$43 a month for the new sports service Venu? No thanks
I’m sure many will pony up but I won’t be one of them. That is way too much for just sports.
Link:
Prepare to pay
53 Replies
2y
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
M
mjfhokie
2y
I was surprised to see the article's mention of 5 million subscribers in 5 years. With 130 million households in the US, that represents only 4 percent of all households. Although expensive, I can see them meeting the 5 million level. There are many sports fans out there.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
S
Stech
2y
don’t see the ACC going away, even if the Mag 7 leave for a P2 one day. I think they will do what Fox has done with the B12 for the ACC, and double down on potential basketball schools, or schools in urban areas with higher Academics, that could do what the Big East private schools did in the 80’s. Just think of the south located version of that for expansion.
** Edited by Stech at 8/1/2024, 12:32:57 PM
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
S
SMU Pony
2y
...that could blunt the impact of cord-cutting on ACCN revenues.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
I agree with you regarding the ultimate outcome for the ACC in all this - erosion from a national "power conference" into something more resembling the 80's era Big East: a regional basketball power where 1-2 of the member schools also fields an occasionally competitive football program.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
Outside of the Ivy. Does that still count for something?
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
2y
I can promise you that it certainly wouldn't matter even one iota with regard to football, which is pretty much the sole metric in determining just how much "power" there is to any given "power conference."
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
1y
Champions for a long time. They only relinquished this because they wanted to focus on academics. The ACC has historically focused on academics and was not willing to cheat on the level of the SEC and SWC where it was abundant. I guess I think that is more honorable that having poor academics and cheating at all costs to win at Football. Now it is legal so I guess it doesn't matter.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
S
Stech
2y
He said the SEC would take UVA over Virginia Tech because of their higher academic ratings. Now he flips a lot on the expansion subject, but that’s what he recently said on his SEC Channel broadcast.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
but I can tell you exactly how much Paul Finebaum's opinions are worth regarding anything. Anyone who, like myself, has been familiar with the Finebaum show since his early days on WJOX in Birmingham can tell you that he's not a competent X's and O's or color analyst guy, he's not even a competent opinion guy, he's nothing more than a carnival huckster who made his bones by having deep south caricatures call into his show and yell at each other unintelligibly. He has obtained the veneer of credibility since his show was put on the college football SiriusXM channel, which led to his contract with ESPN, but his shtick will always be "The Jerry Springer Show meets college football."
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
I’m just pointing out that there is recent change in what some of the media are saying about it. If Academics mattered Stanford would in the B10, but some of this IMHO is trying to keep your competition guessing.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
J
jms41
2y
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
so they are still with ESPN. I still think the best move for the SEC would be to take all 4 Va and NC schools. The SEC is a rivalry Conference, their ratings are about having close rivalries, they definitely don’t have the biggest markets. This would be completely consistent with their formula for success.
(In response to this post by jms41)
2y
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
The B12 had ok school sizes and state coverage. But those both went up very positively with the two recent rounds of expansion. Now they have big schools in big states across lots of time zones.
Both AZ schools, UCF, and Cincinnati were great pure size additions. They already had good basketball and now they have wider reach, which is where the value lies.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
content however, is the driver for both ESPN and FOX, not basketball.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
S
Stech
2y
That is from John Skipper former CEO of ESPN Sports, and Bob Thompson the former President of Fox Sports. They have some pretty good connections on the subject.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
When it comes to money, the media companies need viewers. And bigger schools with more students and more alumni are very valuable. The sports are just what they use to extract the value from viewers. That’s why I keep focusing on school sizes. No matter how good the ACC gets in football, it will never be as valuable as the SEC or BIG because the conference schools are so much smaller on average.
That’s why I’m impressed with not only the B12 survival, but also how they improved their position with new states and very large schools. Compared to the ACC who added one large school and two small private schools (all of which are far away).
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
you would be mentioned in the same breath as Aristotle and Socrates.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
S
Stech
2y
post above on the subject, some heavy weights with connections have said it will change.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
may wax and wane, but college football will always hold exponentially more value, which means, however the paradigm of the sport changes, or doesn't change, wherever the top football brands are aligned will always hold the vast majority of the power. whether you're talking the Ivy League in the late 19th century to the pending SEC/B1G monopoly today. VT, and every other football program with ambition, will either sit at that table, or they won't. That's something that has never changed in the entire 150 year history of intercollegiate athletics, so I wouldn't hold your breath that it's going to change any time soon.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
former ESPN & Fox Sports CEO & Presidents who have way more connections than you or I, know what they are talking about and 🏀 at a minimum will expand to about 96, and pay the Sweet 16 like the 🏈 playoff money. That’s a huge amount of money for the teams/conferences that make it. The playoffs and Sweet 16 is where the money is, but it’s just paid out differently.
Bottom line is you are right, right now, and I agree with right now. However, skate to where the puck is going, and those guys have the connections to know where the puck is going.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
S
Stech
2y
Kansas and Arizona alone make this conference a basketball big deal. Some of the others have not been at the top long enough, and lose coaches to the P2 when good.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
FOX gets a tremendous amount to football content. ESPN also gets the basketball tournament championship, and the first pick in basketball content. FOX gets a tremendous amount of basketball content as well, but there is virtually no difference in the pecking order of the content - football or basketball.
Yormark has talked about separating the football and basketball content in the next round of negotiations, but for now, the media rights are not separated from football.
I also disagree with you on the basketball coaching opinion. It's an area that the B12 and ACC can compete with the P2. Check out UConn as an example.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
getting that, is probably way more valuable than possibly 3 other match ups.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
S
Stech
2y
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
No way shape or form is FOX there just for the basketball. They get about 40+% of both football and basketball. It's an interesting marriage.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
That I did not know that if true, I thought 1 got basketball first pick and 1 got football first pick. It’s been a very long time since I read anything on the B12 agreement. Thus far, the B12 has had very little to do with Virginia Tech, and therefore I am as about as informed as B12 Podcaster on the ACC. 🤣🤣
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
FB picks, then they alternate, I haven't seen any report on how the MBB selections are made.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
was Fox picks first.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2y
follow their teams, and they aren't paying attention to what's going on with the ACC, so except for a few crazies like me and a few others, not many are paying attention out here from what I can see.
Many of the schools in the ACC have not had much experience with the original B12, unless it's in basketball. An undefeated Duke played an undefeated KU recently, but it was like an exhibition game, not a football game. There just is not a lot of history with our conferences if you take out West Virginia. I'm sure you are not alone, and sometimes leads to stereotypes from both fan bases.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
other thoughts are about how other people effect us. 🤣🤣
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
S
Stech
2y
grab San Diego State and Oregon State. If more than that leave, I think Houston market with Rice could be great in basketball, I also think New Orleans with Tulane could also be a powerhouse in basketball. There are others like Temple that would probably thrive in the ACC, but to me those 6 have good to great potential.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
V
VPI_1998
1y
what a nightmare conference that would be! I am guessing this is sarcasm but maybe not?
(In response to this post by Stech)
V
VTCALS72
1y
to no more than 12 per conference. Do any really need more?
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
expansion. I think they are going to about 96 teams playing, and the Sweet 16 will be paid out like 🏈 playoff money. That will make 🏀💵 there, just like it is for the NBA.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
If FSU and Clemson or even more leave the ACC, the name of the conference
beyond that will be purely academic. It won't matter. It will be the ACC in name only.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
you guys need is an extension of that contract. It buys you 12 years of stability. The next round of media negotiations will be more important now, especially with all of the other changes going on with the NCAA and FBS. Having a sound and predictable contract to negotiate these changes are paramount in my opinion.
There are some valuable schools out there that would LOVE and invite to the ACC or the B12 for that matter, but we are not the ones cutting the checks. Also, if the pie just gets sliced in more pieces, maybe the ACC and B12 stay pat for now.
Adding more at the bottom of the spectrum doesn't help either conference, but if the networks pony up the money, it's a different story.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
Still missing alot of sports I watch.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
The Masters on CBS is a must have for me.
A tradition unlike any other ⛳. I also think CBS is doing some college football games too. Also, if VT plays ND on NBC, I imagine that wouldn't be included.
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
...it's called putting up an antenna and getting your network channels over the airwaves.
I hear it's only growing in popularity. :)
BTW, buy an OTA DVR if you want to take full advantage of that technology...lol
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
I just watch stuff on my laptop. LOL.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
2y
problems with Charter recently, was because of the carriage fees, and college athletics were a big part of that. Too many linier subscribers do not want to pay the carriage fees for college athletics.
Of all of Disney's channels, which ones would be first on the chopping block, or first to negotiate down?
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
If it works well, I'll pay and drop YouTube TV.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
2y
(In response to this post by Femoyer Hokie)
Works for me because I have always paid for Peacock and Paramount Plus Apps
I have those to watch broadcast shows the next day without commercials, some exclusive live sports and they throw in your local NBC/CBS channels.
(In response to this post by AnotherTechW)
2y
90% of people that would actually pay that vs. using a pirate stream site would just pony up the extra $25-$30 and get a full streaming package. It makes it even worse when you consider that this is the price on day one - that price will definitely go up at least once every year or two.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)