Big 10 Gearing for Further Expansion?

[Saunders]

The Big 10 is already broadcasting all their games nationally, so adding "markets" is near pointless. Especially if you're adding markets by getting teams that don't move the national interest needle.

 

This is not correct, Saunders. If the market is a 'local' market, then the B1G Network can increase the carrier cost to the cable provider significantly. This time last year during expansion talk, it had come out that the rates the Big 10 Network can charge (because they're a local provider) are significantly higher in their footprint than the rates for cable providers outside of the B1G footprint.

 

Since the B1G uses the local market revenue for base operating expenses to the Big 10 Network, that ultimately means a fatter operations bottom line for the network. This is why Mizzou was in the mix--if the B1G picked Mizzou, then the cost for cable carriers to provide the B1G in MO (read: KC, St. Louis) triples (or quadruples--it's been a while) overnight. (One of the problems, mind you, with Mizzou was that the north part of Missouri (and over 25% of the population) are already considered part of the B1G footprint.)

 

Additionally, this expansion into major media markets would mean the Big 10 Network could charge much more for advertising space on their network. Advertising money is the actual revenue which fills the huge pot 'o money that the Big 10 splits equally.

 

Just the expansion of the Big 10 Network into the Atlanta and DC/Baltimore media markets would pay for onboarding two new folks in a matter of a few scant years, if not sooner (depending on quality of product).

 

10 or 20 years ago, Saunders, your thinking would have been sound. But the Commissioners of these athletic conferences are wearing more than one hat--they're now cable channel directors, too, so fans need to start thinking accordingly when trying to process the logic behind these decisions.

 

And yes, I agree that the Maryland and Ga. Tech athletic programs themselves do nothing to pique my interest. But their media markets (and the increased revenue to DoNU) do make me interested.

 

If that is the case, then why didn't they go for Rutgers or Syracuse instead of Nebraska? We don't add any TV market value.

 

Nebraska adds plenty of TV market value. UNL's sports are basically the only sports in Nebraska so you can bet that most people are going to pay attention to them. If they added Maryland, they may be adding fans of the Baltimore Ravens, Washington Nationals, and Washington Wizards, who care too much about the pro sports to pay attention to the Terrapins. If they added Syracuse, they may be adding fans of the New York Yankees, New York Mets, New York Knicks, New York Giants, New York Jets, Buffalo Bills, New York Islanders, New York Rangers, etc... who care too much about the pro sports to pay attention to Syracuse. If they added Rutgers, they'd be adding fans of the aforementioned teams. With Nebraska, we care about the Cornhuskers, and pay attention to only the Cornhuskers.

 

I've heard that Kansas City has recently lost its connection to the B1G Network, mayhaps the B1G is thinking of adding them in a couple of years to "regain" that footprint.

 

But I agree with matthew_m_g: saunders, your thinking would've been spot on 10-20 years ago, but the Conference commishes wear two hats now.

 

I understand that, and you sort of proved my point. Please understand, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you guys, but this is how I see it.

 

People aren't going to watch the BTN in those areas. It's just the way it is. Pro sports rules the New England area. So, if they add a local team, it's going to jack up the rate to that carrier. Then, the carrier has to include it with the basic package (which is what I understand) forcing them to eat the cost difference, or raise the rates. Then a few years down the road, when it becomes apparent that nobody cares about Rutgers, Syracuse, or Maryland, the cable network is stuck with paying for a channel that nobody watches. It's why carriers add and remove channels all the time. They monitor what actually gets watched. So, do they keep it in the lineup, or move it to an extra tier (which is what Comcast wanted). Remember, FOX was pretty close to this happening not that long ago with Time Warner.

 

I guess my thing is, I know the BTN makes money, but how does it compare to the boatloads of cash that a deal with ABC/ESPN gets you for having national brand names that people around the country want to watch, versus select markets?

[kc_husker]

The Big 10 is already broadcasting all their games nationally, so adding "markets" is near pointless. Especially if you're adding markets by getting teams that don't move the national interest needle.

 

This is not correct, Saunders. If the market is a 'local' market, then the B1G Network can increase the carrier cost to the cable provider significantly. This time last year during expansion talk, it had come out that the rates the Big 10 Network can charge (because they're a local provider) are significantly higher in their footprint than the rates for cable providers outside of the B1G footprint.

 

Since the B1G uses the local market revenue for base operating expenses to the Big 10 Network, that ultimately means a fatter operations bottom line for the network. This is why Mizzou was in the mix--if the B1G picked Mizzou, then the cost for cable carriers to provide the B1G in MO (read: KC, St. Louis) triples (or quadruples--it's been a while) overnight. (One of the problems, mind you, with Mizzou was that the north part of Missouri (and over 25% of the population) are already considered part of the B1G footprint.)

 

Additionally, this expansion into major media markets would mean the Big 10 Network could charge much more for advertising space on their network. Advertising money is the actual revenue which fills the huge pot 'o money that the Big 10 splits equally.

 

Just the expansion of the Big 10 Network into the Atlanta and DC/Baltimore media markets would pay for onboarding two new folks in a matter of a few scant years, if not sooner (depending on quality of product).

 

10 or 20 years ago, Saunders, your thinking would have been sound. But the Commissioners of these athletic conferences are wearing more than one hat--they're now cable channel directors, too, so fans need to start thinking accordingly when trying to process the logic behind these decisions.

 

And yes, I agree that the Maryland and Ga. Tech athletic programs themselves do nothing to pique my interest. But their media markets (and the increased revenue to DoNU) do make me interested.

 

If that is the case, then why didn't they go for Rutgers or Syracuse instead of Nebraska? We don't add any TV market value.

 

Nebraska adds plenty of TV market value. UNL's sports are basically the only sports in Nebraska so you can bet that most people are going to pay attention to them. If they added Maryland, they may be adding fans of the Baltimore Ravens, Washington Nationals, and Washington Wizards, who care too much about the pro sports to pay attention to the Terrapins. If they added Syracuse, they may be adding fans of the New York Yankees, New York Mets, New York Knicks, New York Giants, New York Jets, Buffalo Bills, New York Islanders, New York Rangers, etc... who care too much about the pro sports to pay attention to Syracuse. If they added Rutgers, they'd be adding fans of the aforementioned teams. With Nebraska, we care about the Cornhuskers, and pay attention to only the Cornhuskers.

 

I've heard that Kansas City has recently lost its connection to the B1G Network, mayhaps the B1G is thinking of adding them in a couple of years to "regain" that footprint.

 

But I agree with matthew_m_g: saunders, your thinking would've been spot on 10-20 years ago, but the Conference commishes wear two hats now.

 

 

Kansas City has not lost it's connection with the B1G network. Not sure where you heard that.

[VectorVictor]

 

If that is the case, then why didn't they go for Rutgers or Syracuse instead of Nebraska? We don't add any TV market value.

 

Saunders--you know television ratings hold significant value. Nebraska beat Rutgers, Pitt, Mizzou, UConn, Syracuse, and Notre Dame in television ratings--all prospective Big 10 expansion targets, and all while Nebraska was hobbled with regional-only broadcasts. A national draw that generates ratings allows the B1G Network to increase advertising rates for its network significantly.

 

Sucking up a major metropolitan area helps subscriber base and improves advertising too, but not to the extent of a national draw. Also, having more major metropolitan areas in your back pocket helps when the next round of contract negotiations comes to a head.

 

One thing to note is that with the last round of expansion, the Big 10 made a choice between expansion of their local footprint (Mizzou) or expansion of their national brand (Nebraska). The Frank the Tank blog (which has been covering expansion better than any media outlet) ran the numbers which firmly showed the potential and upside in bringing a national brand like Nebraska on was better than the safe, moderate fiscal improvement Mizzou would bring via media markets.

 

And you're right that Maryland or Ga. Tech, on their own merits, are as exciting as dry toast. But the point is to use those local teams to get their foot in the door to throw, say, Nebraska vs. Michigan in their face--something that even Ma and Pa Kettle, who may not have any vested interest in either team, will stop down to consume.

[corncraze]

I think Rutgers would be a great addition. Get the NY market involved, and who knows, maybe our recruiting in NJ and other Northeast states improves.

[GMoose]

I think Rutgers would be a great addition. Get the NY market involved, and who knows, maybe our recruiting in NJ and other Northeast states improves.

+1 Interesting take. Rutgers would be a good academic add too.

[walksalone]

I think Rutgers would be a great addition. Get the NY market involved, and who knows, maybe our recruiting in NJ and other Northeast states improves.

+1 Interesting take. Rutgers would be a good academic add too.

 

I would love that, I'm an hour from New Brunswick, and would love to kick the crap outta them.

[Saunders]

 

If that is the case, then why didn't they go for Rutgers or Syracuse instead of Nebraska? We don't add any TV market value.

 

Saunders--you know television ratings hold significant value. Nebraska beat Rutgers, Pitt, Mizzou, UConn, Syracuse, and Notre Dame in television ratings--all prospective Big 10 expansion targets, and all while Nebraska was hobbled with regional-only broadcasts. A national draw that generates ratings allows the B1G Network to increase advertising rates for its network significantly.

 

Sucking up a major metropolitan area helps subscriber base and improves advertising too, but not to the extent of a national draw. Also, having more major metropolitan areas in your back pocket helps when the next round of contract negotiations comes to a head.

 

One thing to note is that with the last round of expansion, the Big 10 made a choice between expansion of their local footprint (Mizzou) or expansion of their national brand (Nebraska). The Frank the Tank blog (which has been covering expansion better than any media outlet) ran the numbers which firmly showed the potential and upside in bringing a national brand like Nebraska on was better than the safe, moderate fiscal improvement Mizzou would bring via media markets.

 

And you're right that Maryland or Ga. Tech, on their own merits, are as exciting as dry toast. But the point is to use those local teams to get their foot in the door to throw, say, Nebraska vs. Michigan in their face--something that even Ma and Pa Kettle, who may not have any vested interest in either team, will stop down to consume.

Ah, so get the higher $$$ rate by having the local team (even though they aren't a big draw) and use the appeal of the other teams to get people to watch, and subscribe/keep the channel. It makes sense I suppose.

[knapplc]

I think Rutgers would be a great addition. Get the NY market involved, and who knows, maybe our recruiting in NJ and other Northeast states improves.

+1 Interesting take. Rutgers would be a good academic add too.

 

I would love that, I'm an hour from New Brunswick, and would love to kick the crap outta them.

 

And yet your IP says you post from Moscow. Stop lying, Communist.

[knapplc]

WHAT!?!?!?

 

Yeah, you heard me, Moscow. Enjoy your Vodka, Walks.

[knapplc]

WHAT!?!?!?

 

Don't even deny it. The internet never lies. I got an email that said I could learn Russian in five days if I paid this guy like $5,000, and I thought, "Great, then I can learn to talk to walksalone, because he's RUSSIAN. So I emailed the guy and he responded, "Yeah, you can learn Russian in five days, really." And I'm like, "Seriously?" And he's all, "Da, Comrade!" And I'm like, "Prove it." So he responds, "OK, I'll bet you didn't know that the Russian word for water is vod, did you? That means that "vodka" is Russian for "little water." They drink so much of it up there, it's like their water. Now give me my $5,000, jerk!" And I was all like, "WHAT!?!?!?!" and he says, "There is no Russia." Turns out the whole thing was an M. Knight Shyamalan movie.

 

Weird.

[Saunders]

WHAT!?!?!?

 

Don't even deny it. The internet never lies. I got an email that said I could learn Russian in five days if I paid this guy like $5,000, and I thought, "Great, then I can learn to talk to walksalone, because he's RUSSIAN. So I emailed the guy and he responded, "Yeah, you can learn Russian in five days, really." And I'm like, "Seriously?" And he's all, "Da, Comrade!" And I'm like, "Prove it." So he responds, "OK, I'll bet you didn't know that the Russian word for water is vod, did you? That means that "vodka" is Russian for "little water." They drink so much of it up there, it's like their water. Now give me my $5,000, jerk!" And I was all like, "WHAT!?!?!?!" and he says, "There is no Russia." Turns out the whole thing was an M. Knight Shyamalan movie.

 

Weird.

 

.............

 

 

*Walks away..... slowly*

[biggie]

Allow me to shed some light on this. The BTN and cable had a huge fight over putting it on basic cable or premium. BTN eventually got it on basic cable in the Big Ten footprint and premium in other parts of the country. BTN makes much more money having it on basic cable. They get a set amount based on number of cable subscribers even the ones that never watch it. From what I understand part of the decision to offer Nebraska was even though Nebraska adds no TV market, your fans are likely to add it as a premium channel even if they live in California.

 

Maryland is a good academic school and would deliver nice TV markets but I doubt they leave ACC basketball rivals Duke, UNC and Virginia. The New York TV market is the big prize Delany wants. From what I understand he saw that adding one school would not be enough to pressure cable operators into adding the NY market on basic. Rutgers doesn't have the fan base. Rutgers and Syracuse together might be enough, and they're both AAU members but even two schools might not be enough. Notre Dame would secure New York but no way he gets Notre Dame without major conference realignment. They looked at UConn, with a decent New York following for basketball but it hurt not being an AAU member and a small football following. There was no reason to rush on any of these schools. Delany knows he can get Rutgers and Syracuse whenever he wants. Nebraska had to be a quick decision with the deadline you had.

 

The other big financial boost comes from adding a championship game. With no TV market, Nebraska was not the obvious fit like Penn State was in 1993 but the big $$$ from a championship game and a good football 'brand' made it a good decision from a financial standpoint. The AAU membership also helped it feel right, and I know Delany downplays it now but it was big in selling the Big Ten presidents. You guys are right the AAU has no real value, but it's a matter of conference unity and prestige to say you're the only conference with all AAU members. The Big Ten likes to tout it's unity and academic prestige whenever it can. It's part of the Big Ten brand. You need to get back in the AAU and I think your leadership understands that. I don't expect agreement on a football forum but be prepared for the academic jokes if you don't.

 

Mizzou is now off the table for future expansion. Any future expansion will be to the east for those TV markets with the added benefit of breaking up the Big East might force Notre Dame's hand at some point. If the Big Ten ever moves to 14 expect Rutgers and Syracuse. If it moves to 16 expect a combination of Notre Dame, UConn, Pitt, Maryland or BC. It's way too early to predict how those might shake out. I throw Pitt in because it a rival for Notre Dame and Penn State, AAU member, and it's a good fit except for TV market, but if the Big Ten gets Notre Dame and the NY market, throwing in Pitt to make Notre Dame and Penn State happy won't matter so much.

[caveman99]

Well Syracuse recently walked away from the AAU, so there goes that.

[Haspula]

Georgia Tech isn't even in the midwest. Delany should be slapped

 

Instead we should look at some good local schools like Notre Dame and Marquette

[bigg10]

Also you have to think ABC gets first shot at buying a game, this year (mostly due to Nebraska) they sold alot of games to ABC for a nice sum, now if you are a team that did not make the ABC lineup it moves to SECPN and they can buy games again at a nice sum, if you are a team that did not make that, your games will for sure be on BTN. Pretty much everyone gets to watch their team. Now I doubt, next year they will sell as many to ABC, as the newness of it all will be over. I would guess 2 less next year.

Also he is right about the AAU, the B10 is a very proud conf and likes to point that out when they can. We like to think we hold ourselves, students and programs to a higher standard, but as you all know that has been somewhat of a let down lately, with all the bad news, from several programs. Nebraska,AAU. Iowa,rambo. OH St,sellgate. Mich, bringing up the bottom on acedemics.