(06-09-2023 08:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 05:17 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 05:11 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 01:26 PM)Fanofreason Wrote:  According to the Washington State meeting. The tv deal is $20-$25 million

Wrong. He said "fairly flat" revenue growth. The 2023-2024 TV deal with Fox and ESPN will pay $321,340,000 million. That is about $26.7 million per school. The Pac-12 Networks typically pay an additional $3 million per school in Net Revenue. The 2021-2022 Pac-12 Network revenue numbers were $117 million in revenue and $77 million in expenses. That is close to $30 million TV revenue for 2023-2024. If revenue growth is fairly flat under the new media deal; they will be there with the Big 12 and they should beat their number.

From a Mandel thread to show what the distribution was last year. That's $32 million for 12 (without taking out other expenses) on media alone.


$48 million for ALL revenue.

That would be a huge jump from the $37.0 million in 2021-22. It would put them right with the Big 10 and SEC 21-22 numbers. Mandel's numbers look fake.

Mandel got the numbers from the Pac-12.
https://pac-12.com/article/2023/05/19/pa...al-results

The Pac-12 earned $580.9 million in revenue in 2021-2022. They distributed $444 million or $37 million per school. The Pac-12 is loaded with expenses and waste from the Larry Scott era. The Big 12 made 480.6 million in revenue in the same period and distributed $440 million or $44 million per school.

(06-07-2023 08:27 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  ....
Rebrand it the National Athletic Conference to emphasize the league's broad ambitions and coast-to-coast reach (Major bonus: No need to change the name when the ACC breaks apart and the Non-Magnificent 7 are looking for a home)

How about Amway Conference to emphasize the classy marketing approach?

(06-05-2023 01:16 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Thanks. Here is the tweet....

It's looking now like the task was to enable approval of a deal to happen quickly without regents needing to schedule a new meeting.

The PAC is looking at a June 30 deadline to invite San Diego State.

PAC 12 wanted to keep their network to themselves instead of having someone like ESPN getting them on cable tv. That is on the fault of Larry Scott's part.

Another problem is that California university systems had the idea of dropping football which hurts the state overall in fans and all that. You need more schools than the 7 FBS and 3 FCS schools in a very large state of California. CSU-L A kept their football, stayed in D1, be in FBS? They might be looked at by the PAC 12 themselves for the LA market.

There was an NFL owner wanted to build an on campus FBS stadium for Long Beach State which would hold NFL games there, but the AD and president at the time hates football and they came from schools in the east that dropped football thinks that school did not need a football team, and the sport was dropped. Those idiots killed Long Beach State who could have been in the MWC now instead of San Jose State.

(06-10-2023 12:24 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 08:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 05:17 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 05:11 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 01:26 PM)Fanofreason Wrote:  According to the Washington State meeting. The tv deal is $20-$25 million

Wrong. He said "fairly flat" revenue growth. The 2023-2024 TV deal with Fox and ESPN will pay $321,340,000 million. That is about $26.7 million per school. The Pac-12 Networks typically pay an additional $3 million per school in Net Revenue. The 2021-2022 Pac-12 Network revenue numbers were $117 million in revenue and $77 million in expenses. That is close to $30 million TV revenue for 2023-2024. If revenue growth is fairly flat under the new media deal; they will be there with the Big 12 and they should beat their number.

From a Mandel thread to show what the distribution was last year. That's $32 million for 12 (without taking out other expenses) on media alone.


$48 million for ALL revenue.

That would be a huge jump from the $37.0 million in 2021-22. It would put them right with the Big 10 and SEC 21-22 numbers. Mandel's numbers look fake.

Mandel got the numbers from the Pac-12.
https://pac-12.com/article/2023/05/19/pa...al-results

The Pac-12 earned $580.9 million in revenue in 2021-2022. They distributed $444 million or $37 million per school. The Pac-12 is loaded with expenses and waste from the Larry Scott era. The Big 12 made 480.6 million in revenue in the same period and distributed $440 million or $44 million per school.

Basically any of that above 290 million is from the PAC 12 network. However the network has expenses so Mandel's # is misleading as a comparison.



The Network had total revenues of 117M and expenses of 77M for a profit of 40M. 3.33M per school. Including the total revenue without expenses and pretending that it's some equal comparison with league tv revenue where it's just getting paid by an ESPN or FOX media partner is blatantly dishonest by Mandel.

(06-12-2023 08:13 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(06-10-2023 12:24 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 08:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 05:17 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 05:11 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  Wrong. He said "fairly flat" revenue growth. The 2023-2024 TV deal with Fox and ESPN will pay $321,340,000 million. That is about $26.7 million per school. The Pac-12 Networks typically pay an additional $3 million per school in Net Revenue. The 2021-2022 Pac-12 Network revenue numbers were $117 million in revenue and $77 million in expenses. That is close to $30 million TV revenue for 2023-2024. If revenue growth is fairly flat under the new media deal; they will be there with the Big 12 and they should beat their number.

From a Mandel thread to show what the distribution was last year. That's $32 million for 12 (without taking out other expenses) on media alone.


$48 million for ALL revenue.

That would be a huge jump from the $37.0 million in 2021-22. It would put them right with the Big 10 and SEC 21-22 numbers. Mandel's numbers look fake.

Mandel got the numbers from the Pac-12.
https://pac-12.com/article/2023/05/19/pa...al-results

The Pac-12 earned $580.9 million in revenue in 2021-2022. They distributed $444 million or $37 million per school. The Pac-12 is loaded with expenses and waste from the Larry Scott era. The Big 12 made 480.6 million in revenue in the same period and distributed $440 million or $44 million per school.

Basically any of that above 290 million is from the PAC 12 network. However the network has expenses so Mandel's # is misleading as a comparison.



The Network had total revenues of 117M and expenses of 77M for a profit of 40M. 3.33M per school. Including the total revenue without expenses and pretending that it's some equal comparison with league tv revenue where it's just getting paid by an ESPN or FOX media partner is blatantly dishonest by Mandel.

Okay, so $290.66 divided by 12 is $24.22. Add in the $3.33 and we get $27.55.

If that number stays flat or is slightly above it, they're well within range of the B12 to stay together. Based on the 5.1% annual growth listed in the chart you posted, they'd be over $30 million per (12 team) school by 2024 if it stays flat.

(06-12-2023 09:33 AM)e-parade Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 08:13 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(06-10-2023 12:24 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 08:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 05:17 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

From a Mandel thread to show what the distribution was last year. That's $32 million for 12 (without taking out other expenses) on media alone.


$48 million for ALL revenue.

That would be a huge jump from the $37.0 million in 2021-22. It would put them right with the Big 10 and SEC 21-22 numbers. Mandel's numbers look fake.

Mandel got the numbers from the Pac-12.
https://pac-12.com/article/2023/05/19/pa...al-results

The Pac-12 earned $580.9 million in revenue in 2021-2022. They distributed $444 million or $37 million per school. The Pac-12 is loaded with expenses and waste from the Larry Scott era. The Big 12 made 480.6 million in revenue in the same period and distributed $440 million or $44 million per school.

Basically any of that above 290 million is from the PAC 12 network. However the network has expenses so Mandel's # is misleading as a comparison.



The Network had total revenues of 117M and expenses of 77M for a profit of 40M. 3.33M per school. Including the total revenue without expenses and pretending that it's some equal comparison with league tv revenue where it's just getting paid by an ESPN or FOX media partner is blatantly dishonest by Mandel.

Okay, so $290.66 divided by 12 is $24.22. Add in the $3.33 and we get $27.55.

If that number stays flat or is slightly above it, they're well within range of the B12 to stay together. Based on the 5.1% annual growth listed in the chart you posted, they'd be over $30 million per (12 team) school by 2024 if it stays flat.

IF they stay flat. The guy saying it would stay flat admits he hasn't seen anything but projections. If Marchand's reporting is accurate there's an expectation of a 40% reduction in value. That would put the main contract averaging around 23M.



https://twitter.com/Baylor_S11/status/16...97185?s=20

This is all assuming that the market remains competitive enough to not dip further.

(06-12-2023 09:48 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 09:33 AM)e-parade Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 08:13 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(06-10-2023 12:24 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(06-09-2023 08:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  That would be a huge jump from the $37.0 million in 2021-22. It would put them right with the Big 10 and SEC 21-22 numbers. Mandel's numbers look fake.

Mandel got the numbers from the Pac-12.
https://pac-12.com/article/2023/05/19/pa...al-results

The Pac-12 earned $580.9 million in revenue in 2021-2022. They distributed $444 million or $37 million per school. The Pac-12 is loaded with expenses and waste from the Larry Scott era. The Big 12 made 480.6 million in revenue in the same period and distributed $440 million or $44 million per school.

Basically any of that above 290 million is from the PAC 12 network. However the network has expenses so Mandel's # is misleading as a comparison.



The Network had total revenues of 117M and expenses of 77M for a profit of 40M. 3.33M per school. Including the total revenue without expenses and pretending that it's some equal comparison with league tv revenue where it's just getting paid by an ESPN or FOX media partner is blatantly dishonest by Mandel.

Okay, so $290.66 divided by 12 is $24.22. Add in the $3.33 and we get $27.55.

If that number stays flat or is slightly above it, they're well within range of the B12 to stay together. Based on the 5.1% annual growth listed in the chart you posted, they'd be over $30 million per (12 team) school by 2024 if it stays flat.

IF they stay flat. The guy saying it would stay flat admits he hasn't seen anything but projections. If Marchand's reporting is accurate there's an expectation of a 40% reduction in value. That would put the main contract averaging around 23M.



https://twitter.com/Baylor_S11/status/16...97185?s=20

Is the argument a 40% reduction in the numbers they're seeing today, or a 40% reduction in the value of the contract that would have been negotiated if USC and UCLA were still in the conference? The person you're linking is doing today's number, as opposed to what a contract negotiated today that had the LA market and both USC and UCLA in it would get.

Those are two very different starting numbers. Texas and Oklahoma represented a large portion of the value of the B12 contract, but the B12 was able to not lose value. That was because, while the SEC and B1G had contracts that GREW (as they do over time) the B12s just stayed on the same trajectory.

If just under $30 million is what the Pac could get now (without the market and the two schools), and USC/UCLA represent 40% of the value, you'd expect a value with those two to come in just below $50 million per year. Having LA and those two brands, plus no threats of falling apart (in this world they're not impacted by B1G realignment) sounds at least reasonable.


The person you tweeted is illustrating how you can come up with very different numbers by using different methods and cherry picking. If we go by the WSU quote (which is what I've been clear about what I'm doing - and I changed the number after being corrected on what they actual value was), then it will likely come in somewhere just below to just above where they are today. Losing USC and UCLA means they can't get a big bump, but it doesn't mean they'll lose 40% of where they are today (just like what happened with the B12). He even says in the next tweet that:

Context is key. And he quite literally says "all I'm doing is taking 40% of today's number off the top" (and you'll believe it if it's the kind of value you're looking to see).


I'm just taking a recent tidbit we have from someone and saying what that could come out as. Will it happen? Who knows, but if it's right, it's a perfectly acceptable scenario for the Pac to move forward. If it's not right, then they have (probably) a lot to worry about.

(06-12-2023 10:03 AM)e-parade Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 09:48 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 09:33 AM)e-parade Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 08:13 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(06-10-2023 12:24 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  Mandel got the numbers from the Pac-12.
https://pac-12.com/article/2023/05/19/pa...al-results

The Pac-12 earned $580.9 million in revenue in 2021-2022. They distributed $444 million or $37 million per school. The Pac-12 is loaded with expenses and waste from the Larry Scott era. The Big 12 made 480.6 million in revenue in the same period and distributed $440 million or $44 million per school.

Basically any of that above 290 million is from the PAC 12 network. However the network has expenses so Mandel's # is misleading as a comparison.



The Network had total revenues of 117M and expenses of 77M for a profit of 40M. 3.33M per school. Including the total revenue without expenses and pretending that it's some equal comparison with league tv revenue where it's just getting paid by an ESPN or FOX media partner is blatantly dishonest by Mandel.

Okay, so $290.66 divided by 12 is $24.22. Add in the $3.33 and we get $27.55.

If that number stays flat or is slightly above it, they're well within range of the B12 to stay together. Based on the 5.1% annual growth listed in the chart you posted, they'd be over $30 million per (12 team) school by 2024 if it stays flat.

IF they stay flat. The guy saying it would stay flat admits he hasn't seen anything but projections. If Marchand's reporting is accurate there's an expectation of a 40% reduction in value. That would put the main contract averaging around 23M.



https://twitter.com/Baylor_S11/status/16...97185?s=20

Is the argument a 40% reduction in the numbers they're seeing today, or a 40% reduction in the value of the contract that would have been negotiated if USC and UCLA were still in the conference? The person you're linking is doing today's number, as opposed to what a contract negotiated today that had the LA market and both USC and UCLA in it would get.

Those are two very different starting numbers. Texas and Oklahoma represented a large portion of the value of the B12 contract, but the B12 was able to not lose value. That was because, while the SEC and B1G had contracts that GREW (as they do over time) the B12s just stayed on the same trajectory.

If just under $30 million is what the Pac could get now (without the market and the two schools), and USC/UCLA represent 40% of the value, you'd expect a value with those two to come in just below $50 million per year. Having LA and those two brands, plus no threats of falling apart (in this world they're not impacted by B1G realignment) sounds at least reasonable.


The person you tweeted is illustrating how you can come up with very different numbers by using different methods and cherry picking. If we go by the WSU quote (which is what I've been clear about what I'm doing - and I changed the number after being corrected on what they actual value was), then it will likely come in somewhere just below to just above where they are today. Losing USC and UCLA means they can't get a big bump, but it doesn't mean they'll lose 40% of where they are today (just like what happened with the B12). He even says in the next tweet that:

Context is key. And he quite literally says "all I'm doing is taking 40% of today's number off the top" (and you'll believe it if it's the kind of value you're looking to see).


I'm just taking a recent tidbit we have from someone and saying what that could come out as. Will it happen? Who knows, but if it's right, it's a perfectly acceptable scenario for the Pac to move forward. If it's not right, then they have (probably) a lot to worry about.

1- I am not saying they'll reduce 40% from the prior contract per school averages of 20.8M per school ending at 26.78M. Just to clarify that right off the bat. Staying "flat" revenue wise would be in the ballpark of that 27.55 would be.

2- Lost in the talk about starting numbers on projections is that the SEC and the Big Ten had CBS, ESPN, NBC, and FOX all bidding like mad. The Big Ten also had Amazon trying. That's not at all something that should simply be expected for any deal coming up when media companies are tightening the purse strings. The top rights in the two bigger leagues have MUCH better viewership driving whatever price per viewer the bidders are working from.

3- You pointing to "what they would get" is assuming that the PAC 12 is getting a similarly big bump when the potential media partners have been much less aggressive towards them than either of the big two and a bidding war even with SC and UCLA would be less likely in my opinion. When a simple extension of the current 12 team contract with SC/UCLA would project 32M per school for a starting point it's going to take a bidding war to even get close to 40M much less 50M in that environment. Remember the last deal was done in a bidding war to keep NBC out.

The PAC gives good late night content but can't play at noon (CBS & NBC bow out since prime time and afternoon are booked up) leaving less upside on OTA. ESPN's mostly set other than after dark which won't drive high viewership past 2M often which limits what they can afford to buy rights for since ad buys drive their money.

4- The Big 12 got slightly above what a simple continuation of 5% would imply when you include their tier 3 money deals with ESPN+. With UT and OU they would project around 39M before tier 3 assuming 5.1% and the old contract totals. There's the potential they'd possibly get to 45 or at max 50 with them but it would be tough beyond a point despite the UT/OU combo being a stronger ratings draw than the USC/UCLA one that can also drive huge ratings at noon which the late night window can't duplicate. (Over 20 games of 4M plus & 68 of 2M+ while "after dark" only reached a max of 2.5M with only 4 games of 2M plus in 2021 & 2022)

5- Schultz thinks they'll be flat in revenue but also admits he doesn't know where the deal stands. Based on the deal being negotiated still and how long it's taking it could be going well below projections. Several of the most credible sports tv business reporters have reported limited interest from ESPN, FOX, NBC, CBS, and Amazon. It's a tough spot for them and his alarm at how long it's taken doesn't inspire confidence that a big deal is around the corner.