Article; B10 sees $110 Million Rise in Revenue

[BlockR]

Big Ten sees $110 million rise in revenue

By Sam Cooper 9 hours ago Dr. Saturday

• 
  
  
  
  .
  
  
  Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany (AP Photo/Frank Franklin II)
  
  Business is booming for the Big Ten.
  According to tax records obtained by USA Today, the Big Ten had a significant revenue increase – nearly $110 million – during the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2015. Overall, the conference brought in $448.8 million in total revenue, which divvies up to “roughly $32.4 million to each of its longest-standing 11 members.”
  
  Not too shabby. By comparison, during the same time frame, the SEC brought in $527.4 million to distribute to its 14 members.
  
  Nebraska, Rutgers and Maryland – the Big Ten’s three newest members – are still working their way toward full league revenue.
  
  [Check out Dr. Saturday on Tumblr for entertaining things you won’t see on the blog]
  
  From USA Today:
  
  In fiscal 2015, Nebraska received $19.8 million, Maryland $24.1 million and Rutgers nearly $10.5 million, according to the new return, which the conference provided Wednesday in response to a request from USA TODAY Sports.
  
  The return also showed that the Big Ten loaned Maryland an additional $11.6 million. That money was an advance against future conference distributions, deputy commissioner Brad Traviolia said in an interview. Traviolia declined to discuss the reasons for the loan, but as part of a settlement to a legal dispute with the Atlantic Coast Conference over its exit fee, Maryland agreed in August 2014 to let the ACC keep more than $31 million in revenue share money the conference had been withholding from the school.
  
  The additions of Maryland and Rutgers – and their respective television markets (Washington D.C. and New York) – appear to have brought in a sizeable chunk of revenue for the league.
  
  From USA Today:
  
  The Big Ten annually provides a figure for what it terms "Sports Revenue." Based on the way the conference categorizes other revenue streams, "Sports Revenue" includes — but is not exclusively comprised of — TV revenue and revenue from football bowl games.
  
  The conference reported about $317 million in "Sports Revenue" in fiscal 2014 and almost $397 million in 2015 — an $80 million difference. Based on reports from other conferences that approximate their bowl revenue increases from the CFP, it is likely that $50 million to $60 million of the Big Ten's "Sports Revenue" increase is attributable to the TV rights fee increases that resulted from adding Maryland and Rutgers.
  
  The introduction of the College Football Playoff also undoubtedly played a role in the increased revenue.
  
  [Visit Dr. Saturday on Facebook for stories you might have missed and chat with the writers]
  
  Meanwhile, the Big Ten is working toward a new TV deal. SportsBusiness Journal reported last month that the conference is nearing a $250 million per year agreement with Fox (which owns 51% of Big Ten Network) that would span six years.
  
  The reported deal with Fox, which is said to have outbid ESPN by a significant margin, would cover just half of the league’s overall package. Whether ESPN gets back in the mix for the Big Ten’s remaining media rights (as John Skipper says it wants to) remains to be seen.
  
  The Chicago Tribune reported Wednesday that things are up in the air.
  
  Some industry sources will tell you the Big Ten is set to end the decades-long relationship. Others believe Delany remains determined to keep ESPN in the fold, suggesting that ESPN and Fox annually alternate broadcasting the Big Ten football championship game and the Ohio State-Michigan game, which last year was the most-watched noon game in 18 years (10.8 million viewers).
  
  SportsBusiness Journal reported that Fox/FS1 will commit $250 million a year for six years to secure around 25 football and 50 basketball games. The Big Ten's expiring 10-year deal with ESPN was worth $100 million a year.
  
  "The market," commissioner Jim Delany said, "will decide what happens."
  
  Regardless of the networks involved, the deal(s) will surely bring in huge sums for the conference.
  
  - - - - - - -
  
  Sam Cooper is a writer for the Yahoo Sports blogs. Have a tip? Email him or follow him on Twitter!

 

[BlockR]

in fiscal 2015, Nebraska received $19.8 million, Maryland $24.1 million and Rutgers nearly $10.5 million, according to the new return, which the conference provided Wednesday in response to a request from USA TODAY Sports.

The return also showed that the Big Ten loaned Maryland an additional $11.6 million. That money was an advance against future conference distributions, deputy commissioner Brad Traviolia said in an interview. Traviolia declined to discuss the reasons for the loan, but as part of a settlement to a legal dispute with the Atlantic Coast Conference over its exit fee, Maryland agreed in August 2014 to let the ACC keep more than $31 million in revenue share money the conference had been withholding from the school.

 

[LevaosLectures]

Maryland gets more than Nebraska? Nuts.

 

[sct1111]

Hey Big Ten, you think you can give us a little more money considering we played a considerable role in this increase in revenue? Would really appreciate it, thanks.

 

[PaKnight]

Maryland gets more than Nebraska? Nuts.

It all timing, Maryland needed more upfront to pay the big exit fee from the ACC. They will be making less when we are full share.

 

[ArminRU]

Probably will get $13-14mil this year. Maryland is front loaded and why they are making more.

 

[Scoutnmayo]

"They will be making less when we are full share."

When are we full share? And we don't make anything until then. Confused.
Would appreciate anyone's help in understanding where RU stands. Is it like getting vested in the conference? We make a percentage per year until 100%?

 

[oldman87]

Now that we got the TV money, we need to concentrate on getting some of that internet money.

 

[Scarlet_Scourge]

yes, it is like getting vested.

The new schools, will never make less than they did before. Sadly for us, we were at the low paying Big East.

Maryland was given a LOAN which they must pay off, so they won't get the share when we do. Nebraska will get it before us, since they joined a few years before we did.

 

[patk89]

Yes, it is important to remember that over the next 10 years, RU and Maryland will be paid the identical amount net of loans. Considering that the Terps left the ACC and paid more to do so, RU actually ends up in a better position. Some people here seem to think that RU should have negotiated a full share from Day 1 without any buy-in for the equity in the B1G Network. Even ND was not getting that deal. The B1G is a perfect fit for RU and RU was immediately accretive to the existing B1G members.

 

[srru86]

Maryland gets more than Nebraska? Nuts.

Lot more cable set top boxes in Balto and Metro Washington.
I think the Nebraska jumping was more was of a non brainer for them, where MD had significant ACC hold even within College Park. Also bigger exit fees, no?
Of course it will all even out in the end.

 

[Scarlet Shack]

I really wish people would just chill on this

Our money is coming

And we will be a long term player in the big ten

 

[JerseyVegas]

I am not sure why people are freaking out about not being at a full share yet. RU made last year what they would have made in the AAC and each year will receive progressively more $$$. The amount in a couple of years will be ENORMOUS. RU in the B1G for the long haul.

 

[Caliknight]

None of this is surprise. It's playing out exactly how it was negotiated. Enjoy it RU fans, the next 10-15 years are going to be incredible.

 

[rucoe89]

"They will be making less when we are full share."

When are we full share? And we don't make anything until then. Confused.
Would appreciate anyone's help in understanding where RU stands. Is it like getting vested in the conference? We make a percentage per year until 100%?

Full share begins July 1, 2021. Until then I am not sure if we are fixed or gradually increase year to year. Anyone else know?

 

[Bagarocks]

Yes, it is important to remember that over the next 10 years, RU and Maryland will be paid the identical amount net of loans. Considering that the Terps left the ACC and paid more to do so, RU actually ends up in a better position. Some people here seem to think that RU should have negotiated a full share from Day 1 without any buy-in for the equity in the B1G Network. Even ND was not getting that deal. The B1G is a perfect fit for RU and RU was immediately accretive to the existing B1G members.

"accretive"
I had to look that one up :)

 

[lighty]

Even though Delany knew what he was doing with RU and Maryland, you've got to believe that others did not like the move. I can't imagine that it was only the Big Ten bloggers and beat writers who were confused about what RU brought to the table. RU did the right thing to simply get in the conference and wait for the money. If the school had pushed, maybe it could have gotten a better deal, maybe not. Maybe the Big Ten says let's push for Kansas or Virginia instead.

The important move was to join the conference. The money will come.

 

[bingethinker]

It all timing, Maryland needed more upfront to pay the big exit fee from the ACC. They will be making less when we are full share.

In 2019/2020, both schools will be fully vested members. The revenue will be the same, but Maryland will have expenses related to it's front loaded deal. 2018/2019 is when you'll see the biggest disparity in income. That's the year when Rutgers' payout will be 50% larger (minus UMD's $7 million travel stipend) than Maryland's.

 

[Western PA]

Question from a distance: how confident are you the state/university power brokers will keep the athletic department's subsidy at current levels once the B1G's big money kicks in?

 

[RU848789]

For all the naysayers (bold/underline added by me), the following 2 excerpts confirm what most/many of us said were the obvious reasons why RU was added and why that addition would be very lucrative for the B1G. The future looks bright...

The additions of Maryland and Rutgers – and their respective television markets (Washington D.C. and New York) – appear to have brought in a sizeable chunk of revenue for the league.

The conference reported about $317 million in "Sports Revenue" in fiscal 2014 and almost $397 million in 2015 — an $80 million difference. Based on reports from other conferences that approximate their bowl revenue increases from the CFP, it is likely that $50 million to $60 million of the Big Ten's "Sports Revenue" increase is attributable to the TV rights fee increases that resulted from adding Maryland and Rutgers.

 

[valkabit]

If the school had pushed, maybe it could have gotten a better deal, maybe not.

What better deal?? RU will be in for a full share when Maryland is.

 

[satnom]

For all the naysayers (bold/underline added by me), the following 2 excerpts confirm what most/many of us said were the obvious reasons why RU was added and why that addition would be very lucrative for the B1G. The future looks bright...

The additions of Maryland and Rutgers – and their respective television markets (Washington D.C. and New York) – appear to have brought in a sizeable chunk of revenue for the league.

The conference reported about $317 million in "Sports Revenue" in fiscal 2014 and almost $397 million in 2015 — an $80 million difference. Based on reports from other conferences that approximate their bowl revenue increases from the CFP, it is likely that $50 million to $60 million of the Big Ten's "Sports Revenue" increase is attributable to the TV rights fee increases that resulted from adding Maryland and Rutgers.

It's funny how this article lists DC tv market before NY. NY tv market is #1 in the country and not even close.

GO RU

 

[ruready4somefootball]

Where's a comment from Tranghese now,lol, I

guess people will pay to see Rutgers vs Northwestern after all.

 

[Upstream]

Question from a distance: how confident are you the state/university power brokers will keep the athletic department's subsidy at current levels once the B1G's big money kicks in?

I am 100% confident that the subsidy for the athletic department will get smaller as B1G money kicks in. We already saw the subsidy significantly decrease last year. The goal is for the Athletic Department to receive no subsidy, other than student fees.

http://www.app.com/story/sports/col...s-23-million-inaugural-big-ten-year/79332824/

 

[RU MAN]

Where's a comment from Tranghese now,lol, I

guess people will pay to see Rutgers vs Northwestern after all.

Don't forget dear ol' Tagliabue. The man "knew" what he was talking about. :flushed:

 

[rutgersguy1]

I am 100% confident that the subsidy for the athletic department will get smaller as B1G money kicks in. We already saw the subsidy significantly decrease last year. The goal is for the Athletic Department to receive no subsidy, other than student fees.

http://www.app.com/story/sports/col...s-23-million-inaugural-big-ten-year/79332824/

It's just going to be natural offshoot of increasing revenues over time. There's nothing even extraordinary about it and I don't think anything special needs to be done for it to happen. It shouldn't even be a worry anymore.

As far as getting revenues sooner, of course that would be great but I don't see the worry that we'll have fallen so far behind everyone else the longer it takes. In my mind, I feel like there's a point of diminishing returns with every extra dollar they make more than we do. I mean these type of programs are already in front of us in terms of facilities, recruiting tools, coaching etc...There are still only 80 some odd scholarships to give no matter how much you spend.

In my mind the gap actually closes as the years go by because the return on every extra dollar we get over time is greater than our conference brethren who have had better resources than us forever. Just being in the B10 alone without any money has helped close the gap. The benefits from every boost we get in exposure and finances is greater than the benefits others get to me because they've already had all these advantages over us forever. And again there are only 80 some odd scholarship no matter how much they spend. We have to be smarter with our dollars because we'll never match some of these programs but I think the gap naturally closes over time to a degree rather than widens even if the absolute finances suggest otherwise.

 

[dconifer]

Yeah, it will all even out in the end. Maryland needed a front-loaded deal (and an unprecedented travel stipend) because of the huge ACC buyout, as well as the dire straits caused by the ACC withholding all payments as soon as the jump was announced. Not to mention the financial difficulties that the athletic department was already in.

Maryland was also in a better bargaining position, being a member of a P-5 conference with no urgent reason to leave. Rutgers was on a sinking ship looking for a lifeboat.

I think both schools are already better off, both athletically and academically. And it's only going to get B1Gger...

 

[kapyoche]

Wait.
How much will the players get from this deal?
They better think about this since that is going to happen.
There will be a bidding war on getting players on the TP.