In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 106
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
It is a lot better than last year, but all that matters is that they have their internet streaming service already established. If upgrades need to be made, that can be addressed down the line.
What part of "for example" wasn't understood?
You're actually arguing my point even more. Where people are interested in the product, you can got more per subscriber. Like the B1G member states that average around 70 cents per subscriber. Where people don't give a flying you know what, you can't get anything.
So 2 million subscribers in NY might not be as valuable as 200k rabid college football fans in farm country.
FWIW, I live just north of Pittsburgh and my cable company still doesn't offer the B1G network.
they have no incentive to offer a la carte programming - of course. But that's the problem. As Google, Netflix and new OTT players emerge, the days of the bundled TV will be over...and Comcast / Verizon / AT&T will mainly be reduced to providing fast packets....Comcast will still have a stake in Content though due to its ownership of NBC.
I think its great revenue for the BTN for now. But there will be a day when the good times will end and people just wont buy / consume TV like this. And the B1G will be stuck with MD and RU.
Its only a matter of time until the model changes.
Actually, the true game changer will be when wireless network capacity increases. Then, they guys running a line to your house won't be the ones who control what you get.
But, like I've said for a while... we're still a good ways away from "internet" broadcasts dominating and wireless is behind that.
Louisville will get better ratings. That was my point. Anyone think UMD is more interesting in athletics? Obviously more TV sets is great but then why not add Temple?
The major wireless providers (Verizon / AT&T) are basically the same people as the Internet people sans Comcast.
Google is the biggest variable in all of this. They have launched their new Fiber optic network in Kansas City and it blows away anything Comcast or Verizon can offer.
The BTN is already on Comcast in the Philly TV market based on PSU. Temple adds nothing to the equation.
Ok .. then the Big Ten should add SMU or UNC-Charlotte or how bout FIU or UMass.
Seriously? you are asking that? I get your point about new TV markets but Rutgers and MD were the AAU schools adjacement to the B1G footprint that were the new TV markets that made the most sense right now.
Perhaps Boston and someday Charlotte (UNC) will be targets for further B1G expansion. Seems possible. Not sure if UMASS would be the top Boston target though.
This post was edited by curtismartinfan 16 months ago
Another key variable might be how quickly the wireless companies react to expand their data packages. With most people getting 2G/month, wireless streaming won't catch on. Verizon will be in a very interesting position given the amount of money they've sunk into FiOS.
I may be completely wrong on this stuff b/c I'm no expert on it whatsoever. But it just seems like that's the case. I very rarely use ESPN3 on my phone when I'm not on wifi b/c it just takes up too much data.
This post was edited by rys1324 16 months ago
Verizon and AT&T have all the good bands so thats why they limit the data. Sprint has the crappy bands and offer it on an unlimited basis.
So I'm not sure Verizon or AT&T will ever go back to the unlimited data plan.
That study makes pretty massive assumptions to draw the conclusions that it does. It is massively flawed. Pay attention to the methodology and think about it.
This post was edited by CrazyPaco 16 months ago
They only took Rutgers and MD to block the ACC from getting PSU to switch. PSU feels like the B1G treated them poorly and many wanted to leave for their eastern roots.
The kicker to blocking a PSU move was that they could capitalize on the TV sets via the basic cable base. This whole thing was a big risk. Sure they will make money in those markets if they get on basic packages, until the rest catch up or the model changes. The B1G has to be banking on the landscape changing in those markets that increases interest in Rutgers & MD or these two will be anchors around the necks of the rest. They already have a few anchors sucking of the teet who are longtime members.
All in all the was Jim Delaney being PO'd that ND turned them down and wanting to make a spiteful move to block a PSU exit.
The problem with that is that the Yankees/Nets own 51% of YES, and bundling their network with the BTN (which is worth substantially less) essentially causes a depreciation of their product. Will Fox and the Yankees actually bundle the BTN? I think Fox has an option to take up to 80% after 3 years. Perhaps it will be bundled, but I don't think this is a shoe in as some are predicting.
In any case, the BTN network's only play to get into the tier they want in NYC is to bundle with Yes. There is no way it is getting on that tier in NYC otherwise. Likely not in DC/Baltimore either.
It's not going to come from the cable companies, necessarily. Just like ala carte music services that turned that industry on its head didn't emanate from the music industry or its distributors.
Yes, we all know that the BTN didn't have a shot to get into the standard tier without YES. Fox absolutely will bundle the YES network with BTN because there is just too much revenue that they would leave on the table if they didn't. The cable companies aren't going to fight YES.
Now DC, I agree with... I think the BTN will be able to get in the standard tier, but it's not going to be $1.00 per subscriber. It will likely be closer to $0.25. I think they are hoping that future expansion, with UVA being likely, will help that. I still think that will be their hardest market to get into.
There is a big difference between TV and music. One is basically static (music) while the other is dynamic (TV).
The only way a la carte will be a reality is if pirating runs wild. That is what caused the music industry to reluctantly sign on to iTunes and like services... they decided that getting a piece of the pie was better than giving it away. But, again, that was based on the pirating of static files that never changed and could be distributed rather easily. That's not the case with TV.
There is a reason that internet TV hasn't yet become a serious player. The content is controlled by the channels (HBO, TBS, ESPN, ect) and their best option is to be on TV as part of a complete package of programs. Very, very few channels would be able to make as a stand alone product on an a la carte menu and none would be better off than they are now.
Again, what's the incentive?
PSU wasn't going to move anytime soon. There is just too much money in the Big Ten to make it a viable move. Also, things like the CIC (which I know isn't all it's cracked up to be) and Hockey make the move even less likely.
UVA Isn't moving anywhere though, that is the problem. Neither is UNC. Both are tightly bound together and both are tightly bound to the ACC.
It is yet to be seen if YES will be bundled. Again, the issue is that Yankees/Nets still own 51%. If the Yankees help the BTN get on cable, they are going to be compensated for doing so. It is more complicated than just bundling things together as if it has no effect on the value of the components, particularly important because different groups own parts of all this stuff. If YES is carrying the BTN, that means that the BTN is being overvalued, and YES is being undervalued; particularly the BTN is being overvalued by the amount that YES is being undervalued. The point YES is leaving money on the table (in the form of reducing their carriage fees) so that the BTN can get it (i.e. get increased rates by being picked up on basic cable at an artificially high carriage rate).
I'm going to copy the following example from nzmorange because it isn't worth the time to construct my own example...
1. having YES doesn't make the BTN more enjoyable, and visa versa (i.e. they don't add value to each other)
2. they are packaged together
3. YES is worth $1.00 per subscriber in carriage rates
4. and the BTN is worth $0.50 in per subscriber carriage rates
They are worth $1.50 per subscriber in carriage rates, when combined.
1. the BTN demands $0.60 in carriage rates per subscriber
2. and cable companies won't pay more than something is worth
YES' rates will have to be $0.90, so the package's overall price is not mroe than what it is worth
That means that YES is essentially paying the BTN $0.10 per subscriber in lost carriage rates.
Assuming that the BTN doesn't reimburse YES, then YES only makes $0.90, when it could have made $1.00. That $0.90 is then divided between the Yankees and FOX, so the Yankees make $0.45, which $0.05 less than they could have, and FOX makes $0.45, which $0.05 less than they could have. However, the BTN makes $0.60, when it should have made $0.50. That $0.60 is divided between the B1G and FOX, which means that the B1G makes $0.30, which is $0.05 more than it should have made, and FOX makes, $0.30, which is $0.05 more than it should have made.
In the end, the Yankees lose $0.05, FOX loses $0.05, but then they gain $0.05, so they break even, and the B1G gains $0.05. That's why the Yankees are going to want money back from the B1G, but Fox's participation is an accounting wash.
ACCIAC = CIC, that is a wash.
PSU wasn't going to move anyway.
Totally agree...I've argued this for the past 3 years on TOS on deaf ears.
Its not a shoe-in....in fact, its a big gamble. I live here and people whine about the smallest increases - especially for sports.
Forcing people to buy college sports - in a bundle - is even bigger slap in the face to the residents of this area.
People see 10MM people in NYC and think - they must all be sports fans. NOT!
There are huge amounts of diverse / liberal / intellectual groups around here that could give a ratt's butt about sports - particularly college sports.
Maybe not, but that was the fear. If the ACC made them the right deal (in the wake of the ND sweetheart deal) there was fear they would consider it and keep the B1G in it's diminishing rust belt markets.
Come on now Paco, you know that the ACCIAC isn't on the level of the CIC.
YES absolutely will get a rates bump. And once FOX gains even more control of the network in a few years, it's a moot point. The BTN has been very good to FOX, they are undoubtedly salivating to get it in the largest tv market on the standard tier.
Actually, I think the ACCIAC is slightly superior for reasons that I've pointed out here previously. Given the two, I'd rather Pitt be in the ACCIAC since the ACCIAC is the only one of these types of consortiums that actually distributes research fellowship money, even if a token amount, to its members. That program is superior to anything else out there. Secondarily, and I actually don't believe this is that influential, but if athletics exposure affects anything, it is undergrad admissions; so Pitt better off in a conference where it is associated with schools that have better undergraduate pedigrees. The ACCIAC and CIC do slightly different things (eg the ACCIAC Is not a purchasing consortium) but they are generally the same and have many nearly identical programs, which are nice to have, but neither are really significant at all as far as the impact they have at member schools. Neither would be any sort of impediment for moving from one conference to another. Neither really do a single thing for improving a school's academics or research prowess.
This post has been edited 5 times, most recently by CrazyPaco 16 months ago
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports