Jump to content

Will streaming minimize?


Wag Tag

Recommended Posts

It's the right question. We've had our first test case in the post ESPN-Fox merger world, and the AAC got an interesting deal. Good money, no grant of rights. First some basic information: Conference/revenue per school/rightsholder. How many years the deal is for isn't included because no conference will actually see the end of the current deals.

AAC: $6.9 million (ESPN)
C-USA: $400,000 (CBS/Stadium/ESPN/Facebook)
MAC: $670,000 (ESPN)
Mountain West: $1.1 million (CBS/ESPN)
Sun Belt: $350,000 (ESPN)

The new agreements for AAC and the Sun Belt, minus a game a week, is all about ESPN+. ESPN has already indicated it's going to charge much more for the service in the very near future, and that contract is an indication of that. A question for the ESPN-only conferences is how will a paywall affect viewership and exposure for their programs. AAC gets to be the guinea pig now that the Sun Belt showed the technology worked. 

So far, re-negotiations have generally increased the payout 3-5x, with the C-USA being the one outlier because of how fragmented it is. 

So far streaming has lead to a marked increase in the fees paid to schools. What happens next is out of any conference's hands - does ESPN try to lock down a monopoly? Does Stadium decide to start growing by pursuing the Mountain and C-USA?

But the biggest question is Facebook. If it came between more money and a paywall vs. less money and a place on everyone's news feed... I would be tempted to go with the latter. 

So the answer to the questions are: will people pay at least $14.99/mo for games? Will Facebook decide to go all-in? What is Stadium's model? The AAC and the C-USA may both end up being guinea pigs for the two sides of this debate.

  • Thanks 1
  • Ray 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Legend500 said:

It's the right question. We've had our first test case in the post ESPN-Fox merger world, and the AAC got an interesting deal. Good money, no grant of rights. First some basic information: Conference/revenue per school/rightsholder. How many years the deal is for isn't included because no conference will actually see the end of the current deals.

AAC: $6.9 million (ESPN)
C-USA: $400,000 (CBS/Stadium/ESPN/Facebook)
MAC: $670,000 (ESPN)
Mountain West: $1.1 million (CBS/ESPN)
Sun Belt: $350,000 (ESPN)

The new agreements for AAC and the Sun Belt, minus a game a week, is all about ESPN+. ESPN has already indicated it's going to charge much more for the service in the very near future, and that contract is an indication of that. A question for the ESPN-only conferences is how will a paywall affect viewership and exposure for their programs. AAC gets to be the guinea pig now that the Sun Belt showed the technology worked. 

So far, re-negotiations have generally increased the payout 3-5x, with the C-USA being the one outlier because of how fragmented it is. 

So far streaming has lead to a marked increase in the fees paid to schools. What happens next is out of any conference's hands - does ESPN try to lock down a monopoly? Does Stadium decide to start growing by pursuing the Mountain and C-USA?

But the biggest question is Facebook. If it came between more money and a paywall vs. less money and a place on everyone's news feed... I would be tempted to go with the latter. 

So the answer to the questions are: will people pay at least $14.99/mo for games? Will Facebook decide to go all-in? What is Stadium's model? The AAC and the C-USA may both end up being guinea pigs for the two sides of this debate.

I have been paying for ESPN+ from the get go. I am a die hard sports fan. I am canceling my subscription because I don't use it. ESPN+ will fail and it will fail hard if charging 14.99 a month. The Long Horn Network failed hard. The SEC network is failing. 

ESPN+ is gobbling up material to fill it's catalog. If every fan of the AAC pays for a subscription it still will not be enough to cover the price to have AAC on ESPN+. Paying 14.99 a month to watch Wednesday night hockey or UFC undercards isn't going to work. If as a casual college football fan just watching CBS, FOX, and ABC is enough.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we are banking on any version of a broadcast tv deal, we’re betting on the wrong horse. ESPN+ may not be the answer, but we’d be smart to lean into streaming platform deals. Like it or not, the cord is already cut for the largest, and only growing, segment of sports watchers. 

If we get the infrastructure in place early, get the right promotion tools figured out, and start thinking “digital-first” — meaning get clever with all the tools streaming viewers have to interact with us during the game and after — we’ll be in a great position when the old system comes crashing down. 

IM-very biased-O.

 

  • Upvote 6
  • Skeptical Eagle 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/5/2019 at 12:22 PM, RiseUNT said:

I have been paying for ESPN+ from the get go. I am a die hard sports fan. I am canceling my subscription because I don't use it. ESPN+ will fail and it will fail hard if charging 14.99 a month. The Long Horn Network failed hard. The SEC network is failing. 

ESPN+ is gobbling up material to fill it's catalog. If every fan of the AAC pays for a subscription it still will not be enough to cover the price to have AAC on ESPN+. Paying 14.99 a month to watch Wednesday night hockey or UFC undercards isn't going to work. If as a casual college football fan just watching CBS, FOX, and ABC is enough.

 

The SEC network is hardly failing. The SEC and the B1G Networks are doing very well. It’ll be interesting to see how the ACC Network does. But the PAC network has been a colossal failure, and the LHN is a network fail, but a huge money grab for UT.

Our future has more to do with regional realignment to lower costs and get more attendance. That’s the only hope for the SBCUSA schools. They need to copy the MWC and the MAC...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/5/2019 at 11:22 AM, RiseUNT said:

I have been paying for ESPN+ from the get go. I am a die hard sports fan. I am canceling my subscription because I don't use it. ESPN+ will fail and it will fail hard if charging 14.99 a month. The Long Horn Network failed hard. The SEC network is failing. 

ESPN+ is gobbling up material to fill it's catalog. If every fan of the AAC pays for a subscription it still will not be enough to cover the price to have AAC on ESPN+. Paying 14.99 a month to watch Wednesday night hockey or UFC undercards isn't going to work. If as a casual college football fan just watching CBS, FOX, and ABC is enough.

 

I had it during football season and it was only $4.99 a month. Pretty sure it's still at that price. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, meanrob said:

I had it during football season and it was only $4.99 a month. Pretty sure it's still at that price. 

It is.
For now.
But not for long if they're paying the American that, unless Time Warner really wants to blow millions broadcasting an SMU-UCONN game on Thursday at 6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.