elimunelson
Solvay Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 5,908
- Like
- 11,745
NM
That is way lower than expected, isn't it?NM
Forgive the responding to my own post but The Athletic says the dollar amount corresponds to a number an ESPN article quoted not long ago.That is way lower than expected, isn't it?
This article was projecting $1.9 billion a year.
CFP expansion could increase annual revenue to $2 billion
A new College Football Playoff with triple the number of teams involved could bring in three times as much money to the conferences and schools that share the wealth.apnews.com
Experts please weigh in. Everyone on this board can comment as well.
The guy you responded to is wrong a lotForgive the responding to my own post but The Athletic says the dollar amount corresponds to a number an ESPN article quoted not long ago.
CFP, ESPN agree to 6-year, $7.8 billion extension: Sources
The full contract’s completion is still contingent on CFP leaders finalizing details of the expanded format.theathletic.com
Not so sure about that. Isn’t the bulk of the contracts Tier 1 rights? Those rights are network TV and not the cable model. The cable is Tier 2.Glad to see the values starting to taper off. I expect that with cable cutting moving to streaming that the days of massive contract increases are over. Increase yes, crazy bidding no.
My thinking too. From a business perspective making 30 schools stand alone as opposed to 60, 100, just doesn't make sense. It limits the potential buyers tremendously. I can't see how the remaining states rally around a product that doesn't represent them.Possible that the growing presence of the Power 2 has thrown the security of a sure thing into question and the price reflects that?
I'm no expert, but NYT did a study that highlighted how much revenue ESPN was receiving from cable subscribers who don't watch sports. I think ESPN receives around $10-$15 a month from you cable subscription. NYT concluded that ESPN would have to receive $50 per streaming subscriber just to break-even on their costs (if cable went away).
I'm no expert in Tier 1/2 rights, but I assume even network TV is hurting since all of them (I believe) have a conglomerate of channels that are at least somewhat exposed to cable subscriptions.
It's a model that has been propped up with non-sports watchers. It will be interesting to see how the networks can solve it. I know personally, I love sports (like everyone on here), but paying $50 a month, or $600 a year, to stream ESPN, seems a little steep (Disney+/Netflix/etc, price increases already give me pause)