Started By
Message
re: Expansion Options
Posted on 11/21/12 at 4:28 pm to Scoob
Posted on 11/21/12 at 4:28 pm to Scoob
You really don't understand the motivations of conference expansion do you? Nor do you understand anything about how the TV contracts work or about how the money is made, both currently or in the future.
Your argument makes logical sense to the casual observer, I agree with that much, but it is tremendously far off in terms of financial realities.
This isn't about "people actually watching the games." It is about "people demanding the games(SEC network) in a given viewing area as part of their basic cable package" thus allowing the price/subscriber to be driven up. In this regard, OU brings about 1/5 of the $$ to the table that aTm does. Now, they make up some of the difference in tier 1(CBS games) appeal, but it is not even CLOSE to enough to overcome the previous deficit.
This will be obvious when the reworked tier 1(CBS) and tier 2(ESPN) SEC contract is revealed. I'm betting that the increases are minimal in tier 1(aTm not bringing a ton of national appeal) but MUCH more substantial on tier 2(which is a much larger portion of the total contract anyway)... but tier 3 is where the MEGAbucks lie in the future...and also an aspect in which OU brings VERY little to the table.
LINK / This explains it somewhat(about the SEC adding Mizzou and aTm). We were already outpacing everyone else by 25% in football viewership before this addition. It'll be 40% plus now. That means we should(and will) make 40% more total tv revenue than everyone else once all the pieces are in place...
Your argument makes logical sense to the casual observer, I agree with that much, but it is tremendously far off in terms of financial realities.
This isn't about "people actually watching the games." It is about "people demanding the games(SEC network) in a given viewing area as part of their basic cable package" thus allowing the price/subscriber to be driven up. In this regard, OU brings about 1/5 of the $$ to the table that aTm does. Now, they make up some of the difference in tier 1(CBS games) appeal, but it is not even CLOSE to enough to overcome the previous deficit.
This will be obvious when the reworked tier 1(CBS) and tier 2(ESPN) SEC contract is revealed. I'm betting that the increases are minimal in tier 1(aTm not bringing a ton of national appeal) but MUCH more substantial on tier 2(which is a much larger portion of the total contract anyway)... but tier 3 is where the MEGAbucks lie in the future...and also an aspect in which OU brings VERY little to the table.
LINK / This explains it somewhat(about the SEC adding Mizzou and aTm). We were already outpacing everyone else by 25% in football viewership before this addition. It'll be 40% plus now. That means we should(and will) make 40% more total tv revenue than everyone else once all the pieces are in place...
This post was edited on 11/21/12 at 4:38 pm
Posted on 11/21/12 at 5:11 pm to engie
quote:No, I don't. I freely admit that. Pretty sure only a select few do; otherwise most conferences would be successful.
You really don't understand the motivations of conference expansion do you? Nor do you understand anything about how the TV contracts work or about how the money is made, both currently or in the future.
Explain why the B1G took Nebraska? Why did the Pac 12 take Utah?
The B1G just made it to 16. You know, you can go on yacking about the SEC network if you like; I'm not buying it. I'll likely tune into the big game on ESPN or CBS. Hey- you know what? THAT'S the SEC. You know what else? The SEC will want that to continue. Oh, and the B1G, the Big 12, and others will want it NOT TO. Interestingly, the ACC just might have angled into NBC's deal with Notre Dame.
Adding Oklahoma to the SEC equation adds to our attractiveness, to ESPN. OU-Bama/UGA/Fla/LSU gives the league yet another marquee game to push, driving the SEC price higher.
Keep your conference networks if you like. I like the big network exposure and money.
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News