https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/686880002?_...ssion=true

"The Pac-12 Conference is projected to fall far behind other Power 5 conferences over the next five years in revenue-sharing and won’t even reach $38 million in payouts per school until 2023, according to budget documents recently provided by Pac-12 member Washington State."

"This year, the payout estimate is $31.5 million. It then is projected to go up incrementally to $32.7 million in fiscal year 2019, $35.3 million in 2021 and $38.1 million in 2023, according to the payout projection range confirmed by WSU officials."

"Every other Power 5 league either has exceeded the $40 million payout mark already or is projected to get there in a year or two at most, with contract terms that are expected to increase that amount annually."

I think the PAC 12's biggest problem is this:

When the next contract negotiations come up, the conference network probably isn't going to be worth much. Someone might be willing to buy in or purchase it outright, but they can't catch up using the cable/satellite model as a means of distribution.

The 3rd tier rights will still be valuable long term, but their investment in the network is probably not going to pay off. In the meantime, they've lost potential earnings by keeping everything in house and spending too much.

The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

But I still think if Texas ever gets the itch to move, the Pac-12's 100% ownership model gives the league the edge chasing the Horns.

(06-12-2018 05:20 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

But I still think if Texas ever gets the itch to move, the Pac-12's 100% ownership model gives the league the edge chasing the Horns.

Narcissists don't commit suicide!

(06-12-2018 05:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 05:20 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

But I still think if Texas ever gets the itch to move, the Pac-12's 100% ownership model gives the league the edge chasing the Horns.

Narcissists don't commit suicide!

Nothing suicidal about ESPN wanting to use their ownership of UT third tier rights to gain all or part of Pac-12's third tier. I figure the math for USC vs. Texas every year looks pretty good.

(06-12-2018 10:48 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 05:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 05:20 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

But I still think if Texas ever gets the itch to move, the Pac-12's 100% ownership model gives the league the edge chasing the Horns.

Narcissists don't commit suicide!

Nothing suicidal about ESPN wanting to use their ownership of UT third tier rights to gain all or part of Pac-12's third tier. I figure the math for USC vs. Texas every year looks pretty good.

It will be suicidal for Longhorn sports.

(06-12-2018 11:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 10:48 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 05:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 05:20 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

But I still think if Texas ever gets the itch to move, the Pac-12's 100% ownership model gives the league the edge chasing the Horns.

Narcissists don't commit suicide!

Nothing suicidal about ESPN wanting to use their ownership of UT third tier rights to gain all or part of Pac-12's third tier. I figure the math for USC vs. Texas every year looks pretty good.

It will be suicidal for Longhorn sports.

And not just the Olympic sports. All of them, including football. Well, maybe not literally suicidal. But self-mutilating at least. Neither fans nor recruits will have much interest in playing a west coast schedule.

(06-12-2018 11:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 10:48 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 05:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 05:20 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

But I still think if Texas ever gets the itch to move, the Pac-12's 100% ownership model gives the league the edge chasing the Horns.

Narcissists don't commit suicide!

Nothing suicidal about ESPN wanting to use their ownership of UT third tier rights to gain all or part of Pac-12's third tier. I figure the math for USC vs. Texas every year looks pretty good.

It will be suicidal for Longhorn sports.

Maybe. I suppose it is always possible Texas could get worse.

(06-12-2018 10:48 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 05:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 05:20 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

But I still think if Texas ever gets the itch to move, the Pac-12's 100% ownership model gives the league the edge chasing the Horns.

Narcissists don't commit suicide!

Nothing suicidal about ESPN wanting to use their ownership of UT third tier rights to gain all or part of Pac-12's third tier. I figure the math for USC vs. Texas every year looks pretty good.

It would be easy for the Pac-12 to let UT keep LHN, and for ESPN to operate/distribute both.

But, UT can go or not go wherever they want... they don't *need* anyone's TV money.

If we wanted to see which athletic departments are really in the strongest positions, we would take each department's reported revenue and subtract out university subsidies, student fee money, all TV money, and any other conference revenue. Texas would be at or very close to the top of that list. They have more revenue without all of those other sources than almost anyone else has with all of those sources.

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

I'm not so sure about that.

As we move into streaming, the infrastructure for a traditional cable network loses value regardless of the content. What hurts the PAC is all the time and money they've put into this entity and I'm not sure they can get their money back. The same would be true for the other league networks as well though. The content remains valuable as it can be marketed on any platform, but the value of the platform itself is a little more volatile.

But yes, Wazzu needs more cash so it's understandable that they want to put public pressure on leadership.

(06-13-2018 03:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

I'm not so sure about that.

As we move into streaming, the infrastructure for a traditional cable network loses value regardless of the content. What hurts the PAC is all the time and money they've put into this entity and I'm not sure they can get their money back. The same would be true for the other league networks as well though. The content remains valuable as it can be marketed on any platform, but the value of the platform itself is a little more volatile.

But yes, Wazzu needs more cash so it's understandable that they want to put public pressure on leadership.

They really do.

In another thread I mentioned looking at the "self-generated revenue" that each athletic department would have if you took their reported gross revenue and subtracted out both their "subsidy" (school funds plus student fees) and their conference revenue.

Let's compare 2016 reported Wazzu revenue to Oregon State, to Utah (who only joined a few years ago), and for a big contrast, Washington. I'll use round numbers, and the USA Today data, and subtract $29 million for conference revenue (the conference payout for that year was between $28.5 and 29 million for each school).

Washington: $107 -2 - 29 = $76 million
Utah: $79 - 12 - 29 = $38 million
Oregon State: $73 - 7 - 29 =$37 million
Washington State: $59 - 5- 29 = $25 million

Utah has done a good job catching up to Colorado and Oregon State, considering that they've only been "in the club" for less than 10 years. Washington State is well behind in "self-generated revenue" and has only about one-third as much self-generated revenue as Washington.

(06-13-2018 03:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

I'm not so sure about that.

As we move into streaming, the infrastructure for a traditional cable network loses value regardless of the content. What hurts the PAC is all the time and money they've put into this entity and I'm not sure they can get their money back. The same would be true for the other league networks as well though. The content remains valuable as it can be marketed on any platform, but the value of the platform itself is a little more volatile.

But yes, Wazzu needs more cash so it's understandable that they want to put public pressure on leadership.

The future value is an unknown.

We don't know if streaming will be a bonanza or a played out mine when it becomes truly significant.

Pac-12 may end up being the first to really cash in or values fall and in which case I guess they have a smaller distance to fall.

(06-13-2018 07:00 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 03:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

I'm not so sure about that.

As we move into streaming, the infrastructure for a traditional cable network loses value regardless of the content. What hurts the PAC is all the time and money they've put into this entity and I'm not sure they can get their money back. The same would be true for the other league networks as well though. The content remains valuable as it can be marketed on any platform, but the value of the platform itself is a little more volatile.

But yes, Wazzu needs more cash so it's understandable that they want to put public pressure on leadership.

The future value is an unknown.

We don't know if streaming will be a bonanza or a played out mine when it becomes truly significant.

Pac-12 may end up being the first to really cash in or values fall and in which case I guess they have a smaller distance to fall.

The SECN and ACCN will have nothing to lose and the overhead costs were all in campus production studios and equipment so the ability to stream and self produce is there already. It's the PACN (100% owned) and Big 10 Network (49% self owned) that would see large losses in equity should linear cable networks collapse in value. So right now the lack of shares in the SECN looks like a prescient move on the part of Mike Slive.

(06-13-2018 07:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 07:00 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 03:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 04:44 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The network will be valuable if they sell it, though it's a one-time cash infusion. The school presidents have been too tolerant of Tennis Larry's overspending.

You can see why Washington State leaked this; they need the conference money more than anyone else. Everyone else in the league, even Colorado, Utah, and Oregon State, sells more tickets and raises more money from donors. And even Colorado hasn't mismanaged its athletic department as badly as Wazzu has.

I'm not so sure about that.

As we move into streaming, the infrastructure for a traditional cable network loses value regardless of the content. What hurts the PAC is all the time and money they've put into this entity and I'm not sure they can get their money back. The same would be true for the other league networks as well though. The content remains valuable as it can be marketed on any platform, but the value of the platform itself is a little more volatile.

But yes, Wazzu needs more cash so it's understandable that they want to put public pressure on leadership.

The future value is an unknown.

We don't know if streaming will be a bonanza or a played out mine when it becomes truly significant.

Pac-12 may end up being the first to really cash in or values fall and in which case I guess they have a smaller distance to fall.

The SECN and ACCN will have nothing to lose and the overhead costs were all in campus production studios and equipment so the ability to stream and self produce is there already. It's the PACN (100% owned) and Big 10 Network (49% self owned) that would see large losses in equity should linear cable networks collapse in value. So right now the lack of shares in the SECN looks like a prescient move on the part of Mike Slive.

There would be some loss of value from ESPN's standpoint as they foot the bill for the infrastructure, but for such a large company it was a small price to pay to strengthen the partnership and ensure each school had the ability to produce content going forward.

Not going to create another thread but saw this from Wilner.

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status...37312?s=19

Larry's paycheck draws so much criticism. You know, if the presidents voted to can the guy, he wouldn't be wrong if he said it's not his fault the conference is where it is with money.

B1G-PAC was going to make B-I-G money for both conferences. All but two schools in the PAC wanted it, and, at least one of those schools put it out there they would explore independence if the arrangement went down. How is that on Larry?

Oklahoma and Oklahoma State would have reset media contracts and would have generated considerably more money, plus allow for more diversity and flexibility in kick-off starts. Certainly would have offered more leverage. This obsession some of the PAC schools have NEEDING to be in California is about the most embarrassing thing I've ever heard from college administrators. Larry is not at fault for schools who didn't want Oklahoma because it was Oklahoma State and not Texas-Austin who was joining with them.

How I understood it, and I could be wrong on this one, it was the schools who drove the conference television deal in the state it was in, not Larry. That these schools wanted this model, screwing their fans over royally, thinking viewers and alumni were sheep.

The only thing Larry isn't good at is being able to get into the faces of some of these schools (specifically USC from how it sounds) and forcing them to look at things realistically and sensibly, rather than the usual out-of-touch and step virtually all of higher ed is with reality. So, yeah, maybe Larry is weak...are schools willing to take egg in their own faces for admitting they aren't good at this in any way?