When did the BTN come to this area?
- Thread starter retired711
- Start date
Well you asked for it, and later it was shown in this link. My memory was pretty good, as I said it was about .90 per household back then and it actually was $1.00 per Household and now it's up to $1.50 per household as told in the USC/UCLA expansion
"Let’s do a little quick “back of the napkin math” on this massive victory for BTN. At last check, the channel charges a $1.00 fee per subscriber per month for those customers within the conference footprint, which NY/NJ now falls into thanks to Rutgers."
and this...
"Back in 2012, Sports Illustrated prophetically estimated that the Big Ten could make $200 million annually from television money on the east coast. And that number may now be on the low end of the spectrum."
Big Ten Network hits the NYC jackpot worth tens of millions of dollars
amp.awfulannouncing.com
Thanks for finding the "proof" !
yes, in full disclosure, that's correct. RU isn't my home team.
but that has nothing to do with anything i posted, nor do i think RU isn't a great institution that belongs in a major conference..
other than financially, are you better off today than when in the Big East?
that's probably very debatable, and i'll let RU fans decide that.
that said, is Neb better off now than when in the B12, or Mizzou? to date, hard no on both.
both were far stronger programs when in the B12.
same with Colorado imo, they were better off in the B12 as well.
as for UMd, certainly no better off now than when in the ACC.
and no, i don't judge better or worse off just on money, as that would be idiotic other than to the small handful at any school that's pocketing the money.
and not one fan, student, faculty member, alum, or even player, ever sees one cent of that tv money, not one cent ever, so it would be very wrong headed to gauge a program or school as better or worse off according to just money.
are the programs themselves better off, is how i judge.
Last edited:
Do you think he is going to admit he was wrong like he said?
i'vegotwinners said:
please share with us that link where BTN is getting $1.50 mo per sub in NYC.
good luck with that.
no doubt BTN was hoping that would happen, but i highly doubt it did, and had it happened, no doubt Fox/BTN would have made that public.
BTN had no real leverage in NYC, so i'd be shocked if they were getting "in state" per sub fees in NYC.
my guess is that BTN settled for getting on expanded basic, up from the sports tier, but did so without getting the "in state" fees it hoped for, and that the jump to expanded basic was probably close to revenue neutral from what BTN was already pulling out of NYC.
had the B10/Fox gotten the per sub fees they wanted, they would have made that public, because they always did so prior to that.
that they didn't go public with the outcome of the negotiations, and the negotiations being so public, tells me they didn't.
i would have been shocked had they, because like i said, they pretty much had no leverage.
first off, NYC isn't "in state", which has generally been the dividing line, not "in market".
and RU isn't really "in market" anyway in NYC, the way it is in the midwest.
just because RU is in the NYC market, doesn't mean NYC is in the RU market.
and lastly, imho the cable guys were only going to pay that with a gun to their head, which BTN couldn't provide in NYC.
everywhere else, subs switching to satellite, Directv or Dish Net, if they couldn't get BTN through their cable provider, was always the leverage.
A), in NYC, not that many subs care about RU enough that they would switch providers just to get BTN, even if they could.
B), a good percent of NYC subs don't have the option of switching to satellite, even if they wanted to.
i said at the time that no way would BTN get "in state" fees out of NYC, for the reasons i just mentioned.
they just didn't have the leverage imo.
provide evidence that they did, and i'll gladly admit i was wrong.
i'vegotwinners said:
obviously i have many times the grasp of subject that you do. (and that you didn't begin to understand my DBS reference, and the part it plays in everything we're discussing, shows you're totally clueless on the subject).
and let me know when you can verify even 90 cents per mo per sub for BTN in NYC.
good luck with that.
and when you can't verify, try and grasp why you can't.
sorry guys, but someone projecting what the B10 would gain if NYC providers agreed to pay "in state/in market", (which has never been out of state anywhere in the conference), BTN carriage fees, isn't the same as a link that NYC cable guys actually are paying "in state" fees.
and btw, pretty sure that article was dated prior to BTN ever inking anything with NYC cable guys, as i'm pretty sure the NYC negotiations were still going on in May 2014.
NYC cable guys aren't paying "in state/in market" BTN fees in NYC.
NJ, yes. NYC, no.
there's a good reason you guys can't find a credible link that BTN is getting "in state" fees in NYC.
it's because they aren't.
and absent prior contractual language otherwise, which i highly doubt, if USC and UCLA do join the B10, there is absolutely zero guarantee how much BTN will or won't get in the LA area from LA cable/satellite/streaming guys.
ZERO GUARANTEES.
the cable/satellite/streaming guys will fight BTN to the death on that, just like in NYC.
as they should.
how much BTN will get in LA, will be how much can they force out of the area cable/satellite/streaming guys, and not a cent more.
and i doubt it will be anywhere close to what BTN gets in the midwest, where there is probably far greater fan attachment to the schools than in LA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
and again, don't conflate RU being in the NYC market, with NYC being in the RU market.
they aren't the same thing.
one could walk around NYC all day, and not see anyone in RU gear, any more than they'd see Mich or OSU or IU or PSU gear, which is slim to almost none at that.
walk around a lot of midwest towns/cities, and you'll see multiple people in B10 gear almost every block you walk, with maybe Chicago being the exception..
BTN had no leverage in NYC. it has nothing to do with RU as school.
how much more they'll have in greater LA, i know not, but it won't be anyway near what they have in the midwest, and how much leverage is literally all that matters.
Last edited:
When was the last time you walked around NYC? I was partners in a bar on the UES for many years. Most of the bars are sold out on football weekends and most were B1G schools renting out the establishment. And that has been going on for more than 25 years. Visibility has only increased since RU and UMD joined the conference. NYC is very much a B1G city.
no, it isn't.
not compared to midwest cities in the slightest.
and a sold out bar is what percent of the NYC population?
the SEC and ACC schools have bars on game day too.. that doesn't make NYC an SEC or ACC city either, compared to southeast and south cities.
and we're not discussing whether NYC is a B10 city anyway, we're discussing it being an RU city the way midwest cities support their home schools.
sorry, but BTN isn't getting "in state" BTN fees in NYC.
and btw, NYC ISN'T "in state" for RU.
if it is, i'm sure some NYC RU students will want some tuition rebate.
Last edited:
Didn’t answer the question just keep deflecting. You said and I quote “one could walk around NYC all day, and not see anyone in RU gear, any more than they'd see Mich or OSU or IU or PSU gear, which is slim to almost none at that.”
Sure you can walk around Midwest cities and see B1G teams logos. So out of the ordinary to walk around Iowa city, Columbus,Champlain and see college gear.
See what I did there. Those schools are in Midwest cities. Rutgers doesn’t have to be NYC’s team or you don’t have to see RU logos everywhere to get the value. The reason RU was brought Into the B1G was to get the B1G and “all their universities” greater access and better monetization of the NYC demo. But I think you knew that.
no, it wasn't. the B10 already was in NYC, and every other market, just like the SEC was.
the B10 took UMd hoping they would be the first domino to fall, then get UNC and UVa, while the SEC takes Clemson and FSU, and take out the ACC as a competitor for tv rights.
RU was taken to keep them from going to the ACC.
the goal was to take out the ACC.
same with raiding the B12. the goal was to take out the B12 as a competitor.
the real money, was in reducing the number of major conferences.
the B10 and SEC were already in every market, and already had a nationwide revenue model. (i doubt BTN gets anymore out of NYC today than the SEC Net does).
the NFL negotiates as a monopoly.
the B10, SEC, and PAC, at the time, wanted to reduce the number of conferences to three, and negotiate with networks from there.
as close to the NFL's monopoly as they thought they could get at the time.
looks like they have their sights set on a 2 conference duopoly now.
"RU was taken to keep them from going to the ACC." I do not remember any serious consideration on the part of either Rutgers or the ACC of this. Indeed, the ACC had passed over Rutgers in taking Boston College and Syracuse. At least that's my recollection.
that was before the B10 took UMd.
when the B 10 took UMd, the ACC would have taken RU had the B10 not.
the B 10 was hoping UMd would be the first domino to fall, and UNC, UVa, Clemson, FSU, would follow and take out the ACC as major competitor for tv rights.
the B10 didn't want RU to the ACC fowling that up.
didn't happen anyway.
yet.
As I said it was about getting access and exposure as well as increasing the marketability of the conference.
You’re a character. You get shown the door on one of your arguments you open a new one. Keep moving the goal post.
Why don’t you hang out on your own school/teams board?
I bet your shtick got old there too.
You do a lot of talking and none of it is factual.
what was i wrong on?
nothing.
and i never moved any goal post one inch.
BTN isn't getting "in state" fees in NYC. deal with it.
there's a reason there is no link that says it is. only ones that speculated about it before contracts were signed.
Now you’re confusing which argument your having and with whom. You started so much shite on this board you can’t keep it straight. The argument your having with me was that the B1G was not represented with fans in NYC.
Your act is old. You are getting taken to the woodshed on 3 separate threads on this board. Time to leave and go to your own board.
i said BTN isn't getting "in state" fees in NYC.
it isn't, no matter how much you guys want it to.
and news flash, RU isn't in NY state, and NYC isn't in NJ.
no where is BTN getting "in state" fees out of state.
no where!
let me guess, you guys also are sure Trump won the election, forest fires are from Jewish space lasers, and JFK and JFK Jr are cruising Dallas these days.
amazing how vehemently people will debate a subject they know absolutely zero about, because they think they read something somewhere sometime.
Last edited:
Again that argument wasn't with me. You are off the rails. Now you're talking about politics. Keep changing the conversation. Just go away.
