Media Rights Question Posed To Wilner By Joseph

[Notalot]

Posted for Jon Joseph at his request.

 

QUESTION - The Pac-12 media rights come up for bid after those of the SEC and the B1G. ESPN has already agreed to pay the SEC $300M+ per annum for the same rights that CBS was paying the conference $55M per annum. I believe that FOX will go big with the B1G and perhaps elbow ESPN out of any B1G broadcast rights. What will be left over for the Pac-12 and functionally insolvent network?

 

I think George Kliavkoff is the perfect man to look outside the box. Convince Amazon, now in bed with the NFL and /or other 'streaming networks' to become the lead Pac-12 broadcaster. Kick off one game Friday at 5 Pacific/ 8 Eastern. Kick off two games Saturday at 9AM Pacific/Noon Eastern. Kick off all but 2 of the remaining games at Noon Pacific/ 3 Eastern. Kick off the last two games at 3:30 Pacific/ 6:30 Eastern. Stream these games from completion through the following Thursday. Use common sense when scheduling the games to get 'attractive' games in each time slot. Have half the teams bye in week 5 and the other half in week 6.

 

Doing the same 'media thing' and expecting different viewership results will not allow the Pac-12 to close the financial gap between it and the B1G and the SEC.

 

Does the above make sense to you?

[Charles Fischer]

We need a television broadcast in addition to the games being streaming, as online only would leave a ton of people out who do not have a more recent TV or don't know how to operate that part of it.

 

(You would be VERY surprised at the computer literacy, or lack of it out there.)

[DanLduck]

I do agree that there isn't much left. 

There are only so many time slots and FOX won't have any unless they show Pac12 regionally only. No one wants that.

 

Mr. Kliavkoff would be the one with experience to work out a tv miracle for the Pac.

 

Maybe revitalize the Pac12 network and get it available to more houses. Then ask CBS or some other network to run it.

[DUCati855]

On 2/4/2022 at 2:10 PM, Charles Fischer said:

We need a television broadcast in addition to the games being streaming

Agreed. Many watch games in sports bars or pubs. Games must be televised in order for this demographic to be reached. A streaming only package really limits the reach.

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/4/2022 at 5:10 PM, Charles Fischer said:

We need a television broadcast in addition to the games being streaming, as online only would leave a ton of people out who do not have a more recent TV or don't know how to operate that part of it.

 

(You would be VERY surprised at the computer literacy, or lack of it out there.)

Great point; yet, I think streaming is where all sports is heading. Hundreds of thousands of people are unplugging and going to a streaming platform(s.) The NFL has turned  its schedule over, in part, to Amazon. What could the NFL garner if the NFL network owned all the inventory and instituted pay-to-stream all of its games? I think Amazon is the NFL's beta site.

 

Responding to DUCati855 above, the bars are paying for the inventory via cable. They will if it becomes the go to viewing system, pay for streaming services. Depending on the amount paid for streaming, games will be shown advertisement-free or with far fewer advertisements. Would you pay for an advertisement viewing service instead of paying for cable plus having to watch advertisements? I would.

 

We are in a world of media delivery change. Games streamed during and post game is what I believe is coming on. Access to streaming services is becoming far easier. A tech dummy like I had no problem adding Amazon and Paramount.

 

I think Pac-12 games up and streaming from Friday through Thursday for a base fee and residuals could be very rewarding. I do not believe that ESPN/FOX is going to reward the Pac-12 with the prime viewing windows. I do know that games on the Pac-12 network are watched by very few.

 

I am old enough to recall when CFB went from solely radio to TV. Despite naysayers, the addition of TV added multi-millions of dollars to the CFB coffers.

[Drake]

In my opinion, the numbers being offered reflect that they anticipate an expansion to the CFP. Therefore, they have already forecast the revenue potential and their offer reflects those numbers. 
 

The networks would be shortsighted to not offer the PAC12 a reasonable package. The PAC 12 would have representation in an expanded playoff, and advertising dollars keeps the lights on at these networks. 
 

There are households west of the Rockies that actually buy stuff and advertisers love us. They want money from the people that had the fortitude to settle the untamed west. 
 

Kliavkoff will need to be creative to either unload the PAC 12 network, or enhance it. Streaming entertainment is already here. It will be interesting to see who muscles their way into streaming college football games. Not a cheap proposition by any means, and if it was done incorrectly it would be a very expensive first attempt. 

Edited February 5, 2022 by Drake

[Jon Joseph]

The Pac-12 network either needs to find a media partner who will upgrade the network to 'varsity' level, or file Chapter 11 bankruptcy and hope that in a reorganization bankruptcy the existing lease can be crammed down and a viable media partner found; or,  file a complete BK dissolution, Chapter 7 and get at least some of the investment back from a sale of the assets including the subscriber's list. The network today is an albatross for the Pac-12.

 

And ASU prez Michael Crow, and the AD and Herm, should all be shown the door at ASU. Crow was the biggest Larry enabler by far.

 

The Pac-12 will get a 'reasonable' package that will be far behind the B1G and SEC deals and continue with Pac-12 after dark.

[HappyToBeADuck]

Great post and comments on this thread. Had to read all a few times to ponder and digest all the good thoughts. In advance, I apologize for the following rant.

 

Media rights should be handled by an experienced team, led by an experienced leader. This team should have vision, forward thinking, an open mind and keen negotiating skills. Not be handled by 12 Arrogant, narcissistic, know it alls who sent some sort of tennis guru to handle negotiations.  This magnificent brain trust spurned network merger offers for the P-12 Network because they knew they could build and run their own sports network.  How has that turned out for the brain trust? Larry Scott isn't the only person who should have been fired.

 

The way GK and the 12 dwarfs handled expansion leaves me feeling apprehensive about their ability to negotiate their future media rights. They were presented a major opportunity to change the landscape while adding a good chunk of Texas eyeballs to the P12 footprint. What a powerful bargaining chip for media rights! All 4 time zones (West Virginia) that include Texas and the West Coast. See any forward thinking or the ability to improve your bargaining power in the brain trust?

 

The networks need programming product content. Good quality product to sell advertisers that attracts eyeballs. This conference needs to improve the on field product, top to bottom........

 

Chip and MH's Ducks were must see TV. Games against Stanford, USC, UCLA and even the butt sniffers were nationally televised. Game day came to town and the ESPN A team called some of those games. The product was outstanding and like Pavlov's dogs, the networks came to the table.........let's get back to that type of product or move to a conference who appreciates a committed national brand. This is big business now.

 

I don't have much academic prowess but the Good Lord blessed me with common sense. My Dad, with patience and love honed my business skills and negotiating knowledge. And my wonderful Mother taught me to be courteous and humble. 

 

From all that, my advise to the brain trust would be as they enter media rights negotiations..........leave your arrogance at the door. Admit you failed with the P-12 Network and openly seek out a partner(s) who is willing to fix that. Being open and humble will open the door to multiple offers. Recognize that currently your only bargaining chips are west coast eyeballs, the need for late night time slots to be filled, Oregon s national brand and an emerging Utah. Fortunately, Oregon and Utah proved that on the field we can compete with a CFP blublood.

 

Now GK and the 12 dwarfs it's your turn. Prove that you belong at the media rights negotiating table or put a team in that can. However, due to your shortsighted vision, your team will be bringing a dull butter knife to a 50 caliber gun fight. Good luck..

 

[Duck 1972]

I don't know much when it comes to this but I know I don't want our games being played at 9 a.m.. Just for more eyes from the East Coast, South and Mid West. We didn't need them in the 2010's when we played for 2 nattys and I don't believe we need them now. 

 

I also don't want to play anyone who won't play us H/H games. I don't see any advantage for us to do that. 

 

Let's get more of those teams coming out here and see how they do away from their fans and time zone. I believe if that would happen with our best against their best it would level out about which conferences are better.

 

I know the last 8 yrs haven't been good for the PAC but now with us, USC and Utah we just need a couple more teams to step up with resources, administration and finally product on the field.

 

As I have posited before the advantages the rest of the country has over us are many and maybe to much to overcome. If so, so be it but let's not go down without a fight.

 

Go Ducks Fly High  Go PAC Play Well

[Mike West]

Cal, Stanford and UCLA are not interested in putting a group of world class athletes on the field.  They want student athletes.  Not a bad priority, but it's truly bad for "business".

 

Twenty five percent of the conference is "attacking" the quality of the most important revenue stream for athletics as a whole at their respective schools. Not to mention  it has reduced athletic competition within the conference.  

 

Washington is a World Class University.  Outside of their choices for coaches post Don James (excluding Chris Petersen), the Fuskies are willing to put a respectable football brand on the field.  In fact, they expect championship level football.

 

It is going to be very difficult to restore the level of football the conference witnessed when half the conference produced national contenders ( right before USC dominated the entire college football landscape).  It's simply not a priority.

 

It's almost putting the horse before the cart at this point.  When Mountain West teams  regularly defeat us, we have a problem.  It isn't even difficult to out recruit teams in the conference given the  present circumstances.  

 

In boxing terms, our legs are wobbly.  I sure hope Chip works some magic ( he just needs to find a QB that can win games, so he can outscore his shaky defenses), and the Fuskies actually right their ship.  We need four powerhouse teams.  

 

Cal and Stanford can produce the first hyperspace drive all they want if we find four powerful football teams.  Otherwise, nobody is going to watch PAC12 football in my opinion.  

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/5/2022 at 3:06 PM, Mike West said:

 

Cal and Stanford ...

Great take Mike. The Cal, UCLA, Stanford approach was fine in the bucolic days of regional college football. Before the BCS and this so-called 'Playoff.' Those days are gone. 'Expand territory and wipe out a competitor at the same time, why would we do that,?' evidences either a completely naive athletics business POV or a completely blase POV. As you so artfully point out Mike, the folks in charge at many the Pac-12 school don't give a whip about big time titles in big time sports. And a number that likely do care do not have the money to compete in CFB at the highest levels of competition. Oregon is blessed with a patriarch who is most certainly a 'sports guy.' Oregon, its graduates, students and fans want the program to be competitive in athletics at the highest levels of play. Many of Oregon's partners simply do not care. Their fans or folks who would normally be fans, such as students attending Stanford, don't care.

 

IMO, Oregon will never win a championship in college football playing with the kind of 'partners' it has in the Pac-12. I can't believe that Phil Knight and I hope, President Schill, cannot see that the situation in the Pac-12 when it comes to football is dire. Because once the media rights are pledged to a new media deal, it will cost a whole lot of money to join the B1G or any other conference. At the very least, if Oregon stays in the Pac-12 it should strenuously object to giving an equal cut of revenue to schools that spend far less on athletics.

 

BTW: UCLA did go 8-4 last season but the Bruins did not defeat a team with a winning record, including LSU. 8 wins against no winners says a good deal about the CFB competition in the Pac-12.

 

 

 

 

[Tandaian]

FOX and ESPN have contracts with the Big 12.  ACC has a contract with ESPN.  Pac 12  has a contract with FOX and ESPN.  The Pac 12 doesn't need to go a separate way from FOX and ESPN, however I would love to see what CBS wants to offer.  The 55 mil was way back in 2001 and for 1 football game a week.

 

We can't know one way or another if the Pac 12 should have finished off the Big 12, yet.  The Big 12 had the 4th largest TV deal after SEC, B1G and Pac 12 with Texas and Oklahoma.  Losing Texas and Oklahoma isn't likely to increase their TV deal.

 

I do think stream is part of TV, so we need to make sure the Pac 12 is available on all platforms.  I'd try and make a deal with FOX, ESPN, CBS and a streaming service.  Maybe, even NBC as well. 

 

The ND games are getting half the ratings as other ND games on other channels, so maybe they want to try and have a more consistent game day viewership.  Having so many TV channels would be a mess for the conference and fans, but get everybody involved and see what you can get.

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/7/2022 at 12:30 PM, Tandaian said:

FOX and ESPN have contracts with the Big 12.  ACC has a contract with ESPN.  Pac 12  has a contract with FOX and ESPN.  The Pac 12 doesn't need to go a separate way from FOX and ESPN, however I would love to see what CBS wants to offer.  The 55 mil was way back in 2001 and for 1 football game a week.

 

We can't know one way or another if the Pac 12 should have finished off the Big 12, yet.  The Big 12 had the 4th largest TV deal after SEC, B1G and Pac 12 with Texas and Oklahoma.  Losing Texas and Oklahoma isn't likely to increase their TV deal.

 

I do think stream is part of TV, so we need to make sure the Pac 12 is available on all platforms.  I'd try and make a deal with FOX, ESPN, CBS and a streaming service.  Maybe, even NBC as well. 

 

The ND games are getting half the ratings as other ND games on other channels, so maybe they want to try and have a more consistent game day viewership.  Having so many TV channels would be a mess for the conference and fans, but get everybody involved and see what you can get.

Good points my friend. Here is my rejoinder.

 

The ACC, unless Notre Dame joins as a football member, is locked in with ESPN through 2036; with a lousy media deal that pays $17M to each ACC team per season. The ACC is out of the upcoming media negotiations.

 

There is a finite amount of media dollars to go around. Frankly, I'd prefer to bid against 2 competitors, the B1G and SEC and not 3 competitors when you add the 'new B12.' Instead of adding the Dallas and Houston markets among others and staying as-is, what is the plan to save the Pac-12 network? Keeping the same footprint and continuing to have the same distribution problems is not going to grow the number of  Pac-12 Network subscribers and make it a financially solvent entity. I see no cogent business sense behind not expanding market size and deciding to bring the same product to market. And as for OK ST, TX Tech, Kansas, K St, Baylor and Houston, not bringing in the same revenue cut as Pac-12 teams, you negotiate this issue away. Just like the B1G did when it brought in Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska. You phase in when the newbies will get an equal share. GK has faced far more difficult business negotiations than negotiating with teams that the Pac-12 would have been throwing a life line.

 

Of course the B12 losing TX and OK is a big hit. But eyeballs on the games of the remaining B12 members for the most part exceed the number of viewers watching the Pac-12 play ball. P5 (could have been the P4 that would have helped facilitate playoff expansion and bring in more money) is a big business. If you stand still in big business you are falling behind. And, should the Pac-12 now decide to expand where can it go? The obvious expansion candidates are off the table. BYU, Cincinnati, Houston and UCF all bring value to the restructured B12.

 

The B1G will expand. It will go east with Pitt, UVA, UNC and Georgia Tech, all AAU schools; or, it will go west with all, or a combination of UW, Oregon, Stanford, USC, Utah and CU, all AAU member schools. If the B1G expands west, the Pac-12 is done.

 

Regardless, while the new Pac-12 media deal will yield more revenue than the existing deal it will come nowhere close to closing the gap between the Pac-12 and the B1G and SEC. It's Mom and Pop competing against Big Box stores. I think the decision not to expand was a terrible business decision that seals the fate of the Pac-12 as an also-ran conference. But, I hope you are right because there is no going back.