Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="topdecktiger" data-source="post: 129505758" data-attributes="member: 1459051">No, again, you are wrong. Here's why.You aren't accounting for expenses. You are not factoring in ANY expenses, and you simply have to do that. Until you factor in expenses, your figures simply are not accurate.Go back to my Big Ten example. The Big Ten got $7.6 million for the BTN. Are you saying the Big Ten gets zero Tier 3 rights in that figure? According to your own formula, the Big Ten should get $12.2 million just off of subscriptions fees. That's not even accounting for the Tier 3 rights, or the advertising. So the Big Ten schools should be getting even more than $12 million. Problem is, the actual number for everything came in at $7.6 million. Well there's my point. You see how much is coming out of that for expenses. That's going to take a big chunk out of that $8-10 million figure you calculated, and you simply aren't taking into account how much expenses are going to be.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="topdecktiger, post: 129505758, member: 1459051"] No, again, you are wrong. Here's why. [B][I][U]You aren't accounting for expenses.[/U][/I][/B] You are not factoring in ANY expenses, and you simply have to do that. Until you factor in expenses, your figures simply are not accurate. Go back to my Big Ten example. The Big Ten got $7.6 million for the BTN. Are you saying the Big Ten gets zero Tier 3 rights in that figure? According to your own formula, the Big Ten should get $12.2 million [I]just off of subscriptions fees[/I]. That's not even accounting for the Tier 3 rights, or the advertising. So the Big Ten schools should be getting even more than $12 million. Problem is, the actual number for [I]everything[/I] came in at $7.6 million. Well there's my point. You see how much is coming out of that for expenses. That's going to take a big chunk out of that $8-10 million figure you calculated, and you simply aren't taking into account how much expenses are going to be. [/QUOTE]

Name