[Redrum]

As some folks never tire of reminding us;  the rollout of the Big10 Network left of extremely large proportions gaps in distribution in the first year.  No idea where they stand now.  But these reminders from Realityville were available to savvy observers and playahs in this brave new world of the Pac-12 Network.  Specifically,  Larry Scott,  who sold this deal to the schools. 

So, looking where we are now--with patchy P12N distribution even in the Pac-12's territory and even more threadbare nationally--  this has gotta be affecting revenue.  Revenue that was promised to the schools.  So,  was the public sold the BIG number, the $billions,  as part of an autopilot hyping exercise?  Is there a chance that Scott fixes himself a stiff drink at night when he thinks about how he oversold it?  Or,  did he talk reality to the schools' representatives,  telling them there wouldn't be much money in the first [insert number here] years and to not build optimistic budgets based on an early revenue stream?

I only ask because in mentions, pronouncements and actions by various P12 schools,  not one of them mentioned a slowly growing revenue stream, realistic as that would be.  Based on actions and spending commitments alone,  on the face of it,  they are acting as if the money is already booked.  UCLA, Arizona and WSU notably emptied the Brinks truck to hire new, expensive coaches.  UC East Bay has made it central to paying off its stadium.  Each cited the new money from the P12N.  Is it possible that the school ADs were oversold and now are having heart palpitations? 

[Redrum]

As some folks never tire of reminding us;  the rollout of the Big10 Network left of extremely large proportions gaps in distribution in the first year.  No idea where they stand now.  But these reminders from Realityville were available to savvy observers and playahs in this brave new world of the Pac-12 Network.  Specifically,  Larry Scott,  who sold this deal to the schools. 

So, looking where we are now--with patchy P12N distribution even in the Pac-12's territory and even more threadbare nationally--  this has gotta be affecting revenue.  Revenue that was promised to the schools.  So,  was the public sold the BIG number, the $billions,  as part of an autopilot hyping exercise?  Is there a chance that Scott fixes himself a stiff drink at night when he thinks about how he oversold it?  Or,  did he talk reality to the schools' representatives,  telling them there wouldn't be much money in the first [insert number here] years and to not build optimistic budgets based on an early revenue stream?

I only ask because in mentions, pronouncements and actions by various P12 schools,  not one of them mentioned a slowly growing revenue stream, realistic as that would be.  Based on actions and spending commitments alone,  on the face of it,  they are acting as if the money is already booked.  UCLA, Arizona and WSU notably emptied the Brinks truck to hire new, expensive coaches.  UC East Bay has made it central to paying off its stadium.  Each cited the new money from the P12N.  Is it possible that the school ADs were oversold and now are having heart palpitations? 

[CompSci87]

I thought the partners who are already signed up are paying for the right to carry the network. Comcast doesn't pay less because it is not airing it in some regions. And the quoted value of the deal didn't include speculative amounts from DirecTV or others not actually signed up. Am I wrong?

[CompSci87]

I thought the partners who are already signed up are paying for the right to carry the network. Comcast doesn't pay less because it is not airing it in some regions. And the quoted value of the deal didn't include speculative amounts from DirecTV or others not actually signed up. Am I wrong?

[CrazedZooChimp]

As some folks never tire of reminding us;  the rollout of the Big10 Network left of extremely large proportions gaps in distribution in the first year.  No idea where they stand now.  But these reminders from Realityville were available to savvy observers and playahs in this brave new world of the Pac-12 Network.  Specifically,  Larry Scott,  who sold this deal to the schools. 

So, looking where we are now--with patchy P12N distribution even in the Pac-12's territory and even more threadbare nationally--  this has gotta be affecting revenue.  Revenue that was promised to the schools.  So,  was the public sold the BIG number, the $billions,  as part of an autopilot hyping exercise?  Is there a chance that Scott fixes himself a stiff drink at night when he thinks about how he oversold it?  Or,  did he talk reality to the schools' representatives,  telling them there wouldn't be much money in the first [insert number here] years and to not build optimistic budgets based on an early revenue stream?

I only ask because in mentions, pronouncements and actions by various P12 schools,  not one of them mentioned a slowly growing revenue stream, realistic as that would be.  Based on actions and spending commitments alone,  on the face of it,  they are acting as if the money is already booked.  UCLA, Arizona and WSU notably emptied the Brinks truck to hire new, expensive coaches.  UC East Bay has made it central to paying off its stadium.  Each cited the new money from the P12N.  Is it possible that the school ADs were oversold and now are having heart palpitations?

I'm pretty sure I do remember reading multiple articles that mentioned that for the Pac-12 network, revenues would be small initially (along with all of the start-up costs) and would grow. 

It also sort of sounds like you're forgetting that the Pac-12 network projected revenue has nothing to do with the money coming in from the contract with Fox/ABC, and typically the number thrown around in articles has been the amount coming in from them per school (the $21 million/school or whatever it is).  I don't recall reading many things that included actual estimates of revenue from the Pac-12 network.

[CrazedZooChimp]

As some folks never tire of reminding us;  the rollout of the Big10 Network left of extremely large proportions gaps in distribution in the first year.  No idea where they stand now.  But these reminders from Realityville were available to savvy observers and playahs in this brave new world of the Pac-12 Network.  Specifically,  Larry Scott,  who sold this deal to the schools. 

So, looking where we are now--with patchy P12N distribution even in the Pac-12's territory and even more threadbare nationally--  this has gotta be affecting revenue.  Revenue that was promised to the schools.  So,  was the public sold the BIG number, the $billions,  as part of an autopilot hyping exercise?  Is there a chance that Scott fixes himself a stiff drink at night when he thinks about how he oversold it?  Or,  did he talk reality to the schools' representatives,  telling them there wouldn't be much money in the first [insert number here] years and to not build optimistic budgets based on an early revenue stream?

I only ask because in mentions, pronouncements and actions by various P12 schools,  not one of them mentioned a slowly growing revenue stream, realistic as that would be.  Based on actions and spending commitments alone,  on the face of it,  they are acting as if the money is already booked.  UCLA, Arizona and WSU notably emptied the Brinks truck to hire new, expensive coaches.  UC East Bay has made it central to paying off its stadium.  Each cited the new money from the P12N.  Is it possible that the school ADs were oversold and now are having heart palpitations?

I'm pretty sure I do remember reading multiple articles that mentioned that for the Pac-12 network, revenues would be small initially (along with all of the start-up costs) and would grow. 

It also sort of sounds like you're forgetting that the Pac-12 network projected revenue has nothing to do with the money coming in from the contract with Fox/ABC, and typically the number thrown around in articles has been the amount coming in from them per school (the $21 million/school or whatever it is).  I don't recall reading many things that included actual estimates of revenue from the Pac-12 network.

[Farm93]

The BigTen schools get, a reported, $8-$10 million per year from their BigTen network.  And since most of them are public schools I am sure it is easy enough to track down the real numbers.  The BigTen schools only share the profits with their TV partner, so there is a belief that the Pac-12 schools could get more if the channel really takes off.

The BigTen has more non-alum fans in out there and since most of the school are massive they also have a lot of alums.  In another odd plus, many of their alums leave the area to work or retire in other areas of the country.  And that probably helps the channel's distribution too.

The Pac-12 will have a higher level of play in Olympic sports.  That catch is the conference has fewer passionate fans in the conference's footprint.  Many of the Olympic sports lack a loyal following and few are good for TV.  And worst of all, many people from the Pac-12 schools work and retire in the conference's footprint.  (People from Madison or Ann Arbor may retire in AZ or work in CA, but how many people from Tempe retire in Lincoln or Columbus?)  Those things probably all balance out in the end.

This game of content chicken was always going to spill into September.  If the Pac-12 networks already had a deal in hand, then it would be logical to conclude that they gave up too early and did not get the best terms.

DirecTV will have the Pac-12 before the first Pac-12 Network USC game.  I never really thought the Pac-12 would get on DirecTV before the first football game, and if that did happen I would be convinced the conference left too much money on the table.

[Farm93]

The BigTen schools get, a reported, $8-$10 million per year from their BigTen network.  And since most of them are public schools I am sure it is easy enough to track down the real numbers.  The BigTen schools only share the profits with their TV partner, so there is a belief that the Pac-12 schools could get more if the channel really takes off.

The BigTen has more non-alum fans in out there and since most of the school are massive they also have a lot of alums.  In another odd plus, many of their alums leave the area to work or retire in other areas of the country.  And that probably helps the channel's distribution too.

The Pac-12 will have a higher level of play in Olympic sports.  That catch is the conference has fewer passionate fans in the conference's footprint.  Many of the Olympic sports lack a loyal following and few are good for TV.  And worst of all, many people from the Pac-12 schools work and retire in the conference's footprint.  (People from Madison or Ann Arbor may retire in AZ or work in CA, but how many people from Tempe retire in Lincoln or Columbus?)  Those things probably all balance out in the end.

This game of content chicken was always going to spill into September.  If the Pac-12 networks already had a deal in hand, then it would be logical to conclude that they gave up too early and did not get the best terms.

DirecTV will have the Pac-12 before the first Pac-12 Network USC game.  I never really thought the Pac-12 would get on DirecTV before the first football game, and if that did happen I would be convinced the conference left too much money on the table.

[washingtonismoney]

The other aspect Farm93 misses is that the conference owns a 100% of the network. So the upside is larger for the conference if it succeeds, which is of course the question.

[washingtonismoney]

The other aspect Farm93 misses is that the conference owns a 100% of the network. So the upside is larger for the conference if it succeeds, which is of course the question.

[Redrum]

I treated the  total media package under the collective term "Pac-12 Network' deal.  If they are two different revenue streams with two different payment schedules,  that answers my question:  With allowances for Kal's Sandy Barbour being able to squander ANY amount of money,  the latest Pac-10 spending spree is, by and large, actually paid for and underpinned by $$ not imperiled by the slow growth or stunted growth of the actual P12 Network. 

Notwithstanding,  Larry Scott might still go home at night and need a good stiff drink.

[Redrum]

I treated the  total media package under the collective term "Pac-12 Network' deal.  If they are two different revenue streams with two different payment schedules,  that answers my question:  With allowances for Kal's Sandy Barbour being able to squander ANY amount of money,  the latest Pac-10 spending spree is, by and large, actually paid for and underpinned by $$ not imperiled by the slow growth or stunted growth of the actual P12 Network. 

Notwithstanding,  Larry Scott might still go home at night and need a good stiff drink.

[washingtonismoney]

Owning the network also means 100 percent of the startup costs, which are going to be H-word. I think even in the best scenario, it will be a drag on conference finances for the first couple of years.

Scott claims they've paid for the startup costs by getting the original cable operators to advance the subscription fees to the network.

[washingtonismoney]

Owning the network also means 100 percent of the startup costs, which are going to be H-word. I think even in the best scenario, it will be a drag on conference finances for the first couple of years.

Scott claims they've paid for the startup costs by getting the original cable operators to advance the subscription fees to the network.

[estephan500]

To throw a very tactical question into this thread ... Also a familiar one:

Anyone with recent successes in finding online streaming sites... Sharing would be gratefully appreciated. I am not sure how many of them exist after that big crackdown last year.

I has been hoping (living in SE Asia) that BitTorrent Live was going to become a vehicle for this. But I am realizing that the plan for that app is all very above board business.

Pass on any streaming successes.

[estephan500]

To throw a very tactical question into this thread ... Also a familiar one:

Anyone with recent successes in finding online streaming sites... Sharing would be gratefully appreciated. I am not sure how many of them exist after that big crackdown last year.

I has been hoping (living in SE Asia) that BitTorrent Live was going to become a vehicle for this. But I am realizing that the plan for that app is all very above board business.

Pass on any streaming successes.

[doublespiral]

For those of us with DISH and being hopeful, it's looking even more dubious that we'll see the Pac-12 Network anytime remotely soon. They are now threatening to drop the Big-10 Network:

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/env...2346.story

The article quotes the cost of the B1G at under 40 cents per subscriber per month. I'm not sure if that's for every subscriber DISH has or just for every subscriber who signs up for the extra sports package.

Now that I've given up, do people know what the online radio options are? I'm sure that KZSU streams for free, but I'd rather listen to Dave. Does anyone know if 1050 streams for free or if I'll need to subscribe to something to get the broadcast?

[doublespiral]

For those of us with DISH and being hopeful, it's looking even more dubious that we'll see the Pac-12 Network anytime remotely soon. They are now threatening to drop the Big-10 Network:

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/env...2346.story

The article quotes the cost of the B1G at under 40 cents per subscriber per month. I'm not sure if that's for every subscriber DISH has or just for every subscriber who signs up for the extra sports package.

Now that I've given up, do people know what the online radio options are? I'm sure that KZSU streams for free, but I'd rather listen to Dave. Does anyone know if 1050 streams for free or if I'll need to subscribe to something to get the broadcast?

[CowboyIndian]

Now that I've given up, do people know what the online radio options are? I'm sure that KZSU streams for free, but I'd rather listen to Dave. Does anyone know if 1050 streams for free or if I'll need to subscribe to something to get the broadcast?

Stanford All Access...$6.95/mo or $69.95/year: http://www.gostanford.com/allaccess/

[CowboyIndian]

Now that I've given up, do people know what the online radio options are? I'm sure that KZSU streams for free, but I'd rather listen to Dave. Does anyone know if 1050 streams for free or if I'll need to subscribe to something to get the broadcast?

Stanford All Access...$6.95/mo or $69.95/year: http://www.gostanford.com/allaccess/

[dabigv13]

....these past several posts are why the Pac-12 needs to do something innovative and figure out a way to stream content without tying it to a cable provider.

[dabigv13]

....these past several posts are why the Pac-12 needs to do something innovative and figure out a way to stream content without tying it to a cable provider.

[Class_of_75]

Well, this sucks for us DirecTV customers. Here's a post from the Pac-12 website that tells fans to look elsewhere if they are DirecTV subscribers.

http://pac-12.com/portals/0/content/ente...index.html

[Class_of_75]

Well, this sucks for us DirecTV customers. Here's a post from the Pac-12 website that tells fans to look elsewhere if they are DirecTV subscribers.

http://pac-12.com/portals/0/content/ente...index.html

[OutsiderFan]

Well, this sucks for us DirecTV customers. Here's a post from the Pac-12 website that tells fans to look elsewhere if they are DirecTV subscribers.

http://pac-12.com/portals/0/content/ente...index.html

This is just gamesmanship by the P12.  They are trying to put heat on DTV to acquiesce to their interests.  Whereas before the P12 was encouraging fans to appeal to DTV to get P12N, now they have said they are going to encourage them to take their business elsewhere.  Only when DTV loses subscribers in enough numbers will they cut a deal with the P12 to carry P12N.  The question is what is that number, 5K?  10K?  25K?

[OutsiderFan]

Well, this sucks for us DirecTV customers. Here's a post from the Pac-12 website that tells fans to look elsewhere if they are DirecTV subscribers.

http://pac-12.com/portals/0/content/ente...index.html

This is just gamesmanship by the P12.  They are trying to put heat on DTV to acquiesce to their interests.  Whereas before the P12 was encouraging fans to appeal to DTV to get P12N, now they have said they are going to encourage them to take their business elsewhere.  Only when DTV loses subscribers in enough numbers will they cut a deal with the P12 to carry P12N.  The question is what is that number, 5K?  10K?  25K?

[Prince_Lightfoot]

This is just gamesmanship by the P12.  They are trying to put heat on DTV to acquiesce to their interests.  Whereas before the P12 was encouraging fans to appeal to DTV to get P12N, now they have said they are going to encourage them to take their business elsewhere.  Only when DTV loses subscribers in enough numbers will they cut a deal with the P12 to carry P12N.  The question is what is that number, 5K?  10K?  25K?

This would make more sense if more cable systems carried P12N.  Mine, Charter Communications, doesn't.  Wikipedia says they're the 4th largest cable operator in the country.  DTV can easily maintain the "whaddaya gonna do?" attitude as long as lots of folks have no wired alternative.

I say the P12 should open the streaming interface as PPV for anyone who can show they have no wired or satellite viewing options.  Besides goodwill and a trickle of cash, this would give them some subscriber numbers to strengthen the pitch to  cablecos in those areas. Garvin may say the revenue model wasn't set up for streaming but I'm guessing it wasn't set up for "keep big chunks of the country dark," either.

[Prince_Lightfoot]

This is just gamesmanship by the P12.  They are trying to put heat on DTV to acquiesce to their interests.  Whereas before the P12 was encouraging fans to appeal to DTV to get P12N, now they have said they are going to encourage them to take their business elsewhere.  Only when DTV loses subscribers in enough numbers will they cut a deal with the P12 to carry P12N.  The question is what is that number, 5K?  10K?  25K?

This would make more sense if more cable systems carried P12N.  Mine, Charter Communications, doesn't.  Wikipedia says they're the 4th largest cable operator in the country.  DTV can easily maintain the "whaddaya gonna do?" attitude as long as lots of folks have no wired alternative.

I say the P12 should open the streaming interface as PPV for anyone who can show they have no wired or satellite viewing options.  Besides goodwill and a trickle of cash, this would give them some subscriber numbers to strengthen the pitch to  cablecos in those areas. Garvin may say the revenue model wasn't set up for streaming but I'm guessing it wasn't set up for "keep big chunks of the country dark," either.

[yvonne]

The gamesmanship of the Pac-12 is really annoying. They're trying to use fans as leverage with DirecTV, but they seem to be ignoring the fact that almost all sports bars have DirecTV.

[yvonne]

The gamesmanship of the Pac-12 is really annoying. They're trying to use fans as leverage with DirecTV, but they seem to be ignoring the fact that almost all sports bars have DirecTV.

[76lsjumb]

Today we received this "Special Message" from The Jacquesh & blah blah blah [I guess Bowslby didn't get to take the name with him when he left...  :)] Bernard Muir, and I also noted that it's on the Gostanford web site:

"Dear William D. & Kathy,

We’ve heard from lots of DirecTV customers who are concerned about being able to watch our football team take the field for the season opener against San Jose State tomorrow night. The staff at Pac-12 Networks has been working day and night to make sure that doesn’t happen, but with only a few hours remaining before the game, we have learned that DirecTV does not plan to carry Pac-12 Networks. *** "

I'm still trying to figure out whether this is a bad case of editing or a true statement.  Fortunately, we're on Comcast, but I'm guessing those on DirecTV are probably convinced it means what he says...

[76lsjumb]

Today we received this "Special Message" from The Jacquesh & blah blah blah [I guess Bowslby didn't get to take the name with him when he left...  :)] Bernard Muir, and I also noted that it's on the Gostanford web site:

"Dear William D. & Kathy,

We’ve heard from lots of DirecTV customers who are concerned about being able to watch our football team take the field for the season opener against San Jose State tomorrow night. The staff at Pac-12 Networks has been working day and night to make sure that doesn’t happen, but with only a few hours remaining before the game, we have learned that DirecTV does not plan to carry Pac-12 Networks. *** "

I'm still trying to figure out whether this is a bad case of editing or a true statement.  Fortunately, we're on Comcast, but I'm guessing those on DirecTV are probably convinced it means what he says...

[needle]

I tend to agree with others who say it's about the California households, the LA market. These are the people who have a choice to cancel DirecTV and go cable to get Pac-12. This is what DirecTV is likely watching most closely. Sad but true, it seems there just aren't enough concentrations of Pac-12 fans on EDT to make much of a surge in business, at least as calculated by the cable companies who have tacitly agreed with this notion by not having Pac-12 available in DC, Chicago, etc.

[needle]

I tend to agree with others who say it's about the California households, the LA market. These are the people who have a choice to cancel DirecTV and go cable to get Pac-12. This is what DirecTV is likely watching most closely. Sad but true, it seems there just aren't enough concentrations of Pac-12 fans on EDT to make much of a surge in business, at least as calculated by the cable companies who have tacitly agreed with this notion by not having Pac-12 available in DC, Chicago, etc.

[Prince_Lightfoot]

Some perspective.  Pac12 just doesn't have the leverage of the BTN at this point.  Pac12 take to follow in part 2, apparently.

http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2012-arti...-of-2.html

[Prince_Lightfoot]

Some perspective.  Pac12 just doesn't have the leverage of the BTN at this point.  Pac12 take to follow in part 2, apparently.

http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2012-arti...-of-2.html

[oman]

Most basic questions -- are all the Pac12 games televised on P12 going to be available as reruns on the website for subscribers for a reasonable period of time?

Do the images on the P12 seem a bit "off"?  It may just be my set up

[oman]

Most basic questions -- are all the Pac12 games televised on P12 going to be available as reruns on the website for subscribers for a reasonable period of time?

Do the images on the P12 seem a bit "off"?  It may just be my set up

[washingtonismoney]

I'd heard they were eventually planning on providing hour-long edited versions of the games afterwards, though if it's on the website now I've missed it. Basically if you don't catch it the first time, looks like you're relying on a replay. (They're replaying Utah v. Northern Colorado, so...maybe?)

[washingtonismoney]

I'd heard they were eventually planning on providing hour-long edited versions of the games afterwards, though if it's on the website now I've missed it. Basically if you don't catch it the first time, looks like you're relying on a replay. (They're replaying Utah v. Northern Colorado, so...maybe?)