Conference Realignment

cpf2001

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,283
I don’t think it’s out of the question that ESPN might rather have basically dead air with no revenue for some spots than low rated stuff they’re paying millions of dollars for the privilege to air.

If FSU and a bunch of other teams left ESPN would quite possibly be looking for any way out of the deal. Possibly even without FSU leaving depending on the overall media market; the supposed extension of a renewal option was a very scary move by the ACC in this climate.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,000
I don’t think it’s out of the question that ESPN might rather have basically dead air with no revenue for some spots than low rated stuff they’re paying millions of dollars for the privilege to air.
The bigger problem with dead air is the carriage fees. If ESPN has no sports content for ESPN News, then cable/sat/streaming companies will fight hard to not pay for it. Same with ESPNU. Even if ESPNU has low G5 and FCS games but no P4 games, cable/sat/streaming companies will fight hard to not pay for it. The dead air time for ad-revenue will be very small compared to the loss of carriage fees. There are reasons that ESPN will put some decent games on ESPN2, ESPNU, SECN, and ACCN. They don't put many, but they try to make sure that there is some level of demand for each station, so that they can get carriage fees for all of the stations.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,840
I don’t think it’s out of the question that ESPN might rather have basically dead air with no revenue for some spots than low rated stuff they’re paying millions of dollars for the privilege to air.

If FSU and a bunch of other teams left ESPN would quite possibly be looking for any way out of the deal. Possibly even without FSU leaving depending on the overall media market; the supposed extension of a renewal option was a very scary move by the ACC in this climate.
Espn has been downsizing, they might eventually cut down some channels and focus on quality over quantity
 

cpf2001

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,283
The bigger problem with dead air is the carriage fees. If ESPN has no sports content for ESPN News, then cable/sat/streaming companies will fight hard to not pay for it. Same with ESPNU. Even if ESPNU has low G5 and FCS games but no P4 games, cable/sat/streaming companies will fight hard to not pay for it. The dead air time for ad-revenue will be very small compared to the loss of carriage fees. There are reasons that ESPN will put some decent games on ESPN2, ESPNU, SECN, and ACCN. They don't put many, but they try to make sure that there is some level of demand for each station, so that they can get carriage fees for all of the stations.
But where is the tipping point where ditching a low-end channel and losing, say, 12% of the carriage fee is worth it compared to paying yesterday’s rates for the content on that channel?

ACCN, for instance, is already a paid extra for some cable companies, so I doubt it’s bringing in the big bucks.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,000
But where is the tipping point where ditching a low-end channel and losing, say, 12% of the carriage fee is worth it compared to paying yesterday’s rates for the content on that channel?

ACCN, for instance, is already a paid extra for some cable companies, so I doubt it’s bringing in the big bucks.
Which cable company has ACCN as a paid extra? Comcast for example has it in the Digital starter package in areas with an ACC team, and Digital preferred in areas without an ACC team. Outside of the ACC footprint it does require a higher package, but it isn't a stand alone channel.
 

cpf2001

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,283
Which cable company has ACCN as a paid extra? Comcast for example has it in the Digital starter package in areas with an ACC team, and Digital preferred in areas without an ACC team. Outside of the ACC footprint it does require a higher package, but it isn't a stand alone channel.
Spectrum has it in a "Sports" addon, at least in SoCal. Even on plans that have RSNs. (I checked yesterday since there was discussion in the cable thread of if streaming TV + internet was cheaper than cable bundles.) I didn't say it was standalone - very few channels are - I said it can already end up outside of the primary ESPN carriage deal that is paid for by every customer.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,000
Spectrum has it in a "Sports" addon, at least in SoCal. Even on plans that have RSNs. (I checked yesterday since there was discussion in the cable thread of if streaming TV + internet was cheaper than cable bundles.) I didn't say it was standalone - very few channels are - I said it can already end up outside of the primary ESPN carriage deal that is paid for by every customer.
SoCal is outside of ACC footprints, at least for a few more months. Not sure if SoCal will be considered inside the footprint or not after Cal/Stanford are part of the ACC.

The 2022 (I think that was the fiscal year ended in June 2022) GTAA report said that GT received $9.8 million from the ACCN.
 

cpf2001

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,283
Sure, but we’re talking about if the network (and rest of the package) is worth it for ESPN post-FSU, not if it’s worth it for the schools.

I’m just saying that the ACC being cheaper than the SEC doesn’t mean it’s more profitable for the networks, or that ESPN would see a big hit in fees or subscriber uptake if half the league was effectively relegated to a lower tier post-breakup.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,877

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,239
I'm going to take the "dirty laundry" theory with FSU vs ACC.

FSU knows they need to pay to get out of the GOR/ACC, but they also know some the ACC skeletons. The ACC isn't going to let them out of the GOR without making FSU bleed, but they probably don't want to expose some skeletons in their closet. I think FSU knows they can't win outright, BUT what they can do it make the relationship so untenable and so damaging to the ACC, that both parties agree to some kind of settlement that reduces the full payout FSU would need to pay to get out.

Neither FSU or ACC probably want to go through discovery and years of legal gamesmanship. Signs point to FSU and B1G partnership at the end of the tunnel. B1G media contracts with FOX/CBS/NBC end in 2029-2030 season. At some point near the end of the B1G media contracts, I think the ACC and FSU (and probably other ACC schools) will come to an early dissolution agreement. FSU (and probably other ACC schools) will probably pay a high price to get out of the GOR before 2036, but at a much less amount than the GOR terms. It will line up with the B1G's new media negotiations to have FSU (and probably other ACC schools) rolled into their new contract.

I don't think this ends well for the ACC at the end of the tunnel. The ACC is the only "major" conference left with territories that are attractive with the two biggest sharks in the college sports ocean. The ACC will not be able to compete with the SEC or B1G to retain some of their flagship programs or schools in major markets. Whether it's 2030 when the B1G media contracts end, or 2034 with the SEC contract ends with ESPN/ABC (and that will almost certainly be renewed), or 2036 when the ACC GOR ends. The ACC still probably survives in some form, but I don't expect certain schools to be part of it, and I don't expect the ACC to be part of the "haves" like we once were.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,159
That lawyer really paints a super negative picture of FSU's lawsuit.
It's obviously on the other side of the biased spectrum discussed earlier. It's an interesting approach though. He bases most of his argument on copyright law and intellectual property which I haven't really seen argued anywhere before. I have no idea if its a valid argument or not. One most interesting tidbit to me though was:
I harbor deep skepticism about Florida State University’s calculation of its exit fee from the ACC. FSU’s legal strategy inflates this fee by amalgamating the value of media rights pledged (not forfeited) under the GOR with unreimbursed broadcast fees and a genuine exit fee. That’s $130 million (exit fee) plus $13 million (broadcast fees) plus an estimated $429 million (media rights). The total, a staggering $572 million, misleadingly conflates separate contractual elements, and is an obvious attempt to take what is fundamentally a question of intellectual property licensing and supplant it with one having to do with antitrust law.
He seems to think FSU is inflating the exit fee by a good margin to make their anti-trust argument. However, he doesn't make any attempt at all to say what a more realistic exit fee is or how it should be calculated. It would be nice to know what a realistic exit fee is if $572 million is not realistic.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,000
It's obviously on the other side of the biased spectrum discussed earlier. It's an interesting approach though. He bases most of his argument on copyright law and intellectual property which I haven't really seen argued anywhere before. I have no idea if its a valid argument or not. One most interesting tidbit to me though was:

He seems to think FSU is inflating the exit fee by a good margin to make their anti-trust argument. However, he doesn't make any attempt at all to say what a more realistic exit fee is or how it should be calculated. It would be nice to know what a realistic exit fee is if $572 million is not realistic.
What he is saying is that FSU is conflating their voluntary assignment of copyright rights to their games with the exit fee. The "exit fee" is three years worth of the current ACC media payout. That is where the $130 million number comes from. FSU is saying that the value of the copyright that they assigned to the ACC is $400+ million, but they are calling that an exit fee. It is not an exit fee. The ACC is not required to sell the copyright back to them for any price in the contract that FSU signed which gave the copyright to the ACC. The entire GOR and assignment of media rights is about the copyright of the media. The fact that nobody has discussed copyright before goes to my take that FSU's court fillings and must if not all of the Twitter and forum discussions are about fanboy type arguments and not about valid legal issues.

If I remember correctly from the article, this guy is a copyright lawyer. That is why he is looking at it from a copyright standpoint. His general idea is that FSU is intentionally conflating numbers and points to make things appear more devious than they actually are. Such as inflating the exit fee by adding lost revenue from copyright assignments that are not actually "exit fee" in an attempt to make their antitrust claims valid.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,159
What he is saying is that FSU is conflating their voluntary assignment of copyright rights to their games with the exit fee. The "exit fee" is three years worth of the current ACC media payout. That is where the $130 million number comes from. FSU is saying that the value of the copyright that they assigned to the ACC is $400+ million, but they are calling that an exit fee. It is not an exit fee. The ACC is not required to sell the copyright back to them for any price in the contract that FSU signed which gave the copyright to the ACC. The entire GOR and assignment of media rights is about the copyright of the media. The fact that nobody has discussed copyright before goes to my take that FSU's court fillings and must if not all of the Twitter and forum discussions are about fanboy type arguments and not about valid legal issues.

If I remember correctly from the article, this guy is a copyright lawyer. That is why he is looking at it from a copyright standpoint. His general idea is that FSU is intentionally conflating numbers and points to make things appear more devious than they actually are. Such as inflating the exit fee by adding lost revenue from copyright assignments that are not actually "exit fee" in an attempt to make their antitrust claims valid.
Then what is the correct amount to assign to the media rights? Or is the argument that FSU is stuck here until 2036 because the ACC can just refuse to even let them pay a penalty for that?

Also, I have probably read at least 10 articles from lawyers on the FSU/ACC debacle, and none have mentioned copyright law as the basis of their argument either way. I'm not sure why you think this random Chapel Hill lawyer is the only non fanboy out there.
 
Last edited:

gtbb

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
59
I'm going to take the "dirty laundry" theory with FSU vs ACC.

FSU knows they need to pay to get out of the GOR/ACC, but they also know some the ACC skeletons. The ACC isn't going to let them out of the GOR without making FSU bleed, but they probably don't want to expose some skeletons in their closet. I think FSU knows they can't win outright, BUT what they can do it make the relationship so untenable and so damaging to the ACC, that both parties agree to some kind of settlement that reduces the full payout FSU would need to pay to get out.

Neither FSU or ACC probably want to go through discovery and years of legal gamesmanship. Signs point to FSU and B1G partnership at the end of the tunnel. B1G media contracts with FOX/CBS/NBC end in 2029-2030 season. At some point near the end of the B1G media contracts, I think the ACC and FSU (and probably other ACC schools) will come to an early dissolution agreement. FSU (and probably other ACC schools) will probably pay a high price to get out of the GOR before 2036, but at a much less amount than the GOR terms. It will line up with the B1G's new media negotiations to have FSU (and probably other ACC schools) rolled into their new contract.

I don't think this ends well for the ACC at the end of the tunnel. The ACC is the only "major" conference left with territories that are attractive with the two biggest sharks in the college sports ocean. The ACC will not be able to compete with the SEC or B1G to retain some of their flagship programs or schools in major markets. Whether it's 2030 when the B1G media contracts end, or 2034 with the SEC contract ends with ESPN/ABC (and that will almost certainly be renewed), or 2036 when the ACC GOR ends. The ACC still probably survives in some form, but I don't expect certain schools to be part of it, and I don't expect the ACC to be part of the "haves" like we once were.
Good post, and mostly agree. The Joint Advisory Group that was announced by the SEC & B1G, IMO, puts the ACC firmly on the outside with little opportunity to impact their own standing. If there's a breakaway, we're likely not going to be part of it.

The B1G especially is interested in Florida. One thing the B1G lacks is a sufficient # of high-quality recruits inside their current footprint. Getting into Florida and California helps them tremendously in that regard. FSU is the biggest brand in Florida outside of the Gators, and that's who the B1G wants. And I think the B1G would also be willing to take Miami and FSU together, to maximize their footprint in that talent-rich and high population state. This could be an opportunity for Tech as well, since the B1G is interested in being in large markets. Atlanta is certainly large enough in that regard, and the state of Georgia is also talent-rich.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,000
Then what is the correct amount to assign to the media rights? Or is the argument that FSU is stuck here until 2036 because the ACC can just refuse to even let them pay a penalty for that?

Also, I have probably read at least 10 articles from lawyers on the FSU/ACC debacle, and none have mentioned copyright law as the basis of their argument either way. I'm not sure why you think this random Chapel Hill lawyer is the only non fanboy out there.
I didn't think he is the only non fanboy.

I think you have a basic misunderstanding of the GOR. Each ACC school assigned their media rights to the ACC until 2036. Full stop. The ACC owns the media rights until 2036. You ask what the value of FSU's media rights are. You could use many methods to calculate something. FSU uses projected media payouts. But they also argue that FSU's media is more valuable than the rest of the ACC. Which do you use? Do you include that ESPN might increase the payouts? Do you include that ESPN might reduce the payouts? In the end it is just like anything else, say a classic car. It is worth whatever the owner is willing to accept, and the buyer is willing to pay. The ACC could give them back for no charge, it they could refuse to give them back for any price.

Another point. The media rights are an ownership and buy/purchase agreement. There is no "penalty" involved. If they agree to a purchase price it is an agreement, not a penalty. If they do not agree to a purchase price, it is a lack of agreement but a penalty. Is it a penalty if a car dealer won't sell you a car for a price that you want to pay? Is it a penalty if you buy a car for a price that you agree to?

I believe this guy is a copyright lawyer. He is obviously going to see things through that lens. I have said before that FSU's legal filling conflates things and isn't out together in a logical, legal fashion. This is a prime example and explains it better than me. They are conflating exit fee and perceived value of media rights they do not own, and trying to use that to make anti trust arguments. Their points do not add up to their conclusions.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,159
I didn't think he is the only non fanboy.

I think you have a basic misunderstanding of the GOR. Each ACC school assigned their media rights to the ACC until 2036. Full stop. The ACC owns the media rights until 2036. You ask what the value of FSU's media rights are. You could use many methods to calculate something. FSU uses projected media payouts. But they also argue that FSU's media is more valuable than the rest of the ACC. Which do you use? Do you include that ESPN might increase the payouts? Do you include that ESPN might reduce the payouts? In the end it is just like anything else, say a classic car. It is worth whatever the owner is willing to accept, and the buyer is willing to pay. The ACC could give them back for no charge, it they could refuse to give them back for any price.

Another point. The media rights are an ownership and buy/purchase agreement. There is no "penalty" involved. If they agree to a purchase price it is an agreement, not a penalty. If they do not agree to a purchase price, it is a lack of agreement but a penalty. Is it a penalty if a car dealer won't sell you a car for a price that you want to pay? Is it a penalty if you buy a car for a price that you agree to?

I believe this guy is a copyright lawyer. He is obviously going to see things through that lens. I have said before that FSU's legal filling conflates things and isn't out together in a logical, legal fashion. This is a prime example and explains it better than me. They are conflating exit fee and perceived value of media rights they do not own, and trying to use that to make anti trust arguments. Their points do not add up to their conclusions.
I don't have a basic misunderstanding of the GOR. What I have is a misunderstanding of the actual cost of buying back media rights. That number is important for several reasons. FSU presented their interpretation of that cost. The guy in this article calls BS on that number yet offers nothing in terms of how it should be calculated or what the real costs might be. It's hard to take him seriously on that particular topic when he didn't go into any detail to support his claim. You are right in that it is a difficult question to answer. The fact that ESPN has not yet agreed to keep paying the ACC past 2027 seems to complicate it even more. In the end this will likely end up in a settlement or a judge somewhere is going to decide for them what the actual costs are. The exit fees are a separate matter that will also likely be challenged. Whether FSU has the success Maryland did on that front, we will see.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,000
I don't have a basic misunderstanding of the GOR. What I have is a misunderstanding of the actual cost of buying back media rights. That number is important for several reasons. FSU presented their interpretation of that cost. The guy in this article calls BS on that number yet offers nothing in terms of how it should be calculated or what the real costs might be. It's hard to take him seriously on that particular topic when he didn't go into any detail to support his claim. You are right in that it is a difficult question to answer. The fact that ESPN has not yet agreed to keep paying the ACC past 2027 seems to complicate it even more. In the end this will likely end up in a settlement or a judge somewhere is going to decide for them what the actual costs are. The exit fees are a separate matter that will also likely be challenged. Whether FSU has the success Maryland did on that front, we will see.
You misunderstand what he is saying. The "exit fee" is three years worth of current media payouts. That is currently approximately $130 million. There is no "real cost" to buy back their media rights. I believe he states that in copyright law, once you assign rights to someone else there are very limited legal methods to get those rights back through the legal system. You are looking for what it would cost FSU to leave with their media rights. There is no "real cost" to that. I listed an example of a classic car. If someone owns a 1971 Lamborghini Miura, he might want to sell it or he might not. The highest paid price for a 1971 Miura is about $2 million. You could say that the value is $2 million. There might be a buyer who wants to pay $2 million. However, if the owner does not want to sell the car, he will not accept the $2 million and the hopeful buyer will not get to own the car. The ACC owns the media rights of FSU athletics. FSU wants to buy those media rights back. We can make up any number we want to. Two dollars or one hundred billion dollars. If the ACC isn't willing to accept that price, or FSU isn't willing to pay that price, then it isn't the actual price of the media rights.

There is no "exit fee" to leave the ACC with your media rights. There is no way to calculate such an "exit fee" because it doesn't exist. There is an exit fee to leave the ACC. FSU can pay that price and leave for the 2025 season if they so choose.

There is the issue that the ACC owns FSU's media rights. That has nothing to do with an exit from the ACC. That is not a penalty for leaving the ACC, that was a conscious decision by FSU to assign the media rights to the ACC. What this lawyer is stating is not that the numbers are inaccurate. He says "The total, a staggering $572 million, misleadingly conflates separate contractual elements, and is an obvious attempt to take what is fundamentally a question of intellectual property licensing and supplant it with one having to do with antitrust law." He is stating that FSU is swirling all of the numbers together and calling them something they are not. He says "FSU may have a conceivable beef with the raw exit fee, not the money tied to the GOR (an entirely separate issue tied to licensed intellectual property as opposed to a contract penalty)" Those are totally separate items and have nothing to do with each other.

We DO NOT KNOW that ESPN can unilaterally cancel the entire contract with the ACC. FSU has made that claim, but FSU is also conflating and confusing many other points.

The fanboys say that it costs $572 million to leave the ACC. That is totally inaccurate. It costs $130 million to leave the ACC. That is in the ACC bylaws. This article says "Copyright law doesn’t provide an avenue for licensors to rescind their rights based solely on a change in market conditions or the realization that a deal is a bad one." In other words, courts will not give FSU their rights back just because FSU wants them back. Courts are not going to enforce a value that the ACC must accept for the media rights just because FSU wants to sell those rights to someone else.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,239
B1G and SEC exerting more of their power. Everyone knows how this is going to end, right? LOL at anyone who thought the SEC and B1G were being altruistic in forming an advisory group to straighten out the NCAA and college sports mess. At the end of the day, conferences are about making money. Powerful companies (see: SEC and B1G) want to maximize making money, and if they can bend and dictate rules to maximize revenue for themselves, they will. It's not a difficult concept to grasp.



How revenue is distributed will be at the heart of discussions for the future of the CFP. The new-look SEC and Big Ten will encompass most of college football’s powerhouse programs.

Most are expecting the two leagues to want more in revenue distribution as well as more weighted voting rights on key issues. They may get it, too. Starting in 2026, format and revenue matters do not need unanimous consent among the 11 commissioners and their corresponding 11 presidents.
 
Last edited:
Top