Here's a good summary of conference revenues ...

Discussion in 'Big XII Conference' started by surly, May 18, 2017.

  1. surly

    surly Well-Known Member

    May 16, 2013
    3,486
    166
    63
    writing, trolling
    reservation lake, mn
    The focus is on PAC12 distributions but the summary brings it home for the rest of us. I've said before that both our conference and theirs should be pursuing some sort of joint arrangement. There are many ways to formulate it. If they don't the spread will only increases versus the BIG and SEC.

    SEC: $40.5 million
    Big Ten: $34.8 million
    Pac-12: $28.7 million
    Big 12: $28.45 million

    Notes:

    SEC figure is midpoint of confirmed range of $39.1 million to $41.9 million … Big Ten figure is for 11 continuing members … Big 12 figure is midpoint of confirmed range of $28 million to $28.9 million. Big 12 distributions do not include income from Tier 3 rights, which are owned by the schools.



    http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/16/college-hotline-pac-12-finances-total-revenue-school-payouts-network-income-comps-with-secb1g-and-more/
     
  2. crash_zone

    crash_zone Well-Known Member

    Apr 10, 2006
    1,725
    53
    48
    Engineer
    Tiffin, IA
    Or the B12 should just make a play for what they want from the PAC. Per school, B12 is better off.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. jbhtexas

    jbhtexas Well-Known Member

    Oct 20, 2006
    12,250
    534
    113
    Male
    Arlington, TX
    I think it would be advantageous for the Big 12 and Pac-12 to make some kind of joint arrangement, but I don't think that arrangement would necessarily bring the revenues up to SEC and Big Ten levels. I think one of the primary underlying reason that the SEC and Big Ten get the money they do is because those conferences have more schools with big fan bases than do the BIg 12 and Pac-12.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. norcalcy

    norcalcy Well-Known Member

    Oct 20, 2010
    1,381
    114
    63
    PAC 12 figures are gross payouts that are subject to withholding of Tier 3 fee. Big XII definitely comes out ahead on that. Pretty high overhead to support those salaries for PAC conference and network joint employees. Larry Scott and his friends live well.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. jbhtexas

    jbhtexas Well-Known Member

    Oct 20, 2006
    12,250
    534
    113
    Male
    Arlington, TX
    Correct. So...the Pac-12 Tier I/II deal is what it is, and the Pac-12 network generates very small revenue, leading to the payout above. So what does that say??? There is relatively less fan interest in the Pac 12 than there is in the other conferences??? How do you fix that? They tried to fix it by poaching UT and OU (plus friends), but that fell through.
     
  6. Stewo

    Stewo Well-Known Member

    Oct 29, 2008
    9,661
    857
    113
    Male
    Commodity buyer
    Iowa
    I cringe every time I see these numbers. I still think this whole model is going to come crashing down in near future.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. jbhtexas

    jbhtexas Well-Known Member

    Oct 20, 2006
    12,250
    534
    113
    Male
    Arlington, TX
    The other day in another thread I brought up the study done several years ago that tried to determine fan base size for the FBS schools. Of course there are quibbles about some of the figures for schools, but I think those numbers probably give a good feel for relative conference fanbase size. Below are the average conference school fanbase size for the current conference configurations:

    Big Ten: 1,352,852
    SEC: 1,190,783
    ACC: 898,466
    Big 12: 835,388
    Pac-12: 645,062

    The SEC and Big Ten have the eyeballs. The Pac-12 has a problem (and it is reflected in their media revenue). To be frank, the Big 12 is a bit tenuous, as UT is really pulling up the average.

    IMO, the bottom 3 need to band together somehow. Perhaps between the three of them they could put together a linear network channel (or maybe 2) that could command a nice carriage fee, and maybe come up with some kind of cutting-edge streaming model.

    https://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/
     
  8. cykadelic2

    cykadelic2 Well-Known Member

    Jun 10, 2006
    1,629
    62
    48
    #8 cykadelic2, May 18, 2017
    Last edited: May 18, 2017
    Banding together with the ACC won't happen due to their T1/T2/T3 rights all being owned by ESPN. Much more likely and sensible is the B12 (or 8 members minus BU and WV) buying equity shares in the PACN and forming a 20-school alliance with two divisions or conferences. Despite its issues, the PACN being wholly owned by member schools is already well positioned to deliver content via a linear network or streaming. What the PACN needs now is an equity partner with cash and an expanded footprint to more passionate fanbases in TX and the Midwest.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. weR138

    weR138 Well-Known Member

    Feb 20, 2008
    9,379
    603
    113
    Agree. I think the ONLY way the Pac can begin to keep up in the current TV subscription model is to add the state of Texas plus a program like OU. It seem to me that a combined Pac / XII network is the way to go as I've said many times. I would add BYU and one other western program (UNR? UNM?) to the XII, reduce the number of conf games, and set up cross conference scheduling agreements.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. surly

    surly Well-Known Member

    May 16, 2013
    3,486
    166
    63
    writing, trolling
    reservation lake, mn
    Absolutely agree with you Cy'k'2. It's so dang obvious, one would think even dopey Bob could figure it out and start a conversation with the $4 million man. The leagues are complimentary. An alliance would insure OU's needs are satisfied with USC, UCLA and others dotting their annual schedule. And the alliance could easily be limited to football and MBB.
     
  11. Beyerball

    Beyerball Well-Known Member

    Jun 18, 2013
    3,989
    193
    63
    Sales
    Texas
    Agree that the best case/long term scenerio for both conferences is a merger i just dont see it happening. It would also be a massive collaboration academically as well which would dominate if it went that far anyway. I sure hope Bolwlsby and Scott are getting their paydays earned and talking about this regularly...

    If there is one silver lining to the big 12 not expanding last round is that they did their due diligence on all these potential candidates and found them not worthy of joining a P5 which will hlep a school like ISU come 2023.
     
  12. weR138

    weR138 Well-Known Member

    Feb 20, 2008
    9,379
    603
    113
    I wouldn't suggest a merger but rather a shared TV network. No academic collaboration. Maybe nothing more than FB & MBB...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. jbhtexas

    jbhtexas Well-Known Member

    Oct 20, 2006
    12,250
    534
    113
    Male
    Arlington, TX
    One problem you have is that at least 3 Big 12 schools (UT, OU, WVU) have to give up very lucrative T3 deals ($8 million/yr plus) to join up with a T3 network that has struggled to pay out $2 million/yr. And several other Big 12 schools have been reported to be making well over $2 million/yr on their T3 deals. How will those schools be convinced to do this? Will a Big 12 / Pac-12 alliance somehow give a boost to T1/T2 as well?
     
  14. CascadeClone

    CascadeClone Well-Known Member

    Oct 24, 2009
    2,082
    82
    48
    What's key h
    The key is the 2nd tier rights, which bring some schools (UT, OU, WV) up above the B1G and maybe for UT above SEC revenue. Even ISU gets like $3M, right? So that's nearly B1G with limited sports and a limited home audience...

    From that angle, the Pac12 needs help more than anyone, and only the Big12 makes sense (unless they freak out and absorb parts of the WAC/MWC). Some kind of alliance for FB with divisions and a big CCG seems to make a lot of sense. But does it actually add $$ for the Big12, or just perceived stability? Is stability enough? Would the payout from the Pac12 network be higher than the 3rd tier rights? Maybe for TCU or ISU, but probably not for UT. And in the future with cord cutting the P12N might be even less valuable.

    I think it would be way cool junior to have some kind of alliance with the P12, games at Colorado or Utah etc. And for ISU it would bring some conference stability. But IDK if the $$ adds up, and of course that is the driver.
     
  15. cykadelic2

    cykadelic2 Well-Known Member

    Jun 10, 2006
    1,629
    62
    48
    Absolutely, having a wholly owned T3 network in PACN provides leverage in T1 and T2 negotiations. If Fox, ESPN, Turner, CBS, etc. don’t want to pay us enough money for T1 and T2 content, then PACN will keep it. If the B12 maintains the status quo regarding T3, they won’t have that leverage for T1 and T2 and likely negate existing T3 windfalls for OU, UT and WV.
     

Share This Page