|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
BCS Pay-Per-View? - 11/19/2008 7:21:34 AM
|
|
|
Bobby
Posts: 147
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Orangeburg, Clemson Prefecture, Japan
Status: offline
|
The stage may be set for the BCS Championship moving to pay-per-view television now. With ESPN acquiring the rights to the BCS starting in January 2011, the entire list of the Big Five postseason games will now be on cable television. ESPN reportedly bid considerably more than the Big Three networks (NBC, CBS, Fox).
This is on the heels of the Royal and Ancient Golf Club's decision to move the Open Championship exclusively to cable in 2010 with ESPN.
ESPN's big advantage over the Big Three is that they can charge higher per-subscriber rates that helps them pay for these rights fees. Broadcast networks can only pay for these events by advertising and affiliate fees, which some cannot obtain. Furthermore, the current economic situation is costing advertising dollars.
The stage is set for a potential move of the BCS Championship Game to pay-per-view under ESPN's Game Plan PPV policy. ESPN could get a million homes to pay for the PPV at $20 a pop, for an easy $20 million, and sports bars to have the event at a considerably higher rate, so we could have in theory over $100 million a year on the BCS Championship Game in revenue.
Some in Congress have already asked for an investigation into the move of the BCS to premium cable, since ESPN's per-subscriber fee would rise to the range of such channels.
Thoughts about a potential Pay Per View BCS Championship game? Would it make the current bowls on the Big Three networks irrelevant?
Big Three bowls:
New Year's Day:
Gator (CBS)
Cotton (Fox)
Others:
Sun (CBS)
It would also potentially put the Outback, Chick-Fil-A, and other "minor" bowls near New Year's Day up for grabs as ESPN could lose some of those. It would also change the postseason lineup as some teams may give up a BCS bid to appear on network television instead. What do you think?
Is this New World Order in postseason college football a danger when cable has control? This could hurt the SEC because it is the only conference that does not let ESPN have first choice of games (CBS has that right with the 3:30 PM ET SEC game; the CBS game is the only guaranteed weekly national game on television, as all ESPN games are regional).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 11/19/2008 10:34:39 AM
|
|
|
kernsfamily
Posts: 1400
Joined: 4/26/2006
From: Dallas (originally Detroit)
Status: online
|
wow...
where does the assumption come from that EVERYONE has cable TV/satellite?
I could start PAYING for cable/satellite TV tomorrow (like many people who earn MUCH LESS than I do)...but, the amount of time that I have to spend watching TV just does not justify PAYING for it.
We get well over a dozen channels with the roof-top antenna, and that works great.
Why "fix" something that isn't broke?
this is getting ridiculous...
_____________________________
Proud dad of 3 great girls....Erin, Emilie and Elise
Blessed to have all of them in a "totally awesome" public elementary school!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 11/20/2008 10:13:01 AM
|
|
|
cow451
Posts: 3956
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kernsfamily
wow...
where does the assumption come from that EVERYONE has cable TV/satellite?
I could start PAYING for cable/satellite TV tomorrow (like many people who earn MUCH LESS than I do)...but, the amount of time that I have to spend watching TV just does not justify PAYING for it.
We get well over a dozen channels with the roof-top antenna, and that works great.
Why "fix" something that isn't broke?
this is getting ridiculous...
Doubt it will be true PPV. They don't need the cash because the ad revenue will be stupendous. By 2011, it might also be streamed on the internet. You do have internet don't you?
_____________________________
Nobody ever heard of Acid Rain before we sent people into space.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 11/21/2008 1:37:23 PM
|
|
|
Yankee Nut
Posts: 637
Joined: 4/19/2005
Status: offline
|
That would just be wrong if the BCS Games went to PPV
_____________________________
My Praise To God Is Infinitely Increased With The Use Of An Air Guitar
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 11/22/2008 4:54:14 AM
|
|
|
Rufas2000
Posts: 1311
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ESPN reportedly bid considerably more than the Big Three networks (NBC, CBS, Fox).
So ABC is no longer a "big" network.
quote:
ESPN's big advantage over the Big Three is that they can charge higher per-subscriber rates that helps them pay for these rights fees.
They are no different than the other networks. ESPN is owned by ABC (which in turn is owned by Disney), which is an over the air network just like the "big three". The other "big three" networks also have several cable properties. NBC has the USA Network, The Sci Fi Channel, CNBC and MSNBC. Fox has anything with the word Fox in front of it. CBS is owned by Viacom, they also have MTV, Nickelodian and several other networks.
So all of them own cable networks that can charge higher per subscriber rates. The fact that ABC owns a cable network popular enough to perhaps charge higher fees is our free enterprise system at work.
quote:
The stage is set for a potential move of the BCS Championship Game to pay-per-view under ESPN's Game Plan PPV policy. ESPN could get a million homes to pay for the PPV at $20 a pop, for an easy $20 million, and sports bars to have the event at a considerably higher rate, so we could have in theory over $100 million a year on the BCS Championship Game in revenue.
I've heard this fear for the last 20 years. Its not going to happen unless we see a major paradigm shift in the broadcasting of sporting events. I've heard the same thing about the Super Bowl and every other major event. ESPN is trying to increase its revenue stream by getting people who do not have cable to get it and increasing the per subscriber fee they can charge. More customers + higher fee means mo' money for ESPN. Plus advertisers will have to cough up more to advertise on a network with more potential eyeballs. Especially during premiere events like the BCS. This is why ABC / Disney switched Monday Night Football to ESPN.
Also I think it would be a violation of the contract to move the games to PPV. The other consideration of these sports broadcasting rights contracts is that the entity putting on the sporting event (in this case the NCAA / BCS) wants the event to become more popular so they can charge more in rights fees the next go round. Ask a boxing fan what happens when a sport is pulled off cable TV for PPV. MMA started to take off in popularity when Spike TV started a weekly series on it.
I just wonder if under the terms of the deal ABC can decide to broadcast BCS games on ABC's over the air stations instead of ESPN (or ESPN 2 instead of ESPN). I know Major League Baseball gave them flack for broadcasting a few Sunday night games on ESPN 2 when the contract was for ESPN (due to a conflict with Sunday Night Football).
Finally I have to say that while I sympathize with those who do not have cable I have to say I'm so glad Fox is losing the rights. They telecast exactly zero games on their national networks (some Fox affiliates may have deals with outside syndicators like Raycom sports) so it never made sense for them to have the BCS. They spend about 15 minutes a week discussing it during their NFL telecasts.
Furthermore they do a terrible job at it. They have no college commentators because they are only needed three times a year. No one is on the Fox commentating staff who as a matter of being their job has watched any college football (unless they pull from the Big Ten network but this year thats irrelevant to the BCS aside from the Rose which is on ABC). They even had Howie Long and Terry Bradshaw do a BCS game. That's a joke, they are hosts of a show not color commentators (they did OK but an event like that deserves much better than the yuck yuck twins, commentating on college football is not their job). When ESPN gets the games you'll get commentators who have seen these teams in their biggest games because they were the broadcasters (like Brent & Kirk). They can speak from the historical context of covering these games, not as a one night cram session on the notes / highlights of what happened). It may be cool to hate on ESPN but IMHO they do college football right.
_____________________________
Be my friend!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 11/22/2008 6:37:33 AM
|
|
|
Bobby
Posts: 147
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Orangeburg, Clemson Prefecture, Japan
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
Doubt it will be true PPV. They don't need the cash because the ad revenue will be stupendous. By 2011, it might also be streamed on the internet. You do have internet don't you?
That will, too, be a PPV issue. You'll have to pay $20 a pop for that. Furthermore, ESPN can increase the PPV rules by banning teams from having "home team" radio broadcasts and ensuring no radio coverage by guaranteeing all coverage will be on pay radio too.
But PPV can ensure more cash than advertising, especially considering the economic status of this nation currently.
Under the terms of this BCS deal all BCS games are on the ESPN Cable Network -- no ESPN Broadcast Network games and no Disney Television Distribution (syndicated) games. (The SEC leaves Raycom for DTD in 2009; here we're hearing the potential of having those traditionally syndicated games moving out because Raycom dominates the state's television landscape.)
Rufas,
The NFL ordered CBS and MTV split after the XXXVIII debacle to prevent another halftime entertainment debacle, and banned MTV from the Super Bowl afterwards. Otherwise, CBS wouldn't have been able to bid on another NFL package.
There is no ban on pay-per-view in the new ESPN/BCS contract. It is not an NCAA deal.
We are seeing the major paradigm shift in broadcasting. The NBA was the first, and now MLB has also adopted it where cable takes an increasing share of the playoffs. Then, we saw what ESPN did in Avondale, AZ during the recent NASCAR playoff event by ditching the policy on broadcast networks with races running into prime-time hours by dumping them to cable.
Disney's other motivation for a move of events to cable has been, in the past few years, to place a "franchise tag" on Desperate Housewives. To ensure the raunchy programme is not delayed by a long Sprint Cup race, twice in the two seasons of NASCAR on ESPN has a playoff event been moved from the broadcast to cable network. Tony George has not been happy with the move of the Allstate 400 from network to cable television -- ESPN decided the ArenaBowl was more important than the Allstate 400 when the Indy 500 and the MotoGP1 class Red Bull Indianapolis Grand Prix have network television coverage. NASCAR even blasted ESPN following the Checker O'Reilly Auto Parts 500 debacle. The local O'Reilly Auto Parts store wasn't amused either.
What made the Checker O'Reilly Auto Parts 500 incident worse was that ESPN didn't do this with the Indianapolis 500 by pushing it to ESPN2 in the 7 PM hour -- it turned out that the reason for it was Housewives had finished its season by the time the 500 airs. The two NASCAR races moved to ESPN2 at the 7 PM hour were moved as to protect them.
Many believe ESPN moved Monday Night Football to cable was to protect Housewives. That proved that show is now in protected class status.
ESPN said clearly all games are moving to cable. ABC affiliates no longer matter. They can make more money by moving games to cable thanks to pay services on the Web and a big hike in per-subscriber rates. The Big Three of CBS, NBC, and Fox could only attempt a higher 30-second ad rate.
But I do believe the PPV is coming. ESPN will think it will help provide revenue.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 11/22/2008 9:58:32 AM
|
|
|
Rufas2000
Posts: 1311
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
We are still seeing a slow shift to cable, not a paradigm shift to PPV. I've heard about it for 20 years and it hasn't happened yet. Its just too risky, even the switch to basic cable is meeting heavy resistance. I think they'd get killed publicity wise. If they decide to go with a PPV model I would think they'd start with moving higher profile regular season games to PPV then charge a flat rate for all of them (like this year's Saturday night games such as Texas Tech vs Oklahoma).
Ultimately it may very well happen but I think were a few years away at least. The public has to be brought to believe its normal first, just like the shift of major sports games and playoffs to cable. Even the NFL Network had to cave and allow last year's historic Patriots vs Giants game to be broadcast over broadcast TV because of the public outcry.
_____________________________
Be my friend!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 12/4/2008 8:11:16 AM
|
|
|
Bobby
Posts: 147
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Orangeburg, Clemson Prefecture, Japan
Status: offline
|
Just did some math on a pay-per-view BCS championship.
1. ESPN is at the limit of how much they can realistically charge in per-subscriber fees and stay basic cable.
2. A hike of about 50 cents in the per-subscriber fee for the 90 million homes with ESPN would be worth $45 million a month for the 48 months of this television contract. That's $1.35 billion in revenue to pay for the games in just three years. That pays for the "minor" bowls.
3. Having the BCS Championship on pay-per-view, with a rate of three million buys at $30 each, is worth $90 million a year. Four of these buys is $360 million.
Thus, in the global recession, ESPN could do what networks cannot to -- create these two streams of revenue that together would be worth over $1.44 billion to pay for a $700 million contract. Networks can only trust 30-second ad rates and affiliate fees, which are smaller considering increasing owned and operated stations. A pay-per-view BCS would be gravy for Disney and Hearst financially, since at the end of the contract their revenue from that would be immense.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 12/4/2008 8:40:40 AM
|
|
|
JoeyWest
Posts: 723
Joined: 10/1/2008
From: Alabama with a guitar in my hands
Status: offline
|
are you wanting it to go to ppv? i personally will not pay to watch the game on ppv.
_____________________________
FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A TASTE THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW.
If today was your last day
and tomorrow was too late
Could you say goodbye to yesterday?
Would you live each moment like your last? "Nickelback"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 12/4/2008 9:40:08 AM
|
|
|
Rufas2000
Posts: 1311
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
I'm pretty sure no one wants it to go to PPV. That is part of the reason why I think it will not, at least for several years.
_____________________________
Be my friend!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 12/16/2008 9:43:47 AM
|
|
|
Bobby
Posts: 147
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Orangeburg, Clemson Prefecture, Japan
Status: offline
|
No, I don't want it to go PPV, but I believe it's coming for the Championship Game only.
I just did some recalculation of the event after forgetting sports bars pay extra for PPV events as a "watching party".
50,000 bars (from US Census statistics) - $100 each - $5 million
3 million buys - $30 each - $90 million
Total: $95 million from just the pay-per-view. Just that for each of the four years is $380 million, and can pay over half of ESPN's BCS contract. The other four games would be on the ESPN cable network, and they can use ads and per-subscriber rate hikes to pay for the rest of the $700 million contract, and can make a tidy profit networks cannot offer.
I don't want it to go PPV, but I believe it will happen because the money, in this crisis, is there for the offing.
From 2000: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/IBQTable?_bm=y&-ds_name=EC0272SSSZ3&-NAICS2002=7224
There are about 50,000 bars now.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 12/16/2008 9:59:30 AM
|
|
|
JoeyWest
Posts: 723
Joined: 10/1/2008
From: Alabama with a guitar in my hands
Status: offline
|
how many common workers will pay that for the game on top of the season package. that will be tough.
_____________________________
FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A TASTE THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW.
If today was your last day
and tomorrow was too late
Could you say goodbye to yesterday?
Would you live each moment like your last? "Nickelback"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: BCS Pay-Per-View? - 12/17/2008 9:52:43 AM
|
|
|
pdvc19
Posts: 56
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bobby
quote:
Thus, in the global recession, ESPN could do what networks cannot to -- create these two streams of revenue that together would be worth over $1.44 billion to pay for a $700 million contract. Networks can only trust 30-second ad rates and affiliate fees, which are smaller considering increasing owned and operated stations. A pay-per-view BCS would be gravy for Disney and Hearst financially, since at the end of the contract their revenue from that would be immense.
Why do you say ESPN can do what networks cannot do? What would preclude a network from increasing their monthly fee if they acquired the rights to all BCS games? The fact that networks have the ability to broadcast their signal free of charge does not eliminate their ability to charge cable and satellite companies for the right to carry their signal. The free broadcast rights networks enjoy provides them with an advantage over ESPN.
Also, having 3 million buys of PPV vs. the number of people that would watch this game via "free" broadcasting, would seem to be rather shortsighted. You can't just look at how much additional revenue would be gained by putting the BCS games on PPV, but also how much revenue would be lost from loss of advertising dollars.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
