I believe that everybody thinking this will ever truly get anywhere near a court are probably not accepting/considering historical reality. As another poster pointed out, these things always eventually get settled for an approximate percentage of the general amount regarded as owed. Now I don't know if that percentage considers that OU/TX got off with 50% of exit fee and exactly 0$ paid for the last year of the GOR (so much for unbreakable). I suspect not, but even if it doesn't, the one absolute consistent result that we've seen so far is that the conference held the supposedly irreproachable contractual upper hand, and in every single case that was all negotiated downwards. No judges or courts. Just lawyers and people deciding to move ahead and get on with things.

I don't know why anybody thinks this time will be any different. There is absolutely zero precedent to support that view, and plenty of (and only) precedent to the contrary. Maybe if you remove humans from both sides and let AI supercomputers duke it out or something...?

(03-09-2024 06:56 AM)ouflak Wrote:  I believe that everybody thinking this will ever truly get anywhere near a court are probably not accepting/considering historical reality. As another poster pointed out, these things always eventually get settled for an approximate percentage of the general amount regarded as owed. Now I don't know if that percentage considers that OU/TX got off with 50% of exit fee and exactly 0$ paid for the last year of the GOR (so much for unbreakable). I suspect not, but even if it doesn't, the one absolute consistent result that we've seen so far is that the conference held the supposedly irreproachable contractual upper hand, and in every single case that was all negotiated downwards. No judges or courts. Just lawyers and people deciding to move ahead and get on with things.

I don't know why anybody thinks this time will be any different. There is absolutely zero precedent to support that view, and plenty of (and only) precedent to the contrary. Maybe if you remove humans from both sides and let AI supercomputers duke it out or something...?

a bald dude holding a cat told me 1 million dollars.

(03-06-2024 08:21 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  ....
FSU has given the ACC existential fight...you think they'll settle low enough to encourage others?

At this point the others are already encouraged. The revenue gap does the encouraging.

The ACC is all-but-officially outclassed now by the P2. The conference has increasingly fallen behind in the revenue race—so much so that, for some time now, the most the ACC has been able to do to reduce flight risk is put up barriers to exit.

Over time those barriers—exit fee, rights buyback, legal fees—have lost much of their punch. As P2 cash grows, previously unthinkable exit costs become more thinkable.

There's urgency now to get on the right side of the revenue line. College presidents have new expenses coming up, fast.

(03-09-2024 06:56 AM)ouflak Wrote:  I believe that everybody thinking this will ever truly get anywhere near a court are probably not accepting/considering historical reality. As another poster pointed out, these things always eventually get settled for an approximate percentage of the general amount regarded as owed. Now I don't know if that percentage considers that OU/TX got off with 50% of exit fee and exactly 0$ paid for the last year of the GOR (so much for unbreakable). I suspect not, but even if it doesn't, the one absolute consistent result that we've seen so far is that the conference held the supposedly irreproachable contractual upper hand, and in every single case that was all negotiated downwards. No judges or courts. Just lawyers and people deciding to move ahead and get on with things.

I don't know why anybody thinks this time will be any different. There is absolutely zero precedent to support that view, and plenty of (and only) precedent to the contrary. Maybe if you remove humans from both sides and let AI supercomputers duke it out or something...?

This. I've also voiced an expectation that the two sides will settle. What we've seen with the filings is essentially a jockeying for negotiating position.

People get excited by the rhetoric in the early going of a lawsuit. The whole point in an initial filing is to make the strongest case possible. Each party makes the other party sound like the worst thing to hit the world since pineapple on pizza. Why should a court devote time and resources to your case if you are merely a little irked? No, no, no. You have to make the case that you have been grievously wronged.

All lawsuits are like that. Most settle out of court anyway. The legal process is adversarial as a matter of structure. Sometimes the parties aren't even all that mad at each other; they're just doing what they must.

Jim Phillips has known for some time now that Florida State planned to leave—regretfully!—if the ACC couldn't close the gap. Its leaders told him as much when he signed on. The first thing he did was make a year-long push to get Notre Dame to go all in. That was the only move left to him that could make anything like a real difference. It didn't happen.

Since then everyone has been playing out their roles. Florida State, before it can attempt to leave, has to give the league office every chance to address its concerns. (It can expect to be asked about this later in lawsuits.) That means the school first must voice those concerns. Michael Alford conspicuously did so, as did six additional schools soon after. The ACC, for its part, has to show that it's been trying in good faith to address those concerns. (The league can expect to field questions of its own about this.) Hello, uneven distributions. Hello, San Francisco and Dallas.

And here we are. The Next Big Thing in college sport is upon us. Florida State is as ready as it can make itself. At least six other schools have been making preparations. All the rituals are being observed. We'll see what happens.

(03-08-2024 07:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  Ballpark number?

I think the courts will take the FSU lawyers numbers and set the GOR figure at $572 Million (cash).

I have to admit: you're definitely consistent...

lol

And who knows, you could be correct.

But is that likely? Not really, no.

Does anyone believe that if NC decides to leave the ACC that they are going to pay "$572 Million (cash)"?

Not really, no.

But hey, keep your chin up, who knows. Maybe NC will decide to stay in the ACC with their friends and not leave for one of the P2.

Not really likely either, but again, who knows...

(03-09-2024 06:56 AM)ouflak Wrote:  I believe that everybody thinking this will ever truly get anywhere near a court are probably not accepting/considering historical reality. As another poster pointed out, these things always eventually get settled for an approximate percentage of the general amount regarded as owed. Now I don't know if that percentage considers that OU/TX got off with 50% of exit fee and exactly 0$ paid for the last year of the GOR (so much for unbreakable). I suspect not, but even if it doesn't, the one absolute consistent result that we've seen so far is that the conference held the supposedly irreproachable contractual upper hand, and in every single case that was all negotiated downwards. No judges or courts. Just lawyers and people deciding to move ahead and get on with things.

I don't know why anybody thinks this time will be any different. There is absolutely zero precedent to support that view, and plenty of (and only) precedent to the contrary. Maybe if you remove humans from both sides and let AI supercomputers duke it out or something...?

The only precedent involving a GoR was OUT escaping a full 12 months early, and even that took enthusiasm from ESPN, the SEC, the schools, AND the Big 12 to get them out the door early. FSU, rather than looking for 12 months, wants to get out 12 YEARS early. That doesn't mean that it won't happen, but the OUT case is hardly applicable at all.

We could create a dart board with 50 different scenarios, blindfold the protagonist from The Sound and Fury, then let him throw a dart at that board to figure out the final outcome, and his answer would be as apt to be accurate as anything we'd come up with. $100m and start in the SEC or B1G in 2025? No number at all and they stay in the ACC until 2075? $500m and out by 2028? State of Florida gets involved and invalidates GoR completely, FSU gets kicked out of ACC and nobody else will invite them either b/c they can't sign a contract so they have to go independent? GoR invalidated by Court in North Carolina, FSU leaves for $40m tomorrow? Phillips calls Yormark and agrees to full Big 12-ACC merger, ESPN and Fox happily smooth out the edges, everybody wins? We could easily come up with dozens of other scenarios, and like the Drake equation, nobody really knows how much weight to put on any of the variables.

(03-08-2024 09:10 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(03-08-2024 07:39 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-07-2024 06:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  UTSA has an enrollment of 29,500 undergraduate
USF has an enrollment of 55,000.

UTSA has an R1 research rating.
USF as we know is now AAU.

UTSA reaches no part of Texas not reached by UT and A&M.
USF reaches part of Florida where UF's reach is not as strong though UF reaches all of the state.

USF is clearly the superior candidate for the ACC, an academically minded conference to take over any of the other G5 schools available. And USF's hoops are ranked this year. Not a big deal in decision making but something I'm sure the ACC has noticed.

^^^ THIS ^^^

For these reasons, USF should know that if FSU leaves (and maybe even if they don't), they are the top G5 candidate and one of the top overall candidates for further ACC expansion/replacement.

I'm going on record right now in saying that the ACC only invites USF if BOTH FSU and Miami leave. And if both FSU and Miami leave, it's not the same ACC that we see right now. If only 1 leaves, then the ACC will stay away from USF, but they'll send feelers out to UCF.

I still find it telling that the Big 12 considered USF in 2016, but in the midst of a near death experience 2021, USF was nowhere to be found. Here's the list:

The Big 12 ended up with 12 finalists for expansion in 2016: Air Force, Brigham Young, Central Florida, Cincinnati, Colorado State, Connecticut, Houston, Rice, South Florida, Southern Methodist, Temple and Tulane.

Other applications were received. Schools that did not make the cut were Arkansas State, Boise State, East Carolina, Memphis, New Mexico, Northern Illinois, San Diego State and Nevada-Las Vegas.

This time around, the top contenders are expected to be BYU, Central Florida, Cincinnati, Houston, Boise State, SMU and Memphis.

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/sports/2...647450001/

We all know who the chosen 4 were, and we all have endlessly discussed the other 3 in the interim. We've also seen SMU since jump to the ACC, Memphis make lots of noise about their new stadium and other improvements, and the Big 12 flirt aggressively with UConn. What happened to USF that relegated them to the same "afterthought" status as Rice, Temple, Tulane, and CSU? And of those 4 + USF, hasn't Tulane done more to attract positive attention than USF in the past couple years? USF has faded a bit, like Boise St though for different reasons.

I get it. I understand the enthusiasm about USF, their enrollment is huge and I've given then plenty of props for making the AAU. But I also think that it's important to view these things anew regularly, and the only current reason I can see for slotting USF ahead of schools that would otherwise attract more interest from the M2 is their location, a reason that is less important today than it was a few years ago, and could very well fade even more in importance over time.

Everything is a comparison, and USF's comparison to peers and near-peers like UConn, UCF, Memphis, SDSU, Tulane, BYU, UH, SMU, Boise St, etc etc is generally weaker today than it was a decade ago, despite their recent AAU ascension.

That was for the Big 12.

I think the ACC would feel the need to be in Florida, and then talk themselves into USF being okay because at least they are an AAU school.

The Big 12 doesn't care about that.

UCF may be as good or better a school than Louisville, but Louisville isn't the baseline. Also, UCF is in the Big 12 with a GOR anyway. If the ACC is to pluck Big 12 schools, I think WVU and UC would be at the top of the list, with TCU as a longer shot.

One could argue that UCF is as good or better a school than WVU or UC. But WVU has more in common geographically with the center of gravity of the modern ACC. And UC goes with Louisville and WVU. (Which is why, alternatively, the only school I could see the Big 12 poaching from the ACC is Louisville, unless it were a desperate to exit and a got-over-its skis FSU.)

If the ACC loses big state schools like FSU or Clemson or (God forbid) UNC, I think that the remaining members would lean even more toward the academic side.

(03-18-2024 04:15 PM)DemonDeke Wrote:  

(03-08-2024 09:10 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(03-08-2024 07:39 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-07-2024 06:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  UTSA has an enrollment of 29,500 undergraduate
USF has an enrollment of 55,000.

UTSA has an R1 research rating.
USF as we know is now AAU.

UTSA reaches no part of Texas not reached by UT and A&M.
USF reaches part of Florida where UF's reach is not as strong though UF reaches all of the state.

USF is clearly the superior candidate for the ACC, an academically minded conference to take over any of the other G5 schools available. And USF's hoops are ranked this year. Not a big deal in decision making but something I'm sure the ACC has noticed.

^^^ THIS ^^^

For these reasons, USF should know that if FSU leaves (and maybe even if they don't), they are the top G5 candidate and one of the top overall candidates for further ACC expansion/replacement.

I'm going on record right now in saying that the ACC only invites USF if BOTH FSU and Miami leave. And if both FSU and Miami leave, it's not the same ACC that we see right now. If only 1 leaves, then the ACC will stay away from USF, but they'll send feelers out to UCF.

I still find it telling that the Big 12 considered USF in 2016, but in the midst of a near death experience 2021, USF was nowhere to be found. Here's the list:

The Big 12 ended up with 12 finalists for expansion in 2016: Air Force, Brigham Young, Central Florida, Cincinnati, Colorado State, Connecticut, Houston, Rice, South Florida, Southern Methodist, Temple and Tulane.

Other applications were received. Schools that did not make the cut were Arkansas State, Boise State, East Carolina, Memphis, New Mexico, Northern Illinois, San Diego State and Nevada-Las Vegas.

This time around, the top contenders are expected to be BYU, Central Florida, Cincinnati, Houston, Boise State, SMU and Memphis.

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/sports/2...647450001/

We all know who the chosen 4 were, and we all have endlessly discussed the other 3 in the interim. We've also seen SMU since jump to the ACC, Memphis make lots of noise about their new stadium and other improvements, and the Big 12 flirt aggressively with UConn. What happened to USF that relegated them to the same "afterthought" status as Rice, Temple, Tulane, and CSU? And of those 4 + USF, hasn't Tulane done more to attract positive attention than USF in the past couple years? USF has faded a bit, like Boise St though for different reasons.

I get it. I understand the enthusiasm about USF, their enrollment is huge and I've given then plenty of props for making the AAU. But I also think that it's important to view these things anew regularly, and the only current reason I can see for slotting USF ahead of schools that would otherwise attract more interest from the M2 is their location, a reason that is less important today than it was a few years ago, and could very well fade even more in importance over time.

Everything is a comparison, and USF's comparison to peers and near-peers like UConn, UCF, Memphis, SDSU, Tulane, BYU, UH, SMU, Boise St, etc etc is generally weaker today than it was a decade ago, despite their recent AAU ascension.

That was for the Big 12.

I think the ACC would feel the need to be in Florida, and then talk themselves into USF being okay because at least they are an AAU school.

The Big 12 doesn't care about that.

UCF may be as good or better a school than Louisville, but Louisville isn't the baseline. Also, UCF is in the Big 12 with a GOR anyway. If the ACC is to pluck Big 12 schools, I think WVU and UC would be at the top of the list, with TCU as a longer shot.

One could argue that UCF is as good or better a school than WVU or UC. But WVU has more in common geographically with the center of gravity of the modern ACC. And UC goes with Louisville and WVU. (Which is why, alternatively, the only school I could see the Big 12 poaching from the ACC is Louisville, unless it were a desperate to exit and a got-over-its skis FSU.)

If the ACC loses big state schools like FSU or Clemson or (God forbid) UNC, I think that the remaining members would lean even more toward the academic side.

UCF is above average academically in the Big 12. Well, in the 12 team Big 12 with the original 4 adds and sans OUT. They're probably right at average in the 16 school Big 12, clearly behind the 5 AAU schools, but somewhere in that 6-12 range. West Virginia was never appealing Academically to the ACC, nothing has changed there. If the ACC was able to successfully steal Big 12 schools, there would be a whole bunch they'd talk to first before getting to WVU.

In fact, I just looked at 2 different pages, one said their avg SAT is 1099, another said it's 1110. I believe that's the lowest in the P4. Their #216 ranking in USN&WR is also poor. I don't blame the Big 12 for inviting them, and I don't blame the Big 12 for keeping them around as they could very well serve as a travel buddy for potential future ACC conquests, but I also find it highly unlikely that an ACC that had the ability poach WVU would want to do so. ie, if the ACC is so desperate that they're talking to WVU, then WVU will already be talking to NC St, Louisville, VT, GT, UVA, Pitt, etc etc to gauge interest in a slide on over to the Big 12.

IMO, the recent CFP deal has likely disabused any of the schools with plausible P2 prospects (FSU, NC, VA, Clemson, Miami) of any notions that the ACC can remain ballpark-competitive with respect to $$$. And with respect to respect, as the ACC is now clearly a second-level league, as IIRC an FSU official put it a few months ago.

So if anything, I expect FSU to be even more vigorous in trying to fight their way out, with the other schools listed secretly cheering them on, even as they remain silent to keep their own suits clean, so to speak.

(03-18-2024 04:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, the recent CFP deal has likely disabused any of the schools with plausible P2 prospects (FSU, NC, VA, Clemson, Miami) of any notions that the ACC can remain ballpark-competitive with respect to $$$. And with respect to respect, as the ACC is now clearly a second-level league, as IIRC an FSU official put it a few months ago.

So if anything, I expect FSU to be even more vigorous in trying to fight their way out, with the other schools listed secretly cheering them on, even as they remain silent to keep their own suits clean, so to speak.

I don’t disagree with you. FSU would be more willing to pay to get out.

(03-18-2024 04:59 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-18-2024 04:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, the recent CFP deal has likely disabused any of the schools with plausible P2 prospects (FSU, NC, VA, Clemson, Miami) of any notions that the ACC can remain ballpark-competitive with respect to $$$. And with respect to respect, as the ACC is now clearly a second-level league, as IIRC an FSU official put it a few months ago.

So if anything, I expect FSU to be even more vigorous in trying to fight their way out, with the other schools listed secretly cheering them on, even as they remain silent to keep their own suits clean, so to speak.

I don’t disagree with you. FSU would be more willing to pay to get out.

I would have said "FSU would be willing to pay more to get out"...

(03-18-2024 04:22 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(03-18-2024 04:15 PM)DemonDeke Wrote:  

(03-08-2024 09:10 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(03-08-2024 07:39 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-07-2024 06:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  UTSA has an enrollment of 29,500 undergraduate
USF has an enrollment of 55,000.

UTSA has an R1 research rating.
USF as we know is now AAU.

UTSA reaches no part of Texas not reached by UT and A&M.
USF reaches part of Florida where UF's reach is not as strong though UF reaches all of the state.

USF is clearly the superior candidate for the ACC, an academically minded conference to take over any of the other G5 schools available. And USF's hoops are ranked this year. Not a big deal in decision making but something I'm sure the ACC has noticed.

^^^ THIS ^^^

For these reasons, USF should know that if FSU leaves (and maybe even if they don't), they are the top G5 candidate and one of the top overall candidates for further ACC expansion/replacement.

I'm going on record right now in saying that the ACC only invites USF if BOTH FSU and Miami leave. And if both FSU and Miami leave, it's not the same ACC that we see right now. If only 1 leaves, then the ACC will stay away from USF, but they'll send feelers out to UCF.

I still find it telling that the Big 12 considered USF in 2016, but in the midst of a near death experience 2021, USF was nowhere to be found. Here's the list:

The Big 12 ended up with 12 finalists for expansion in 2016: Air Force, Brigham Young, Central Florida, Cincinnati, Colorado State, Connecticut, Houston, Rice, South Florida, Southern Methodist, Temple and Tulane.

Other applications were received. Schools that did not make the cut were Arkansas State, Boise State, East Carolina, Memphis, New Mexico, Northern Illinois, San Diego State and Nevada-Las Vegas.

This time around, the top contenders are expected to be BYU, Central Florida, Cincinnati, Houston, Boise State, SMU and Memphis.

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/sports/2...647450001/

We all know who the chosen 4 were, and we all have endlessly discussed the other 3 in the interim. We've also seen SMU since jump to the ACC, Memphis make lots of noise about their new stadium and other improvements, and the Big 12 flirt aggressively with UConn. What happened to USF that relegated them to the same "afterthought" status as Rice, Temple, Tulane, and CSU? And of those 4 + USF, hasn't Tulane done more to attract positive attention than USF in the past couple years? USF has faded a bit, like Boise St though for different reasons.

I get it. I understand the enthusiasm about USF, their enrollment is huge and I've given then plenty of props for making the AAU. But I also think that it's important to view these things anew regularly, and the only current reason I can see for slotting USF ahead of schools that would otherwise attract more interest from the M2 is their location, a reason that is less important today than it was a few years ago, and could very well fade even more in importance over time.

Everything is a comparison, and USF's comparison to peers and near-peers like UConn, UCF, Memphis, SDSU, Tulane, BYU, UH, SMU, Boise St, etc etc is generally weaker today than it was a decade ago, despite their recent AAU ascension.

That was for the Big 12.

I think the ACC would feel the need to be in Florida, and then talk themselves into USF being okay because at least they are an AAU school.

The Big 12 doesn't care about that.

UCF may be as good or better a school than Louisville, but Louisville isn't the baseline. Also, UCF is in the Big 12 with a GOR anyway. If the ACC is to pluck Big 12 schools, I think WVU and UC would be at the top of the list, with TCU as a longer shot.

One could argue that UCF is as good or better a school than WVU or UC. But WVU has more in common geographically with the center of gravity of the modern ACC. And UC goes with Louisville and WVU. (Which is why, alternatively, the only school I could see the Big 12 poaching from the ACC is Louisville, unless it were a desperate to exit and a got-over-its skis FSU.)

If the ACC loses big state schools like FSU or Clemson or (God forbid) UNC, I think that the remaining members would lean even more toward the academic side.

UCF is above average academically in the Big 12. Well, in the 12 team Big 12 with the original 4 adds and sans OUT. They're probably right at average in the 16 school Big 12, clearly behind the 5 AAU schools, but somewhere in that 6-12 range. West Virginia was never appealing Academically to the ACC, nothing has changed there. If the ACC was able to successfully steal Big 12 schools, there would be a whole bunch they'd talk to first before getting to WVU.

In fact, I just looked at 2 different pages, one said their avg SAT is 1099, another said it's 1110. I believe that's the lowest in the P4. Their #216 ranking in USN&WR is also poor. I don't blame the Big 12 for inviting them, and I don't blame the Big 12 for keeping them around as they could very well serve as a travel buddy for potential future ACC conquests, but I also find it highly unlikely that an ACC that had the ability poach WVU would want to do so. ie, if the ACC is so desperate that they're talking to WVU, then WVU will already be talking to NC St, Louisville, VT, GT, UVA, Pitt, etc etc to gauge interest in a slide on over to the Big 12.

WVU might be the most valuable member of the Big 12 other than UT, OU and KU.
West Virginia diaspora are everywhere. There's a guy on the Texas board who is in media says WVU has brought the Big 12 into markets all over the east coast. With their time in the Big East, people in the east have heard of them. They were in and won 3 BCS bowls, over Georgia, Oklahoma and Clemson.

(03-06-2024 07:19 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  I decided to try to ballpark a number for FSU "buyout" of the ACC. The term "buyout" encompasses two elements: the exit fee (per reporting: 3x annual revenue) and buyback of the media rights from the GOR( this is the total value of the future media payouts over the length of the contract)
Annual Revenue of the ACC:
Based on Analysis by Hokie Mark, the current ACC revenue is 38.4 million a year, but these numbers do not include the pro rata shares from SMU, Cal and Stanford. It has been reported the Cal and Stanford each took a 30% share to start, and SMU took nothing. We don't know how long Cal and Stanford took a 30% share, so I am assuming that they will eventually get to a full share combined over the the course of the contract. This means there are 2 shares of 38.4 mil to be split among the 14 ACC members. 38.4*2/14= 5.5 mill. This brings us to 43.9. An undisclosed amount of money will be going to the success initiative. There will be fluctuations based on bowl payouts, and cord cutting after a projected rise for the additions of new markets. I factor these in by reducing starting payout to 40 mill for 2024.

Next there is the 4.5% T1 escalator that Hokie Mark's Analysis and reporting remains in place. It would be to difficult to breakout the T1 payouts so I discount this to a 4% escalator.

The Exit Fee:
Exit Fee, as stated before is 3x annual payout 120 mill
ACC media payouts
For each year I took 40 and added a 4% increase in each year and totaled this for the length of the contract .Each year the buy out drops by that amount.

The combined amount of the exit fee and GOR buyback are as follows:

2025: $747 mill
2026: $706 mill
2027: $663 mill
2028: $618 mill
2029: $571 mill
2030: $522 mill
2031: $472 mill
2032: $413 mill
2033: $359 mill
2034: $304 mill
2035: $245 mill
2036: $184 mill

ACC could likely argue for damages as a result of FSU breaking the contract ,but I'd say that is is a ballpark of the floor by year.

Thoughts?

Meh. I still think the ACC has a huge damages problem. How can the ACC justify that it and its members will be harmed to the tune of half a billion dollars or more if the conference and its members are in the same - or better - financial position after FSU leaves? It isn't - and won't be - hard to calculate.

FSU's primary argument is that the ACC's GOR penalty is grossly excessive and overly broad.

(03-18-2024 05:29 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(03-06-2024 07:19 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  I decided to try to ballpark a number for FSU "buyout" of the ACC. The term "buyout" encompasses two elements: the exit fee (per reporting: 3x annual revenue) and buyback of the media rights from the GOR( this is the total value of the future media payouts over the length of the contract)
Annual Revenue of the ACC:
Based on Analysis by Hokie Mark, the current ACC revenue is 38.4 million a year, but these numbers do not include the pro rata shares from SMU, Cal and Stanford. It has been reported the Cal and Stanford each took a 30% share to start, and SMU took nothing. We don't know how long Cal and Stanford took a 30% share, so I am assuming that they will eventually get to a full share combined over the the course of the contract. This means there are 2 shares of 38.4 mil to be split among the 14 ACC members. 38.4*2/14= 5.5 mill. This brings us to 43.9. An undisclosed amount of money will be going to the success initiative. There will be fluctuations based on bowl payouts, and cord cutting after a projected rise for the additions of new markets. I factor these in by reducing starting payout to 40 mill for 2024.

Next there is the 4.5% T1 escalator that Hokie Mark's Analysis and reporting remains in place. It would be to difficult to breakout the T1 payouts so I discount this to a 4% escalator.

The Exit Fee:
Exit Fee, as stated before is 3x annual payout 120 mill
ACC media payouts
For each year I took 40 and added a 4% increase in each year and totaled this for the length of the contract .Each year the buy out drops by that amount.

The combined amount of the exit fee and GOR buyback are as follows:

2025: $747 mill
2026: $706 mill
2027: $663 mill
2028: $618 mill
2029: $571 mill
2030: $522 mill
2031: $472 mill
2032: $413 mill
2033: $359 mill
2034: $304 mill
2035: $245 mill
2036: $184 mill

ACC could likely argue for damages as a result of FSU breaking the contract ,but I'd say that is is a ballpark of the floor by year.

Thoughts?

Meh. I still think the ACC has a huge damages problem. How can the ACC justify that it and its members will be harmed to the tune of half a billion dollars or more if the conference and its members are in the same - or better - financial position after FSU leaves? It isn't - and won't be - hard to calculate.

FSU's primary argument is that the ACC's GOR penalty is grossly excessive and overly broad.

Well, there's the difference, isn't it? SEC: "It just means more!" ACC: "It just costs more!"

The thing is one of two things is true if the ACC insists on an exorbitant fee. 1. The ACC is extremely valuable, and FSU is fouling it up. 2. FSU is extremely valuable, and the ACC is losing their cash cow which everyone attaches too like a remora to a shark.

Hint: The ACC has, until the final raid on the Big 12, been the 4th best paid conference out of 5 so, so much for being highly valuable. I'll take Door #2 Monty! Either way the courts will see it for what it is.

It costs FSU some big money, but nowhere in the ball park of 4-6 hundred million.

Oh, and exit fees? To date it has basically been limited to funds withheld before annual distributions are made. Why? Enforceability of one state over another is questionable. FSU will owe money for the GOR and that's what will be negotiated.

(03-18-2024 05:06 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(03-18-2024 04:59 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-18-2024 04:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, the recent CFP deal has likely disabused any of the schools with plausible P2 prospects (FSU, NC, VA, Clemson, Miami) of any notions that the ACC can remain ballpark-competitive with respect to $$$. And with respect to respect, as the ACC is now clearly a second-level league, as IIRC an FSU official put it a few months ago.

So if anything, I expect FSU to be even more vigorous in trying to fight their way out, with the other schools listed secretly cheering them on, even as they remain silent to keep their own suits clean, so to speak.

I don’t disagree with you. FSU would be more willing to pay to get out.

I would have said "FSU would be willing to pay more to get out"...

Oops. You are right. Thanks for bearing with this non-native speaker.

(03-18-2024 05:29 PM)YNot Wrote:  Meh. I still think the ACC has a huge damages problem. How can the ACC justify that it and its members will be harmed to the tune of half a billion dollars or more if the conference and its members are in the same - or better - financial position after FSU leaves? It isn't - and won't be - hard to calculate.

FSU's primary argument is that the ACC's GOR penalty is grossly excessive and overly broad.

This is a HUGE misunderstanding/misrepresentation of the situation.
The "damages" are covered by the Exit Fee, which is only $130 million.
The G-o-R is about repurchasing media rights and has nothing to do with damages.

(03-18-2024 05:29 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(03-06-2024 07:19 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  I decided to try to ballpark a number for FSU "buyout" of the ACC. The term "buyout" encompasses two elements: the exit fee (per reporting: 3x annual revenue) and buyback of the media rights from the GOR( this is the total value of the future media payouts over the length of the contract)
Annual Revenue of the ACC:
Based on Analysis by Hokie Mark, the current ACC revenue is 38.4 million a year, but these numbers do not include the pro rata shares from SMU, Cal and Stanford. It has been reported the Cal and Stanford each took a 30% share to start, and SMU took nothing. We don't know how long Cal and Stanford took a 30% share, so I am assuming that they will eventually get to a full share combined over the the course of the contract. This means there are 2 shares of 38.4 mil to be split among the 14 ACC members. 38.4*2/14= 5.5 mill. This brings us to 43.9. An undisclosed amount of money will be going to the success initiative. There will be fluctuations based on bowl payouts, and cord cutting after a projected rise for the additions of new markets. I factor these in by reducing starting payout to 40 mill for 2024.

Next there is the 4.5% T1 escalator that Hokie Mark's Analysis and reporting remains in place. It would be to difficult to breakout the T1 payouts so I discount this to a 4% escalator.

The Exit Fee:
Exit Fee, as stated before is 3x annual payout 120 mill
ACC media payouts
For each year I took 40 and added a 4% increase in each year and totaled this for the length of the contract .Each year the buy out drops by that amount.

The combined amount of the exit fee and GOR buyback are as follows:

2025: $747 mill
2026: $706 mill
2027: $663 mill
2028: $618 mill
2029: $571 mill
2030: $522 mill
2031: $472 mill
2032: $413 mill
2033: $359 mill
2034: $304 mill
2035: $245 mill
2036: $184 mill

ACC could likely argue for damages as a result of FSU breaking the contract ,but I'd say that is is a ballpark of the floor by year.

Thoughts?

Meh. I still think the ACC has a huge damages problem. How can the ACC justify that it and its members will be harmed to the tune of half a billion dollars or more if the conference and its members are in the same - or better - financial position after FSU leaves? It isn't - and won't be - hard to calculate.

FSU's primary argument is that the ACC's GOR penalty is grossly excessive and overly broad.

Florida State's own lawyers said they calculated the cost of the buy-out to be $572 Million.

$400 million

https://www.sportskeeda.com/college-foot...-departure

It seems that UNC AD is coming to similar "buyout" numbers

(03-18-2024 07:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-18-2024 05:29 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(03-06-2024 07:19 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  I decided to try to ballpark a number for FSU "buyout" of the ACC. The term "buyout" encompasses two elements: the exit fee (per reporting: 3x annual revenue) and buyback of the media rights from the GOR( this is the total value of the future media payouts over the length of the contract)
Annual Revenue of the ACC:
Based on Analysis by Hokie Mark, the current ACC revenue is 38.4 million a year, but these numbers do not include the pro rata shares from SMU, Cal and Stanford. It has been reported the Cal and Stanford each took a 30% share to start, and SMU took nothing. We don't know how long Cal and Stanford took a 30% share, so I am assuming that they will eventually get to a full share combined over the the course of the contract. This means there are 2 shares of 38.4 mil to be split among the 14 ACC members. 38.4*2/14= 5.5 mill. This brings us to 43.9. An undisclosed amount of money will be going to the success initiative. There will be fluctuations based on bowl payouts, and cord cutting after a projected rise for the additions of new markets. I factor these in by reducing starting payout to 40 mill for 2024.

Next there is the 4.5% T1 escalator that Hokie Mark's Analysis and reporting remains in place. It would be to difficult to breakout the T1 payouts so I discount this to a 4% escalator.

The Exit Fee:
Exit Fee, as stated before is 3x annual payout 120 mill
ACC media payouts
For each year I took 40 and added a 4% increase in each year and totaled this for the length of the contract .Each year the buy out drops by that amount.

The combined amount of the exit fee and GOR buyback are as follows:

2025: $747 mill
2026: $706 mill
2027: $663 mill
2028: $618 mill
2029: $571 mill
2030: $522 mill
2031: $472 mill
2032: $413 mill
2033: $359 mill
2034: $304 mill
2035: $245 mill
2036: $184 mill

ACC could likely argue for damages as a result of FSU breaking the contract ,but I'd say that is is a ballpark of the floor by year.

Thoughts?

Meh. I still think the ACC has a huge damages problem. How can the ACC justify that it and its members will be harmed to the tune of half a billion dollars or more if the conference and its members are in the same - or better - financial position after FSU leaves? It isn't - and won't be - hard to calculate.

FSU's primary argument is that the ACC's GOR penalty is grossly excessive and overly broad.

Florida State's own lawyers said they calculated the cost of the buy-out to be $572 Million.

Well, the FSU lawyers could calculate that cost precisely to show that it is grossly excessive.

I think they likely have a point. IMO, so long as ESPN keeps the individual schools who remain whole in terms of their payouts, then to me FSU - or UNC, Clemson, whoever - should be able to walk away with their rights for basically nothing, because the ACC won't have suffered any relevant loss as a result.

IIRC, the GOR documents themselves say that the reason the schools are signing the GOR is because that was a condition of ESPN agreeing to the base payout and for forming the ACC Network. That was the 'consideration' the schools were receiving for doing so. So to me, as long as ESPN keeps those things should FSU leave, then the ACC has not lost anything by FSU walking with their rights.

So if I was a judge, and I asked the ACC what amount they would accept to release FSU from the GOR, and they said $572m, I would ask them what is the basis for that price, what losses will they suffer from relinquishing those rights that adds up to that amount?

If the ACC responds by saying ESPN has informed them that an FSU exit will result in a $5m a year reduction in annual per-school payout for the remaining members, and then you multiply that by 11 years and you get around $570m, then that would satisfy me. But if they can't say that, then ...