The Official SEC thread

[WhosYourDawggy]

Are you implying that ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX will no longer exist or no longer carry sports on broadcast tv?

They lead the cable, satellite, and streaming viewership numbers by a mile. They're not giving that up.

Good point ... streaming and OTA. I think the point was there will no longer be basic cable. It will all be YTTV, streaming services, etc. My kids are 22 and 24 ... they would never in a million years call a cable company and get a basic cable package. They get Internet and then the streaming services they want. With this sports package, I can't see them paying for YTTV.

 

[Thiefery]

Are you implying that ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX will no longer exist or no longer carry sports on broadcast tv?

They lead the cable, satellite, and streaming viewership numbers by a mile. They're not giving that up.

i'll continue to overpay for cable!!

 

[Red_Alert]

Good point ... streaming and OTA. I think the point was there will no longer be basic cable. It will all be YTTV, streaming services, etc. My kids are 22 and 24 ... they would never in a million years call a cable company and get a basic cable package. They get Internet and then the streaming services they want. With this sports package, I can't see them paying for YTTV.

That I can agree with.

My roof has 3 satellite dishes and one aerial antenna on it. They were all there when I bought this place 3 years ago. The roof is in good shape, so I'll have them removed when it's time for a new roof, whenever that is. I'm a good 30 - 35 miles out in the country, have fiber to my house, and stream HULU. I use a $25 digital antenna for OTA since it's a better picture with no delay like you get with cable, satellite, or streaming.

Funny thing is when I bought this place my 17 year old boy pointed at the aerial antenna on the roof and asked "Dad, what is that?"
I then explained that back in the day there were only 3 tv channels and that's how we received them. That the little digital antenna behind my tv replaced it. LOL

 

[Thiefery]

That I can agree with.

My roof has 3 satellite dishes and one aerial antenna on it. They were all there when I bought this place 3 years ago. The roof is in good shape, so I'll have them removed when it's time for a new roof, whenever that is. I'm a good 30 - 35 miles out in the country, have fiber to my house, and stream HULU. I use a $25 digital antenna for OTA since it's a better picture with no delay like you get with cable, satellite, or streaming.

Funny thing is when I bought this place my 17 year old boy pointed at the aerial antenna on the roof and asked "Dad, what is that?"
I then explained that back in the day there were only 3 tv channels and that's how we received them. That the little digital antenna behind my tv replaced it. LOL

View attachment 116213

but at the end of the day.. if you tune into CBS/ABC/FOX or NBC using an antenna.. you still get counted in the ratings and still catch whatever commercials right? That's how they are getting paid.. not gonna stop.

 

[Red_Alert]

i'll continue to overpay for cable!!

The company that provides fiber to my house has a cable package available, but I stream HULU.

I only pay for internet which is like $60/month. If I were to pay the fiber company for everything I get with HULU on their cable platform, my bill would be over $200/month.

 

[Thiefery]

The company that provides fiber to my house has a cable package available, but I stream HULU.

I only pay for internet which is like $60/month. If I were to pay the fiber company for everything I get with HULU on their cable platform, my bill would be over $200/month.

yeah my bill is at $330 now

 

[Wild Turkey]

1. No, it doesn't. ESPN is giving a pro-rata share for anyone that comes into the SEC. Please show us your source for that. If anyone atESPn negotiated that deal they should be shown the door.

2. Doesn't matter. The economics are still going to rely on eyeballs and CFP shares. Streaming doesn't change that. In fact, streaming will take the one thing Duke and UNC have going for them .... a new market in NC. Absent that, the two schools have zero value to the SEC.

3. Streaming doesn't change this except make it worse, as I said before. With streaming, geographic value models go away. Now you have eyeballs and CFP shares. UNC and Duke provide nothing there. They drive no numbers. They won't earn any shares. They have small fanbases.

If money drives everything, give me one rational explanation as to what Duke and UNC bring to the SEC. Money only. And do it in 2036 when it will be a 100% streaming world.

1. Sankey negotiated the CBS contract that burned the conference when aTm and Missouri joined and everyone had to take a hit a revenue so he made sure there were protections in place if the conference expanded. You can look it up because I'm not spending my time researching for you.

2. Duke and UNC have a huge basketball following so they will sign up for the streaming service just to watch the BBall. That is numbers and eyeballs. If you can comprehend that I can't help you.

There are as many UNC and Duke basketball fans as there are Alabama football fans. Note ratings don't matter because non-fans who watch Alabama football and don't watch any basketball but you will potentially have the same numbers of subscribers. Under a streaming model big Bball schools start to make a lot more sense.

 

[Red_Alert]

but at the end of the day.. if you tune into CBS/ABC/FOX or NBC using an antenna.. you still get counted in the ratings and still catch whatever commercials right? That's how they are getting paid.. not gonna stop.

I don't know the intricacies of how I'm counted.

I do know they still have the Nielsen Ratings of which they used to do by mail, but I believe they do by phone now (??). They obviously can't call everybody, so I think they just do an average.

I don't know if the commercials are the same streaming vs OTA.

 

[Thiefery]

1. Sankey negotiated the CBS contract that burned the conference when aTm and Missouri joined and everyone had to take a hit a revenue so he made sure there were protections in place if the conference expanded. You can look it up because I'm not spending my time researching for you.

2. Duke and UNC have a huge basketball following so they will sign up for the streaming service just to watch the BBall. That is numbers and eyeballs. If you can comprehend that I can't help you.

There are as many UNC and Duke basketball fans as there are Alabama football fans. Note ratings don't matter because non-fans who watch Alabama football and don't watch any basketball but you will potentially have the same numbers of subscribers. Under a streaming model big Bball schools start to make a lot more sense.

thought it was Slive who negotiated that CBS deal?

u might be surprised but Duke vs UNC isn't what it was 20 years ago anymore.

 

[Red_Alert]

yeah my bill is at $330 now

Damn, dude.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

1. Sankey negotiated the CBS contract that burned the conference when aTm and Missouri joined and everyone had to take a hit a revenue so he made sure there were protections in place if the conference expanded. You can look it up because I'm not spending my time researching for you.

2. Duke and UNC have a huge basketball following so they will sign up for the streaming service just to watch the BBall. That is numbers and eyeballs. If you can comprehend that I can't help you.

There are as many UNC and Duke basketball fans as there are Alabama football fans. Note ratings don't matter because non-fans who watch Alabama football and don't watch any basketball but you will potentially have the same numbers of subscribers. Under a streaming model big Bball schools start to make a lot more sense.

Don't do the "if I can't comprehend" nonsense. You know that I know my shit here. It's math. For UNC and Duke to contribute enough to earn a $100 million share, they would have to generate hundreds of millions that are split 18 ways. Even then, they can't earn a $100 million share. Do the math for us if you think it's so obvious.

You have no idea what you are talking about with regard to Duke and UNC fans vs. Alabama fans. Here are the numbers for the UNC v. Duke game a few weeks ago:

ESPN drew 3.2 million viewers for the game, behind only the same matchup in March 2022 (Mike Krzyzewski's finale at Cameron Indoor Stadium) as the network's second-best men's college hoops game since the Zion Williamson-fueled campaign of 2019 (each UNC-Duke game in 2019 was over 4 million).

North Carolina-Duke, Caitlin Clark drive Saturday hoops numbers for ESPN, Fox

North Carolina's win over Duke gave ESPN a strong Saturday of college basketball numbers.

www.sportsbusinessjournal.com

They didn't even reach 4 million viewers for the biggest game of the year, the biggest in many years. Only in 2019 did their games get over 4 million viewers. Basketball numbers are so far lower than football numbers it's not even close. You should know by now that the 4 million views mark is what they are shooting for, and they didn't even hit that for the biggest game of the year. Imagine how low the numbers are for all the other games. Oh, wait, we don't have to imagine ... here they are:

College basketball TV ratings

College basketball TV ratings for the 2023 season. Will be updated weekly throughout the season, typically on Tuesdays.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

Duke/Clemson - 1.3 million
UNC/FSU - 1.1 million

These are the highest rated games of the week. These aren't numbers that generate enough revenue to earn a $100 million share.

You want more? UNC generates 31 million a year in basketball revenue. That's great, right? No, Alabama 20 million, Auburn 19 million, Arkansas 19 million, UGA 12 million, Kentucky 32 million, UTjr 21 million, UT 23 million. Duke is private, but it will be far less as they have a small fieldhouse. So it's not like UNC is way ahead of the SEC schools in hoops. How is that going to make up for not generating any football revenue that is relevant?

Sportico’s Intercollegiate Finance Database

Sportico is maintaining an interactive, real-time database that tracks the official balance sheets of public FBS university athletic departments.

www.sportico.com

So, please, save the nonsense about me doing my research, and you can't help me if I don't see something you haven't come close to proving. The simple fact is that hoops do not drive enough revenue to add teams that don't drive football revenue.

 

[Red_Alert]

Don't do the "if I can't comprehend" nonsense. You know that I know my shit here. It's math. For UNC and Duke to contribute enough to earn a $100 million share, they would have to generate hundreds of millions that are split 18 ways. Even then, they can't earn a $100 million share. Do the math for us if you think it's so obvious.

You have no idea what you are talking about with regard to Duke and UNC fans vs. Alabama fans. Here are the numbers for the UNC v. Duke game a few weeks ago:

ESPN drew 3.2 million viewers for the game, behind only the same matchup in March 2022 (Mike Krzyzewski's finale at Cameron Indoor Stadium) as the network's second-best men's college hoops game since the Zion Williamson-fueled campaign of 2019 (each UNC-Duke game in 2019 was over 4 million).

North Carolina-Duke, Caitlin Clark drive Saturday hoops numbers for ESPN, Fox

North Carolina's win over Duke gave ESPN a strong Saturday of college basketball numbers.

www.sportsbusinessjournal.com

They didn't even reach 4 million viewers for the biggest game of the year, the biggest in many years. Only in 2019 did their games get over 4 million viewers. Basketball numbers are so far lower than football numbers it's not even close. You should know by now that the 4 million views mark is what they are shooting for, and they didn't even hit that for the biggest game of the year. Imagine how low the numbers are for all the other games. Oh, wait, we don't have to imagine ... here they are:

College basketball TV ratings

College basketball TV ratings for the 2023 season. Will be updated weekly throughout the season, typically on Tuesdays.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

Duke/Clemson - 1.3 million
UNC/FSU - 1.1 million

These are the highest rated games of the week. These aren't numbers that generate enough revenue to earn a $100 million share.

You want more? UNC generates 31 million a year in basketball revenue. That's great, right? No, Alabama 20 million, Auburn 19 million, Arkansas 19 million, UGA 12 million, Kentucky 32 million, UTjr 21 million, UT 23 million. Duke is private, but it will be far less as they have a small fieldhouse. So it's not like UNC is way ahead of the SEC schools in hoops. How is that going to make up for not generating any football revenue that is relevant?

Sportico’s Intercollegiate Finance Database

Sportico is maintaining an interactive, real-time database that tracks the official balance sheets of public FBS university athletic departments.

www.sportico.com

So, please, save the nonsense about me doing my research, and you can't help me if I don't see something you haven't come close to proving. The simple fact is that hoops do not drive enough revenue to add teams that don't drive football revenue.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we're gonna do math in comparing football to basketball viewership, shouldn't we consider that there are 3X as many regular season basketball games as there are football games?

You'd have to look at 'total' viewership on the year, no?

Also of note is that only BTN is represented in those ratings. It's void of the ACC/SEC Networks and ESPN+ (of which the Big 12 plays on).

 

[Red_Alert]

To counter that '3X as many televised basketball games than football games', one would have to think advertisers pay more for a slot for most football games than basketball games.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we're gonna do math in comparing football to basketball viewership, shouldn't we consider that there are 3X as many regular season basketball games as there are football games?

You'd have to look at 'total' viewership on the year, no?

Also of note is that only BTN is represented in those ratings. It's void of the ACC/SEC Networks and ESPN+ (of which the Big 12 plays on).

That's a good point, but if you aren't getting to 4 million+ viewers, each game is worth far less. Most games are on the conference networks, not on ESPN or broadcast TV. CBB money pales in comparison to CFB money. There is just no getting around that.

As I said in an early post, the B12 is going all in on hoops because they need incremental revenue. Adding a few million per team here and there is what they have to do. It doesn't move the needle when a team needs to be able to generate 100 million to earn a share to get into the SEC.

 

[Across The Field]

Good point ... streaming and OTA. I think the point was there will no longer be basic cable. It will all be YTTV, streaming services, etc. My kids are 22 and 24 ... they would never in a million years call a cable company and get a basic cable package. They get Internet and then the streaming services they want. With this sports package, I can't see them paying for YTTV.

Youtube has the Google backing, which I would have to think would come into play in some regard, but yeah this would be a massive blow.

 

[Across The Field]

yeah my bill is at $330 now

Well you're in Texas and don't have state income tax so that's what you get.

 

[Red_Alert]

That's a good point, but if you aren't getting to 4 million+ viewers, each game is worth far less. Most games are on the conference networks, not on ESPN or broadcast TV. CBB money pales in comparison to CFB money. There is just no getting around that.

As I said in an early post, the B12 is going all in on hoops because they need incremental revenue. Adding a few million per team here and there is what they have to do. It doesn't move the needle when a team needs to be able to generate 100 million to earn a share to get into the SEC.

Per event, that is a fact.

 

[Wild Turkey]

thought it was Slive who negotiated that CBS deal?

u might be surprised but Duke vs UNC isn't what it was 20 years ago anymore.

Slive was the commissioner but Sankey (associate Comish at the time) was in charge of the negotiations.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we're gonna do math in comparing football to basketball viewership, shouldn't we consider that there are 3X as many regular season basketball games as there are football games?

You'd have to look at 'total' viewership on the year, no?

Also of note is that only BTN is represented in those ratings. It's void of the ACC/SEC Networks and ESPN+ (of which the Big 12 plays on).

Save your breath he is stuck on the current revenue model and can’t wrap his head around what is coming.

It’s simple math when you are looking at streaming subscription numbers and when you break it down to that it comes down to subscribing households and Duke basketball will equal Alabama football in that scenario.

The only caveat is going to be ad revenue and sponsorships because that will be a piece of the model. You are correct in how many more basketball games there will be so basketball will become more profitable when the conferences own the ad revenue.

Then add in the big money that can be earned by the conferences owning the basketball tournament that currently brings in 1.1 billion but that is networks paying for it. Put it on streaming and capture the ad revenue and the number jumps substantially.

He just can’t see it, this is too big for him.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Youtube has the Google backing, which I would have to think would come into play in some regard, but yeah this would be a massive blow.

I would really have to think through $80+ for YTTV, or the sports package. I would likely stay with YTV because the $300 just doesn't matter, and maybe one day I'd want something that is on YTTV. But it really shows where we are headed.