Breaking Oregon and Washington to the B1G

[Herbie]

Perhaps we have different definitions, here. Neither school is getting a full share and the existing schools in the conference are getting less base money (in theory made up for the extra bowl money distribution). Doesn’t sound like Fox ponied up.

If you’re saying they gave some money, then yes that appears to be the case. But they didn’t go out of their way to make this happen.

Thought I saw fox ponied up and paid to add them but they didn’t go after nbc and cbs for more

 

[Carm]

If you’re saying they gave some money, then yes that appears to be the case. But they didn’t go out of their way to make this happen.

they didn't have to - the Pac 12 was falling apart and they were available on the cheap. Based on the numbers it is completely possible they paid their entire half-share - the statement that members "would likely view this as a 2M reduction in the share" suggests it is travel cost and not an explicit share reduction.

They would not be in if Fox didn't cover a significant part of the cost, and Fox/CBS/NBC wouldn't pay 70-80M a year for them - they'd lose money.

 

[Alum-Ni]

The SEC would have moved to 9 games if ESPN would have paid for it. They didn’t. Fox didn’t pony up to add UO or UW. I have a feeling they aren’t going to pay for more right now.

That's because they won't change their existing contract.....and I doubt FOX will either for the Big Ten. But on the next (new) contract, the additional game would bring in substantially more revenue.

 

[Kaladin]

here comes Cal

 

[Frogsker30]

here comes Cal

cal to the MWC

 

[That SOB Van Owen]

We took Buttgers for the NYC TV market. Seems logical to take cal/furd for the Bay Area market (yes no one watches them but no one watches buttgers either). Plus you get the 👩‍🏫 🤓 bullshit too.

 

[Baron Winnebago]

It feels like Comcast losing 12% of their cable subscribers in the last year is relevant

 

[LoudHogRider]

We took Buttgers for the NYC TV market. Seems logical to take cal/furd for the Bay Area market (yes no one watches them but no one watches buttgers either). Plus you get the 👩‍🏫 🤓 bullshit too.

Has it been settled whether UCLAbia (and possibly) Cal can even travel to many of the existing B1G member states yet? IIRC, Governor Gav has made state sponsored travel to states whose politics don't align with California's verboten. USC (and possibly Stanford) are private universities, so there may be some wiggle room there, but I'm not sure the matter is as settled as "the science", which apparently HAS been settled.

 

[LoudHogRider]

It feels like Comcast losing 12% of their cable subscribers in the last year is relevant

Most have simply switched to YTTV, Hulu, Sling, FUBO or some other form of internet driven (aka streaming) cable. The fees from those streaming cable packages still count towards the conference fees assessed to their subscribers, it's just being delivered over a different mechanism.

 

[Jim14510]

It feels like Comcast losing 12% of their cable subscribers in the last year is relevant

What percentage of people are still on cable or dish? What market is the B1G network not at least part of a package? Would think the following of teams is more important than the geographic location now. In 5 years? 10 years?

 

[Jim14510]

Most have simply switched to YTTV, Hulu, Sling, FUBO or some other form of internet driven (aka streaming) cable. The fees from those streaming cable packages still count towards the conference fees assessed to their subscribers, it's just being delivered over a different mechanism.

What do they use for boundaries?

 

[Baron Winnebago]

Most have simply switched to YTTV, Hulu, Sling, FUBO or some other form of internet driven (aka streaming) cable. The fees from those streaming cable packages still count towards the conference fees assessed to their subscribers, it's just being delivered over a different mechanism.

Even if it's "most", you are still losing some fraction of cord cutters who never watched your product, but paid for BTN. I think you're mostly right, but any "slippage" is going to cost money. Maybe the Big Ten is better positioned by moving off of ESPN properties as those are hurt the most by cable cord cutting

 

[Carm]

What percentage of people are still on cable or dish? What market is the B1G network not at least part of a package? Would think the following of teams is more important than the geographic location now. In 5 years? 10 years?

I don't have cable or Dish. I do frequently use a Spectrum app. I have apps for a number of other streaming services as well. I wonder how app data is interpreted.

There are lots of large metro areas with a large number of B1G alumni, such as San Franciso, NY, DC. Those would be fertile markets to develop. You have to believe that many people don't simply watch their favorite team - they also watch conference games that impact that team.

 

[Carm]

Even if it's "most", you are still losing some fraction of cord cutters who never watched your product, but paid for BTN. I think you're mostly right, but any "slippage" is going to cost money. Maybe the Big Ten is better positioned by moving off of ESPN properties as those are hurt the most by cable cord cutting

I think we'll see this in the next media contract in 2030. I doubt it increases in value very much. Another reason is that ESPN is crippled and is a weaker competitor to Fox. Fox will try to keep more of the margin for itself.

 

[LoudHogRider]

What do they use for boundaries?

If you're referring to geographical boundaries, it doesn't matter in the same sense that traditional cable mattered. It's simply a question of does the streaming tv package you're currently using carry the BTN ... or ESPN ... and if it does, the streaming tv provider still pays carriage fees, which ultimately trickle back to the content owner. In the case of the B1G, that's Fox and the B1G conference and it's member institutions.

Even if it's "most", you are still losing some fraction of cord cutters who never watched your product, but paid for BTN. I think you're mostly right, but any "slippage" is going to cost money. Maybe the Big Ten is better positioned by moving off of ESPN properties as those are hurt the most by cable cord cutting

I think the larger impact is the "seasonality" of streaming TV content providers. Let's face it: one of the things we all hated about cable, DirecTV, DISH, etc. was getting stabbed in the ass with a two-year contract so you could watch sports. It's a 30 day contract with the streaming TV content providers, so there are many fans who simply switch it off when CFB season is over. Those fees aren't being generated for 7 months out of the year for the conferences in that case, and THAT'S a YUGE hit to their wallets.

 

[Jim14510]

It's simply a question of does the streaming tv package you're currently using carry the BTN ... or ESPN

So all of them?

 

[Baron Winnebago]

I think we'll see this in the next media contract in 2030. I doubt it increases in value very much. Another reason is that ESPN is crippled and is a weaker competitor to Fox. Fox will try to keep more of the margin for itself.

Media partners need concessions to keep the money going up. These concessions I suspect will likely take the form of more games on subscription based streaming services

 

[huskerj12]

Going to a 10 game conference schedule might make the conference more TV money, but I feel like it would take decades for that to matter within the actual sport. Big 10 teams would theoretically make more money than SEC teams, but the tradeoff would be more "good" teams finishing seasons at 7-5 or 8-4, while the same caliber SEC teams continue to finish at 9-3 or 10-2.

The public perception (which includes recruits) would be that, yeah you can watch more Big 10 matchups on tv, and maybe some Big 10 teams have nicer weight rooms or richer coaches, but the SEC teams win more games and send more teams to the playoff. Personally, that's what I want. I don't care at all about how many MORE zillion dollars we can add to our coffers, I want to win games.

 

[LoudHogRider]

So all of them?

No. Not all of them. As an example, Sling carries a "Blue" package and an "Orange" package. One is Fox/BTN centric and the other is ABC/ESPN centric.

 

[iruletheskool]

We took Buttgers for the NYC TV market. Seems logical to take cal/furd for the Bay Area market (yes no one watches them but no one watches buttgers either). Plus you get the 👩‍🏫 🤓 bullshit too.

That was also in an age before everyone Cut the Cord fwiw