Tweets About ESPN, Big Ten

[rutgersguy1]

ESPN is making a business decision.

They will only be losing 1/2 of the B1G which is worth so much to them.

Maybe they know Fox overpaid and they are not going to make the same mistake.

Happens in business.

Toshiba paid $5.4 Billion for Westinghouse Nuclear.

Then they admitted they overpaid and had to write down $2.3 Billion.

Have to wait and see how it plays out.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

Yup you mentioned this but I'm still not counting ESPN out as a player for the B10 but regardless I mentioned the alternative which seems realistic to me. You mention they'll always do what's in their best interest, but that assumes the management knows what will actually be in their best interest regarding the future. No one can foresee that with certainty. Just look at what happened when they turned Delany down which created all these conference networks and help set off realignment. Was that in their best interest? I'd say no looking back now.

Break that 2nd half of the package up into quarters and put it out for bid to CBS, NBC and see what they think. Just make them put the football games and some basketball games on their main broadcast channels. You can have double headers with ND and the SEC on their broadcast channels. Some ancillary basketball games can be on their cable channels and maybe some olympic sports too. The quarter pieces might be more digestible for the networks and by being on the main network you're not losing exposure by being off of ESPN. I think ESPN is trying to call their bluff and say who else is there and to me this is the other option.

In the end, if they lose the package I think they'll end up regretting it just like I think they ended up regretting not giving Delany the money he wanted the first time around which started this whole carousel of realignment, conference networks, etc and in the end probably ended up costing them more money.

Just like the NFL breaking up their package into smaller pieces, now possibly the B10 could do the same and then in the future the same for the NBA, MLB, and the other college conferences. So in the end you have a bunch of fragments of sports properties allowing more players to get a piece of each of them and then suddenly ESPN's strangle hold and almost monopoly on sports is broken. In that kind of environment are they worth the carriage fee they charge if other networks become players with their own pieces of more and more properties.

 

[RU4Real]

One other possibility to consider here is that there may be ongoing conversations with ESPN and the NFL about possible Saturday night NFL games through the entire season. It could be that the Mouse is gambling on a better return from a slate of Saturday primetime NFL games competing with the NCAA games.

 

[rutgersguy1]

One other possibility to consider here is that there may be ongoing conversations with ESPN and the NFL about possible Saturday night NFL games through the entire season. It could be that the Mouse is gambling on a better return from a slate of Saturday primetime NFL games competing with the NCAA games.

Isn't there some law preventing the NFL from having Friday and Saturday games during the highschool/college seasons. That's why NFL Saturday games are only at the end of the years after the college regular season is over no?

 

[RU4Real]

Isn't there some law preventing the NFL from having Friday and Saturday games during the highschool/college seasons. That's why Saturday games are only at the end of the years after the college regular season is over no?

"Law"?

Um... no.

 

[Upstream]

wonder if its just a bargaining chip or if they really might drop the King.

Yes.

Delany knows that you are in a much stronger negotiating position if you are willing to walk away. By letting ESPN know that the B1G is willing to walk away from ESPN, Delany may be able to get a better contract from the network. But if not, he can walk away.

 

[rutgersguy1]

"Law"?

Um... no.

Isn't there some antitrust legislation/regulation for it?

 

[sherrane]

I was referring to CBS Sports Network.

"CBS Sports Network is available to 96 million homes nationwide." (http://www.cbssportsnetwork.com/faq/)

 

[rutgersguy1]

"Law"?

Um... no.

I believe it's part of the sports broadcasting act of 1961.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_Broadcasting_Act_of_1961

 

[sherrane]

The last time the B1G and ESPN got into a staring contest, the BTN was formed. That was not a good development for ESPN. Are they willing to test the resolve of Delany again?

On the other hand, without having 2 or more B1G games on every Saturday, they may no longer feel the need to invest in an ACC Network.

 

[RU4Real]

Isn't there some antitrust legislation/regulation for it?

The Sports Broadcasting Act of '61 has language in it that prevents Friday and Saturday games. It also prevents a bunch of other things (like teams moving from one city to another) but each provision of the Act has been broken previously. I think if they wanted to do it, they could. The NFL loves going to court. It gives all their lawyers something to do besides hang around the office and give Workplace Sexual Harassment presentations.

 

[mdh2003]

B1G and NBC please if they do anything similar to how their soccer coverage is.

Big +1

Even though the relegation results were predetermined, pretty sure they carried every final PL game simultaneously on all of their channels. Professional.

Plus, airing Viri Recte Vetiti from the crap section of SoHo gets them extra tingling points.

 

[needmorecowbell]

ESPN is making a business decision.

They will only be losing 1/2 of the B1G which is worth so much to them.

Maybe they know Fox overpaid and they are not going to make the same mistake.

Happens in business.

Toshiba paid $5.4 Billion for Westinghouse Nuclear.

Then they admitted they overpaid and had to write down $2.3 Billion.

Have to wait and see how it plays out.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

Keep beating your drum. The Big 10 is by far the most valuable property. The SEC is the only one who is even close. Bringing up random manufacturing companies failures doesn't change that.

 

[rutgersguy1]

The last time the B1G and ESPN got into a staring contest, the BTN was formed. That was not a good development for ESPN. Are they willing to test the resolve of Delany again?

This is basically my thinking. Forget about just the BTN, that started the whole cascade of realignment and conference networks which in the end probably wasn't a good thing for ESPN. With this I could see a further fragmentation of sports properties. The NFL already does it, so now it's possible the B10 could too like I mentioned above. Then others could follow and now you have a bunch of fragmented sports properties allowing other players to get a piece and then ESPN's strangle hold and virtual monopoly on so many sports properties is broken. In that environment are they worth their carriage fee?

It could happen anyway eventually but this could be just pushing it along quicker.

 

[mdh2003]

Keep beating your drum. The Big 10 is by far the most valuable property. The SEC is the only one who is even close. Bringing up random manufacturing companies failures doesn't change that.

Do the kids still say pwned?

 

[rutgersguy1]

Keep beating your drum. The Big 10 is by far the most valuable property. The SEC is the only one who is even close. Bringing up random manufacturing companies failures doesn't change that.

Forget about just that, one of his mantras is ESPN will do what is in the best interest of ESPN. Well duh, that can be said about any business. I'm sure Toshiba thought that was in their best interest. They're plenty of other business moves that management thought were in their best interest which in the end weren't. That's the debate not ESPN doing what they think is best for them. The debate is would letting the B10 go be the right move for ESPN in the future or not, just like letting Delany form the BTN some years ago when they didn't ante up? I think we know the answer to that one, this one we'll see.

 

[fatsam98]

I want us to be on whatever network does not employ Beth Mowens.

 

[OrangeJC]

ESPN can live without the BIG ten. They have enough of the other conferences.

http://www.nielsen.com/content/dam/...ts/nielsen-year-in-sports-report-feb-2016.pdf

That said, I think they come to an agreement.

 

[Leonard23]

"CBS Sports Network is available to 96 million homes nationwide." (http://www.cbssportsnetwork.com/faq/)

CBSSN is playing games with that statement by using "available to," as that # is irrelevant to how many homes actually subscribe to the channel, which was 61M according to this link with data from SNL Kagan:
http://www.whatyoupayforsports.com/numbers/. BTN.com correctly states that BTN is in more than 60M homes (actually 62M subscribers according to SNL Kagan), even though it's available in 79,250,000 homes.

 

[Upstream]

ESPN can live without the BIG ten. They have enough of the other conferences.

http://www.nielsen.com/content/dam/...ts/nielsen-year-in-sports-report-feb-2016.pdf

That said, I think they come to an agreement.

I'm not sure what you wanted us to look at in the report you linked. But I found page 29 (college football strength of power conferences) interesting. The Nielsen data indicates that the Big Ten had the highest average viewership at 8.5M with the SEC very close behind at 8.1M. Then there was a large drop to the ACC (6.1M), B12 (5.0M) and P12 (4.5M). More interestingly, the report noted that 6 of the top 10 ACC games were out-of-conference games, which the report implies is based on those games including B1G or SEC teams.

 

[Caliknight]

Cali,
It was on Fox Sports 2 for a few years (which I still can't get where I live), but it doesn't look like Aussie Football is on any more unless you sign up for the games via the internet. I really wish someone would televise on TV in America again. About 7-10 years ago,we had a local Comcast channel show the AFL and Australian Rugby for a few years and then one day they just stopped in the middle of the season. It was on something called ONE Sports or something like that.

Yea I stopped trying and just get the games online.

 

[Caliknight]

I'm not sure what you wanted us to look at in the report you linked. But I found page 29 (college football strength of power conferences) interesting. The Nielsen data indicates that the Big Ten had the highest average viewership at 8.5M with the SEC very close behind at 8.1M. Then there was a large drop to the ACC (6.1M), B12 (5.0M) and P12 (4.5M). More interestingly, the report noted that 6 of the top 10 ACC games were out-of-conference games, which the report implies is based on those games including B1G or SEC teams.

The link actually strengthens the position of the B1G.

 

[Panthergrowl13]

Yup you mentioned this but I'm still not counting ESPN out as a player for the B10 but regardless I mentioned the alternative which seems realistic to me. You mention they'll always do what's in their best interest, but that assumes the management knows what will actually be in their best interest regarding the future. No one can foresee that with certainty. Just look at what happened when they turned Delany down which created all these conference networks and help set off realignment. Was that in their best interest? I'd say no looking back now.

Break that 2nd half of the package up into quarters and put it out for bid to CBS, NBC and see what they think. Just make them put the football games and some basketball games on their main broadcast channels. You can have double headers with ND and the SEC on their broadcast channels. Some ancillary basketball games can be on their cable channels and maybe some olympic sports too. The quarter pieces might be more digestible for the networks and by being on the main network you're not losing exposure by being off of ESPN. I think ESPN is trying to call their bluff and say who else is there and to me this is the other option.

In the end, if they lose the package I think they'll end up regretting it just like I think they ended up regretting not giving Delany the money he wanted the first time around which started this whole carousel of realignment, conference networks, etc and in the end probably ended up costing them more money.

Just like the NFL breaking up their package into smaller pieces, now possibly the B10 could do the same and then in the future the same for the NBA, MLB, and the other college conferences. So in the end you have a bunch of fragments of sports properties allowing more players to get a piece of each of them and then suddenly ESPN's strangle hold and almost monopoly on sports is broken. In that kind of environment are they worth the carriage fee they charge if other networks become players with their own pieces of more and more properties.

Hi Guy

Thanks for acknowledging the fact that I brought up this exact scenario with ESPN and the B1G before any of the latest articles/tweets surfaced.

As I stated previously, ESPN probably would like to keep 1/2 of theB1G in the fold but at a certain price.
If the B1G and ESPN cannot arrive at a mutually acceptable figure (ESPN will not pay $250 million because they believe Fox overpaid) they are prepared to walk. I'm sure the B1G is also prepared to walk.

If ESPN does walk, all other bidders will now feel that the amount paid may be excessive and will want to come in at a lower value. With the BIG Broadcasting DOG out of the bidding process there is no reason to overpay.

As you stated previously, the B1G could then try to market the remaining 1/2 of the B1G package by breaking it into 1/4, 1/8 or 1/16 increments(lets see how that works out) to the remaining bidders.

I think ESPN would like to keep the B1G but in the end they know they only had 1/2 of the package to begin with.

Again it is a business decision and not a sports decision.

Good discussion and lets see how it evolves.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[Panthergrowl13]

Hi Guy

Thanks for acknowledging the fact that I brought up this exact scenario with ESPN and the B1G before any of the latest articles/tweets surfaced.

As I stated previously, ESPN probably would like to keep 1/2 of theB1G in the fold but at a certain price.
If the B1G and ESPN cannot arrive at a mutually acceptable figure (ESPN will not pay $250 million because they believe Fox overpaid) they are prepared to walk. I'm sure the B1G is also prepared to walk.

If ESPN does walk, all other bidders will now feel that the amount paid may be excessive and will want to come in at a lower value. With the BIG Broadcasting DOG out of the bidding process there is no reason to overpay.

As you stated previously, the B1G could then try to market the remaining 1/2 of the B1G package by breaking it into 1/4, 1/8 or 1/16 increments(lets see how that works out) to the remaining bidders.

I think ESPN would like to keep the B1G but in the end they know they only had 1/2 of the package to begin with.

Again it is a business decision and not a sports decision.

Good discussion and lets see how it evolves.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[WhiteBus]

Gotcha. Here is a good break down of the channel, # of homes, fees & revenue:
http://www.whatyoupayforsports.com/numbers/. This seems more updated than the #s I originally posted as BTN is now in over 79M homes.

TBS 94,602,000
TNT 93,294,000
ESPN 91,772,000
ESPN2 91,679,00
FS1 84,434,000
NBCSN 83,623,000
BTN 79,250,00
ESPNU 71,445,000
ESPNN 69,744,000
SECN 69,100,000
CBSSN 61,000,000
FS2 47,827,000
P12N 12,300,000

This is available homes not subscribers. Big difference.

1. ESPN $6.61 x 94.5 million homes = $7.5 billion



2. NFL Network $1.31 x 73.6 million homes = $1.16 billion



3. FS1 .99 x 91.2 million homes = $1.08 billion



4. ESPN2 .83 x 94.5 million hiomes = $941.2 million



5. SEC Network .66 x 69.1 million homes = $547.3 million



6. Golf Channel .35 x 79.4 million homes = $332.2 million



7. NBC Sports Network .30 x 83.1 million homes = $299 million



8. Big Ten Network .39 x 62 million homes = $290.2 million



9. MLB Network .26 x 71.3 million homes = $222.5 million



10. FS2 .28 x 64 million homes = $215 million



11. NBA TV .29 x 57.2 million homes = $199 million



12. ESPNU .22 x 74.9 million homes = $198 million



13. CBS Sports Network .26 x 61 million homes = $190.3 million



14. NHL Network .32 x 37.4 million homes = $143.6 million



15. Pac 12 Network .39 x 12.3 million homes = $57.6 million

 

[Panthergrowl13]

On the other hand, without having 2 or more B1G games on every Saturday, they may no longer feel the need to invest in an ACC Network.

Without the B1G, ESPN would now promote (marketing and financial) the SEC and ACC Conferences even more because they are under contract exclusively with ESPN including the SEC Network.

With the B1G out of the picture ESPN would need the SEC and ACC even more for content.

There will be an ACC Network headquartered in Charlotte NC (using the same facilities as the SEC Network). I'll stand by my predictions and be back to discuss the final outcomes.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[WhiteBus]

Without the B1G, ESPN would now promote (marketing and financial) the SEC and ACC Conferences even more because they are under contract exclusively with ESPN including the SEC Network.

With the B1G out of the picture ESPN would need the SEC and ACC even more for content.

There will be an ACC Network headquartered in Charlotte NC (using the same facilities as the SEC Network). I'll stand by my predictions and be back to discuss the final outcomes.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

They only problem that you fail to realize is that many people are no longer watching ESPN!

 

[Panthergrowl13]

I'm not sure what you wanted us to look at in the report you linked. But I found page 29 (college football strength of power conferences) interesting. The Nielsen data indicates that the Big Ten had the highest average viewership at 8.5M with the SEC very close behind at 8.1M. Then there was a large drop to the ACC (6.1M), B12 (5.0M) and P12 (4.5M). More interestingly, the report noted that 6 of the top 10 ACC games were out-of-conference games, which the report implies is based on those games including B1G or SEC teams.

YES, yet ESPN only had 1/2 of the B1G package.

What is 1/2 of something worth from a business perspective.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[Panthergrowl13]

They only problem that you fail to realize is that many people are no longer watching ESPN!

Maybe that is why they are not going to pay $250 million per year to keep 1/2 of the B1G.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[WhiteBus]

Maybe that is why they are not going to pay $250 million per year to keep the B1G.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

They aren't going to pay that because they are losing subscribers, not because they don't need the Big Ten. They are stuck with the ACC....the boring ACC that they rebuilt and is failing miserably with.

 

[Panthergrowl13]

They aren't going to pay that because they are losing subscribers, not because they don't need the Big Ten. They are stuck with the ACC....the boring ACC that they rebuilt and is failing miserably with.

Well your assessment is hyperbole.

So we can then agree to disagree.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[rutgersguy1]

Hi Guy

Thanks for acknowledging the fact that I brought up this exact scenario with ESPN and the B1G before any of the latest articles/tweets surfaced.

As I stated previously, ESPN probably would like to keep 1/2 of theB1G in the fold but at a certain price.
If the B1G and ESPN cannot arrive at a mutually acceptable figure (ESPN will not pay $250 million because they believe Fox overpaid) they are prepared to walk. I'm sure the B1G is also prepared to walk.

If ESPN does walk, all other bidders will now feel that the amount paid may be excessive and will want to come in at a lower value. With the BIG Broadcasting DOG out of the bidding process there is no reason to overpay.

As you stated previously, the B1G could then try to market the remaining 1/2 of the B1G package by breaking it into 1/4, 1/8 or 1/16 increments(lets see how that works out) to the remaining bidders.

I think ESPN would like to keep the B1G but in the end they know they only had 1/2 of the package to begin with.

Again it is a business decision and not a sports decision.

Good discussion and lets see how it evolves.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

I don't think ESPN "lowballing" should have much affect on how others may bid. They've lost other properties where other networks bid higher so it wouldn't be the first. They had to join with Fox to keep their hands on some properties as well. So it's not as if they're the only ones who set the market. 100-125M from 2 is just as good as 200-250 from one and I've said on an absolute basis more digestible for another network if the total figure is too big.

The B10 is a premium sports property and I don't think you can quantify what it would mean to a competing network trying to acquire that content versus ESPN. There's no way to know. Maybe they wouldn't have to rely on everything revolving around ND or the SEC. Like I've said I think ESPN likes to have a finger in every pie, no reason other networks wouldn't like to get their fingers in some other pies as well. BTW breaking it up further doesn't preclude ESPN from taking a 1/4 either.

I just offer breaking up the package further as a realistic alternative to ESPN. I think both would prefer to stick together but for the B10 to walk away completely there has to be a realistic alternative that can offer similar exposure. To me getting on the broadcast networks is that. Even if it's not breaking up the package further, any realistic alternative that provides similar exposure is all they need to walk away.

If ESPN lost the package completely, to me that's the first sign of a chink in the armor. They wrapped up some contracts for long durations for good reason but eventually everything will come up again and the more fragmented it gets the worse it is for ESPN. I kind of think that will be an eventuality anyway and that sports properties will become more fragmented in the future and ESPN will eventually lose its tight grip on everything but IMO this kind of loss hastens things, especially if the B10 demonstrates it can live on without ESPN.

 

[Panthergrowl13]

I don't think ESPN "lowballing" should have much affect on how others may bid. They've lost other properties where other networks bid higher so it wouldn't be the first. They had to join with Fox to keep their hands on some properties as well. So it's not as if they're the only ones who set the market. 100-125M from 2 is just as good as 200-250 from one and I've said on an absolute basis more digestible for another network if the total figure is too big.

The B10 is a premium sports property and I don't think you can quantify what it would mean to a competing network trying to acquire that content versus ESPN. There's no way to know. Maybe they wouldn't have to rely on everything revolving around ND or the SEC. Like I've said I think ESPN likes to have a finger in every pie, no reason other networks wouldn't like to get their fingers in some other pies as well. BTW breaking it up further doesn't preclude ESPN from taking a 1/4 either.

I just offer breaking up the package further as a realistic alternative to ESPN. I think both would prefer to stick together but for the B10 to walk away completely there has to be a realistic alternative that can offer similar exposure. To me getting on the broadcast networks is that. Even if it's not breaking up the package further, any realistic alternative that provides similar exposure is all they need to walk away.

If ESPN lost the package completely, to me that's the first sign of a chink in the armor. They wrapped up some contracts for long durations for good reason but eventually everything will come up again and the more fragmented it gets the worse it is for ESPN. I kind of think that will be an eventuality anyway and that sports properties will become more fragmented in the future and ESPN will eventually lose its tight grip on everything but IMO this kind of loss hastens things, especially if the B10 demonstrates it can live on without ESPN.

Your comments are reasonable and it will be interesting to see how it ends up.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[WhiteBus]

I don't think ESPN "lowballing" should have much affect on how others may bid. They've lost other properties where other networks bid higher so it wouldn't be the first. They had to join with Fox to keep their hands on some properties as well. So it's not as if they're the only ones who set the market. 100-125M from 2 is just as good as 200-250 from one and I've said on an absolute basis more digestible for another network if the total figure is too big.

The B10 is a premium sports property and I don't think you can quantify what it would mean to a competing network trying to acquire that content versus ESPN. There's no way to know. Maybe they wouldn't have to rely on everything revolving around ND or the SEC. Like I've said I think ESPN likes to have a finger in every pie, no reason other networks wouldn't like to get their fingers in some other pies as well. BTW breaking it up further doesn't preclude ESPN from taking a 1/4 either.

I just offer breaking up the package further as a realistic alternative to ESPN. I think both would prefer to stick together but for the B10 to walk away completely there has to be a realistic alternative that can offer similar exposure. To me getting on the broadcast networks is that. Even if it's not breaking up the package further, any realistic alternative that provides similar exposure is all they need to walk away.

If ESPN lost the package completely, to me that's the first sign of a chink in the armor. They wrapped up some contracts for long durations for good reason but eventually everything will come up again and the more fragmented it gets the worse it is for ESPN. I kind of think that will be an eventuality anyway and that sports properties will become more fragmented in the future and ESPN will eventually lose its tight grip on everything but IMO this kind of loss hastens things, especially if the B10 demonstrates it can live on without ESPN.

Why does the Big Ten in this day and age have to bend over to accommodate a struggling ESPN????

There is zero benefit for the Big Ten to get less to let ESPN have a piece of the pie. ESPN is no longer the sports network giant that they were 10 years ago.

 

[Scarlet Shack]

Three things

1.) in surprised it took people that long to see the NBC and notre dame angle

Jim Delaney is a smart man...but this conversation is not happening for this set of media right negotiations...but the NEXT one ....

2.) I would really be surprised if it all went to fox. Big ten wants broad based coverage on as many networks as possible...

3.) ESPN needs the big ten badly. Go look at Matt Sarz television schedules from the past few years and take the big ten games off and see what ends up on their networks at noon and 3:30.

Jim Delaney knows this and will be on negotiation in good faith with others and expect ESPN to beat it

And they will

 

[JoeRU0304]

ESPN is making a business decision.

They will only be losing 1/2 of the B1G which is worth so much to them.

Maybe they know Fox overpaid and they are not going to make the same mistake.

Happens in business.

Toshiba paid $5.4 Billion for Westinghouse Nuclear.

Then they admitted they overpaid and had to write down $2.3 Billion.

Have to wait and see how it plays out.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

...gotta love how you're constantly devaluing the B1G worth in favor of ESPN...wouldn't have anything to do with Pitt being on the ACC/ESPN train now, would it?


Joe P.


(PS- I enjoy your posts and do see where you're coming from; just thought it was kind of funny though)

 

[rutgersguy1]

Why does the Big Ten in this day and age have to bend over to accommodate a struggling ESPN????

There is zero benefit for the Big Ten to get less to let ESPN have a piece of the pie. ESPN is no longer the sports network giant that they were 10 years ago.

They're still the biggest and best network for sports even if that "gravitas" may be lessened now as opposed to before. They still get the most exposure as well. Now I think that is going to change a little in the future but I don't think that's the case at present and the contract is being negotiated in the present. So I don't have an issue with a bit of a hometown/established brand discount but I don't think it should be a big one and I don't expect it would be. If Fox is paying 250M I wouldn't expect ESPN to pay below 200M for 1/2 or 100M for 1/4. The B10 might not even let it go that low but I could envision some sort of discount. I don't consider this a big accommodation.

I wouldn't call ESPN struggling either. I think that mantra gets overhyped. They have issues and will face increasing competition but they are still the most valuable network out there. Eventually this stuff will trough and as long as they still have quality content they'll be okay. I think what they need to do is get their cost structure in order. They can't be as profligate as they may have been in the past. But to me that can't be at the expense of their main product, their premium sports properties. That's their lifeblood and without it they're nothing but a bunch windbags, which is why you see some of these windbags going off to other networks.

 

[WhiteBus]

They're still the biggest and best network for sports even if that "gravitas" may be lessened now as opposed to before. They still get the most exposure as well. Now I think that is going to change a little in the future but I don't think that's the case at present and the contract is being negotiated in the present. So I don't have an issue with a bit of a hometown/established brand discount but I don't think it should be a big one and I don't expect it would be. If Fox is paying 250M I wouldn't expect ESPN to pay below 200M for 1/2 or 100M for 1/4. The B10 might not even let it go that low but I could envision some sort of discount. I don't consider this a big accommodation.

I wouldn't call ESPN struggling either. I think that mantra gets overhyped. They have issues and will face increasing competition but they are still the most valuable network out there. Eventually this stuff will trough and as long as they still have quality content they'll be okay. I think what they need to do is get their cost structure in order. They can't be as profligate as they may have been in the past. But to me that can't be at the expense of their main product, their premium sports properties. That's their lifeblood and without it they're nothing but a bunch windbags, which is why you see some of these windbags going off to other networks.

If you don't think they are struggling than the rest of your post is equally nonsense.

 

[Panthergrowl13]

They aren't going to pay that because they are losing subscribers, not because they don't need the Big Ten. They are stuck with the ACC....the boring ACC that they rebuilt and is failing miserably with.

Hyperbole (failing miserably) with respect to the ACC.

Florida State won the 2013 National Football Championship and qualified for the CFP in 2014. Clemson reached the CFP in 2015, losing an epic title game to Alabama 45-40.

In 2015 Duke claimed the NCAA Championship followed by Syracuse and North Carolina advancing to the Final Four this season.

ACC Teams won 36 NCAA Tournament games the past two years more than any other conference (B1G won 20).

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[WhiteBus]

Hyperbole (failing miserably) with respect to the ACC.

Florida State won the 2013 National Football Championship and qualified for the CFP in 2014. Clemson reached the CFP in 2015, losing an epic title game to Alabama 45-40.

In 2015 Duke claimed the NCAA Championship followed by Syracuse and North Carolina advancing to the Final Four this season.

ACC Teams won 36 NCAA Tournament games the past two years more than any other conference (B1G won 20).

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

FAIL!!! All the teams you post about are not BC, Miami, Pitt, V Tech, and Cuse. Thanks for proving my point! They have failed by forcing teams to the ACC and have got nothing out of it!!!

 

[rutgersguy1]

If you don't think they are struggling than the rest of your post is equally nonsense.

Ok no debate about what is struggling besides the typical parroting of what's out there. There's nothing nonsense about my post at all and you don't even rebut anything and say here's why that's wrong. Just write it off as nonsense and I'm suppose to take your post seriously. Is their any other network that is as valuable? Any other network that can charge the carriage fee they do or anything close? Has their distribution? Any other sports networks get the ratings they get?

Being knocked of their high perch isn't the same as struggling. They're just not the big bad ass anymore that doesn't mean they're going to oblivion. As long as they keep their content, they'll be fine and the subscriber losses etc.. will eventually trough.