New posts

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="topdecktiger" data-source="post: 129593071" data-attributes="member: 1459051">QUOTE="Buckaineer, post: 1120071, member: 844"]B: The link you provided IS INCORRECT. As of January 2016 there are NOT 43 million total tv households in the ACC footprint, there are 37,861,070 and that is straight from the INDUSTRY SOURCE THAT PROVIDES THE NUMBERS.Your claim as to how many of those have cable or satellite is HIGHER THAN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ACTUAL TV HOMES!!!!! Its INCORRECT. NOT TRUE. WRONG.I haven't tried to do anything and offered to allow you to bring in the accurate current numbers of total pay tv subscribers in ACC states--you have yet to do this, so don't say I didn't do something--you are the one making the claims.</blockquote>No, the link I provided is not incorrect. The numbers I provided you came from Neilson as well. I will certainly say you didn't do something, because you didn't. You did not provide the number of satellite subscribers. I did.Yes, the numbers are correct. They are from Neilson. It clearly said that in the graphic.Yes, there are 43 million total TV homes. There are 38 million homes with either cable or satellite. The burden of proof is not on me at all. I provided with a link to figures that were take from Neilson.No, there has never been an "announcement date" other than 2016-2017. You have not provided a link showing the ACC announced a date.I'll tell you again. Swofford "talking about" a network, and actually setting a launch date are two completely different things. You have not produced anything that shows a launch date other than 2016-2017.No they don't. The ACC will not own anything on the network. Just like the SEC. ESPN owns 100% of the SEC Network. "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/03/sports/ncaafootball/sec-will-have-own-tv-network-starting-in-2014.html?_r=1">The SEC Network, like Texas’s Longhorn Network, will be owned and operated by ESPN.</a>" ESPN owns all the content for the SECN. The SEC doesn't own any of it.The ACC is not getting a subscriber fee for the content. ESPN can't start an ACC Network without compensating the ACC. Even though ESPN owns all the ACC's games, they still can't create and "ACC Network" without paying the ACC. The rights to the games themselves and the rights to a network, the ACC name, etc. are completely different things.I'm not. I've been saying it the whole time. The problem is you just now realized it.The ACC doesn't sell anything for subscription fees. You simply do not understand that the rights to a network itself and the rights to individual games are not the same thing. The ACC doesn't provide content for the network. ESPN does. The ACC is providing ESPN the right to create a network with the ACC name. Otherwise, ESPN can't do it. The only thing ESPN could do is show the games on its other channels, which is already happening.No, the subscription fees are not payment for the rights to the games.The aren't giving ESPN subscription fees for a product they already own. ESPN cannot start an ACC network without compensating the ACC. ESPN only has the rights to the games themselves. ESPN does not have the rights to a network.No, that's not a lie. You didn't post the whole quote. I said:Before expansion, the SEC got $20 million a year. Now, they get $25 million a year. I clearly indicated that the numbers were averages. You just left out that part because YOU were twisting words and lying.Sorry, that's you being dishonest. You can  go back and look at every post I made, and nowhere will you find where I said, "Missouri and A&M were not on ESPN networks." I said the opposite. The games with A&M and  Missouri were already being televised by ESPN prior to the network, so that's not new inventory. The Tier 3 rights were the only new inventory. That's only 14 games (similar to the Big 12). The SEC network shows 45 games a year. Tier 3 isn't nearly enough content to fill up the network. It's also not enough content to account for the money the SEC gets, if you are sticking to your claim that subscription fees are for content.No, I'm not the liar. You are.  I clearly said it was an average in the first post about the $25 million. You just dishonestly ignored that.The $5 million subscription fee is not for inventory. I don't care how many times you insist on this, it isn't true.This is what you don't get. YOu said:So that means ESPN owns those rights still and sublicences those rights. If Raycom gets back the FOX games and ESPN attains those rights back from Raycom--WHO owns those rights still? ESPN. Not the ACC. The ACC doesn't have to own those rights. ESPN  has to own them to put them on the network. This is EXACTLY how the SEC network functions now. ESPN owns all the rights to those games, not the SEC. The ACC doesn't have to get back those rights.Here is something else you don't get. When ESPN repurchased the SECs syndication package from Comcast and Fox, the SEC never got back those rights. Those rights went straight from ESPN to the SECN. The sec never got them back.The average for the Big 12 was $25.2 million. You have to count West Virginia and TCU fort he average. You can't just count 8 schools and not the other two. The ACC had schools that got $27 million as well, such as Florida St and Georgia TEch. That's why you have to take an average. You are also not correct when you try to limit the Big12's Tier 3 figures to just TV. For most of the schools, the TV rights are included in their total Tier 3 package. TExas and Oklahoma aren't because they have their own networks, but that's not true for the rest of them.[/QUOTE]

Name

Top Bottom