Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43
  1. #21
    Old Line Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    3659′36″N 7813′30″W
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by 133304Hokie View Post
    Okay so out of curiosity I ran the numbers:

    B1G states:

    Illinois 12,882,135
    Pennsylvania 12,773,801
    Ohio 11,570,808
    Michigan 9,895,622
    Indiana 6,570,902
    Wisconsin 5,742,713
    Minnesota 5,420,380
    Iowa 3,090,416
    Nebraska 1,868,516
    Sub total 50,362,256

    New Jersey 8,899,339
    Maryland 5,928,814
    Total 65,190,409


    SEC states:

    Texas 26,448,193
    Florida 19,552,860
    Georgia 9,992,167
    Tennessee 6,495,978
    Missouri 6,044,171
    Alabama 4,833,722
    South Carolina 4,774,839
    Louisiana 4,625,470
    Kentucky 4,395,295
    Mississippi 2,991,207
    Arkansas 2,959,373
    Total 93,113,275


    Final Score:
    SEC markets 93,113,275
    B1G markets 65,190,409
    The Big 10 would also include metro New York (Rutgers) and metro Washington, DC (Maryland) if you go by television markets. That would be another 16 million or so. The ACC will still include metro DC after Maryland leaves. DC, Montgomery, PG, Howard, Frederick, Charles, Calvert, southern Anne Arundel, St. Mary's counties, Maryland would still be watching ACC games on DC television stations. Plus northern New Jersey, southeast CT, and Chicagoland.
    Last edited by Old Line Hokie; Mon Jan 13 2014 at 11:30 PM.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    January 01, 2005
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by Femoyer Hokie View Post
    I think your B1G numbers add up to about 85 mil. But point well taken.
    Curses! Foiled again by math. You are correct, my addition was clearly way off. Sorry about that. I THINK the correct numbers are:

    SEC states: 93,113,275
    B1G states: 84,643,446

  3. #23

    Join Date
    January 01, 2005
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by Melbourne Hokie View Post
    Aren't the numbers a bit misleading? How many of the 26+ million in Texas really interested in aTm? The same for the Gators in Florida? I mean we are giving a lot of credit for having a SINGLE school in two of the top four most populous states.....
    I think the question is whether or not there is enough interest in aTm AND the SEC within the state of Texas to make it impossible for cable and satellite carriers within Texas to refuse to carry the SEC Network even at exorbitant carriage fees.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    January 01, 2005
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Line Hokie View Post
    The Big 10 would also include metro New York (Rutgers) and metro Washington, DC (Maryland) if you go by television markets. That would be another 16 million or so. The ACC will still include metro DC after Maryland leaves. DC, Montgomery, PG, Howard, Frederick, Charles, Calvert, southern Anne Arundel, St. Mary's counties, Maryland would still be watching ACC games on DC television stations. Plus northern New Jersey, southeast CT, and Chicagoland.
    But I assume those adjacent markets get the B1G Network at the much lower out-of-state carriage rate, which makes them less significant to a dedicated conference network.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    January 01, 2005
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by Freddyburg Hokie View Post
    No, they won't. With more people "cutting the cable" each month, this will only add more reasons for the non-sports-fan to do this. Cable companies will fight tooth and nail to prevent cost-creep by the network. As more and more networks try to generate the same type of income (B1G, P16, SEC, ACC, FS1, along with other non-sports channels), the average consumer's cable bill will keep increasing. At some time in the future, it will reach a tipping point where even casual sports fans will throw up their arms. Cable bills can't keep going up at the current rates forever.

    People are making the mistake of projecting the current sports media landscape out into the future, when the foundation of it (fees being borne by all cable subscribers, even those that don't watch sports), is already starting to crumble. A paradigm shift is coming. Sports will at a minimum be moved to their own tiers, with costs borne only by subscribers of that tier, and they're going to be pricey. Beyond that, think college football pay-per-view.

    Would love to hear CobbCountyHokie's take on this. Am I totally off-base here?

    In a semi-related matter, keep an eye on CBS v Aereo, coming soon to a U.S. Supreme Court near you. If Aereo wins, this will cause a HUGE shakeup in the network TV world, with sports programming feeling the trickle-down effects.
    I think the conference networks in their contracts with TV providers require that in order to carry their channel, it has to be placed on the standard programming tier within the conference footprint, so shifting the network channels to a premium sports tier (at least within the conference footprint) would not be possible as contracts are currently written.

    And while I agree with you though that it seems unlikely that carriage rates can continue to increase at the rate they have been, people have been saying that for years and yet rates keep increasing. I'm sure there is some price at which cable operators in the state of Alabama would refuse to carry the SEC Network, but it's going to have to be mighty high.
    Last edited by 133304Hokie; Tue Jan 14 2014 at 01:02 AM.

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    February 21, 2013
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Melbourne Hokie View Post
    Aren't the numbers a bit misleading? How many of the 26+ million in Texas really interested in aTm? The same for the Gators in Florida? I mean we are giving a lot of credit for having a SINGLE school in two of the top four most populous states.....
    Population of cable subscribers is the important number. Every cable subscriber pays the freight whether they tune-in or not.

  7. #27
    Melbourne Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 01, 2005
    Location
    In a series of tubes, filled mostly with cats
    Posts
    43,158
    Quote Originally Posted by 33laszlo99 View Post
    Population of cable subscribers is the important number. Every cable subscriber pays the freight whether they tune-in or not.
    Is that really true? I don't pay for the Big 10 network though it is on my cable system in a tiered package.....

  8. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    February 21, 2013
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Melbourne Hokie View Post
    Is that really true? I don't pay for the Big 10 network though it is on my cable system in a tiered package.....
    You don't pay to BTN directly. BTN is part of the cable carrier's "bundle". The cable carrier pays BTN based on how many cable boxes he serves. But rest assured, the carrier is charging all of his subscribers for the BTN.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    1,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Femoyer Hokie View Post
    Is the network typically part of a more basic package or a higher priced premium sports package? As a comparison, I wonder hov many "subscribers" the B1G Network has compared to what the SEC Network will have.
    I would expect that in SEC markets that it will be part of the basic tier. Outside the SEC footprint it will be part of a sports tier. I also think it will be basic tier on Direct and Dish.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    1,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Freddyburg Hokie View Post
    No, they won't. With more people "cutting the cable" each month, this will only add more reasons for the non-sports-fan to do this. Cable companies will fight tooth and nail to prevent cost-creep by the network. As more and more networks try to generate the same type of income (B1G, P16, SEC, ACC, FS1, along with other non-sports channels), the average consumer's cable bill will keep increasing. At some time in the future, it will reach a tipping point where even casual sports fans will throw up their arms. Cable bills can't keep going up at the current rates forever.

    People are making the mistake of projecting the current sports media landscape out into the future, when the foundation of it (fees being borne by all cable subscribers, even those that don't watch sports), is already starting to crumble. A paradigm shift is coming. Sports will at a minimum be moved to their own tiers, with costs borne only by subscribers of that tier, and they're going to be pricey. Beyond that, think college football pay-per-view.

    Would love to hear CobbCountyHokie's take on this. Am I totally off-base here?

    In a semi-related matter, keep an eye on CBS v Aereo, coming soon to a U.S. Supreme Court near you. If Aereo wins, this will cause a HUGE shakeup in the network TV world, with sports programming feeling the trickle-down effects.
    I think you are making a bit more of the cord cutter than is really happening. We are not seeing a lot of cord cutting but I do admit that it is happening. For 2013 our subscriber count was up. Comcast was up as well. Time Warner really took it in the shorts and lost a ton of customers. Our customer losses are coming from competitors and not from cord cutters for the most part.

    Here is one thing that you need to remember. Sports programming is golden to the carriers because it is DVR proof. The sports networks know that you cannot DVR a live sporting event and then live in a bunker insulated from social media without spoiling the outcome. This is why live sports programming is worth so much. The fact that you cannot fast forward through the commercials and "time shift" your viewership is huge to any network or distributor. Frankly, if carriage fees rise for a sports network, I think you are more likely to see non-sports networks getting bumped off a system. We all now know exactly how many viewers are watching specific networks. This consumption data will drive future carriage deals and the under performing networks will begin to go away.

    Look at the fight right now between the Weather Channel and DirecTV. Weather wants more money but Direct is not going to budge. Now Weather is off Direct. Direct knows exactly how many subs are watching the weather channel and they are going to hold that over their heads.

Posting Permissions

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