Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Big 12 revenue distribution
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #1
Big 12 revenue distribution
ESPN reports:

Quote:IRVING, Texas -- The Big 12 Conference will distribute a record $364.9 million to its 10 institutions for the fiscal year, commissioner Bob Bowlsby announced Friday at the conclusion of league meetings.

That amounts to $36.5 million per school, likely placing the Big 12 third among the Power 5 conferences, behind the SEC and Big Ten but ahead of the Pac-12 and ACC.

Not bad at all especially when you consider that the 3rd Tier deals are not included.

This only aids the notion that the conference might be in a position to acquire new properties in a few years.
06-01-2018 04:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #2
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
To mean it seems like justification for Texas and OU to remain in the B12 if the networks offer the same or more money. No conference is going to allow the Longhorn to keep the LHN and the Sooners T3 numbers put them Texas within spitting distance of the SEC. Combined with maintaining control, its hard to see an impetus for leaving or even expansion.
06-01-2018 06:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,728
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1392
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #3
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
Not to be a party pooper (ok, yes), but...

Well, not exactly... SportsDay says "The total figure is $364.875 million or nearly $36.5 on the average to the 10 member schools," but that completely ignores the conference cut (which the Big XII almost always ignores in these press releases). Further down in the article it states "the Big 12 distributed an average of $34.8 million per school" -- not from media, but TOTAL conference payout.

03-shhhh

The article also indicates that this is NOT apples to apples, because this new Big XII number must be for the 2017-18 fiscal year (which isn't done yet for most conferences). Why do I conclude that? Because it also states "The increase came despite the Big 12 not having Sugar Bowl revenue because of the College Football Playoff rotation..." that was true THIS year, not the previous one.
06-01-2018 06:46 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #4
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-01-2018 06:46 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Not to be a party pooper (ok, yes), but...

Well, not exactly... SportsDay says "The total figure is $364.875 million or nearly $36.5 on the average to the 10 member schools," but that completely ignores the conference cut (which the Big XII almost always ignores in these press releases). Further down in the article it states "the Big 12 distributed an average of $34.8 million per school" -- not from media, but TOTAL conference payout.

03-shhhh

The article also indicates that this is NOT apples to apples, because this new Big XII number must be for the 2017-18 fiscal year (which isn't done yet for most conferences). Why do I conclude that? Because it also states "The increase came despite the Big 12 not having Sugar Bowl revenue because of the College Football Playoff rotation..." that was true THIS year, not the previous one.

But what's important is whether or not Texas and OU are within spitting distance of the likes of UF, Bama and UM. 34M plus the 15M the Horns get from ESPN answers the bell. While OU doesn't report their T3 numbers, they aren't bad either. As long as those two are happy, the other B12 members will be content so long as they aren't cast down from P5 heaven.
(This post was last modified: 06-02-2018 09:25 AM by vandiver49.)
06-01-2018 07:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #5
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-01-2018 07:58 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-01-2018 06:46 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Not to be a party pooper (ok, yes), but...

Well, not exactly... SportsDay says "The total figure is $364.875 million or nearly $36.5 on the average to the 10 member schools," but that completely ignores the conference cut (which the Big XII almost always ignores in these press releases). Further down in the article it states "the Big 12 distributed an average of $34.8 million per school" -- not from media, but TOTAL conference payout.

03-shhhh

The article also indicates that this is NOT apples to apples, because this new Big XII number must be for the 2017-18 fiscal year (which isn't done yet for most conferences). Why do I conclude that? Because it also states "The increase came despite the Big 12 not having Sugar Bowl revenue because of the College Football Playoff rotation..." that was true THIS year, not the previous one.

But what's important is whether or not Texas and OU are within spitting distance of the likes of UF, Bama and UM. 34M plus the 15M the Horns get from ESPN answers the bell. While OU doesn't report their T3 numbers, they are bad either. As long as those two are happy, the other B12 members will be content so long as they aren't cast down from P5 heaven.
I can think of four schools off hand that were not very happy with the Big XII math.
06-01-2018 08:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
The real difference maker for OU and UT will be how well the B12 serves as a vehicle to get them to the playoff.

So far it's not worked so great. They've missed half the playoffs and been embarrassed in both trips to the semifinals. It's not hard to say the quality of league opponents hurts both their chance of getting into and then competing in the playoff.

You can see OU and UT responding to this with big beef ups of their OOC schedule (including UT heavily scheduling SEC opponents) to try and improve their chances. Their record in the playoffs will tell you wether or not they decide to continue with the "easiest path to the playoff!" experiment.
06-01-2018 08:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #7
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-01-2018 08:14 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(06-01-2018 07:58 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-01-2018 06:46 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Not to be a party pooper (ok, yes), but...

Well, not exactly... SportsDay says "The total figure is $364.875 million or nearly $36.5 on the average to the 10 member schools," but that completely ignores the conference cut (which the Big XII almost always ignores in these press releases). Further down in the article it states "the Big 12 distributed an average of $34.8 million per school" -- not from media, but TOTAL conference payout.

03-shhhh

The article also indicates that this is NOT apples to apples, because this new Big XII number must be for the 2017-18 fiscal year (which isn't done yet for most conferences). Why do I conclude that? Because it also states "The increase came despite the Big 12 not having Sugar Bowl revenue because of the College Football Playoff rotation..." that was true THIS year, not the previous one.

But what's important is whether or not Texas and OU are within spitting distance of the likes of UF, Bama and UM. 34M plus the 15M the Horns get from ESPN answers the bell. While OU doesn't report their T3 numbers, they are bad either. As long as those two are happy, the other B12 members will be content so long as they aren't cast down from P5 heaven.
I can think of four schools off hand that were not very happy with the Big XII math.

Who?
06-02-2018 09:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #8
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-01-2018 08:53 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  The real difference maker for OU and UT will be how well the B12 serves as a vehicle to get them to the playoff.

So far it's not worked so great. They've missed half the playoffs and been embarrassed in both trips to the semifinals. It's not hard to say the quality of league opponents hurts both their chance of getting into and then competing in the playoff.

You can see OU and UT responding to this with big beef ups of their OOC schedule (including UT heavily scheduling SEC opponents) to try and improve their chances. Their record in the playoffs will tell you wether or not they decide to continue with the "easiest path to the playoff!" experiment.

Unless the playoff expand, I don't see how moving to another conference would improve OU and UTX chances. OU was more than capable of moving on to the championship game last year and the Longhorns will eventually find a coach that can return them to glory while appeasing the BMD.
06-02-2018 09:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-02-2018 09:25 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-01-2018 08:14 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(06-01-2018 07:58 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-01-2018 06:46 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Not to be a party pooper (ok, yes), but...

Well, not exactly... SportsDay says "The total figure is $364.875 million or nearly $36.5 on the average to the 10 member schools," but that completely ignores the conference cut (which the Big XII almost always ignores in these press releases). Further down in the article it states "the Big 12 distributed an average of $34.8 million per school" -- not from media, but TOTAL conference payout.

03-shhhh

The article also indicates that this is NOT apples to apples, because this new Big XII number must be for the 2017-18 fiscal year (which isn't done yet for most conferences). Why do I conclude that? Because it also states "The increase came despite the Big 12 not having Sugar Bowl revenue because of the College Football Playoff rotation..." that was true THIS year, not the previous one.

But what's important is whether or not Texas and OU are within spitting distance of the likes of UF, Bama and UM. 34M plus the 15M the Horns get from ESPN answers the bell. While OU doesn't report their T3 numbers, they are bad either. As long as those two are happy, the other B12 members will be content so long as they aren't cast down from P5 heaven.
I can think of four schools off hand that were not very happy with the Big XII math.

Who?

I imagine he's speaking of Texas A&M, Missouri, Nebraska, and Colorado
06-02-2018 10:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
I'm crossing topics on multiple threads here, but the SEC's long term interests are very much at stake.

If I've been wrong and the Big 12 is going to be worth big money going forward then someone in a back room somewhere needs to get busy cutting a deal before the GOR is up.

My idea a long time ago was to merge the SEC and the Big 12. A 24 team league with those schools would command a great deal of leverage in the marketplace. The 3rd Tier deal alone would be very enticing because so much content would be under one roof. And in the world of streaming, the larger the audience you can reach the more you're worth because all subs are of equal value regardless of market size. That is, the number of subs you can sell is a matter of the size of the respective fan base rather than the overall population of a particular market.

Within a few years, the economic weight of this league would allow cherrypicking of select ACC properties that could add to the content value. At that point, the league has everything it could possibly want and its future is secure regardless of whether we're doing deals with ESPN or Amazon or anyone else...
06-02-2018 11:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
The B12s problem already is too many redundant schools in small markets with small fan bases who don't bring enough value. The SEC won't make the same mistake by adding the B12 deadweight and neither will anyone else.
(This post was last modified: 06-02-2018 03:08 PM by 10thMountain.)
06-02-2018 03:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #12
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-02-2018 10:39 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(06-02-2018 09:25 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-01-2018 08:14 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(06-01-2018 07:58 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-01-2018 06:46 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Not to be a party pooper (ok, yes), but...

Well, not exactly... SportsDay says "The total figure is $364.875 million or nearly $36.5 on the average to the 10 member schools," but that completely ignores the conference cut (which the Big XII almost always ignores in these press releases). Further down in the article it states "the Big 12 distributed an average of $34.8 million per school" -- not from media, but TOTAL conference payout.

03-shhhh

The article also indicates that this is NOT apples to apples, because this new Big XII number must be for the 2017-18 fiscal year (which isn't done yet for most conferences). Why do I conclude that? Because it also states "The increase came despite the Big 12 not having Sugar Bowl revenue because of the College Football Playoff rotation..." that was true THIS year, not the previous one.

But what's important is whether or not Texas and OU are within spitting distance of the likes of UF, Bama and UM. 34M plus the 15M the Horns get from ESPN answers the bell. While OU doesn't report their T3 numbers, they are bad either. As long as those two are happy, the other B12 members will be content so long as they aren't cast down from P5 heaven.
I can think of four schools off hand that were not very happy with the Big XII math.

Who?

I imagine he's speaking of Texas A&M, Missouri, Nebraska, and Colorado

Well those schools have resolved their issues with the B12. I was referring to the current members.
06-02-2018 04:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #13
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-02-2018 11:02 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I'm crossing topics on multiple threads here, but the SEC's long term interests are very much at stake.

If I've been wrong and the Big 12 is going to be worth big money going forward then someone in a back room somewhere needs to get busy cutting a deal before the GOR is up.

My idea a long time ago was to merge the SEC and the Big 12. A 24 team league with those schools would command a great deal of leverage in the marketplace. The 3rd Tier deal alone would be very enticing because so much content would be under one roof. And in the world of streaming, the larger the audience you can reach the more you're worth because all subs are of equal value regardless of market size. That is, the number of subs you can sell is a matter of the size of the respective fan base rather than the overall population of a particular market.

Within a few years, the economic weight of this league would allow cherrypicking of select ACC properties that could add to the content value. At that point, the league has everything it could possibly want and its future is secure regardless of whether we're doing deals with ESPN or Amazon or anyone else...

I don’t see the SEC having a problem even if the B12 can achieve some sort of long term stability. Either there will be opportunities with the ACC or a G5 promotion becomes available. To me the B12 needs to get cross conference rival games with the SEC West.
06-02-2018 04:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-02-2018 03:07 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  The B12s problem already is too many redundant schools in small markets with small fan bases who don't bring enough value. The SEC won't make the same mistake by adding the B12 deadweight and neither will anyone else.

Market size really only matters when you're broadcasting through traditional means. In this day and age, that sort of distribution model has shaped the landscape as well as conventional thinking on what brings value.

The problem is that technology has outpaced that model.

If you're talking about lining up products for an on-demand streaming service then the size of the fan base and/or other interested parties are the only people who will drop money on a subscription.

With that in mind, there's quite a few Big 12 teams that bring a decent sized fan base into the fold despite being based in smaller states. Remember that a school from a larger state doesn't necessarily have a mechanism to cash in on a large local population because most of those people won't sign up for a subscription. They don't get the chance to say 'no' to a broadcast company setting up shop locally, but when you go directly to consumer then it changes the equation.
06-02-2018 04:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,914
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-02-2018 03:07 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  The B12s problem already is too many redundant schools in small markets with small fan bases who don't bring enough value. The SEC won't make the same mistake by adding the B12 deadweight and neither will anyone else.

Oklahoma and Texas earn 36% of all of the revenue earned by the Big 12 and the two states represent 80% of it's total population. The bottom line is that any network is better off taking those two schools and nothing else.

That said they are two solid brands that if other brands could be added could form the basis of a solid conference, but not if that means keeping all of the F.O.T.'s (friends of Texas).
06-02-2018 04:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-02-2018 04:21 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-02-2018 11:02 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I'm crossing topics on multiple threads here, but the SEC's long term interests are very much at stake.

If I've been wrong and the Big 12 is going to be worth big money going forward then someone in a back room somewhere needs to get busy cutting a deal before the GOR is up.

My idea a long time ago was to merge the SEC and the Big 12. A 24 team league with those schools would command a great deal of leverage in the marketplace. The 3rd Tier deal alone would be very enticing because so much content would be under one roof. And in the world of streaming, the larger the audience you can reach the more you're worth because all subs are of equal value regardless of market size. That is, the number of subs you can sell is a matter of the size of the respective fan base rather than the overall population of a particular market.

Within a few years, the economic weight of this league would allow cherrypicking of select ACC properties that could add to the content value. At that point, the league has everything it could possibly want and its future is secure regardless of whether we're doing deals with ESPN or Amazon or anyone else...

I don’t see the SEC having a problem even if the B12 can achieve some sort of long term stability. Either there will be opportunities with the ACC or a G5 promotion becomes available. To me the B12 needs to get cross conference rival games with the SEC West.

Well, I think having problems would be a relative concept.

It all depends on what Amazon/Netflix does...whether they start bidding on properties or not.

But here's my thought process...I don't just want the SEC to be ok in the long run. I want them to win and the reason is because there is entirely too much interference from corporations in how these conferences are functioning. I would rather be in a situation where we dictate terms and where no conference backed by any sort of maniacal group bent on taking over the world could possibly break up our membership.

I think the best chance of that is "peace through strength" if you will.

In reality, I wish we have a larger number of smallish conferences that were pretty much regional. Perhaps something like what it used to be before all the money started altering the landscape. But we're not going back to that...the genie is out of the bottle.
06-02-2018 04:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-02-2018 04:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(06-02-2018 03:07 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  The B12s problem already is too many redundant schools in small markets with small fan bases who don't bring enough value. The SEC won't make the same mistake by adding the B12 deadweight and neither will anyone else.

Oklahoma and Texas earn 36% of all of the revenue earned by the Big 12 and the two states represent 80% of it's total population. The bottom line is that any network is better off taking those two schools and nothing else.

That said they are two solid brands that if other brands could be added could form the basis of a solid conference, but not if that means keeping all of the F.O.T.'s (friends of Texas).

There's no debating that OU and UT far outpace any of their conference mates. Any conference or network would be better off taking those 2 and nothing else, but the current pay model has rewarded properties in large markets because the locals have had to pay for a bundle to get any sort of TV entertainment. The people pay for everything to get whatever it is that they want.

What Amazon and Netflix have done is turn the market on its head with regard to how creative content is distributed and purchased. Others, even Disney, are now following suit, but the precedent has been set in other words.

When it comes to sports, no one has had to deal with the effects of direct to consumer distribution. Sports have actually been keeping the cable companies afloat more than anything, but as people abandon traditional broadcasting in exchange for something cheaper and more suited to their appetite then this will undercut the ability of networks to rely on this model to pay their bills.

The networks, by contrast, are a little more secure because they deal in content rather than in delivery methods although what the internet now offers is the opportunity for networks to do both.

I don't think cable and satellite are going to completely go away in the same sense that I don't think newspapers will ever go away, but the market has been altered and that changes the pay model in the long run.

I think the majority of sports content will head this direction and the new version of "bundling" will be networks that have their hand in a variety of different leagues and sports so that their consumers can access a lot of content for one price. It's much simpler that way and it benefits the distributors(new and old) because they don't have to go out of their way to appeal to the customer if the network has something that appeals to a litany of populations. The network becomes a one-stop shop for sports whereas the general population that might not like sports so much spends their dollar on other products.
06-02-2018 05:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
I think what you're going to see is entities like Amazon and Netflix making direct deals with say the Top 30 NCAA FB/MBB properties ala Nike and Under Armour

Meanwhile, the days of schools like Texas Tech and Baylor getting to sit at the big boy table due to politics and flukes of history are numbered
(This post was last modified: 06-02-2018 09:56 PM by 10thMountain.)
06-02-2018 09:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,914
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-02-2018 09:55 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I think what you're going to see is entities like Amazon and Netflix making direct deals with say the Top 30 NCAA FB/MBB properties ala Nike and Under Armour

Meanwhile, the days of schools like Texas Tech and Baylor getting to sit at the big boy table due to politics and flukes of history are numbered

And I think you are wrong. Amazon and Netflix will sublet games from the networks because they don't have the production capabilities. TV is not going away as it relates to cable and dish. Amazon and Netflix will purchase the right to stream games, maybe even game on a network channel. We will earn more money as conferences, but conferences aren't going away. The presidents don't want to be responsible for contracts, the A.D.'s & Presidents hired contract attorney's as commissioners so they never would have to fool with it. Donors and alums want familiar games that have been played for decades and can be persuaded to have better OOC games and maybe even another conference game for a price.

What's more is the Big 10 and SEC are worth more as a unit than they are severely.

Not even in your lifetime will you see what that dumb ass Okie article predict come true and the so called Amazon exec was most strangely unnamed. Where I come from we call that B.S..

Corporate structures like the major conferences aren't going away. Streaming isn't going to completely replace cable. And institutions like Universities will act in their self interest, but their self interest is in not going it alone.
06-02-2018 11:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Big 12 revenue distribution
(06-02-2018 11:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(06-02-2018 09:55 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I think what you're going to see is entities like Amazon and Netflix making direct deals with say the Top 30 NCAA FB/MBB properties ala Nike and Under Armour

Meanwhile, the days of schools like Texas Tech and Baylor getting to sit at the big boy table due to politics and flukes of history are numbered

And I think you are wrong. Amazon and Netflix will sublet games from the networks because they don't have the production capabilities. TV is not going away as it relates to cable and dish. Amazon and Netflix will purchase the right to stream games, maybe even game on a network channel. We will earn more money as conferences, but conferences aren't going away. The presidents don't want to be responsible for contracts, the A.D.'s & Presidents hired contract attorney's as commissioners so they never would have to fool with it. Donors and alums want familiar games that have been played for decades and can be persuaded to have better OOC games and maybe even another conference game for a price.

What's more is the Big 10 and SEC are worth more as a unit than they are severely.

Not even in your lifetime will you see what that dumb ass Okie article predict come true and the so called Amazon exec was most strangely unnamed. Where I come from we call that B.S..

Corporate structures like the major conferences aren't going away. Streaming isn't going to completely replace cable. And institutions like Universities will act in their self interest, but their self interest is in not going it alone.

The bold is the only portion I'd slightly disagree on.

They don't have the production capabilities in 2018, but I don't think we can assume they'll never have them.

If the AT&T/Time Warner deal goes through then that will be another set of production studios moving into the hands of a distributor. In other words, I think it's a strategy for long term survival. It's also a set of studios that contain a solid sports broadcasting division in Turner.

When AT&T acquired DirecTV, they started offering their own streaming service in DirecTV Now. It has sports channels and the execs are now talking about offering a sports-less service in the event the deal goes through. It's probably a cynical ploy on their part, but either way they are trying to appeal to a large number of consumers by touching a lot of different bases.

I think there's a pattern here though...

Comcast buys NBC and Universal Studios....distributor buys production capacity.

AT&T tries to buy Time Warner...distributor tries to buy production capacity.

Disney tries to buy 21st Century Fox...content creator and production studio tries to add to their portfolio of content and production capacity. No distributor involved unless you count BAMTech, but their infrastructure is purely internet based.

What do Amazon and Netflix do assuming they want to get more involved in sports? Both entities already have production capacity for creative content, but sports broadcasting divisions could be easily acquired. Fox is out there and maybe CBS too.

The pattern seems to be two-fold. 1) No one is buying into the current distribution method of cable and satellite. Some of the larger companies have been merging(AT&T buying DirecTV while Charter bought Time Warner Cable), but no one is buying into this distribution method that wasn't already in it. 2) Some of the current distributors are buying into content creation, but everyone is trying to take advantage of how the internet and streaming technology have affected the market.

Amazon is so stinking rich in large part due to their online retail. That's really all they were until a few years ago so they've actually progressed quite quickly into the content creation and distribution industry. I don't think their lack of sports broadcasting infrastructure in the here and now is necessarily an indicator that they won't seek out that capacity in the future. It might not be in time to bid on the Big Ten in 6 years, but I think it's only a matter of time.

Netflix says they don't want to get into sports, but there's no guarantee they won't change their mind especially if their direct competitors all get involved.

I think Facebook and Twitter are behind the curve though because their business model relies on social media interaction rather than content creation in any way. Facebook has plenty of money, but their platform really isn't conducive to investing big time into sports.

The one I might watch is Google. They're filthy rich and have one of the most robust and pervasive footprints on the internet not to mention already one of the most recognizable brands. They invested in Android which low and behold became much more than an operating system for smart phones. They're now in the streaming business with YouTube TV so it's no huge jump from where they are to sports broadcasting or at least greater content creation.

I just wouldn't bet on cable companies being dominant in the market in the future. I'm not sure how long it's going to take, but everyone seems to be moving away from dependency on the old infrastructure.
06-03-2018 04:06 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.