? Who works at Raycom that has a connection with the ACC?

Help me out.

If ESPN owns all of the SEC and most (possibly all) of the ACC with the SECN and possible ACCN, how do they make money moving inventory? What if there was a scheduling alliance between the SEC and ACC? What if ESPN was having trouble getting carriage for one of their networks? What could ESPN do with If the B1G wants to go all-in with FOX, how does ESPN replace their inventory? Who has more leverage ESPN or FOX?

I'm with you nzmorange, lots of questions and many answers?

What I was getting at with the other question you had is, ESPN (more like reallocation), Jefferson Pilot, ESPN has a partnership with Raycom, and John Swofford's son.