you probably should actually read the info and try to understand it a little better before interpreting it. The real time to compare will be once the first football game has gone live and the dust begins to settle.

A few more observations for you to consider. FIOS was not a bit player. You also fail to consider differences in leverage. For example, Dish's agreement was reached as part of a wider carriage deal while that same deal is not presently renegotiable around the ACC date. ESPN chose the ACC launch date with regards to where they would have the earliest leverage with wider carriage deals subject to renegotiation, where the physical operations at all schools and in Bristol could be up to speed and gave them the chance for the most money at the earliest date. The SEC launch will, in my opinion, prove to be better than the ACC and a reflection of the differences in the depth and breadth of the two leagues and the additional leverage enjoyed at the SEC launch compared to the current ACC launch. The question is what will constitute much better versus just better. I think there will be at least a couple of dates to really evaluate the ACC launch. As I said the first date will be subsequent to the first football game going live. The second date will be once all the existing omnibus agreements have been subject to at least one renewal/renegotiation. The third date is much more subjective and is probably five or 10 years down the road. That third date will give a good idea of long term stability, the ability of networks to adapt to technology and industry changes both on the media side and the NCAA side. I think it is far to early to try and write the final chapter on how bad or how good the ACC Network launch and concept really is.
[Post edited by 2hhoop3 at 08/23/2019 8:04PM]