That’s one of the problems with the PAC12 network…they needed a partner.
West Coast View on Expansion
- Thread starter rucoe89
- Start date
Yes.
BTN is an independent asset with separate ownership.
This is was the Rutgers/Maryland/Nebraska "buy-in" was for.
They had to pay for their share of the BTN.
There was no "buy-in" for Big Ten Conference membership.
Originally Fox owned 49% and Big Ten Conference owned 51% (which is split evenly among the conference members).
So originally, PSU owned 1/11th share of 51% of BTN.
When Nebraska joined the Big Ten Conference, it was now diluted to 1/12th share for all existing members.
Nebraska had to pay for that dilution - pay money to the current shareholders for going from 1/11th to 1/12th.
They paid this through reduced Big Ten Conference payouts over 6 years.
Similar when Maryland and Rutgers joined.
Shares went from 1/12th to 1/14th.
Currently, Fox Sports owns 61% and Big Ten Conference owns 39% (originally Big Ten Conference owned 51% upon launch).
Big Ten recently sold 20% of it's 50% share back to Fox Sports for $100m cash (10% of total ownership). This suggests a $1b valuation.
So Rutgers owns a 1/14th share of 39% of a $1b company (approx $27m asset).
Once USC/UCLA join - it will be reduced to a 1/16th share.
Initial reports appear to be that USC/UCLA will not need to compensate the existing shareholders through a buy-in and will be fully vested in their 1/16th shares right from the start.
Last edited:
Details on the Big Ten sale of ownership:
"For example, the Big Ten exercised a pre-existing option to sell 20% of its interest in the Big Ten Network to Fox, the company with which it has roughly shared ownership of the network since it was formed in 2006. The deal put about $100 million in cash or receivables on the Big Ten’s books, and the conference said about $3.5 million of that went to each of the 14 member schools in fiscal 2021."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...-ten-big-12-revenue-fell-pandemic/9855686002/
"For example, the Big Ten exercised a pre-existing option to sell 20% of its interest in the Big Ten Network to Fox, the company with which it has roughly shared ownership of the network since it was formed in 2006. The deal put about $100 million in cash or receivables on the Big Ten’s books, and the conference said about $3.5 million of that went to each of the 14 member schools in fiscal 2021."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...-ten-big-12-revenue-fell-pandemic/9855686002/
If the Big 10 presidents are thinking this through strategically, they will realize the alumni base in NorCal is relatively large from their schools and relatively wealthy. An opportunity to fly out each fall due to a Cal or Stanford game and meet and develop relationships with those alums can lead to monies that can make faculty back home very happy.
That said, unclear what they are thinking or how much control they may have over this vs the Big 10 ADs and media powers.
I doubt there are *that* many Big Ten alums in Northern California who can be reached only by having them come to a football game against two non-spectacular teams. But it's a nice thought -- Stanford and Cal need every possible argument why the Big Ten would want them.
IMO, Stanford's ticket in is with ND. I think as a single partner for ND it's better than 50/50 shot and if it's more than 1 partner with ND than I'd say close to 100% shot.
Of course, we don't know if ND will go with the Big Ten; and maybe ND won't care about Stanford that much. But if Stanford comes, it makes sense for Cal to come too so there's an even number of west coast teams. But wold the Big Ten accept both as the price of getting ND? Who knows?
The argument for Stanford is easy, Gavin Newsom can't do diddly to prevent it.
He's on the Board of Regents. He may not block it in the end, but he could try.
That doesn't mean squat. He'll gauge his response based on what gets him votes. Not unique.
Right, but it's hard to see why blocking UCLA gets him votes. But it's California, so who knows? Usually the governor does not have that much sway over the Board of Regents because members serve for very long terms. Even Reagan, despite being in office for two terms and being very popular, didn't always get his way.
Its not that the alums go to the game, but rather that they are concentrated here so that you can do things like hold receptions for them and the like centered around game times. For sure in the industries I am tied to in Silicon Valley, the B1G Ten is well represented. Michigan, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, Penn State are among the top of the pack in the area. In addition, you want to build relationships with institutions in the area that may donate too. For example, Michigan, Illinois, and Purdue have strong CS and Engineering programs that may attract the likes of some of the big Silicon Valley players. On the Life Sciences / Biotech side, this area and Boston are neck and neck and have money to expand towards research at places outside of the area.
The football games are a "forcing function" for the school to have constant contact with alums and key contacts with money. Those consistent relationships "forced" by annual games out here may become a primary driver of getting money from them.
UCLA is going to go regardless. The Regents don't have the power to stop that move. What they may be able to do is put pressure on UCLA to advocate for Cal. The carrot/stick may be some tie to some financials in other ways that may be non-athletic. Unclear how effective that will be, but as noted Cal has to use every advantage it can get to land in a better spot. Stanford's will have the ND or Cal route (meaning one or the other will likely get them a seat). For Cal, just because Stanford gets a seat does not mean it will get a seat.
The current conventional wisdom is that UCLA will be compelled to use some of its gain to help Cal pay off its huge stadium debt. The Regents could stop the move -- the Regents in the UC system can do anything -- but they'll settle for something short of that.
I think ND is unlikely to go to the Big Ten yet, and I'm not at all convinced they'll care about Stanford. If they do, then Cal might get in as Stanford's traditional rival and as a way of having an even number of West Coast teams. If Notre Dame doesn't go to the Big Ten, then my guess is that two more Pacific Coast teams will be invited so that USC/UCLA have less travel. But those teams can as easily be Washington/Oregon as Cal/Stanford. An argument can be made for either pair. Which matters more -- having the better programs that Washington/Oregon do, or, by having Cal/Stanford, getting the Bay Area/Sacramento market in the way Rutgers brings the NYC market? I don't think there's an obvious answer to that.
Surplus……… all gone
How Newsom solves California budget that went from a $97.5 billion surplus to $31.5 billion deficit
California went from $97.5 billion budget surplus to $31.5 billion deficit in a year.
www.mercurynews.com
A
anon_ivydyf0amkzay
Guest
It’s funny to hear someone call commiefornia the cultural capital of not only the us but the world…lol…how hilariously naive! 🤭Surplus……… all gone
How Newsom solves California budget that went from a $97.5 billion surplus to $31.5 billion deficit
California went from $97.5 billion budget surplus to $31.5 billion deficit in a year.
There was never a surplus. It was fuzzy math and lies.Surplus……… all gone
How Newsom solves California budget that went from a $97.5 billion surplus to $31.5 billion deficit
California went from $97.5 billion budget surplus to $31.5 billion deficit in a year.
Now the tax base os leaving in droves. America, I hope you like bailing out Ca
Just read WA & OR vetted for B1G membership
Seems likely these 2 schools are the best options to join B1G. Kind of odd to have both Nike & UnderArmour in same conference
Seems likely these 2 schools are the best options to join B1G. Kind of odd to have both Nike & UnderArmour in same conference
Yea saw that a couple days ago. It was a McMurphy report.
He says the B10 doesn’t want to kill the PAC12 off and needs the B12 to take some schools, Colorado and/or Arizona, first plus it would give the B10 even more leverage than they would already have.
Personally, I think it most likely will happen anyway down the line regardless of the B12 taking schools or not, just probably not soon without the B12 poaching schools. Every time a tv contract comes up is an opportunity for it. They may not do it all at once for the reason of not destroying the PAC12. But the same way the ACC did it to the BE piecemeal over time so can the B10 come around years down the line and take schools.
Similar threads
