UT Close To Picking Partner For Longhorn Network

by srr50 on Oct 12, 2010 5:07 PM CDT in Texas Longhorns and Other Football

There are reports that the creation of a Longhorn Network will take a major step by the end of the month. The paysite Sports Business Journal is stating that Fox Sports Net is the leader to become the broadcast partner for UT in the venture. The target date for launching the Longhorn Network is August, 2011.

IMG College, the multimedia rights holder for UT, is handling the negotiations and supposedly Fox Sports Net and ESPN have emerged as the two main potential partners for the network. An August 2011 debut is still the goal for the Longhorn Network.

The selection of a partner is key for Texas, because unlike the Big 10 Network, which is already a booming success, or the proposed Pac 10 Network, the Longhorns will not have the luxury of having other programs in a conference to help supply content for the network.

The selection of the broadcast partner is also important for the multiple goals of the proposed network.

Expanding and protecting the UT brand is a major goal of the Longhorn Network.

The added revenue that a Longhorn Network will bring in is important, but it is hardly the only benefit Texas is looking to produce. Furthering the Texas brand -- by controlling the message going out -- is another key factor in this project. Texas already has an excellent brand equity built in, and a channel broadcasting that brand throughout the dominant markets of influence carries recruiting advantages for all parts of the University - not just the athletic department.

Another goal is to avoid as much risk as possible. Over 20 years ago, Texas signed on with Host Communications as their broadcast partner. Deloss Dodds wanted an outside agent who would provide a "turnkey" process whereby the football and basketball coaches were taken out of the fund-raising business for their own TV and radio shows. Host became responsible for the sale and placement of the media products, and would pay the coaches a flat fee. This process soon became the industry standard.

As Texas looks to start its own channel, Dodds again is looking at uncharted territory for individual schools, and he is looking to cut the risk factors down to a minimum. The Big 10 Network offers a great opportunity to look at the pitfalls, and benefits of having your own network.

The Big 10 Network is seen as the template for creating a new media revenue stream.

The biggest battle any channel has in starting out is getting clearance from the cable and satellite distributors. The Big 10 Network had an extended - and ugly - battle with Time Warner and Comcast Cable when they were launching. Getting on the basic tier while also getting a monthly franchise fee that was profitable was a very difficult process for the Big 10 Network.

The Big 10 Network is co-owned by the league (51%) and Fox Sports (49%). Dodds has gone on public record in the past that Texas does not necessarily have to be a part owner of the network.

Texas could have another "hands off" arrangement by having IMG College and a media partner own the channel and simply pay Texas a yearly rights fee. Another option would have Texas, IMG, and the media partner all as owners of the network.

Texas and IMG could also look towards distributors such at Time Warner, Comcast or AT&T as partners as well. AT&T and Verizon have launched video businesses to compete with the traditional distributors. Right now Fox Sports and ESPN are the major players in any kind of sports channel creation. There are pros and cons for both operations.

ESPN is currently the 800-pound gorilla that dominates the sports media landscape. They have a proven track record in running multiple media platforms with great success, including broadband. They obviously have the expertise in programming, production and sales that would be needed for a start up, and they are the best negotiator around when it comes to carriage deals -- and that might actually be a strike against them for Texas.

ESPN just completed a protracted - and bitter - negotiation with Time Warner over its channels. The idea of re-opening those negotiations for a new niche sports channel is an unpleasant one for both sides.

Fox Sports has several inherent advantages in its proposed deal with Texas. Fox already operates Regional Sports Networks across the country, including several in Texas. They include Fox Sports Houston, Fox Sports Southwest, and Fox Sports College. Fox could take one of those channels, assign the Longhorn Network to it and solve the carriage negotiation problem within the state of Texas overnight, giving the network strong coverage in the state right from its launch.

PROGRAMMING

Fox also has an advantage in producing programming, since it already controls much of the inventory that would fill in a Longhorn Network by way of their current agreement with the Big 12. This is especially important in the area of Olympic and women's sports, which will offer the opportunity for live broadcasts.

It is expected that UT will negotiate into the next Big 12 contract that at least one home football game be retained for its network.

Several home basketball games are expected to be made available on the Longhorn Network.

Men's and women's basketball as well as baseball and softball are also expected to be the major events that will find their way live onto the channel.

Again a look at the Big 10 Network will also give you an idea of what supplemental programming will look like on the Longhorn Network. You can expect replays of past games, coach's shows and other "insider" video on the athletic department. Non-sports programming will also have a home on the channel. Major events on campus could be telecast live. Departments throughout the University will be given the chance to highlight their achievements.

Shows highlighting Austin and its attractions - such as 6th street - will find a home on the Longhorn Network.

There are plenty of voices in the industry who are more than willing to point out the potential pitfalls facing such a start up. Partnering with an experienced media provider does not guarantee wide spread distribution.

A single University Network has a hard sell when it comes to convincing distributors that their content is as valuable as other sports channels already out there. The deeper you go into the non-revenue sports for live broadcasts the smaller the audience you attract that wants to view that content. That makes settling on the license fee that doesn't price you out of the market a critical part of the equation.

Still, Texas is willing to step out before other colleges take the plunge, and they are working on a proven business model that can produce the desired fiscal and branding results while keeping the risks to that brand at a minimum.

One of the advantages Texas saw in preserving the Big 12 was the ability to strike out with a Longhorn Network. Nobody is willing to make a guess as to the long-term viability of the Big 12, but no matter what, UT wants to have its own channel as part of its total package -- no matter where they call home.

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Fox Sucks Net, home of such quality as Dave Lapham and endless shots of ugly fat band chicks. The GD of sports networks?

by Not confident on Oct 12, 2010 6:02 PM CDT reply actions

Good run down srr. I’m not sure how all of the contract negotiations work with the cable providers but where do the satellite providers fall into the equation?

Who do you see winning out in the partnership between ESPN and FSN?

by maninblack on Oct 12, 2010 6:08 PM CDT reply actions

Great information in an area far removed from my expertise (and, usually, my area of interest). I second Not Confident on the Fox issue . . . I try to avoid Fox regional programming at all costs. When I can’t, I watch with the mute button in effect.

In fairness, some of the Fox regionals around the country are excellent — but those originating in Texas are weaker than our running game. ESPN (The “E” stands for Ego) doesn’t thrill me either, but I’d rather go that way. Getting access is the make or break, and it’s an extremely crowded field getting more crowded by the hour.

by edsp on Oct 12, 2010 6:17 PM CDT reply actions

not confident & edsp

Don;t worry — Dave Lapham won’t come within 800 miles of this venture. Texas will have total control over who represents them on air. Fox has run the Big 10 Network and fully understands quality control in that situation.

MIB: I think Fox wins out because of their history of running regional nets and their access to distributors throughout Texas.

This is — at least starting out — a regional effort. Getting it established in the Lone Star State will be priority #1. And negotiations with the satellite providers will run basically the same route as with cable.

by srr50 on Oct 12, 2010 7:28 PM CDT reply actions

Fan has awesome slo-mo.

by Guh on Oct 12, 2010 9:00 PM CDT reply actions

FSN

by Guh on Oct 12, 2010 9:01 PM CDT reply actions

Just a great run down, Steve. The best that any of us will read. This is right in your wheelhouse.

Sign me up now.

by beowulf on Oct 12, 2010 9:11 PM CDT reply actions

What’s U of Florida doing? Don’t they have their own school network up and running?

by Stiendam Hall on Oct 12, 2010 11:02 PM CDT reply actions

Florida has GatorVision. They produce the TV shows for the regional network in Florida as well as GatorVision online — which is their premium subscription-based outlet. GatorVision Online their premium content, subscription-based web product. GatorVision offrs fans streaming video (live and archived games) and other exclusive content produced by the Athletic Department. It also offers special game-day packages with stats and online streaming of pre and post game events.

by Steve Ross on Oct 12, 2010 11:31 PM CDT reply actions

“I think Fox wins out because of their history of running regional nets and their access to distributors throughout Texas.”

This will prove to be accurate.

by BEHorn on Oct 13, 2010 12:01 AM CDT reply actions

The future of non revenue programming is on the internet. You can’t fill 168 hours a week with olympic sports, womens sports, and cademic department infomercials. The Longhorn network might, might be able to charge a decent fee if it offered live athletic events from revenue sports of other schools. A defacto SWC network.

Let UH, Rice, SMU, TCU, etc view their home football, b-ball, and basketball games on there, In addtion to reruns of our games, coaches shows, and classic programming. Also it could pick up the Big 12 game of the week that did not make the regular tv lineup. those Iowa St. Baylor games would be good candidates.

Maybe pick up big time high school games as well. But the non revenues are not going to help them.

by fear_the_cow on Oct 13, 2010 12:08 AM CDT reply actions

Anotehr idea is to simulcast from the ABC/ESPN games a different angle. Perhaps a sideline view or end zone view with the radio announcers.

by fear_the_cow on Oct 13, 2010 12:08 AM CDT reply actions

srr,

So if Florida is doing this already, why is Texas considered some trailblazer here? Is Florida making money on their deal? Thanks for the article.

by dick on Oct 13, 2010 1:00 AM CDT reply actions

The announcers on the Big 10 network make Dave Lapham sound like Jack Buck

The Big 10 network recognizes that anyone who is willing to watch Purdue vs. NW will do so regardless of who is announcing the game and pay their on-air talent accordingly. The same principle applies to a Texas vs. Iowa State basketball game.

by The Replacements on Oct 13, 2010 7:10 AM CDT reply actions

dick: Florida’s Gatorvision is more of a hybrid feature: it is a web streaming service. You pay a yearly or monthly fee and get access to some live events (no football) press conferences, special “insider” features etc. They also put some of this on the Fox regional cable network Sun Sports.

The announcers on the Big 10 network make Dave Lapham sound like Jack Buck

The Big 10 telecasts 35 live football and 145 live basketball games, and therefore has to dig deeper into the announcer pool. That will not be a problem for Texas.

by srr50 on Oct 13, 2010 8:23 AM CDT reply actions

I think fear the cow nailed it. The internet is grabbing share from traditional TV at a huge rate. Eventually, broadband internet and television are going to get intertwined. It might be 5-10 years away but it’s going to happen. More on-demand and content driven, less “channel” driven.

Texas should proceed very carefully when the traditional rules of media may not apply in the new world.

by SynTex on Oct 13, 2010 9:34 AM CDT reply actions

I would like to see us retain the option to choose a few high school football games every year from around Texas to broadcast on the network. This way, we could provide our recruiting prospects with cable TV time, get coaches around Texas to like UT even more, and highlight to parents of recruits that they will never have to miss a game because of our media presence.

by CZW on Oct 13, 2010 9:35 AM CDT reply actions

This is sports focused site, obviously, and sports will be the primary draw of the Longhorn Network. However, I’ve been impressed with academic content on some Univ. sites. U of Washington is an example.

As the inferno regarding conference realignment touched on, the academic enterprise of the University system, not football or sports in general, is the primary business and revenue stream for the institution.

UT administration will find the partner that allows it to accent its academic qualities more broadly. Sports will be the carrot, nothing else.

by quigley on Oct 13, 2010 9:49 AM CDT reply actions

Great write-up srr50. Not sure I’d be excited about this tidbit of news were I a UT fan/alum. The B10 partnered with Fox Sports albeit remained a 51% owner of the venture. All 11 schools within the B10 chipped in $10M EACH to fund the venture. Regardless of the talent pool of the personalities on the B10 network, it’s still twice the quality of broadcast of any of the regional Fox Sports properties. If Fox Sports regional properties are so piss poor, what makes anyone think that a UT specific property will be any better?

I think the note above of the drive to the Internet for non-revenue sports is very insightful. It allows schools to find those “niche” fans without the huge investment.

I’m not sure this will end well for UT. They should have jumped at the B12 Network when it was offered.

by seattlehusker on Oct 13, 2010 10:41 AM CDT reply actions

Seattlehusker:

If Fox Sports regional properties are so piss poor, what makes anyone think that a UT specific property will be any better?

Once again, Texas will not rely on FSN for announcers — FSN will supply the sales and distribution expertise. Most of the production can be handled in-house (which is why UT built the media facility in the North Endzone).

I think the note above of the drive to the Internet for non-revenue sports is very insightful. It allows schools to find those "niche" fans without the huge investment.

Every athletic facility on campus is wired for video streaming. This no doubt will be a major part of any kind of network down the line.

Why jump to be a part of a conference TV network when that conference may be doomed?

by srr50 on Oct 13, 2010 5:44 PM CDT reply actions

Except now I have to worry that Plonsky will hire Pam Ward…

by E. Orr on Oct 13, 2010 9:11 PM CDT reply actions

Fox Sports Texas? That’s it? We didn’t join the big 10 / Pac 10 for regional fucking coverage of UT v Rice?

That’s a disaster from my point of view. The more I watch this train wreck I see SWC 2.0

I want some Longhorns Network up in Colorado.

Make it happen Deloss.

by roach on Oct 13, 2010 10:57 PM CDT reply actions

I in addition to my guys have been going through the great helpful hints from your web page and so then came up with a horrible feeling I never expressed respect to you for those tips. The young boys appeared to be certainly glad to learn all of them and have now extremely been using them. Appreciation for truly being really helpful and then for considering some very good guides millions of individuals are really eager to learn about. Our own sincere apologies for not saying thanks to sooner.

by bus for sale in texas on May 14, 2011 8:32 PM CDT reply actions