Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Buckaineer" data-source="post: 129593808" data-attributes="member: 1428007">More lies and nothing but lies.The ACC will have to buy the Raycom licensed product back --as the just posted link from Sports Business Daily clearly shows.&nbsp; I knew as usual you would ignore that as you have the multiple other links I provided.Doesn't matter--in reality the ACC will have to provide ESPN with content for an ACC network.When ESPN renegotiated for adding ND partially to the ACC there are no indications anywhere that that agreement included ANY provisions for A: A conference network or B: payment to the ACC if they didn't get one.Its not true and its just more unsubstantiated bunk in your desperate attempts to paint a picture that you've created in your head-or rather the ACC painted in your head.ESPN gave the ACC schools about $1 million extra and paid ND a few million per year (revenue neutral from the Big East Swarbrick reported) for Olympic Sports.&nbsp; Nothing more reported in that agreement.ESPN doesn't owe the ACC anything and didn't make guarantees of anything.&nbsp; ACC people are making it up.No TV network would guarantee the startup of a conference network they don't know if they want or if it would be successful,or if they don't start it they'll just dole out millions for nothing in return.&nbsp; I've already demonstrated -with links mind you -that the supposed network or increase has changed over the years and the latest was made up by an ACC announcer--which you of course ignored.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Buckaineer, post: 129593808, member: 1428007"] More lies and nothing but lies. The ACC will have to buy the Raycom licensed product back --as the just posted link from Sports Business Daily clearly shows. I knew as usual you would ignore that as you have the multiple other links I provided. Doesn't matter--in reality the ACC will have to provide ESPN with content for an ACC network. When ESPN renegotiated for adding ND partially to the ACC there are no indications anywhere that that agreement included ANY provisions for A: A conference network or B: payment to the ACC if they didn't get one. Its not true and its just more unsubstantiated bunk in your desperate attempts to paint a picture that you've created in your head-or rather the ACC painted in your head. ESPN gave the ACC schools about $1 million extra and paid ND a few million per year (revenue neutral from the Big East Swarbrick reported) for Olympic Sports. Nothing more reported in that agreement. ESPN doesn't owe the ACC anything and didn't make guarantees of anything. ACC people are making it up. No TV network would guarantee the startup of a conference network they don't know if they want or if it would be successful,or if they don't start it they'll just dole out millions for nothing in return. I've already demonstrated -with links mind you -that the supposed network or increase has changed over the years and the latest was made up by an ACC announcer--which you of course ignored. [/QUOTE]

Name