|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Apr 19, 2023 15:49:35 GMT -8
Yeah, he's been trying to con the PAC into a full share since day one -- mostly by threatening to go to the Big 12. That's one of the reasons that the Big 12 doesn't want you -- you've not only been very public in your preference for the PAC, you've embarrassed the Big 12 by being very public with your disdain for the conference, except as a safe harbor in case your preferred gig doesn't come through. So yeah, he's intimating that the Aztecs can get a full share from the Big 12, not because it's true, but because it can help him get a full share from the PAC. Except the PAC and the Big 12 talk with each other. It must be very frustrating to be on the outside looking in at State… wanted by both conferences, already offered by both regardless what the P10/12 schools decide to do… if JD called Yormack tomorrow and said we want to accept the B12 offer… it would be a done deal |
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Apr 19, 2023 15:54:57 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Apr 19, 2023 16:01:04 GMT -8
Actually, by jumping ahead with basically a renewal of their current contract (adding and subtracting those schools realigning) they may have done nothing but lowered the market value of both them and the PAC. Most believe they left money on the table in order to get a jump on the PAC. They know they don't have the product the PAC does. The PAC believes the B12 deal is the floor, not the ceiling. Bob Thompson, former President of Fox Sports, says otherwise. He doesn't think that the Big 12 left material money on the table. The story that they did is coming from the PAC, which is looking for excuses for their failure to deliver a big contract. that makes no sense at all… the B12 taking ~$32m means that the P12 leadership can take a similar number and blame it on the market being set by the B12… it is not in their interests to say that the market is around $40m just to then miss it… silly |
|
|
|
Post by bnastyaztecs on Apr 19, 2023 16:23:12 GMT -8
Well look at you, orbiting this topic, while mooning us. I see this thread has taken a Saturn for the worse. I'll stay Neptuned to see if you show me Uranus in return, but probably best we keep our relationship Plutonic. That was outta this world.... |
|
|
|
Post by gocoaztec on Apr 19, 2023 16:39:28 GMT -8
Basic business Deal - and so far it sure seems that TV Networks or Media have not offered enough money to make the PAC Deal to be close enough to the Big 12's deal So the PAC has to hope that there is a good report about the PAC teams after the Spring Practices and the PAC is a better product / Viewer wise - The Key element for TV Or hope that some TV / Media group wants to get involved Yes the Big 12 leap frogged over the PAC and got a decent TV Deal and set the bar at what the PAC hopes to get . The PAC is SDSU's First choice and until it gets confirmed that there is an actual offer from the Big 12 there is not anything SDSU can do and that is the same for any MW school - as the Big 12 wants the PAC schools So it is a sitting and waiting process for numerous schools So Congratulations on getting us to 400 Pages 💥🎉🎊 1. B12 - leapt over the P12 and got a deal in place, most analyst said that they took security over money as they left about 30% on the table… not sure it is good for B12 in the long term… decent deal… maybe… 2. B12 Offer - JD and Adela have almost said they have a confirmed offer from the B12… they aren’t going to come out and say it point blank… the B12 has confirmed with their Media Partners that the B12 will receive a full share if State comes to the B12 just like ASU, Colorado, etc. 3. It is a waiting process, State will wait and accept the P12 offer as soon as the deal is completed. I think the B12 is the better conference, but there is no way that the $32m deal is only 70% - that means that the B12 could/should have a deal for $45m! If you really believe that then I can’t imagine why you would still be pushing the P12, who is struggling to match the $32m deal. The B12 might have left $5m per school on the table - still not an insignificant amount. There are times when selling at a discount is a smart move - and I think that this was one of those times. Sooner or later (if the PAC ever gets their poop together) we’ll have a better idea regarding the wisdom of the B12’s media deal. |
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Apr 19, 2023 16:57:01 GMT -8
So Congratulations on getting us to 400 Pages 💥🎉🎊 1. B12 - leapt over the P12 and got a deal in place, most analyst said that they took security over money as they left about 30% on the table… not sure it is good for B12 in the long term… decent deal… maybe… 2. B12 Offer - JD and Adela have almost said they have a confirmed offer from the B12… they aren’t going to come out and say it point blank… the B12 has confirmed with their Media Partners that the B12 will receive a full share if State comes to the B12 just like ASU, Colorado, etc. 3. It is a waiting process, State will wait and accept the P12 offer as soon as the deal is completed. I think the B12 is the better conference, but there is no way that the $32m deal is only 70% - that means that the B12 could/should have a deal for $45m! If you really believe that then I can’t imagine why you would still be pushing the P12, who is struggling to match the $32m deal. The B12 might have left $5m per school on the table - still not an insignificant amount. There are times when selling at a discount is a smart move - and I think that this was one of those times. Sooner or later (if the PAC ever gets their poop together) we’ll have a better idea regarding the wisdom of the B12’s media deal. So… $31.6m x 1.3 is $41m and yes folks have said that it could be up to that number that was left on the table… maybe it was $5m per school per year or $30m per school… significant… you are assuming that the P12 is struggling to get to $32m… it will play out, but the comments that have been sourced to folks that are part of the negotiations have said that the $32m number will be a layup… the truth will come out soon enough. |
|
|
|
Post by gocoaztec on Apr 19, 2023 18:55:51 GMT -8
I think the B12 is the better conference, but there is no way that the $32m deal is only 70% - that means that the B12 could/should have a deal for $45m! If you really believe that then I can’t imagine why you would still be pushing the P12, who is struggling to match the $32m deal. The B12 might have left $5m per school on the table - still not an insignificant amount. There are times when selling at a discount is a smart move - and I think that this was one of those times. Sooner or later (if the PAC ever gets their poop together) we’ll have a better idea regarding the wisdom of the B12’s media deal. So… $31.6m x 1.3 is $41m and yes folks have said that it could be up to that number that was left on the table… maybe it was $5m per school per year or $30m per school… significant… you are assuming that the P12 is struggling to get to $32m… it will play out, but the comments that have been sourced to folks that are part of the negotiations have said that the $32m number will be a layup… the truth will come out soon enough. $45m x 0.70 = $31.5m. Please link to any reputable source that says the B12 deal could have been $45m. I should have been more precise - the P12 is struggling to negotiate a deal that is acceptable to the schools within the conference. The correct combination of dollars, exposure, and duration continues to elude them. And the longer the negotiations continue, barring an unforeseen “Hail Mary”, the less likely a successful outcome becomes. Maybe Kalashnikov will prove me wrong, but I’ve never heard of a nine month layup 🤔. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Apr 19, 2023 19:15:28 GMT -8
Actually, by jumping ahead with basically a renewal of their current contract (adding and subtracting those schools realigning) they may have done nothing but lowered the market value of both them and the PAC. Most believe they left money on the table in order to get a jump on the PAC. They know they don't have the product the PAC does. The PAC believes the B12 deal is the floor, not the ceiling. Bob Thompson, former President of Fox Sports, says otherwise. He doesn't think that the Big 12 left material money on the table. The story that they did is coming from the PAC, which is looking for excuses for their failure to deliver a big contract. Can you post a link where Thompson said that? I follow him on Twitter and have never seen him say that. Not calling you a liar, of course, just would like to see for myself even if I'm not from Missouri. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Apr 19, 2023 19:16:22 GMT -8
Yeah, he's been trying to con the PAC into a full share since day one -- mostly by threatening to go to the Big 12. That's one of the reasons that the Big 12 doesn't want you -- you've not only been very public in your preference for the PAC, you've embarrassed the Big 12 by being very public with your disdain for the conference, except as a safe harbor in case your preferred gig doesn't come through. So yeah, he's intimating that the Aztecs can get a full share from the Big 12, not because it's true, but because it can help him get a full share from the PAC. Except the PAC and the Big 12 talk with each other. God you're a maroon. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Apr 19, 2023 19:20:12 GMT -8
Bob Thompson, former President of Fox Sports, says otherwise. He doesn't think that the Big 12 left material money on the table. The story that they did is coming from the PAC, which is looking for excuses for their failure to deliver a big contract. that makes no sense at all… the B12 taking ~$32m means that the P12 leadership can take a similar number and blame it on the market being set by the B12… it is not in their interests to say that the market is around $40m just to then miss it… silly You trying to use logic with the guy from "Squirt U?" You gotta remember you are not talking with this:  But, instead, this:  Umm, just following the space angle we seem to have achieved. |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Apr 19, 2023 19:31:51 GMT -8
Bob Thompson, former President of Fox Sports, says otherwise. He doesn't think that the Big 12 left material money on the table. The story that they did is coming from the PAC, which is looking for excuses for their failure to deliver a big contract. Can you post a link where Thompson said that? I follow him on Twitter and have never seen him say that. Not calling you a liar, of course, just would like to see for myself even if I'm not from Missouri. I should clarify. Thompson said that the Big 12 did not leave money on the table. That the story is coming from the PAC was my observation, not his -- and by "from the PAC", I meant the PAC media. Thompson's comments were made during a podcast. I don't remember which one; it was probably two months ago. Sorry I can't be more specific. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Apr 19, 2023 19:33:22 GMT -8
So Congratulations on getting us to 400 Pages 💥🎉🎊 1. B12 - leapt over the P12 and got a deal in place, most analyst said that they took security over money as they left about 30% on the table… not sure it is good for B12 in the long term… decent deal… maybe… 2. B12 Offer - JD and Adela have almost said they have a confirmed offer from the B12… they aren’t going to come out and say it point blank… the B12 has confirmed with their Media Partners that the B12 will receive a full share if State comes to the B12 just like ASU, Colorado, etc. 3. It is a waiting process, State will wait and accept the P12 offer as soon as the deal is completed. I think the B12 is the better conference, but there is no way that the $32m deal is only 70% - that means that the B12 could/should have a deal for $45m! If you really believe that then I can’t imagine why you would still be pushing the P12, who is struggling to match the $32m deal. The B12 might have left $5m per school on the table - still not an insignificant amount. There are times when selling at a discount is a smart move - and I think that this was one of those times. Sooner or later (if the PAC ever gets their poop together) we’ll have a better idea regarding the wisdom of the B12’s media deal. Umm, 30% of 31.7M is 9.5M which, added together would be 41.2M, not 45.3M. Your number would be leaving 43% ($13.6M) on the table. You don't math well, do you? |
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Apr 19, 2023 19:35:25 GMT -8
I think the B12 is the better conference, but there is no way that the $32m deal is only 70% - that means that the B12 could/should have a deal for $45m! If you really believe that then I can’t imagine why you would still be pushing the P12, who is struggling to match the $32m deal. The B12 might have left $5m per school on the table - still not an insignificant amount. There are times when selling at a discount is a smart move - and I think that this was one of those times. Sooner or later (if the PAC ever gets their poop together) we’ll have a better idea regarding the wisdom of the B12’s media deal. Umm, 30% of 31.7M is 9.5M which, added together would be 41.2M, not 45.3M. Your number would be leaving 43% ($13.6M) on the table. You don't math well, do you? .7x=31.7 X=? |
|
|
|
Post by namssa on Apr 19, 2023 19:35:41 GMT -8
Altimore states that he has been told by contacts that the paperwork has already been signed at least on a preliminary level for SDSU to join the PAC12.
|
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Apr 19, 2023 19:36:15 GMT -8
Can you post a link where Thompson said that? I follow him on Twitter and have never seen him say that. Not calling you a liar, of course, just would like to see for myself even if I'm not from Missouri. I should clarify. Thompson said that the Big 12 did not leave money on the table. That the story is coming from the PAC was my observation, not his -- and by "from the PAC", I meant the PAC media. Thompson's comments were made during a podcast. I don't remember which one; it was probably two months ago. Sorry I can't be more specific. And there you go again... |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Apr 19, 2023 19:45:16 GMT -8
Umm, 30% of 31.7M is 9.5M which, added together would be 41.2M, not 45.3M. Your number would be leaving 43% ($13.6M) on the table. You don't math well, do you? .7x=31.7 X=? I admit to being rather rusty at math, but .3 x 31.7 = 9.5. But, if you want to make the claim that the B12 left nearly $14M on the table it helps mine and Boise's points. I do recall that Klavikoff had the PAC valued at about $45M/school which was higher than he valued the B12. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Apr 19, 2023 19:47:37 GMT -8
Altimore states that he has been told by contacts that the paperwork has already been signed at least on a preliminary level for SDSU to join the PAC12. Hmm, Boise are you one of those contacts? |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Apr 19, 2023 20:02:27 GMT -8
Altimore states that he has been told by contacts that the paperwork has already been signed at least on a preliminary level for SDSU to join the PAC12. For those who don't want to listen to the whole thing, that comment is made at about 1:00.35. He also mentions that USCLA may not want any of their PAC rivals to follow them to the B1G shortly thereafter. |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Apr 19, 2023 20:43:16 GMT -8
I admit to being rather rusty at math, but .3 x 31.7 = 9.5. But, if you want to make the claim that the B12 left nearly $14M on the table it helps mine and Boise's points. I do recall that Klavikoff had the PAC valued at about $45M/school which was higher than he valued the B12. (31.7/0.7) = 45.29 million (value of the contract if it was underpriced by 30%) 45.29 million - 31.7 mil = 13.59 million (money, per school, left on the table, if the contract was undervalued by 30%) As I said, I don't think that the Big 12 left money on the table. That's just the excuse that the pro-PAC crowd use for not meeting the inflated numbers that GK originally threw out as being a slam dunk. The relative value of their TV deals is meaningless as a measurement of the quality of the conferences because, the situations faced by the two conferences when they went to market were very different. Whether accidently or by design, by going to market first, the Big 12 filled most of the remaining product needs for the broadcasters. So when the PAC came along, the supply vs. demand situation was entirely different. The demand was way down because it had already largely been met. Add to that, broadcaster cutbacks reduced or eliminated the bidding war that might have occurred last summer. It's not that the Big 12 is a "better" conference than the PAC -- it's that they went to market at a time where the demand for product, relative to the supply, was much greater and when the broadcasters were willing to pay to fill that demand. Honestly, I don't know if it was brilliance on the part of Yormark or just dumb luck. But either way, it is causing the PAC all sorts of problems. But the one thing it doesn't do is prove that the Big 12 is better than the PAC. |
|
|
|
Post by Texaz on Apr 19, 2023 20:58:09 GMT -8
Texas Monthly is a well sourced straight-up magazine. I'm impressed your research found it. The article makes several good points and I witnessed the SWC breakup. Other than TCU what other school competes in football. I think going forward TCU leaves the Big 12 and what is left--basketball. |
|
