Very, very interesting article regarding how the Disney-DirectTV dispute-
could affect the continued viability of the ACCN, the Disney-ACC deal, and the ACC GOR. You should definitely read the entire article, but, in a nutshell, it speculates (with provided reasoning) that a major impasse in the ongoing Disney-DTV dispute is an insistence by DTV that only the immediate markets for ACC member schools should be considered "in-conference," as opposed to entire states. This means, by way of example, the entirety of NYC would no longer be paying the premium rate (~$1.30) for the ACCN, because Syracuse is 4 hours away and in the Buffalo TV market; instead, NYC subscribers would pay the out-of-market rate (~$0.25.) Comcast has already secured this arrangement from Disney for the SMU (Dallas only) and Cal/Stanford (San Fran only) markets. The article speculates that DTV saw that, and is only taking the next logical step in its current negotiation.
Concisely stated, only 2.2% of cable subscribers ever actually watch the ACCN, and it's only a profitable venture for Disney because it's getting in-market rates from entire states with ACC schools, regardless of the actual location and actual market for that school. If that changes, the ACCN will instantly cease being profitable, and will instead become a massive financial anchor tied around Disney's neck. And, if that's the case, why would they extend the deal?
24 Replies
V
VPI 1924
1y
This post by VPI 1924 removed by Tech Sideline admin
1y
This post by Baltimore_Hokie removed by Tech Sideline admin
Remember that DirecTV is a dying platform and they are negotiating hard
These programming battles can get nasty and I can give you some examples of ugly negotiating. Realistically, Direct is in big trouble as they try to transform from all dish to all over the top. If Disney concedes, it really reduces the potential income from both ACCN and SECN. That will not go over too well at Disney after taking a lot of stock value hits over the last couple of years.
I used to be a Direct customer even though I worked in cable. Once I moved to Florida, I could not dump Direct fast enough and moved to Charter/Spectrum at a MUCH cheaper rate for similar service. I say dump Direct and move on before they sell off or file for bankruptcy.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
E
EDGEMAN
1y
...in the game. Their satellite branch probably won't have much future growth since broadband availability seems to be spreading across the country, but their streaming service seems to be doing OK.
Disney/ESPN has these battles with all providers, other than Hulu.
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
R
RJHokie
1y
about Dish and DirecTV considering a merger. I wonder if something like that might still be under consideration.
In 2021 DirecTV, U-Verse and AT&T TV were spun off by AT&T into a separate entity where AT&T retained 70% and TPG Capital received a 30% interest in the new entity.
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
1y
for the past decade to anyone that would entertain the concept. Anyone that is willing to keep up with very simple technology can easily cut the cord. So, I don't disagree with you. But, if it's not DTV, Dish, Spectrum, etc. raising cain, it will be the streaming platforms like YouTubeTV, or Sling, or Fubo, etc. trying to drive the hard bargain.
I am inclined to believe that where this all ends up for live sports is an a la carte, direct to consumer model. Consumers will pay the media production companies directly for access to the content they want to see. You want the SEC? $25 a month. ACC too? another $15. Oh, you want to see the MNF games? That's going to be another $30 a month for the NFL. Additional surcharges for the NBA and NHL. You want all sports content that Disney has the rights to? $99.99 per month, a real bargain! And, you're also going to have to pay your broadband bill. That's where all this is going to end up.
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
1y
were paying for cable bundles
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
S
Stech
1y
amongst many others. It’s also absurd in some states. Virginia Tech pulls TV ratings in DMV, Richmond, Hampton Roads, etc.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
I would point you to my "I think that was just in reference to Syracuse/NYC." comment below. College sports markets are different animals than professional sports markets.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2
2hhoop3
1y
the source and motivations. It is an FSU fan site and everything will be spun to the FSU legal benefit. It raises valid points on the payments and valuations and that relates to all companies not just ESPN and Direct TV. It also creates some interesting potential conflicts with the B1G, NBC, Comcast, etc.. It is an interesting article, raises lots of questions and may have reach far beyond the current argument you just have to sort through the FSU propaganda and spin.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
admittedly, speculation based thereon. But I don't think the guy is coming way out of left field with the points he makes. Folks here can take it for what it's worth without killing the messenger.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
1y
a lot of speculation, some of which is dressed up as facts. The level of bias is an opinion but, the source, allegiance and motivation are fact.
** Edited by 2hhoop3 at 9/12/2024, 5:28:00 PM
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
The SEC network will be under the same pressure. Adding Clemson and FSU will not add a penny to ESPN's SEC network revenue in those states, and it will reduce revenue from the ACC network. I think it is B1G or bust for those schools.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
D
dallasvt
1y
(In response to this post by pburg_hokie)
1y
my cable too and going streaming. I don't have internet service now that is fast enough to stream, but just got notified yesterday we're getting fiber optic internet.
(In response to this post by pburg_hokie)
1y
I'm curious how they would approach a 20 year customer.
(In response to this post by pburg_hokie)
1y
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
And ESPN will be just fine no matter what. Directv will be just fine no matter what. But the ACC is clearly the one with the most to lose...and just happens to have a big date only a few months away that gives ESPN a way out of the existing contract if the profit model no longer works.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
I'm sure there are states where a majority of alumni are 4+ hours from the school, yet constitute a bulk of the viewing. Maybe not ACC schools though ...
Unbundling will continue to push us towards a subscription sports model.
** Edited by Hokie Bird at 9/12/2024, 11:56:27 AM
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
I agree that colleges, as opposed to professional teams, have different "markets." For example, one could not reasonably argue that the "market" for Alabama is limited to Tuscaloosa and its immediate environs - the TV market for Alabama is the entire state, and probably beyond.
I imagine a good set of lawyers working with reasonable business partners could come up with an equitable way to determine what a market is using available data, but no matter how you bake that cupcake for the ACC, it's going to instantly kill the profitability of the ACCN if "in-market" means anything but the entire states where member schools are located. If you're utilizing available viewership numbers, the market for Pitt is certainly not going to include Philadelphia. The market for Boston College may not even extend beyond a 1 mile radius outside Chestnut Hill.
Ultimately, it all may not even end up mattering anyway. Legacy cable and the concept of cable channels and programming that people watch live is already an ancient, obsolete concept for everything except sports - people just pick the shows/events they want to watch from a giant grid on their TV, whether they're watching something live or not. It will not be long before sports get there as well.
(In response to this post by Hokie Bird)
1y
I would think Virginia, North Carolina, and maybe Florida stay as all-state in-conference rates. Georgia gets knocked down to Atl, S Car to Greenville, PA to just Pitt area, and so on (thus, excluding California, any state w/ 2 more schools are under the "current" in-state rules).
The question will become will the Big Ten Network and/or SECN go through this - especially Rutgers viewing area when those contracts come up.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)