|
|
Post by aztecjeff on Jun 30, 2025 9:13:59 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecjeff on Jun 30, 2025 10:59:07 GMT -8
Official Pac-12 Announcement:
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecjeff on Jun 30, 2025 16:43:29 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecjeff on Jun 30, 2025 17:16:46 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on Jun 30, 2025 17:51:34 GMT -8
I agree with the "Great Conference" sentiment but am concerned about three things: Inventory, Inventory, Inventory. The networks are buying programming (Football Games + game content). I've got 30+ years in media, so if I can explain. What Are Media Rights?Media rights give a network the ability to: 1. Broadcast or stream live games on TV, cable, or digital platforms 2. Distribute game highlights and replays 3. Use official league/team footage in pre- and post-game shows 4. Rights also include behind-the-scenes content, archival access, or content integrations 5. Shoulder programming to support the league or conference What Are They Buying?A sports network is buying the exclusive time-limited license to: 1. Show games live (most valuable) 2. Monetize viewership across platforms 3. Leverage the association with a major conference What they’re not buying:1. Ownership of the content (it’s a license) 2. Long-term control Bottom line the Networks need plenty of games (Inventory) to pay fees and Monetize the Content.
How Do Sports Networks Monetize the Games?Networks monetize media rights in the following ways: 1. Advertising RevenueMain revenue stream: selling ads during live games, halftime, and pre/post shows - Premium games, conference championships & finals attract top ad dollars due to large and live audiences - Rates vary widely, CPMs can range from $10 to $100 cost per thousand, in my experience is CW ranges $10 to $30, Big CBS and ESPN $30 to $60+ - There are typically 80-92 :30 national commercials in a college football game including pre/post, halftime and in-game units. (local breaks not included) 2. Subscription Revenue- Cable carriage fees: Cable providers pay networks a fee per subscriber per month - Direct-to-consumer (DTC) platforms: ESPN+, Peacock, etc., charge monthly or annual fees - More viewers → more leverage → higher carriage or sub fees 3. Sponsorship & Branding- Integrated brand placements (studio sets, jersey sponsorships, virtual signage) -Co-branded content (e.g., “presented by Gatorade” segments) 4. Syndication & Licensing- Sell content to other broadcasters or digital platforms - Highlights and clips licensed to YouTube, news media, sports apps, etc. 5. Other Monetization- Betting partnerships - Merchandise & affiliates So in order to drive revenues from Media Rights, there has to be plenty of inventory (games), premium match ups. With a league of 8 Football Members, the PAC Media Rights is limited. Plus, the difference between West Coast and East Coast sports viewing has a major impact on audience behavior, ratings, and revenue strategies for the networks. West coast prime starts too late for East Coast viewers (10–10:30 PM ET), which: Hurts live ratings, reduces ad effectiveness in national brand campaigns, and lead to lower national TV exposure for West Coast teams. Advertisers pay more for slots in East Coast-friendly time windows due to broader reach. So, that's why the AAC, ACC, Big East as well as Big 10 & SEC Media Rights contracts are larger than ours (PAC/MW) More eyeballs, better time slots, broader reach. Wow. Great content. So thorough. No offense, but I have to ask, ChatGPT? Truth is I've spent 35+ years in Media Strategy, Planning, Buying and Research, so its a combination of my skill set and AI support. In fact, the AAC Commissioner, Tim Pernetti, was our agency sales contact when he was selling for the CSTV(College Sports Network) and then CBS Sports before Rutgers, he started at ABC Sports in the 1990s. I've been a part of many Sports Marketing partnerships, with ESPN including the Bowl Series (Rose Bowl), The NBA and TNT, MLB Licensed Work, The PGA while at Taylor Made, and worked with Shaq O'Neil's brand Dunk.net (failed online shoe co.) & Kobe on creative/media projects and most recently the Lakers social team. The information comes from my head, Grammerly & Open AI for verification and structure. |
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on Jun 30, 2025 21:05:21 GMT -8
I believe the PAC is no longer expanding beyond Texas State. However, a 9th member allows for an 8-game conference schedule. I still believe that they will play 8, but with a Home/Home 2-game series.
For basketball, I was hoping for 1x BB only: St. Mary's, USF, UC Irvine, or to the Midwest, for Creighton or Wichita. Well, maybe not the Shockers. But with another reputable basketball brand.
|
|
|
|
Post by 94sdsu on Jul 1, 2025 6:33:14 GMT -8
Can’t believe these two guys got this interview the day of the announcement….I’m impressed |
|
|
|
Post by docmm on Jul 1, 2025 7:10:16 GMT -8
I believe the PAC is no longer expanding beyond Texas State. However, a 9th member allows for an 8-game conference schedule. I still believe that they will play 8, but with a Home/Home 2-game series. For basketball, I was hoping for 1x BB only: St. Mary's, USF, UC Irvine, or to the Midwest, for Creighton or Wichita. Well, maybe not the Shockers. But with another reputable basketball brand. The Big East gets about $7M per school media $o we could come close to that and Creighton wouldn't have to travel so far so often. But the BE can generate some good MM $. Not sure what the BE MM$ breakdown is for how much the school gets to keep. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Jul 1, 2025 8:46:52 GMT -8
When they turned down the MWC was when I thought they wanted to be added and expected to be. Once it was determined that now future members that would change the media deal much, then adding TXST, given their zero acquisition costs, made sense. The fact that they come in on a reduced, though graduating, share of the media money (which likely includes the PAC Enterprises), then the decision is a slam dunk. If Memphis were to get their Oly's intp the BE, then adding them as FB only would make some sense, but their real value is in both FB and BB. Tulane is more valuable as FB only but I don't know if they have a place to park their sports. I do think that AFA (FB only) and UNLV may still be in play. I really find it difficult to believe that they would sign a binding contract with the MWC through 2031 without knowing how much they'll make. The likely would have to come in 2027 or later, however. I have warmed up to the idea of adding SMC. Adds a quality BB program and brings regional baseball and men's soccer. TXST doesn't field either. Plus, according to Canzano, they are going to upgrade their facilities. And, the PAC contract is only through the 2030 season. I expect that a major realignment will occur then, after these P4 schools have a few years of travel in their conferences. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Jul 1, 2025 8:48:40 GMT -8
Wow. Great content. So thorough. No offense, but I have to ask, ChatGPT? Truth is I've spent 35+ years in Media Strategy, Planning, Buying and Research, so its a combination of my skill set and AI support. In fact, the AAC Commissioner, Tim Pernetti, was our agency sales contact when he was selling for the CSTV(College Sports Network) and then CBS Sports before Rutgers, he started at ABC Sports in the 1990s. I've been a part of many Sports Marketing partnerships, with ESPN including the Bowl Series (Rose Bowl), The NBA and TNT, MLB Licensed Work, The PGA while at Taylor Made, and worked with Shaq O'Neil's brand Dunk.net (failed online shoe co.) & Kobe on creative/media projects and most recently the Lakers social team. The information comes from my head, Grammerly & Open AI for verification and structure. I'm a Callaway guy. |
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on Jul 1, 2025 22:56:21 GMT -8
Canzono had a lot of interesting things to say today, this from the Monday Mailbag
• I expect the Pac-12 to pause after the Texas State addition. The Pac-12 is now compliant with the NCAA’s mandate to have eight full-time members. Unless a no-brainer option suddenly becomes available at the right number, I expect the league to focus its energy on some other things. Keep in mind that all nine members would need to approve further expansion.
• I expect the Pac-12 will look for football-only affiliate members. It would help with scheduling to have at least one additional member. Memphis would be ideal, but might come at a prohibitive cost. I’d also look at UTSA and Rice.
• North Texas has not had meaningful recent contact with the Pac-12, per a source.
• One Pac-12 athletic director told me: “Focus will continue to be on highest-value full membership, then highest value football-only.”
• The Pac-12 announced CBS as its cornerstone media partner last week. I expect The CW and Warner Bros. Discovery (TNT Sports) will be involved, too, although nothing has been announced. I am cool on the idea that ESPN will come in as a partner, but I expect the Olympic sports to end up on ESPN+.
• I am curious what role Pac-12 Enterprises will play with the league’s media deal. I expect the entity will be involved with multiple partners.
• As a basketball conference, seven of the nine new-look Pac-12 basketball programs have made the NCAA Tournament since 2021. Two of those schools (Gonzaga and San Diego State) have appeared in the men’s national title game in that span.
• I’m asked regularly about the status of the Pac-12-Mountain West mediation. It’s ongoing, and the stay issued by the court expires on July 15. I checked with Matthew Wand, an experienced litigator, to see what he thinks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Snohomie-Aztec on Jul 3, 2025 6:18:15 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by LostAztec on Jul 4, 2025 4:21:55 GMT -8
Can’t believe these two guys got this interview the day of the announcement….I’m impressed They do a good job. He has had Coryell on before and has visited the TxSt campus. Tbh, Damphouse and Coryell have done numerous interviews this week. |
|
|
|
Post by LostAztec on Jul 4, 2025 4:23:47 GMT -8
He whiffed on the part where WOSU lose their veto power as of June 30, 2026. They are co-equal members at that point. |
|
|
|
Post by namssa on Jul 4, 2025 9:12:14 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecjeff on Jul 5, 2025 20:01:23 GMT -8
I like this guy's podcast, but I'm unsure about the numbers he's hearing. If it's close to those kinds of numbers, what a knockout punch for the Pac-12! That could help reel in "football only" teams like Memphis, Tulane, UTSA or South Florida. It's always been my opinion that anything over 10 million in TV revenue is a bonus for the conference. It'll be interesting to see how much it ends up being. The new Pac-12 is most likely negotiating their football separately from their basketball and Olympic sports. One last item, do you think the Pac-12 might offer some type of olive branch (in 2027 or 2028) to the likes of North Dakota State or Sacramento State, or will that idea "never" take place? At this point, I think donors of Sacramento State should be offering every Pac-12 university 2 million dollars for the opportunity to join the league as a "football only" member... or they could offer a "ZERO" media share for their first two years in the league. They could buy their way in, so to speak, like SMU did in the ACC. They could put their money where their mouth is. That would give the league additional tonnage at "zero" expense. Personally, I'm not convinced Sacramento State is worth it at this point. They're an unproven quantity and don't offer any semblance of a national following. On the other hand, North Dakota State is a proven quantity & a different beast altogether, and just might fit the bill for football only... "if" none of the AAC schools join the league. www.youtube.com/shorts/aHEy7NKovpA |
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Jul 5, 2025 21:13:05 GMT -8
I like this guy's podcast, but I'm unsure about the numbers he's hearing. If it's close to those kinds of numbers, what a knockout punch for the Pac-12! That could help reel in "football only" teams like Memphis, Tulane, UTSA or South Florida. It's always been my opinion, that anything over 10 million in tv revenue is a bonus for the conference. It'll be interesting to see how much it ends up being. The new Pac-12 is most likely negotiating their football separately from their basketball and Olympic sports. One last item, do you think the Pac-12 might offer some type of olive branch (in 2027 or 2028) to the likes of North Dakota State or Sacramento State, or will that idea "never" take place? At this point, I think donors of Sacramento State should be offering every Pac-12 university 2 million dollars for the opportunity to join the league as a "football only" member... or they could offer a "ZERO" media share for their first two years in the league. They could buy their way in, so to speak, like SMU did in the ACC. They could put their money where their mouth is. That would give the league additional tonnage at "zero" expense. Personally, I'm not convinced Sacramento State is worth it at this point. They're an unproven quantity and don't offer any semblance of a national following. On the other hand, North Dakota State is a proven quantity & a different beast altogether, and just might fit the bill... "if" none of the AAC schools join the league. www.youtube.com/shorts/aHEy7NKovpAThe PAC is not in the market, but when they are, they will use the same evaluation matrix. 1. Has relevance in their TV market 2. Has a track record of investing and committed to investing more. 3. Is on the Mississippi or West 4. Has achieved athletic success Using this as a guide, you can knock out UTSA and USF. UTSA has had success but has not invested at all in their facilities. That is not their biggest issue. Their biggest issue is that Texas State is in the same market. UTSA doesn’t bring anything new. USF ticks a lot of boxes but unless the PAC goes to 14 or more, I don’t see it working. Memphis and Tulane are candidates, but they aren’t going to move until 2030/2031. That’s when their current tv contract runs out and they stop collecting exit fees totaling $79M. The AAC will just keep leveling them up with exit fees and unequal media shares. Sac State is not a candidate for the PAC. The meet none if the criteria. They need to address their facilities which is bad for FCSet alone FBS. There is a reason the MW gave UCD the right of first refusal. The Dakota and Montana schools just don’t have the population to join the PAC or even the MW. I like the big Sky and would like to see them make a jump and have a nice regional rural FBS conference. Just not all of them could make the jump. Montana Montana State Idaho Idaho State USD SDSU UND NDSU Would be a core for a very fun rural west coast version of the SBC. In the end, the PAC is better off small than adding disparate pieces. It’s what collapsed the WAC and now the MW. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecjeff on Jul 6, 2025 14:50:14 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Jul 6, 2025 15:56:50 GMT -8
We shall see what the media value turns out to be, but I think it will be more than $10M. Here is the simple math, if you believe that the departing schools are 66% of the value of the MW contract and that the new contract will receive an under market increase of 65% the market for the departing 5 is as follows: 48x.66x1.65=52.272 or a per team rate of 52.72/5=10.544. Figure WSU and OSU is 10% higher for the UW and OU games, you get 10.544*1.1*2=23.197. So for the 7 you get 23.197+52.72=75.917 or 75.97/7=10.853 per team. But let’s now say TXST adds $3M and Gonzaga adds $5M but get full shares. That would be 3+5+75.97=83.97 or 83.97/9=9.33 per team. This is all with some very conservative estimates. CUSA, MAC, etc have reported or leaked 80-110% increases. I would place the final media number at $10M with CPPI adjustments each year going forward. Wilner and Canzano are guessing. I’m guessing a bit but using comps to support my guesses. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecjeff on Jul 6, 2025 20:46:34 GMT -8
If the Pac-12 really wanted to add UNLV, then they should invite Nevada first. That invitation alone would chap UNLV's hide to such an extent, it would make them feel "inferior" to their "little brother" up north. Their pride would quickly suffer & the pressure from their alumni would be immense. That chess move alone would light a fire under their feet. Why would UNLV want to remain in the Mountain West if "little brother" Nevada was elevated to the Pac-12?
And would Nevada say "no" to a bona fide offer from the new Pac-12? Not a chance!
Think about it.
|
|
