FSU vs The ACC

[sutomcat]

In McKenzie's take, he said it was a mandatory step in the civil process.

The civil process should not mandate extremely expensive processes in cases where it is clear the process has no chance of working.

Let’s hope McKenzie is right and the mediation process at least ends quickly. If he is right, I am thinking we should have word it failed shortly.

 

[Shoym]

I love this thread! Thanks to all for the insight!

 

[HtownOrange]

The civil process should not mandate extremely expensive processes in cases where it is clear the process has no chance of working.

Let’s hope McKenzie is right and the mediation process at least ends quickly. If he is right, I am thinking we should have word it failed shortly.

Whether this continues is really up to the judge and what he thinks he can safely do without danger of his own career and how much heat he is willing to handle. It will be interesting to see what happens.

 

[Sdot]

Haven’t said much about this or read it all but is there also a possibility our ACC contract with espn gets voided or reworked…the way espn has looked to be on a downward trajectory I wondered if they might have to make changes with the ACC

 

[SURules]

Haven’t said much about this or read it all but is there also a possibility our ACC contract with espn gets voided or reworked…the way espn has looked to be on a downward trajectory I wondered if they might have to make changes with the ACC

The simple answer is “No”. Don’t listen to the Big12 idiOT’s as they know nothing and just hate the ACC for various reasons. Simply, ESPN is making big $$$ profit off of the ACC and the ACCN. In what business mind, would anyone cut a division that makes you major $$ profit??

ESPN is managing their expenses as any business should. Don’t buy into the FSU (and a few others) narrative that the all mighty ESPN is out to get the ACC and especially FSU. It’s all BS.

 

[DoctorBombay]

The simple answer is “No”. Don’t listen to the Big12 idiOT’s as they know nothing and just hate the ACC for various reasons. Simply, ESPN is making big $$$ profit off of the ACC and the ACCN. In what business mind, would anyone cut a division that makes you major $$ profit??

ESPN is managing their expenses as any business should. Don’t buy into the FSU (and a few others) narrative that the all mighty ESPN is out to get the ACC and especially FSU. It’s all BS.

 

[Hoo's That]

This is David McKenzie’s take on the mediation process for this case.

Why the incompetent FSU law school grad judge would order mediation in a case with no chance of it being successful is beyond me. As is everything that judge does.

Hopefully this case marks the end of his career on the bench.


BTW, yesterday was the withdrawal deadline for schools wanting to leave the ACC for 2025-26. The usuall boneheads all said to expect big news by yesterday. It was finally going to happen!

Nope.

I don't think it's too far-fetched to believe that the judge is doing all this in hopes of convincing F$U that their case is hopeless and they withdraw it so he doesn't have to rule against them. Supposedly, just about every time he speaks to their lawyers in court, the tone of his voice screams, "Please withdraw this suit!"

 

[Hoo's That]

The simple answer is “No”. Don’t listen to the Big12 idiOT’s as they know nothing and just hate the ACC for various reasons. Simply, ESPN is making big $$$ profit off of the ACC and the ACCN. In what business mind, would anyone cut a division that makes you major $$ profit??

ESPN is managing their expenses as any business should. Don’t buy into the FSU (and a few others) narrative that the all mighty ESPN is out to get the ACC and especially FSU. It’s all BS.

^^This^^. If ESPN is, indeed, losing money from its other operations, they are losing less because of the profits they're making off the ACC and ACCN.

 

[orangefog]

The simple answer is “No”. Don’t listen to the Big12 idiOT’s as they know nothing and just hate the ACC for various reasons. Simply, ESPN is making big $$$ profit off of the ACC and the ACCN. In what business mind, would anyone cut a division that makes you major $$ profit??

ESPN is managing their expenses as any business should. Don’t buy into the FSU (and a few others) narrative that the all mighty ESPN is out to get the ACC and especially FSU. It’s all BS.

I agree with you, but this is a network that kept an over priced Mike Greenberg and Steven A Smith. Does anyone care about those guys or what they have to say? They could have kept a person at $200k/year that would gladly and easily do a better job.

 

[SURules]

I agree with you, but this is a network that kept an over priced Mike Greenberg and Steven A Smith. Does anyone care about those guys or what they have to say? They could have kept a person at $200k/year that would gladly and easily do a better job.

Mike Greenberg and Steven A Smith probably have good to great ratings is my bet that justified their cost even though some people, like you possibly, might not like them.

 

[sutomcat]

^^This^^. If ESPN is, indeed, losing money from its other operations, they are losing less because of the profits they're making off the ACC and ACCN.

Correct. ESPN was making money off the ACC before the ACCN was created and it continues to be profitable for them.

But the ACCN makes dumping the ACC unthinkable. Last I heard, each ACC full time member was making $11 million/year from ACCN. ND gets a partial share.

And the conference gets a share too. So the ACC gets in the neighborhood of $170 million per year from ACCN. Profits are split 50-50 with ESPN so from ACCN alone, ESPN makes about $170 million per year.

That money is going to drop over the next 12 years as people continue to cut the cord but that is offset in part by the markets ACCN has added to with higher in state carriage fees (California and Texas). It isn't going to go down a ton. Confident it will still be over $100 million per year by 2036.

So we are talking about $1.5 billion dollars (conservatively) over the rest of the ACC contract that ESPN is going to make off ACCN alone.

They can't throw that away. When you compare what the ACC makes for ESPN to what it costs them to get that programming, it has to be one of the most profitable contracts ESPN has. They will extend the contract and if they have a chance to expand the footprint of the conference during the next 12 years into areas that will increase their profits, they will act to make that happen.

This is why the B12 is in such deep trouble.

 

[TexanMark]

Correct. ESPN was making money off the ACC before the ACCN was created and it continues to be profitable for them.

But the ACCN makes dumping the ACC unthinkable. Last I heard, each ACC full time member was making $11 million/year from ACCN. ND gets a partial share.

And the conference gets a share too. So the ACC gets in the neighborhood of $170 million per year from ACCN. Profits are split 50-50 with ESPN so from ACCN alone, ESPN makes about $170 million per year.

That money is going to drop over the next 12 years as people continue to cut the cord but that is offset in part by the markets ACCN has added to with higher in state carriage fees (California and Texas). It isn't going to go down a ton. Confident it will still be over $100 million per year by 2036.

So we are talking about $1.5 billion dollars (conservatively) over the rest of the ACC contract that ESPN is going to make off ACCN alone.

They can't throw that away. When you compare what the ACC makes for ESPN to what it costs them to get that programming, it has to be one of the most profitable contracts ESPN has. They will extend the contract and if they have a chance to expand the footprint of the conference during the next 12 years into areas that will increase their profits, they will act to make that happen.

This is why the B12 is in such deep trouble.

For ACCN carriage fees, Cincy makes a ton of sense. For pure branding there are other programs worth more.

I still think a merger of the Big12 and ACC is the play. Somewhere around 32-26 teams broken up with 4 to 6 mini-divisions.

 

[Scooch]

I still think a merger of the Big12 and ACC is the play. Somewhere around 32-26 teams broken up with 4 to 6 mini-divisions.

I suspect this is the end state as well. Although I believe it'll happen after the B1G and SEC have grabbed their desired ACC schools. So we'll end up with 2 1/2 power conferences. And then a Group of 5 that's essentially one league and operates as an FBS tier 2.

 

[kcsu]

^^This^^. If ESPN is, indeed, losing money from its other operations, they are losing less because of the profits they're making off the ACC and ACCN.

When a company goes through cost cutting its called cost cutting not revenue cutting. Now what this is going to do is to make sure that any increase that ESPN provides the ACC is based on them making additional profit. So, any team that is added is most definitely going to be accretive or it isn't going to happen. In the event that FSU and Clemson do leave i can see the ACC adding schools that make up the revenue difference by adding viewers and also by agreeing to a lower payout then the current teams. The ACC can survive and actually increase the payouts to the original members if those two do leave but it will have to do so by most likely adding two to four new members who agree to a lower payout.

 

[richmondcuse03]

Correct. ESPN was making money off the ACC before the ACCN was created and it continues to be profitable for them.

But the ACCN makes dumping the ACC unthinkable. Last I heard, each ACC full time member was making $11 million/year from ACCN. ND gets a partial share.

And the conference gets a share too. So the ACC gets in the neighborhood of $170 million per year from ACCN. Profits are split 50-50 with ESPN so from ACCN alone, ESPN makes about $170 million per year.

That money is going to drop over the next 12 years as people continue to cut the cord but that is offset in part by the markets ACCN has added to with higher in state carriage fees (California and Texas). It isn't going to go down a ton. Confident it will still be over $100 million per year by 2036.

So we are talking about $1.5 billion dollars (conservatively) over the rest of the ACC contract that ESPN is going to make off ACCN alone.

They can't throw that away. When you compare what the ACC makes for ESPN to what it costs them to get that programming, it has to be one of the most profitable contracts ESPN has. They will extend the contract and if they have a chance to expand the footprint of the conference during the next 12 years into areas that will increase their profits, they will act to make that happen.

This is why the B12 is in such deep trouble.

It'll be interesting what they do with a standalone ESPN + streaming subscription too. Will ACCN be included? Is it an add on? That's where the value of certain brands makes sense beyond the cord cutters.

 

[Scooch]

It'll be interesting what they do with a standalone ESPN + streaming subscription too. Will ACCN be included? Is it an add on? That's where the value of certain brands makes sense beyond the cord cutters.

ESPN will launch a standalone, direct to consumer streaming service next year. It will include all of their linear networks (ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNEWS, ACCN, SECN) and likely ESPN+ bundled in.

I imagine the ACC and SEC will receive a small portion of the subscriber fees specific to their respective network carriage share, although I'm not sure if it will be the same portion they receive for traditional distribution via cable, satellite and VMPVD (live streaming services like YouTube TV).

 

[DoctorBombay]

This is why the B12 is in such deep trouble.

In the end, the issue that determined who survives as #3 is the ACCN.
ESPN made their decision when they gave the ACC a network, but declined one for the BigXII. The rest is just rhetoric and background noise.

 

[orangefog]

Mike Greenberg and Steven A Smith probably have good to great ratings is my bet that justified their cost even though some people, like you possibly, might not like them.

I am indifferent to them. I don’t need to be told what to think about sports or anything else, in the case of SAS. And, I don’t find what Mike Greenberg does significantly better than anyone else that does his job reasonably well. Certainly not worth millions of dollars more. But, obviously I’m not their target, because they lost me years ago.

 

[TexanMark]

ESPN will launch a standalone, direct to consumer streaming service next year. It will include all of their linear networks (ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNEWS, ACCN, SECN) and likely ESPN+ bundled in.

I imagine the ACC and SEC will receive a small portion of the subscriber fees specific to their respective network carriage share, although I'm not sure if it will be the same portion they receive for traditional distribution via cable, satellite and VMPVD (live streaming services like YouTube TV).

Do you think Venu will get approved?

I heard it is under litigation

 

[Scooch]

Do you think Venu will get approved?

I heard it is under litigation

Yep, Fubo brought a suit. Judge just issued an injunction on Friday that prevents Venu from going to market for now. Obviously that will be immediately appealed. Who knows what the timing for a resolution will be.

I'm no lawyer, but I do understand Fubo's premise. Among their claims is that the creation of Venu breaks programming covenants that Disney, WBD and Fox mandate with other distributors. Basically, Fubo would like to offer a sports-only package but those 3 companies prevent that by demanding that non-sports networks are carried along with the sports nets. Which of course inflates the cost of Fubo's service.

Now those same companies are offering a "sports only" service (not entirely, but mostly) that does not include the vast majority of their non-sports networks. And at a much lower price point.

I don't know the law, but I do believe Fubo can make a compelling case.

 

[kirbivore]

Mike Greenberg and Steven A Smith probably have good to great ratings is my bet that justified their cost even though some people, like you possibly, might not like them.

 

[elimunelson]

I suspect this is the end state as well. Although I believe it'll happen after the B1G and SEC have grabbed their desired ACC schools. So we'll end up with 2 1/2 power conferences. And then a Group of 5 that's essentially one league and operates as an FBS tier 2.

You mean 2.5 power conferences and notre dame? It'll be hilarious when the dust settles and ND can basically cherry pick their 10 win seasons not having to be part of these monolithic conferences and end up stronger than ever. I'm rooting for that. The team that didn't buck to the pressure of musical chairs ends up strongest of all.

EDIT: I root for strengthened catholic colleges being a proud customer of the College of the Holy Cross.

 

[NKR1978]

Yep, Fubo brought a suit. Judge just issued an injunction on Friday that prevents Venu from going to market for now. Obviously that will be immediately appealed. Who knows what the timing for a resolution will be.

I'm no lawyer, but I do understand Fubo's premise. Among their claims is that the creation of Venu breaks programming covenants that Disney, WBD and Fox mandate with other distributors. Basically, Fubo would like to offer a sports-only package but those 3 companies prevent that by demanding that non-sports networks are carried along with the sports nets. Which of course inflates the cost of Fubo's service.

Now those same companies are offering a "sports only" service (not entirely, but mostly) that does not include the vast majority of their non-sports networks. And at a much lower price point.

I don't know the law, but I do believe Fubo can make a compelling case.

The Biden justice dept has been winning some antitrust suits. They blocked the JetBlue/American "Northeast Alliance" (which I was annoyed with because it was nice earning JetBlue points on the one AA trip I took) and blocked the JetBlue takeover over Spirit. JetBlue must have lost Garland's luggage or something those attacks seem really arbitrary.

 

[HouClone]

Correct. ESPN was making money off the ACC before the ACCN was created and it continues to be profitable for them.

But the ACCN makes dumping the ACC unthinkable. Last I heard, each ACC full time member was making $11 million/year from ACCN. ND gets a partial share.

And the conference gets a share too. So the ACC gets in the neighborhood of $170 million per year from ACCN. Profits are split 50-50 with ESPN so from ACCN alone, ESPN makes about $170 million per year.

That money is going to drop over the next 12 years as people continue to cut the cord but that is offset in part by the markets ACCN has added to with higher in state carriage fees (California and Texas). It isn't going to go down a ton. Confident it will still be over $100 million per year by 2036.

So we are talking about $1.5 billion dollars (conservatively) over the rest of the ACC contract that ESPN is going to make off ACCN alone.

They can't throw that away. When you compare what the ACC makes for ESPN to what it costs them to get that programming, it has to be one of the most profitable contracts ESPN has. They will extend the contract and if they have a chance to expand the footprint of the conference during the next 12 years into areas that will increase their profits, they will act to make that happen.

This is why the B12 is in such deep trouble.

ACCN is a good deal for the ACC but not a good deal for ESPN. They aren't making the ad money showing the lower rating, bottom feeder football teams and women's gymnastics. However, where ESPN is making out like a bandit is on the regular ACC deal which FSU AD said last year was $17 million each. So looking at both together is a good deal overall for ESPN.

 

[HouClone]

In the end, the issue that determined who survives as #3 is the ACCN.
ESPN made their decision when they gave the ACC a network, but declined one for the BigXII. The rest is just rhetoric and background noise.

No. They gave the ACCN to the ACC to lock them in for 20 years at a ridiculous low rate for the regular ESPN deal.

ESPN+ is the de facto Big 12 Network. And ESPN+ is where ESPN is shifting their future resources.