Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 51
  1. #11
    Old Line Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    3659′36″N 7813′30″W
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by CobbCountyHokie View Post
    Frankly, I really don't care about Philadelphia being a deal breaker in this scenario. It is just one of the top 10 markets. But if you can secure New York, Chicago, Dallas, Washington, Atlanta, and Houston...then you have the makings of a very profitable enterprise. Also remember this, the networks or ESPN cannot show all of the your best games if you have a lot of big name games in your inventory. They still have contracts to show other leagues and that will naturally push down content to the ACC Network making it a much more meaty proposition.

    I am glad to see a lot of you are starting to understand this puzzle now.
    This is a map of the Pitt Panthers ISP Radio Network. Harrisburg is the closest they get to Philly.


  2. #12
    Old Line Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    3659′36″N 7813′30″W
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by No Clue View Post
    Ratings are one thing but subscriber base is another. The big 10 network gets a certain amount from subscribers in footprint and a lesser amount out of footprint. I know I am paying for the big 10 network in my direct tv package because I get the direct tv sport package and I don't recall ever watching anything on it.
    If anyone looks at the sequence of events that led to where we are, it appears that an ACC network was the ultimate plan. It will have the largest footprint of any conference. I still can't reconcile though, why they seem to be a bit behind the other conferences with respect to a network. But whatever the real plan was, I think the ACC is really well positioned.
    I'm very aware of the BTN model and gathering cable subscribers. It's just a matter of the ACCN getting into all those markets it wants to. The BTN has had a huge head start. The future of cable/satellite sports programming could easily change within the next decade and the BTN model could become obsolete like the video store. Swofford has expressed his concern about technology and the future of sports programming. IMHO, the 3 factors deciding the ACCN are (1) Notre Dame's full membership and/or addition of other major TV markets like Dallas and Houston, (2) the future of TV sports programming/technology, and (3) ESPN's financial success with their new SECN and how it's administered.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    June 05, 2003
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Line Hokie View Post
    I wouldn't count on Philadelphia supporting Pitt and the ACCN. Philly is a pro sports town and Penn State is their #1 college football team. The BTN will get a majority of the college sports viewers with PSU and Rutgers (NJ suburbs of Philly). An ACCN will have trouble getting into Philly and Baltimore. UConn (Fairfield County) would help solidify NYC TV market, having ACC members on both ends of the city.

    I think an ACCN would do well from DC to Miami. Like the article, I'm not so sure about the Northeast. Notre Dame's full membership into the ACC would solidify the Northeast TV footprint. As for adding Texas and a few other Big 12 schools, I could see Texas giving up their LHN if Notre Dame joined and the ACCN could get into all the cable markets within their geographic footprint.
    I think you and I have discussed earlier in another thread about Pittsburgh not carrying the entire State of Pennsylvania. Only Penn State does this. I would love to have Penn State in the ACC. But if that is not a possibility, if the ACC wants the Philadelphia market, Temple is the only game in town. Temple would definitely be second fiddle in Philadelphia at the college level to Penn State, but Georgia Tech is to the Georgia Bulldogs in Atlanta too. Raycom is having trouble getting distribution on the Philadelphia Local Sports Nets like Comcast Sportsnet Philadelphia, which carries the Phillies. Raycom does have one Philadelphia Fox broadcast station carrying some of the Raycom package.

    I went online doing a little research about Temple. If they would step it up a notch, they have potential. It's a large school. I remember Georgia Tech stunk at basketball when they joined the ACC. And Florida State has grown into a well rounded athletic department since being in the ACC. When they joined, they were football and baseball only. Their olympic sports have vastly improved. So it can be done. While doing my research, I came across Temple's football promotion for this year. I'll link it for anyone interested. I especially like the sack of the Maryland Quarterback at the end and the kickoff return at Louisville.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYwjqQvUm8g

    I believe that Temple would get the ACC on the air in Philadelphia at least. Then they would need a marketing plan to grow the interest. With the loss of Baltimore due to Maryland's defection, the ACC has taken a hit in the Mid-Atlantic. Philadelphia would be a nice regain of territory. It would also get the ACC coverage on both ends of Pennsylvania. Temple University has 38,000students and 200,000 plus living alumni. One would think that the ACC and Temple could do some marketing to get them excited at least a little bit. They have quality basketball and are spending money on their football program. The ACC needs to make a decision on whether it wants that market. And as you point out, Connecticut locks down the New England area and the north side of New York City. So there are some choices and trade offs. I hope they do the proper market analysis for the ACC Network because I want the ACC to have one.
    Last edited by HOO86; Thu Aug 01 2013 at 09:55 PM.

  4. #14
    Old Line Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    3659′36″N 7813′30″W
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by HOO86 View Post
    I think you and I have discussed earlier in another thread about Pittsburgh not carrying the entire State of Pennsylvania. Only Penn State does this. I would love to have Penn State in the ACC. But if that is not a possibility, if the ACC wants the Philadelphia market, Temple is the only game in town. Temple would definitely be second fiddle in Philadelphia at the college level to Penn State, but Georgia Tech is to the Georgia Bulldogs in Atlanta too. Raycom is having trouble getting distribution on the Philadelphia Local Sports Nets like Comcast Sportsnet Philadelphia, which carries the Phillies. Raycom does have one Philadelphia Fox broadcast station carrying some of the Raycom package.

    I went online doing a little research about Temple. If they would step it up a notch, they have potential. It's a large school. I remember Georgia Tech stunk at basketball when they joined the ACC. And Florida State has grown into a well rounded athletic department since being in the ACC. When they joined, they were football and baseball only. Their olympic sports have vastly improved. So it can be done. While doing my research, I came across Temple's football promotion for this year. I'll link it for anyone interested. I especially like the sack of the Maryland Quarterback at the end and the kickoff return at Louisville.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYwjqQvUm8g

    I believe that Temple would get the ACC on the air in Philadelphia at least. Then they would need a marketing plan to grow the interest. With the loss of Baltimore due to Maryland's defection, the ACC has taken a hit in the Mid-Atlantic. Philadelphia would be a nice regain of territory. It would also get the ACC coverage on both ends of Pennsylvania. Temple University has 38,000students and 200,000 plus living alumni. One would think that the ACC and Temple could do some marketing to get them excited at least a little bit. They have quality basketball and are spending money on their football program. The ACC needs to make a decision on whether it wants that market. And as you point out, Connecticut locks down the New England area and the north side of New York City. So there are some choices and trade offs. I hope they do the proper market analysis for the ACC Network because I want the ACC to have one.
    I doubt Penn State will be in the ACC any time soon, if ever. Too bad the ACC didn't try to get PSU in the late 1980's before they joined the Big 10 in 1990. If the ACC doesn't add 4 or 5 Big 12 schools to form a western pod of 20 teams, it'll be interesting to see who #16 is if Notre Dame joins as a full member. I agree with you about the ACC losing a good chunk of the mid-Atlantic market with loss of Maryland. That has created a gap from the southern/western Baltimore suburbs to central New Jersey. I am leaning towards UConn because they bring a second ACC school to the NYC metropolitan market. Throw in Notre Dame and the ACC is solidly represented there. Some say Cincinnati but they don't even carry southwest Ohio, Ohio State does. I think UC's radio network cover a 50 mile radius around the city. They would give the ACC Cincinnati and nearby towns of Dayton and Springfield. UConn would give the ACC all of New England. Navy has been mentioned too and they would bring a national fan base and put the ACC back in the Baltimore region, even though I've only seen a few Navy basketball games shown locally on TV during my 26 years in the area. Temple has a rich basketball tradition which the ACC values. Their football program has shown some positive signs the past 5 years, but most sports fans in Philly are thinking about the Eagles on Saturday afternoons in the fall. Sometimes I think the ACC should grab UConn before the Big 10 does. I had the same feeling a few years before Rutgers joined the Big 10.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    December 22, 2002
    Posts
    4,351
    Quote Originally Posted by CobbCountyHokie View Post
    http://roanoke.com/sports/colleges/2...t-logical.html

    Here is what I can tell you...

    The ACC will need to have a network in order for the member institutions to be on a financial par with the other leagues. The Big 10, PAC-12 and the SEC will all be earning a lot more money thanks to their networks over the ACC and the Big 12 and that inequity will once again drive a lot of chatter about realignment, etc. The Big-12 will be a mess thanks to the Longhorn Network. To me, they have no hope of getting a network. The ACC has a chance but they need to find a way to get distribution in order to make it a success and then a financial windfall.

    My company has systems in a few ACC markets. We are in Virginia, Georgia, Florida and Rhode Island. Most of our customers are actually outside ACC country so we may be one of those that would be skeptical to add an ACC network...although I think we would get crushed in Northern VA, Roanoke, Hampton Roads and Central Florida without the ACC Network and that will ultimately get us in...plus we would probably get a heavy lean from ESPN. That is just my guess.

    For the ACC Network to be a national play, I think that a few things have to happen. First, I think Notre Dame has to really think about coming all in. If they are in, the ACC Network football portfolio becomes an instant national player. Say what you like about ND but they do bring an audience and that cannot be ignored. Second, the ACC has to be willing to put major basketball inventory on the network. This means that if you want to watch Duke, Carolina, Louisville, Syracuse or other national contender hoops programs...you have to go to the ACC network...again this makes it a national play that will bring distribution. Third, a westward expansion is needed. If Texas can be brought in and the LHN comes with it and gets swallowed up by the ACC Network then you have a national player that will include the following markets... #1-New York (Syracuse), #3-Chicago (Notre Dame), #4- Philadelphia (Pitt), #5-Dallas-Fort Worth(UT), #7-Boston (BC), #8-Washington(VT, UVa), #9-Atlanta (GT, Clemson, FSU), #10-Houston (UT), #14-Tampa/St. Pete (FSU, Miami), #16-Miami/Ft. Lauderdale (Miami, FSU), #19-Orlando (FSU, Miami), #23-Pittsburgh (Pitt), #24- Raleigh/Durham (UNC, Duke, NCSU, WFU), and #25-Charlotte (UNC, Duke, NCSU, WFU, Clemson). That is a formidable lineup of national markets and can command some good per subscriber money if the content is there.

    For those of you scoring at home, Norfolk/Newport News is market #44, Richmond is #57 and Roanoke/Lynchburg is #68.

    As I keep telling you all...it is about gaining distribution. Once that code has been cracked, the ACC Network will become a reality and will make the schools a TON of money thanks to the markets in which the league plays.
    Hey Swofford, how's your son gonna come out when this "reacquiring" happens? He points to the SEC having to acquire its TV rights, but I think theirs were sold well before everybody on the planet, particularly most of TSL, knew conference networks could be profitable. The B1G was already making a ton when Greensboro sold those rights to his son. I think the SEC made a deal well before that.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    December 22, 2002
    Posts
    4,351
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Line Hokie View Post
    I wouldn't count on Philadelphia supporting Pitt and the ACCN. Philly is a pro sports town and Penn State is their #1 college football team. The BTN will get a majority of the college sports viewers with PSU and Rutgers (NJ suburbs of Philly). An ACCN will have trouble getting into Philly and Baltimore. UConn (Fairfield County) would help solidify NYC TV market, having ACC members on both ends of the city.

    I think an ACCN would do well from DC to Miami. Like the article, I'm not so sure about the Northeast. Notre Dame's full membership into the ACC would solidify the Northeast TV footprint. As for adding Texas and a few other Big 12 schools, I could see Texas giving up their LHN if Notre Dame joined and the ACCN could get into all the cable markets within their geographic footprint.
    Rutgers would really help there and in NYC. They are both B1G country now.

  7. #17
    BUGGZY's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 15, 2002
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    13,709
    Quote Originally Posted by CobbCountyHokie View Post
    http://roanoke.com/sports/colleges/2...t-logical.html

    Here is what I can tell you...

    The ACC will need to have a network in order for the member institutions to be on a financial par with the other leagues. The Big 10, PAC-12 and the SEC will all be earning a lot more money thanks to their networks over the ACC and the Big 12 and that inequity will once again drive a lot of chatter about realignment, etc. The Big-12 will be a mess thanks to the Longhorn Network. To me, they have no hope of getting a network. The ACC has a chance but they need to find a way to get distribution in order to make it a success and then a financial windfall.

    My company has systems in a few ACC markets. We are in Virginia, Georgia, Florida and Rhode Island. Most of our customers are actually outside ACC country so we may be one of those that would be skeptical to add an ACC network...although I think we would get crushed in Northern VA, Roanoke, Hampton Roads and Central Florida without the ACC Network and that will ultimately get us in...plus we would probably get a heavy lean from ESPN. That is just my guess.

    For the ACC Network to be a national play, I think that a few things have to happen. First, I think Notre Dame has to really think about coming all in. If they are in, the ACC Network football portfolio becomes an instant national player. Say what you like about ND but they do bring an audience and that cannot be ignored. Second, the ACC has to be willing to put major basketball inventory on the network. This means that if you want to watch Duke, Carolina, Louisville, Syracuse or other national contender hoops programs...you have to go to the ACC network...again this makes it a national play that will bring distribution. Third, a westward expansion is needed. If Texas can be brought in and the LHN comes with it and gets swallowed up by the ACC Network then you have a national player that will include the following markets... #1-New York (Syracuse), #3-Chicago (Notre Dame), #4- Philadelphia (Pitt), #5-Dallas-Fort Worth(UT), #7-Boston (BC), #8-Washington(VT, UVa), #9-Atlanta (GT, Clemson, FSU), #10-Houston (UT), #14-Tampa/St. Pete (FSU, Miami), #16-Miami/Ft. Lauderdale (Miami, FSU), #19-Orlando (FSU, Miami), #23-Pittsburgh (Pitt), #24- Raleigh/Durham (UNC, Duke, NCSU, WFU), and #25-Charlotte (UNC, Duke, NCSU, WFU, Clemson). That is a formidable lineup of national markets and can command some good per subscriber money if the content is there.

    For those of you scoring at home, Norfolk/Newport News is market #44, Richmond is #57 and Roanoke/Lynchburg is #68.

    As I keep telling you all...it is about gaining distribution. Once that code has been cracked, the ACC Network will become a reality and will make the schools a TON of money thanks to the markets in which the league plays.

    does anyone think this starts out as an expansion/growth of the ACC Digital Network first? i believe many less rights (if any) would need to be reacquired assuming we only sold off OTA and cable rights, not streaming rights. ESPN3 was first and is the biggest name in this market, of course, but the Olympics did it with NBC last year and NBC is going to launch dedicated online streaming channels for their new EPL coverage starting in 2 weeks.

    while i'm skeptical of streaming replacing TV, particularly for live sports, any time soon, many on this board and elsewhere are claiming that is the future of media rights, and that the dedicated cable channel model is doomed to fail when cable companies can no longer support the carriage fees.

    Swofford likes to think he is always out in front of change (whether we agree with that is another issue), so i could see him pushing this route so when the change comes, the ACCDN is already up and running with carriage on all the major ISPs while the BTN and SECN would need to adjust their strategies and revenue streams.

    Does ESPN charge ISPs for the right to carry ESPN3? i believe they do, so what if the ACCDN could get $.25/mo from every FiOS, Verizon DSL, Xfinity, Cox, TWC, etc broadband subscriber on the East Coast (and maybe $.05/sub from the rest of the country). Do more people have broadband in their home than a high enough cable tier to access special sports packages? probably.

    just a made up number of 20M broadband customers on the East Coast would net the ACC $5M/mo, or $60M/year to distribute to 15 schools ($4M/school). maybe that could be more? less? i have no clue, i'm just messing around with hypotheticals, but it wouldn't shock me to see Swofford go this route, at least out of the gate while they work on a TV network.

    even if/once a TV Network launches, the digital network could promise 100% access to all games from the most popular sports not being aired on ESPN family or ACCN as well as 24/7 access to replays, etc.

    just a thought, feel free to ignore...
    "This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC

  8. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    February 21, 2013
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckd4vt View Post
    Hey Swofford, how's your son gonna come out when this "reacquiring" happens? He points to the SEC having to acquire its TV rights, but I think theirs were sold well before everybody on the planet, particularly most of TSL, knew conference networks could be profitable. The B1G was already making a ton when Greensboro sold those rights to his son. I think the SEC made a deal well before that.
    Forgive, please, the pessimistic view, but hear me out before you react. I think the prospects for a successful ACC network were dramatically diminished when no FB or mens' BB rights were retained by the conference in the ESPN deal. I think this was done to position Raycom as the only choice as the ACC partner in the eventual network. Swofford made sure Raycom got a chunk of content and the conference didn't.

    Some harsh realities:

    All FB and men's BB rights have been asigned to ESPN for $260 ($280?) million per year until 2027
    Raycom acquired some FB and BB games from ESPN for $50 million per year (same duration as above)
    Fox acquired some FB and BB games from Raycom (yes, same interval)
    All three of the above parties have legitimate reason to maintain status quo

    Raycom's 17 FB and 35 BB games plus non-revenue sports would be the "live sports" content for an ACC network. (assuming Raycom hasn't given long-term license to YES for some of those games) TV consultants can, and probably already did, calculate the demand for a cable channel in the ACC footprint and beyond. Perhaps the conference has already shopped the cable carriers to get a view of the carriage landscape. Maybe they know about how much $$$ they can get and whether it's enough.

    The ACC network could be deployed at any time with the conference and Raycom as partners. But limited FB content makes it difficult to gain carriage. Can the negotiation of carriage agreements drag on until its no longer sustainable? Can the expense of reacquiring content from FOX make it unprofitable?

    Swofford tells us this needs study, consideration, etc. He probably already knows the answer.

    Some more more harsh realities:

    Temple is not in the ACC
    Connecticut is not in the ACC
    Navy is not in the ACC
    Notre Dame FB is not in the ACC
    Texas is not in the ACC
    There is no "Western Pod" in the ACC
    Why this constant chant to add more and more schools? The current lineup aint so bad.

    The ACC network will be built upon the current member schools. (not an absolute)

  9. #19

    Join Date
    May 18, 2006
    Posts
    4,112

    A possible thinking?

    Quote Originally Posted by HOO86 View Post
    I think you and I have discussed earlier in another thread about Pittsburgh not carrying the entire State of Pennsylvania. Only Penn State does this. I would love to have Penn State in the ACC. But if that is not a possibility, if the ACC wants the Philadelphia market, Temple is the only game in town. Temple would definitely be second fiddle in Philadelphia at the college level to Penn State, but Georgia Tech is to the Georgia Bulldogs in Atlanta too. Raycom is having trouble getting distribution on the Philadelphia Local Sports Nets like Comcast Sportsnet Philadelphia, which carries the Phillies. Raycom does have one Philadelphia Fox broadcast station carrying some of the Raycom package.

    I went online doing a little research about Temple. If they would step it up a notch, they have potential. It's a large school. I remember Georgia Tech stunk at basketball when they joined the ACC. And Florida State has grown into a well rounded athletic department since being in the ACC. When they joined, they were football and baseball only. Their olympic sports have vastly improved. So it can be done. While doing my research, I came across Temple's football promotion for this year. I'll link it for anyone interested. I especially like the sack of the Maryland Quarterback at the end and the kickoff return at Louisville.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYwjqQvUm8g

    I believe that Temple would get the ACC on the air in Philadelphia at least. Then they would need a marketing plan to grow the interest. With the loss of Baltimore due to Maryland's defection, the ACC has taken a hit in the Mid-Atlantic. Philadelphia would be a nice regain of territory. It would also get the ACC coverage on both ends of Pennsylvania. Temple University has 38,000students and 200,000 plus living alumni. One would think that the ACC and Temple could do some marketing to get them excited at least a little bit. They have quality basketball and are spending money on their football program. The ACC needs to make a decision on whether it wants that market. And as you point out, Connecticut locks down the New England area and the north side of New York City. So there are some choices and trade offs. I hope they do the proper market analysis for the ACC Network because I want the ACC to have one.




    Get Navy and Army under the ACC NETWORK umbrella. Not really in league but their games could be part of the league. Allow Navy to play alot of games in Baltimore against ACC powers. VT FSU and Clemson I believe would sell in that area. Plus ND.

    Temple if what you say seems intriguing.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Posts
    15,119

    It's articles like this that force me to question the ACC leadership....

    Quote Originally Posted by CobbCountyHokie View Post
    http://roanoke.com/sports/colleges/2...t-logical.html

    Here is what I can tell you...

    The ACC will need to have a network in order for the member institutions to be on a financial par with the other leagues. The Big 10, PAC-12 and the SEC will all be earning a lot more money thanks to their networks over the ACC and the Big 12 and that inequity will once again drive a lot of chatter about realignment, etc. The Big-12 will be a mess thanks to the Longhorn Network.
    The ACC's initial planned expansion was built around TV markets - that's all we heard. Yet, the ACC is one of the last major conferences to actually pursue its own network? As the Big Ten's network began to take off, why didn't the ACC invite two from this TV market-heavy group: Rutgers, Syracuse, & Pitt? They sat on their hands and we missed out on Rutgers, and lost Maryland. How attractive would a 14 member ACC that dominated the entire Atlantic Coast been to Notre Dame in 2010? How about Penn State?

    So now Swoff is mulling an ACC network ("it's business analysis, that's what it is"). I just can't understand whether it's ACC leadership or university presidents that are terminally reactionary. Will we get our TV network in 2017, just as FTTH initiatives render it obsolete?

    Let's hold our breath and hope Texas joins, or that Notre Dames comes fully aboard. That still doesn't mean that the ACC hasn't pissed away millions through inaction/cluelessness. When I imagine the ACC annual meetings, I see it as something like a brainstorming session on Duck Dynasty.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •