Fairly Optimistic Prediction for ACC Network...

[sutomcat]

Predictions: The deals of 2019

...
The ACC Network launch will be considered a modified success.
The ACC Network’s launch will look more like that of the Big Ten Network — which endured a couple of years of brutal carriage fights — than the launch of the SEC Network — which nearly had full distribution from the start. ESPN already has a negotiating blueprint thanks to its Altice deal. Plus, you won’t find a better distribution executive than Justin Connolly, who was behind the SEC Network’s launch. It won’t be an unqualified success, but it will be good enough to keep schools happy.
...

 

[OrangePA]

Good news!

Should be fun.

 

[GonzoInMD]

I just got an email from Verizon saying that Disney is insisting that the ACC Network be included to get all their other network channels such as ABC and ESPN .

 

[sutomcat]

I just got an email from Verizon saying that Disney is insisting that the ACC Network be included to get all their other network channels such as ABC and ESPN .

Yup. Verizon's agreement with Disney for content is expiring at the end of this month. This will be a big hurdle for the ACC Network. It is another major milestone ad bares a close watch.

ESPN, Disney channels could go dark for Verizon Fios customers | What it means for NFL playoffs, College Football Playoff national championship

 

[sutomcat]

Yup. Verizon's agreement with Disney for content is expiring at the end of this month. This will be a big hurdle for the ACC Network. It is another major milestone ad bares a close watch.

ESPN, Disney channels could go dark for Verizon Fios customers | What it means for NFL playoffs, College Football Playoff national championship

More...

Disney and Verizon Fios prep for potential carriage standoff right before NFL and CFB playoffs

 

[NKR1978]

Yup. Verizon's agreement with Disney for content is expiring at the end of this month. This will be a big hurdle for the ACC Network. It is another major milestone ad bares a close watch.

ESPN, Disney channels could go dark for Verizon Fios customers | What it means for NFL playoffs, College Football Playoff national championship

This is where being in bed with Disney/ESPN is insanely helpful. Disney being able to package all of its networks is such a great advantage to the ACC Network.

 

[nzm136]

This is where being in bed with Disney/ESPN is insanely helpful. Disney being able to package all of its networks is such a great advantage to the ACC Network.

Maybe. It’s not a disadvantage (or they just wouldn’t do it), but cost savings from avoiding duplicative negotiations aside, bundling may or may not be a great advantage. It all depends on elasticities and the characteristics of each channel’s consumers.

However, the equation isn’t as easy as “Disney is big, therefore it’s good.”

 

[NKR1978]

Maybe. It’s not a disadvantage (or they just wouldn’t do it), but cost savings from avoiding duplicative negotiations aside, bundling may or may not be a great advantage. It all depends on elasticities and the characteristics of each channel’s consumers.

However, the equation isn’t as easy as “Disney is big, therefore it’s good.”

Well, Disney packaging ABC, the Disney Channel and ESPN together and insisting Fios take the ACC Network in order to receive all of the more popular networks is a good thing. Seems like pretty normal negotiation tactics.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

I just got an email from Verizon saying that Disney is insisting that the ACC Network be included to get all their other network channels such as ABC and ESPN .

This way, Verizon can raise everyone's rates. Even the people who have no interest in the ACCN.

 

[SURules]

This way, Verizon can raise everyone's rates. Even the people who have no interest in the ACCN.

I pay for the BTN a now as a “package” and have no interest in that.

 

[reedny]

I pay for the BTN a now as a “package” and have no interest in that.

I have BTN and SEC through Spectrum, via the "Silver" package. Like you, these are forced down my throat and neither has any connection to NYS. In fact, for many cable subscribers living upstate - SU's prime viewing area - the Jury's out on whether the ACCN will be available. If Spectrum and other upstate NY carriers adopt it, life will be good. If not, there will be torches and pitchforks in front of Spectrum headquarters.

 

[Toga]

Is it fair to say that any deal between Disney (ACC Network inclusion) and FIOS will be the benchmark for other carriers?

 

[orangepassion]

Hope it's on sling

 

[Jake]

It will make no difference, but this was fun to send.

 

[Toga]

It will make no difference, but this was fun to send.View attachment 148453

I tweeted pretty much the same thing to them.

 

[Halfmooncuse]

I have BTN and SEC through Spectrum, via the "Silver" package. Neither, of course, is my choice, or has any connection to NYS. In fact, for many cable subscribers living upstate - SU's prime viewing area - the Jury's out on whether the ACCN will be available. If Spectrum and other upstate NY carriers adopt it, life will be good. If not, we'll be twisting in the wind and there will be a torch line in front of Spectrum headquarters.

I thought spectrum is being kicked out of NYS

 

[JeremyCuse]

I thought spectrum is being kicked out of NYS

It was all a big circus to get them to reach a settlement with the state. They were never leaving the state.

 

[KaiserUEO]

If I lose Disney and ESPN over this stupid ACC Network...there will be more than hell to pay.

 

[Cusefan95]

Well, Disney packaging ABC, the Disney Channel and ESPN together and insisting Fios take the ACC Network in order to receive all of the more popular networks is a good thing. Seems like pretty normal negotiation tactics.

In the very short term, it probably is. The issue is that this card has been played so many times to extract money from consumers with no interest in a specific product (like ESPN) because it’s part of a package which contains what they want, that bundling has gone from a decent arrangement to a bad one for consumers. It’s not the lone cause of cable cutting - but it’s a contributor.

The strategy is to continue the same tactics...but that’s not really a viable long term strategy.

 

[nzm136]

Well, Disney packaging ABC, the Disney Channel and ESPN together and insisting Fios take the ACC Network in order to receive all of the more popular networks is a good thing. Seems like pretty normal negotiation tactics.

What do you know about price elasticities and how they change as the underlying asset changes?

(Not a rhetorical question)

I can’t say whether or not the packaged assets (the channels that you listed) have a random demand pattern that will aggregate to relatively stable demand from interested cable customers. But if they don’t, negotiating cost savings aside, the package would likely cost each channel money. If they do have favorable demand characteristics, then the act of packaging would make each channel money.

Again, I personally can’t speak to whether the assets are more valuable separate or packaged, but I can definitively say that the answer isn’t as simple as saying “packaging channels creates more market power, therefore it’s always a good idea.”

 

[nzm136]

In the very short term, it probably is. The issue is that this card has been played so many times to extract money from consumers with no interest in a specific product (like ESPN) because it’s part of a package which contains what they want, that bundling has gone from a decent arrangement to a bad one for consumers. It’s not the lone cause of cable cutting - but it’s a contributor.

The strategy is to continue the same tactics...but that’s not really a viable long term strategy.

Imagine a world with 2 channels and 2 customers. Then imagine a world where each customer will pay some amount for a channel that is not necessarily the same.

SCENARIO 1:

Person A will pay:
$11 for a bundle, or $10 for Channel X and $1 for Channel Y

Person B will pay:
$6 for a bundle, or $3 for Channel X and $3 for Channel Y

The bundle price will be $6, and both will buy, generating $12 in revenue. The unbundled price for Channel X will be $10 and $3 for Channel Y, creating a revenue of $13. $1 of potential revenue was LOST by bundling in that instance.

SCENARIO 2:

Person 1 will pay $6 for a bundle, or $1 for X and $5 for Y.

Person 2 will pay $6 for a bundle, or $5 for X and $1 for Y.

The bundle will sell for $6 and create $12 in revenue. Separately, the X will sell for $5 to one person, and Y will sell for $5 to one person, creating $10 in revenue. $2 of value was CREATED by the bundle.

The real would obviously has more channels and groups of people than just 2, but the basic idea remains unchanged. Cost savings from simplified negotiations aside, there is no one answer to whether bundling creates or destroys value. Additionally, without information that nobody on this forum has, there is no way to understand the extent to which value is created or destroyed in a given circumstance. THAT uncertainty and potential to destroy value is THE issue. It’s not consumer fatigue.

 

[nzm136]

I pay for the BTN a now as a “package” and have no interest in that.

You think that you do, but you really don’t - except for the extent that the channel changes the price elasticity of the overall package. Then it would force you to pay more for the channels for which you’re currently underpaying (vs. the value that you think you get from them).

And, if you think that you’re paying more for cable than you’re getting, you are either irrational, or in the process of rendering the situation moot by dropping cable.

 

[NKR1978]

What do you know about price elasticities and how they change as the underlying asset changes?

(Not a rhetorical question)

I can’t say whether or not the packaged assets (the channels that you listed) have a random demand pattern that will aggregate to relatively stable demand from interested cable customers. But if they don’t, negotiating cost savings aside, the package would likely cost each channel money. If they do have favorable demand characteristics, then the act of packaging would make each channel money.

Again, I personally can’t speak to whether the assets are more valuable separate or packaged, but I can definitively say that the answer isn’t as simple as saying “packaging channels creates more market power, therefore it’s always a good idea.”

Literally know nothing and genuinely appreciate the information.

 

[Hokie Mark]

This way, Verizon can raise everyone's rates. Even the people who have no interest in the ACCN.

Just the idea of millions of Big Ten fans paying a dollar a month to the ACC Network puts a smile on my face!

 

[KaiserUEO]

The issue here is, now they’re with kids.

I basically need about 10 channels, everything else I can live without.

I need the 4 networks (I’m old school), the ESPNs, The Disney’s, the Nickelodeon’s, YES and MSG.

While most of the tv shows I love are not on the networks, I willingly will trade them for my kids shows and my sports.

I don’t care to watch Syracuse rowing on the ACC Network.

This is dirty, now Disney is using kids as a shield...