Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
Author Message
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
The SEC CBS deal won't make that much difference. Its one game a week. If it doubled to $8 million, it would only increase the SEC by $4 million. So is one SEC game a week really worth 40% of the entire Pac 12/ACC/Big 12 package? I think if it came up today, it would be more like $6 million, a big relative increase, but not that much in the scheme of things.
04-19-2018 04:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,884
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #42
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-19-2018 04:51 PM)bullet Wrote:  The SEC CBS deal won't make that much difference. Its one game a week. If it doubled to $8 million, it would only increase the SEC by $4 million. So is one SEC game a week really worth 40% of the entire Pac 12/ACC/Big 12 package? I think if it came up today, it would be more like $6 million, a big relative increase, but not that much in the scheme of things.
And 3.5 to 4 million more would put us right about where the Big 10 money will be. And that's without additions or renegotiation on the T2 / T3 stuff. Besides Bullet, CBS may not win the bid.
04-19-2018 04:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-19-2018 04:51 PM)bullet Wrote:  The SEC CBS deal won't make that much difference. Its one game a week. If it doubled to $8 million, it would only increase the SEC by $4 million. So is one SEC game a week really worth 40% of the entire Pac 12/ACC/Big 12 package? I think if it came up today, it would be more like $6 million, a big relative increase, but not that much in the scheme of things.

I think it'd be more than that. The package is the #1 package in college football. The CBS package had the top 2 games of the regular season last year- in a down SEC year. Think about that. It had 4 of the top 12 rated games of the year. Also I'd be pretty certain that the SEC has a look-in at the same point as the CBS deal is done.
04-19-2018 04:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,010
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 729
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
If the reports are correct? The Big 10 wants to get into the Canadian TV market. Toronto and McGill could start with Men's and Women's ice hockey to the Big 10. I know Simon Fraser wants to move their men's ice hockey to D1. This might be a start where the Big 10 could grow even more money with new tv markets in Canada.
04-19-2018 05:01 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #45
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-19-2018 04:51 PM)bullet Wrote:  The SEC CBS deal won't make that much difference. Its one game a week. If it doubled to $8 million, it would only increase the SEC by $4 million. So is one SEC game a week really worth 40% of the entire Pac 12/ACC/Big 12 package? I think if it came up today, it would be more like $6 million, a big relative increase, but not that much in the scheme of things.

It will get the SEC more than $6 million/game, because getting the first-choice game of the week in any P5 conference is worth a lot more than the last-choice game that week.

The Pac-12 and Big 12 are each getting more than $4 million per football game from ESPN and Fox if you average the contract over all of the games those networks get. That probably means the first Big 12 or Pac-12 pick each week was already valued at $6 million or so in contracts signed several years ago.

Factor in the rise in the going rate since then, plus the fact that TV will value the first-pick SEC game of the week at a higher price, and I'd guess the SEC is going to get $9-10 million/game from its next "OTA" TV deal, not including the SEC championship game which is likely worth over $40 million/year.
04-19-2018 05:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,007
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #46
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-19-2018 05:01 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  If the reports are correct? The Big 10 wants to get into the Canadian TV market. Toronto and McGill could start with Men's and Women's ice hockey to the Big 10. I know Simon Fraser wants to move their men's ice hockey to D1. This might be a start where the Big 10 could grow even more money with new tv markets in Canada.

FWIW, when I was in Vancouver three years ago, Fall of 2015, the TV in my hotel room got the PAC, B1G, and even SEC Networks.
04-19-2018 06:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-19-2018 05:51 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 04:51 PM)bullet Wrote:  The SEC CBS deal won't make that much difference. Its one game a week. If it doubled to $8 million, it would only increase the SEC by $4 million. So is one SEC game a week really worth 40% of the entire Pac 12/ACC/Big 12 package? I think if it came up today, it would be more like $6 million, a big relative increase, but not that much in the scheme of things.

It will get the SEC more than $6 million/game, because getting the first-choice game of the week in any P5 conference is worth a lot more than the last-choice game that week.

The Pac-12 and Big 12 are each getting more than $4 million per football game from ESPN and Fox if you average the contract over all of the games those networks get. That probably means the first Big 12 or Pac-12 pick each week was already valued at $6 million or so in contracts signed several years ago.

Factor in the rise in the going rate since then, plus the fact that TV will value the first-pick SEC game of the week at a higher price, and I'd guess the SEC is going to get $9-10 million/game from its next "OTA" TV deal, not including the SEC championship game which is likely worth over $40 million/year.

I was talking $6 million per school but with 14 schools and 14 weeks, I guess it comes out about the same. $6 million x 14 schools =$84 million divided by 14 weeks in the season = $6 million per game.

There is more than just football in those contracts. With the Big 12 the networks get roughly 5 home football games, so with a $20 million per school contract, that would be $4 million per game if the contract was only football. But the P5 would clearly get at least as much as the Big East which gets $4 million per school with no football. So that would mean a maximum of $16 million / 5 games = 3.2 million per game on average.
04-19-2018 07:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #48
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-19-2018 07:09 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 05:51 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 04:51 PM)bullet Wrote:  The SEC CBS deal won't make that much difference. Its one game a week. If it doubled to $8 million, it would only increase the SEC by $4 million. So is one SEC game a week really worth 40% of the entire Pac 12/ACC/Big 12 package? I think if it came up today, it would be more like $6 million, a big relative increase, but not that much in the scheme of things.

It will get the SEC more than $6 million/game, because getting the first-choice game of the week in any P5 conference is worth a lot more than the last-choice game that week.

The Pac-12 and Big 12 are each getting more than $4 million per football game from ESPN and Fox if you average the contract over all of the games those networks get. That probably means the first Big 12 or Pac-12 pick each week was already valued at $6 million or so in contracts signed several years ago.

Factor in the rise in the going rate since then, plus the fact that TV will value the first-pick SEC game of the week at a higher price, and I'd guess the SEC is going to get $9-10 million/game from its next "OTA" TV deal, not including the SEC championship game which is likely worth over $40 million/year.

I was talking $6 million per school but with 14 schools and 14 weeks, I guess it comes out about the same. $6 million x 14 schools =$84 million divided by 14 weeks in the season = $6 million per game.

There is more than just football in those contracts. With the Big 12 the networks get roughly 5 home football games, so with a $20 million per school contract, that would be $4 million per game if the contract was only football. But the P5 would clearly get at least as much as the Big East which gets $4 million per school with no football. So that would mean a maximum of $16 million / 5 games = 3.2 million per game on average.

Pac-12 is getting an average of $250 million/year from ESPN and Fox.

ESPN is paying 53%, Fox 47%. Each gets the same number of football games, 22/year not counting the CCG. ESPN gets twice as many basketball games as Fox. If football is 82% of the contract value, then the math confirms the 53-47 split.

So assign 0.82 x 250 = $205 million/year to football. If $25 million/year is for the CCG, a reasonable guess for a 2010 contract, that leaves $180 million/year for 44 regular-season telecasts, average of $4.09 million/game. If you use $20 million for the CCG value, then it's $4.4 million/regular season game.
04-19-2018 09:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CrazyPaco Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,944
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 275
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #49
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-19-2018 10:37 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 10:29 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 08:29 AM)stever20 Wrote:  from the article-
According to Wilner’s projections for 2018, distributions of more than $50 million would give the Big Ten a sizable revenue advantage over schools from the SEC (approximately $43 million each), the Big 12 ($36.5 million), the Pac-12 ($32 million) and the ACC ($28 million).

What's crazy is to look at the Big East (2012 Membership) television revenue per year in 2019:

Rutgers - $51.1 million (B1G)
West Virginia - $36.5 million (Big 12)
Syracuse, Pittsburgh and Louisville - $28 million (ACC)
Notre Dame - $15 million (NBC Football) + ??? (ACC membership) (Ind./ACC)
DePaul, Georgetown, Marquette, Providence, Seton Hall, St. Johns and Villanova - 4.17 million per year (Big East)
UConn, Cincinnati, USF, $1.7 million (American)

That's not quite accurate. the numbers for Big Ten, Big 12, and ACC are the conference distro- which is for everything. The Big East and AAC schools number is just tv only.

Wild assumptions in those projections and not accurate for Rutgers at all. Rutgers doesn't get a full share until 2020-21. Until then, they on a structured ramp up of payouts from the Big Ten. Here's what Rutgers' prior and scheduled distributions from its prior conferences and the Big Ten were according to reports a couple years back.

2012 Big East $9.7m
2013 American $9.5m
2014 American Exit Fee -$11.5m
2014 Big Ten $9.4m
2015 Big Ten $10.86m
2016 Big Ten $11.2m
2017 Big Ten $11.6m
2018 Big Ten $14.9m
2019 Big Ten $19.3m

By comparison and using conservative (stagnant growth) estimates over the period of 2013-2019, Pitt and Syracuse will have received at least $86 million more than Rutgers in conference payouts. What happens in 2020, when Rutgers receives a full payout and the ACC Network is up and running, is a different story that is impossible to accurately know at the current time.

And to underscore Rutgers athletic's current financial struggles, it is reportedly paying ~$6 million a year just in debt service. So you can start to see why they still have such a high subsidization of their athletic department (by far the highest of all power conference schools according to USAToday).
(This post was last modified: 04-19-2018 10:05 PM by CrazyPaco.)
04-19-2018 09:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 11,898
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 502
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #50
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-19-2018 09:43 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 10:37 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 10:29 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 08:29 AM)stever20 Wrote:  from the article-
According to Wilner’s projections for 2018, distributions of more than $50 million would give the Big Ten a sizable revenue advantage over schools from the SEC (approximately $43 million each), the Big 12 ($36.5 million), the Pac-12 ($32 million) and the ACC ($28 million).

What's crazy is to look at the Big East (2012 Membership) television revenue per year in 2019:

Rutgers - $51.1 million (B1G)
West Virginia - $36.5 million (Big 12)
Syracuse, Pittsburgh and Louisville - $28 million (ACC)
Notre Dame - $15 million (NBC Football) + ??? (ACC membership) (Ind./ACC)
DePaul, Georgetown, Marquette, Providence, Seton Hall, St. Johns and Villanova - 4.17 million per year (Big East)
UConn, Cincinnati, USF, $1.7 million (American)

That's not quite accurate. the numbers for Big Ten, Big 12, and ACC are the conference distro- which is for everything. The Big East and AAC schools number is just tv only.

Wild assumptions in those projections and not accurate for Rutgers at all. Rutgers doesn't get a full share until 2020-21. Until then, they on a structured ramp up of payouts from the Big Ten. Here's what Rutgers' prior and scheduled distributions from its prior conferences and the Big Ten were according to reports a couple years back.

2012 Big East $9.7m
2013 American $9.5m
2014 American Exit Fee -$11.5m
2014 Big Ten $9.4m
2015 Big Ten $10.86m
2016 Big Ten $11.2m
2017 Big Ten $11.6m
2018 Big Ten $14.9m
2019 Big Ten $19.3m

By comparison and using conservative (stagnant growth) estimates over the period of 2013-2019, Pitt and Syracuse will have received at least $86 million more than Rutgers in conference payouts. What happens in 2020, when Rutgers receives a full payout and the ACC Network is up and running, is a different story that is impossible to accurately know at the current time.

And to underscore Rutgers athletic's current financial struggles, it is reportedly paying ~$6 million a year just in debt service. So you can start to see why they still have such a high subsidization of their athletic department (by far the highest of all power conference schools according to USAToday).

Yep. Rutgers is more susidized than the least subsidized non cartel school New Mexico.
04-19-2018 10:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #51
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-19-2018 06:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 05:01 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  If the reports are correct? The Big 10 wants to get into the Canadian TV market. Toronto and McGill could start with Men's and Women's ice hockey to the Big 10. I know Simon Fraser wants to move their men's ice hockey to D1. This might be a start where the Big 10 could grow even more money with new tv markets in Canada.

FWIW, when I was in Vancouver three years ago, Fall of 2015, the TV in my hotel room got the PAC, B1G, and even SEC Networks.

You paid $800 dollars for a flight to a generic North American city to watch conference networks in your hotel room?

Shame on you....shame on you.
04-19-2018 11:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,007
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #52
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-19-2018 11:32 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 06:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 05:01 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  If the reports are correct? The Big 10 wants to get into the Canadian TV market. Toronto and McGill could start with Men's and Women's ice hockey to the Big 10. I know Simon Fraser wants to move their men's ice hockey to D1. This might be a start where the Big 10 could grow even more money with new tv markets in Canada.

FWIW, when I was in Vancouver three years ago, Fall of 2015, the TV in my hotel room got the PAC, B1G, and even SEC Networks.

You paid $800 dollars for a flight to a generic North American city to watch conference networks in your hotel room?

Shame on you....shame on you.

03-lmfao

FWIW, first, it was business, so my school paid. Second, I loved Vancouver, had a blast their while taking care of business, would love to go back. Great scenery and lots to do in town. Third, I didn't watch the networks, I just saw them as i was scrolling late at night, and flipped on them to see if you had to pay extra for them (you didn't). Was surprised to see them there.

04-cheers
04-20-2018 12:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DawgNBama Offline
the Rush Limbaugh of CSNBBS
*

Posts: 8,319
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation: 444
I Root For: conservativism/MAGA
Location: US
Post: #53
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-19-2018 11:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 08:52 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 08:40 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 08:29 AM)stever20 Wrote:  from the article-
According to Wilner’s projections for 2018, distributions of more than $50 million would give the Big Ten a sizable revenue advantage over schools from the SEC (approximately $43 million each), the Big 12 ($36.5 million), the Pac-12 ($32 million) and the ACC ($28 million).

Can't imagine FSU being happy about making half what Northwestern does.....

Like I said, should be some "interesting" negotiations in the next few years....

This is old news, as we've already been made aware of the Michigan letter projecting $50m + payout next year. Nothing new in this article.

Of course it does remain important news, because if those projections do come true, everything the author says about revenue gaps will be correct, which could lead to instability within the P5 from schools in under-paid conferences.

There are a couple of things to note. The SEC could realize some more money in 2024, when its deal with CBS expires. That could bring in some new dollars, though not huge dollars. Also, the Comcast- NYC stuff being talked about here could impact the B1G negatively.

But, that said, what appears most likely is that, thanks to Delany's foresight, the B1G will be making a good $10m more than the SEC. To me, that's the comparison that irks the most. You can't really blame Swofford for the ACC not making as much, because the ACC just isn't as inherently valuable as the B1G. But, the B1G should not be making any more than the SEC does. If it does, that's due to bad SEC leadership.

Call me crazy, but I could see even the SEC be threatened - if the B1G is making $10m + a year more than the SEC, the B1G could be tempting to a Kentucky.

The figures for the Big 10 in 2018 are correct. Where Wilner missed the boat, conveniently for his tease line of swamping the SEC in revenue, is in two places.

1. 2017 the SEC didn't receive Sugar Bowl money due to the CFP rotation. Last year's earnings would normally have been around 43.7 million instead of 40.9 million. The SEC contract accrues at a rate of about 2 million a year. Hence we appeared stagnant because of the bowl money. Next year 2018 the SEC will be earning closer to 46 million and that is without factoring in the Altice deal and the spread of our carriage.

So the Big 10 will likely be 5 million ahead of the SEC in TV rights money in 2018. But, the SEC outpaces the Gross Revenue production of the Big 10 by about 15 million per school on average per year. So the B1G will close the "real" gap in total revenue which Wilner knows and fails to mention to around a 10 million dollar deficit to the SEC at the end of 2018.

Okay, how did the P5 conferences do in Gross Revenue production & total revenue???

Quote:2. Wilner touts the Big 10's ability to renew a contract in 2023. But Wilner fails to mention that the most undervalued contract still in existence, the contract between CBS Sports and the SEC for the SEC's T1 rights is up in 2024. So it is the SEC that will be stepping up to the plate a year after the new Big 10 numbers are known.

And of course it is estimated that the Big 10 will lose 2% of its expected revenue from Comcast and that is not factored in either.

And finally, the ACC and SEC both enjoy renegotiation clauses in their media contracts with ESPN. If either of us adds schools before 2024 those clauses will kick in and then the rest of the SEC's T2 and T3 may be renegotiated, and if the ACC adds any all of their rights will be renegotiated.

So let's wrap this up. In 2018 the Big 10 will be making around 51 million. The SEC will be making around 46. The SEC will still be out earning Big 10 schools by around 10 million each from all sources of revenue of which TV rights amount to between a 1/4th to 1/5th of the gross total revenue.

And the conditions of the other three P conferences will be an unknown rather than a static quantity. The ACC will have network in 2019 which should overtake the PAC handsomely, and they will have the right to renegotiate existing contracts with additions.

The PAC may choose to sell the ownership of their network for carriage and receive a nice bump for doing so.

Texas with its T3 rights already makes over 50 million in TV revenue and Oklahoma makes around 41 with T3. So there will be no overwhelming pressure on either of the two schools who lead the Big 12 to do anything they don't want to do.

I will be a happy camper when this board wakes up and smells the coffee on media deals. They are a significant part of total revenue, but are only about 20 to 25% of it. Therefore how much TV money a conference earns doesn't carry enough weight to make any substantive difference in that conference's fortunes.

Thanks to the Big 10 we all will be getting raises when we renew or renegotiate. So I'm happy for them in that regard. But the reality is even if the Big 10 made 10 million more in TV revenue they'd still be 5 million behind in total revenue. But instead they will enjoy around a 5 million dollar advantage plus or minus 1 million in TV revenue alone. They have had that advantage and more in the past. This is nothing new.
I can see why USC is so furious now @ the Pac12 Conference. UO should be furious as well, and it’s a surprise that they are not, IMO.
(This post was last modified: 04-20-2018 01:58 AM by DawgNBama.)
04-20-2018 01:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,884
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #54
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-20-2018 01:20 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 11:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 08:52 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 08:40 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 08:29 AM)stever20 Wrote:  from the article-
According to Wilner’s projections for 2018, distributions of more than $50 million would give the Big Ten a sizable revenue advantage over schools from the SEC (approximately $43 million each), the Big 12 ($36.5 million), the Pac-12 ($32 million) and the ACC ($28 million).

Can't imagine FSU being happy about making half what Northwestern does.....

Like I said, should be some "interesting" negotiations in the next few years....

This is old news, as we've already been made aware of the Michigan letter projecting $50m + payout next year. Nothing new in this article.

Of course it does remain important news, because if those projections do come true, everything the author says about revenue gaps will be correct, which could lead to instability within the P5 from schools in under-paid conferences.

There are a couple of things to note. The SEC could realize some more money in 2024, when its deal with CBS expires. That could bring in some new dollars, though not huge dollars. Also, the Comcast- NYC stuff being talked about here could impact the B1G negatively.

But, that said, what appears most likely is that, thanks to Delany's foresight, the B1G will be making a good $10m more than the SEC. To me, that's the comparison that irks the most. You can't really blame Swofford for the ACC not making as much, because the ACC just isn't as inherently valuable as the B1G. But, the B1G should not be making any more than the SEC does. If it does, that's due to bad SEC leadership.

Call me crazy, but I could see even the SEC be threatened - if the B1G is making $10m + a year more than the SEC, the B1G could be tempting to a Kentucky.

The figures for the Big 10 in 2018 are correct. Where Wilner missed the boat, conveniently for his tease line of swamping the SEC in revenue, is in two places.

1. 2017 the SEC didn't receive Sugar Bowl money due to the CFP rotation. Last year's earnings would normally have been around 43.7 million instead of 40.9 million. The SEC contract accrues at a rate of about 2 million a year. Hence we appeared stagnant because of the bowl money. Next year 2018 the SEC will be earning closer to 46 million and that is without factoring in the Altice deal and the spread of our carriage.

So the Big 10 will likely be 5 million ahead of the SEC in TV rights money in 2018. But, the SEC outpaces the Gross Revenue production of the Big 10 by about 15 million per school on average per year. So the B1G will close the "real" gap in total revenue which Wilner knows and fails to mention to around a 10 million dollar deficit to the SEC at the end of 2018.

Okay, how did the P5 conferences do in Gross Revenue production & total revenue???

Quote:2. Wilner touts the Big 10's ability to renew a contract in 2023. But Wilner fails to mention that the most undervalued contract still in existence, the contract between CBS Sports and the SEC for the SEC's T1 rights is up in 2024. So it is the SEC that will be stepping up to the plate a year after the new Big 10 numbers are known.

And of course it is estimated that the Big 10 will lose 2% of its expected revenue from Comcast and that is not factored in either.

And finally, the ACC and SEC both enjoy renegotiation clauses in their media contracts with ESPN. If either of us adds schools before 2024 those clauses will kick in and then the rest of the SEC's T2 and T3 may be renegotiated, and if the ACC adds any all of their rights will be renegotiated.

So let's wrap this up. In 2018 the Big 10 will be making around 51 million. The SEC will be making around 46. The SEC will still be out earning Big 10 schools by around 10 million each from all sources of revenue of which TV rights amount to between a 1/4th to 1/5th of the gross total revenue.

And the conditions of the other three P conferences will be an unknown rather than a static quantity. The ACC will have network in 2019 which should overtake the PAC handsomely, and they will have the right to renegotiate existing contracts with additions.

The PAC may choose to sell the ownership of their network for carriage and receive a nice bump for doing so.

Texas with its T3 rights already makes over 50 million in TV revenue and Oklahoma makes around 41 with T3. So there will be no overwhelming pressure on either of the two schools who lead the Big 12 to do anything they don't want to do.

I will be a happy camper when this board wakes up and smells the coffee on media deals. They are a significant part of total revenue, but are only about 20 to 25% of it. Therefore how much TV money a conference earns doesn't carry enough weight to make any substantive difference in that conference's fortunes.

Thanks to the Big 10 we all will be getting raises when we renew or renegotiate. So I'm happy for them in that regard. But the reality is even if the Big 10 made 10 million more in TV revenue they'd still be 5 million behind in total revenue. But instead they will enjoy around a 5 million dollar advantage plus or minus 1 million in TV revenue alone. They have had that advantage and more in the past. This is nothing new.
I can see why USC is so po’d now @ the Pac12 Conference. UO should be po’d as well, and it’s a surprise that they are not, IMO.

I have the numbers you asked for over in the pinned threads at the top of the SEC board here. But off the top of my head the total revenue averages for a school (and they are averages) were approximately this:

SEC: 127 million per school
B1G 114 million per school
B12 108 million per school
PAC 97 million per school
ACC 92 million per school

And that is gross total revenue.

The TV money per the article cited for 2017 had this:
SEC 41 million
B1G 38.5 million
B12 34.7 million
PAC 31 million
ACC 28 million

Next year the Big 10 jumps to 51.1 million for full members.
Next year the SEC will once again get Sugar Bowl (3mil) money plus their escalator (2mil) so we should be around 46 million.
The Big 12 will get a slight escalator so probably around 37 million plus T3 money.
The ACC will be around 29 to 30 with escalator and a year away from ACCN money.
The PAC will be up about the same 2 mil so around 33.

So the Big 10 will enjoy an advantage in TV money at least util 2023 when contracts start to renew.

Of course the above figures don't include other issues. The Big 10 income is expected to take a slight hit of 2% because of Comcast. The SEC will get a slight bump from the Altice deal.

But remember the TV revenue is only around 1/4 to 1/5th of the total revenue.
(This post was last modified: 04-20-2018 01:59 AM by JRsec.)
04-20-2018 01:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DawgNBama Offline
the Rush Limbaugh of CSNBBS
*

Posts: 8,319
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation: 444
I Root For: conservativism/MAGA
Location: US
Post: #55
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
Gotcha!!
04-20-2018 02:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #56
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
those numbers are NOT TV money. that's full conference distribution that the conference gives schools for everything.

also the numbers from 2017 are for the 2016-17 school year. So SEC and Big Ten both had their normal Sugar/Rose bowls.
if the Big Ten is up to 51 million for the 2017-18 school year that would be for a year with no Big Ten Rose Bowl. So whatever the gap is between the Big Ten and SEC will be maintained next year....
04-20-2018 02:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,873
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 892
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #57
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-20-2018 12:07 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 11:32 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 06:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 05:01 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  If the reports are correct? The Big 10 wants to get into the Canadian TV market. Toronto and McGill could start with Men's and Women's ice hockey to the Big 10. I know Simon Fraser wants to move their men's ice hockey to D1. This might be a start where the Big 10 could grow even more money with new tv markets in Canada.

FWIW, when I was in Vancouver three years ago, Fall of 2015, the TV in my hotel room got the PAC, B1G, and even SEC Networks.

You paid $800 dollars for a flight to a generic North American city to watch conference networks in your hotel room?

Shame on you....shame on you.

03-lmfao

FWIW, first, it was business, so my school paid. Second, I loved Vancouver, had a blast their while taking care of business, would love to go back. Great scenery and lots to do in town. Third, I didn't watch the networks, I just saw them as i was scrolling late at night, and flipped on them to see if you had to pay extra for them (you didn't). Was surprised to see them there.

04-cheers

My wife and I were in Vancouver a few years ago. We loved it and I would also like to go back there.

My father-in-law was a Vietnam era Marine Gunnery Sergeant (three tours of duty) and had retired to Whidbey Island, Washington (another great scenery location) and we took the drive over the border.
(This post was last modified: 04-20-2018 06:44 AM by TerryD.)
04-20-2018 06:43 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 16,476
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 2968
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Staffordsville, KY
Post: #58
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
The Big Ten is the old man with a big bank account and a limp **** when it comes to getting it done where it counts.

Do they make a blue pill for:

Not putting a team into the college football play-offs?
No round ball championships since ?
Sucking in college baseball and whining that the season starts too early?


The big bank account doesn't make-up for the failure to perform on the field or court.
CJ
04-20-2018 07:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,231
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #59
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-20-2018 06:43 AM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-20-2018 12:07 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 11:32 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 06:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-19-2018 05:01 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  If the reports are correct? The Big 10 wants to get into the Canadian TV market. Toronto and McGill could start with Men's and Women's ice hockey to the Big 10. I know Simon Fraser wants to move their men's ice hockey to D1. This might be a start where the Big 10 could grow even more money with new tv markets in Canada.

FWIW, when I was in Vancouver three years ago, Fall of 2015, the TV in my hotel room got the PAC, B1G, and even SEC Networks.

You paid $800 dollars for a flight to a generic North American city to watch conference networks in your hotel room?

Shame on you....shame on you.

03-lmfao

FWIW, first, it was business, so my school paid. Second, I loved Vancouver, had a blast their while taking care of business, would love to go back. Great scenery and lots to do in town. Third, I didn't watch the networks, I just saw them as i was scrolling late at night, and flipped on them to see if you had to pay extra for them (you didn't). Was surprised to see them there.

04-cheers

My wife and I were in Vancouver a few years ago. We loved it and I would also like to go back there.

My father-in-law was a Vietnam era Marine Gunnery Sergeant (three tours of duty) and had retired to Whidbey Island, Washington (another great scenery location) and we took the drive over the border.

Please thank him for his service.
04-20-2018 07:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,357
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #60
RE: Big Ten's Rights Deal Threatens To Widen Financial Gap Between Even The Biggest Confe
(04-20-2018 07:12 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The Big Ten is the old man with a big bank account and a limp **** when it comes to getting it done where it counts.

Do they make a blue pill for:

Not putting a team into the college football play-offs?
No round ball championships since ?
Sucking in college baseball and whining that the season starts too early?


The big bank account doesn't make-up for the failure to perform on the field or court.
CJ

Ask this question in 5-10 years when SAban is making $30M a year to put Wisconsin in the national title game and Calipari is making $20M a year to take Rutgers to the Final Four.
04-20-2018 07:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.