Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Eden Hazard In London For Medical, According To Reports

Why ESPN Is Willing To Pay UT $300 Million

It’s amazing the amount of dust that can be kicked up when a simple business deal is announced. Sailor wants to know just exactly what will this new UT channel be called. I kinda like BEVO-D on steroids, but I suppose that isn’t politically correct enough.

Star-divide

Our soon-to-be-gone neighbor to the North thinks Texas went too far this time.

Meanwhile miketag from I Am the 12th Man believes that the Longhorn channel will finally be the impetus for the Aggies to try and jump to the SEC.

Aside from the monetary gain, there has been a lot of talk about some of the other advantages Texas gets from this deal with ESPN. There is the recruiting advantage of having a platform for telecasting virtually all sports. Out of state recruits in the Olympic sports could find Texas more attractive since their families will have a way to follow their careers.

Others see the Texas-ESPN business relationship as especially unfair when it comes to some programming (high school football games involving elite recruits) and the general promotion of the Longhorns on the WWL.

ESPN has already announced that it will create and operate a broadband footprint established in high school sports. The plan is to live stream not just high school football games from around the state, but basketball and other centralized events such as track and field, tennis, soccer, etc.

In the NCAA rule book under “NCAA Rules for Media Relations” there is section 13.11.3 Radio/TV Show which states:

A member institution shall not permit a prospective student-athlete or a high school, college preparatory school or two-year college coach to appear, be interviewed or otherwise be involved (in person or via film, audio tape or videotape) on:

(a) A radio or television program conducted by the institution's coach;

(b) A program in which the institution's coach is participating; or

(c) A program for which a member of the institution's athletics staff has been instrumental in arranging for the appearance of the prospective student-athlete or coach or related program material.

It sounds as if this part of the plan will be a “stand-alone” aspect run directly by and through ESPN, but of course UT’s competitors will still see this as an unfair recruiting advantage.

There will only be one live football game telecast on this new channel, and some of our conference brethren point out that one game hardly makes it worthwhile. However there is another network already up and running that provides somewhat of a model Texas fans can expect during football season.


When you think of the new Longhorn Channel during football season, think NFL Network.

When the Texas game is being broadcast live by ESPN, ABC or Fox, there no doubt will be a live pre-game show on the Longhorn channel – along with a live post-game show.

There could be weekly “insider” shows, breaking down the previous week’s game. I would imagine that Bryan Harsin and Manny Diaz will have their own coach’s shows.

How about a live broadcast special on Signing Day?

There will also be a “UT Classic” venue available on the channel. UT has announced that they have acquired of all previous games that appeared on TV – no matter the network. The Big 10 has had great success with such nostalgic content, including past coaches shows from the likes of Woody Hayes and Bo Schembechler (my DVR will get a real workout if Texas follows suit).

There are lots of reasons for Texas to embrace this pact, but again you can find those who agree with miketag when he wonders, “why anyone except the most die hard of Texas fans would pony up extra money every month in order to watch women’s swimming and tennis.”

In other words, What’s in it for ESPN?

DUAL REVENUE STREAMS

When ESPN finally got a piece of the NFL TV pie, they agreed to pay $1 Billion a year to carry Monday Night Football. That was almost $300 million more a year than Fox is paying for the NFC ($720 million). CBS pays the NFL $620 million for the AFC games, and NBC throws in a little over $600 million a year for the Sunday Night Football package. While ESPN writes the biggest check to the NFL, they are left out of the play off and Super Bowl rotation, but they are still getting a lot of bang for their bucks.

If you are a basic digital cable subscriber you get channels in “bundles,” many of which you never watch. The cable (or dish) operator is paying a monthly retransmission fee to each of those channels. When ESPN was created in 1979, most channels were either carried by the distributors for free or the channels actually paid a small fee. As ESPN expanded its content to include college sports, they were instrumental in getting that template reversed.

Today the ESPN family of channels is the dominant force in pay TV. According to industry analyst SNL Kagan, the flagship network (ESPN) collects $4.58 per subscriber per month from distributors. That’s just the beginning. Other channels in the WWL family are also bundled to carriers – ESPN2 at 54 cents, ESPN Classic at 18 cents, ESPN News at 17 cents, etc. ESPN and ESPN2 are available in approximately 100 million homes across the U.S.


Currently ESPN collects over $550 million each month in subscription fees before selling a single advertisement.

That of course is just one of the revenue streams for ESPN. Ad revenue is expected to reach over $2 Billion in 2011. Total revenue for ESPN is expected to reach over $8.6 Billion this year.

The dual revenue streams of subscription and ad revenues will be in play for the new Longhorn channel as well.

For Texas, there is strength in numbers – or bundles – in joining forces with ESPN. The new Longhorn channel can be bundled with the other ESPN channels when negotiating with carriers. The channel can be a part of the basic digital cable package in Texas and Oklahoma, with ESPN charging just pennies per subscriber to add it to the bundle. One of the more pleasant consequences of this part of the agreement for Texas is that any Aggie, Sooner, Red Raider, etc in-state who has the basic sports digital package will be helping ESPN pay the $300 million to the Longhorns.

As for the out-of-region Longhorn fans who wish to get the channel it will be a premium buy. Generally the way those channels work is that the carrier and the content provider split the fee down the middle.

Based on the projected placement of the Longhorn channel on basic digital cable combined with selected premium buys out of state, those wondering who “would pay to watch UT women’s swimming and tennis” need not worry about ESPN eventually making back it’s investment.

”WE DON’T BUY GAMES – WE BUY CONTENT”

That is the quote from ESPN’s executive VP, John Skinner, and it helps explains why ESPN sees joining UT to create the channel makes sense. It is about getting as much content under the ESPN tent as possible, and distributing it throughout as many platforms as possible.

College football is a perfect example of how ESPN uses content to drive ad sales. As much as 75% of their college football inventory is sold in season packages before a single kick off. The rest of the commercial availabilities are basically divided up among the official BCS sponsors.


By controlling 33 of the 35 bowl games, ESPN worries less about lackluster matchups and sells its content as a total season package.

The deal with Texas is the first of its kind, but it may not be the last. ESPN can use such regional-centric agreements to help strengthen the sports tiers on digital cable. For instance, this past football season, ESPN unveiled ESPN Goal Line,” and has Buzzer Beater,” this basketball season. Both channels enable viewers to jump from game to game to catch as many highlights as possible. Negotiations for distributors to have the highlight channels will also include bundling other regional attractions, such as UT’s new venture.


”TV Everywhere”

A key component to this deal is the broadband rights that ESPN holds to UT events. ESPN plans to be at the forefront of another concept that could add another revenue stream –“TV Everywhere.” Time Warner Cable is a big proponent of the idea which means that your monthly cable bill will “bundle” services such as digital cable, digital phone and high speed internet, and would allow you to access television on any web-enabled device you have anywhere.

“TV Everywhere” is basically the reason ESPN360 became ESPN3 – in order to help brand it as an equal to its other channels. ESPN already has deals in place with major cable systems to pay a small fee for ESPN’s broadband content.

Much of the live contests produced for the new Longhorn Channel would not be available on the basic ESPN cable channels, but could be streamed on ESPN3.

For ESPN, the 20-year, $300 million deal with Texas works on many levels. It helps strengthen their regional “brand” while also expanding their control of BCS member TV rights. Having an independent channel was a strong factor in Texas not moving to the Pac 10 and becoming part of a conference network (probably run by Fox). With UT still in the Big 12-2 it slows down the momentum for any more expansion in the near future among the other conferences, which will help keep broadcast rights fees down for ESPN. It also gives ESPN another arrow in its cable, broadband and wireless quivor when it comes to negotiating fees with distributors.

But really, there is one basic answer as to why ESPN is willing to pay Texas $300 million.

BECAUSE THEY CAN

Comment 25 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Srr, thanks for the interesting info. I have a couple of questions for you. The cable operators are paying a lot less for ESPN2, ESPN News, etc. than the flagship ESPN network. It doesn’t seem like ESPN2 is worth 9 times less than ESPN. Is that pricing structure based off of the assumption that all the operators are going to buy all of the ESPN channles as a package anyway, so we should just think of the total package price? Also, I remember reading before that ESPN gets the highest fees from the operators of any cable channel. I am curious, who is #2?

by DeepEddy on Jan 23, 2011 11:13 PM CST reply actions  

If I hear you say “dual revenue streams” one more time….

I agree with you that the TV game has changed. (To their credit, the Big Ten figured this out first, at least in college sports. I remember everyone on the internet wondering who was gonna watch midnight basketball reruns…)

It’s not about ratings any more, it’s about subsription fees.

by Hoju on Jan 23, 2011 11:39 PM CST reply actions  

Ratings are still nice to have, they just don’t matter as much to cable channels as they do to networks because of that “one more time” phrase.

by Saul on Jan 23, 2011 11:45 PM CST reply actions  

Great read.

by ColoradoAg on Jan 24, 2011 6:10 AM CST reply actions  

I love it!

While all of my SEC buddies pound their chest and point to things like the SEC network as the reason why their Conference is the best in college football, I can point to this and re-state why my TEAM is the best in college period!

Thanks for the insightful post srr50.

Hook ’em!

by jinx on Jan 24, 2011 7:52 AM CST reply actions  

DeepEddy: You’re right the pricing for the other ESPN networks is based on the “bundle” approach where you get a community discount. ESPN is working to have ESPN2 seen as interchangable with the flagship network. They never would put Sports Center on ESPN2 but now they will have 1st run editions of SC on the Duece.

As for subscription fees, FoxSports is next at about $2.35 per month. Sports is the driving force on cable subscriptions. About 40% of the monthly payouts go to sports outlets. There is no other basic cable channel that gets anywhere close to what ESPN garners. TNT is next at 99 cents per subscriber per month.

by srr50 on Jan 24, 2011 8:14 AM CST reply actions  

Frank the Tank pointed out that the 15 mil per year also can be considered an insurance payment to keep the B12 together. Superconferences will raise costs.

by Bob in Houston on Jan 24, 2011 8:23 AM CST reply actions  

Steve- How much original non-event content do you see UT producing? How does Texas and WWL decide when and what airs? It seems that if UT would think outside they box they could get creative with this chance to push their brand name.

by g'69 on Jan 24, 2011 8:42 AM CST reply actions  

g’69:

I’m not sure how deep into non-event programming that UT will go, but they will have a lot of resources (facilities, archival material, University student workforce, etc) available. I assume in the “Classic” portion you could have a mini-Biography channel documentaries. I would also think at some point you may put cameras in the studio of whatever radio station has our rights and simulcast a show or two from there.

You could also have a “UT Sports Center” daily show — only it could also have a section passing on news from around the University. Why not also have a portion of the day with the UT Home Shopping Channel, and sell UT merchandise and paraphernalia.

There will also be non-athletic events (concerts, lectures, visiting speakers, commencement) telecast live.

This really is an open-ended opportunity to expand the public relations efforts of the University.

by srr50 on Jan 24, 2011 9:05 AM CST reply actions  

Exactly. This is a chance for UT to set the template.

by g'69 on Jan 24, 2011 9:33 AM CST reply actions  

I just went on the I am the 12th Man site and saw their preseason rankings. The funny (and sad) thing is that they capitalize the names of every school but “texas”. Somehow I don’t think it’s an accident.

How much dick envy do you have to have to be so petty. The good think is I’m pretty sure it will be capitalized on the $15 million dollar checks for ESPN>

by The Real bob on Jan 24, 2011 10:17 AM CST reply actions  

There could be weekly ‘insider’ shows, breaking down the previous week’s game. I would imagine that Bryan Harsin and Manny Diaz will have their own coach’s shows.

With that much time to fill, we may see some of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4SewgD0Vz0

by parlin on Jan 24, 2011 10:48 AM CST reply actions  

Great writeup, srr. I was WONDERING if there would be a “classics” feature on the network, and now I see that there will be. Most Excellent. 1982 Cotton Bowl would be a nice game to show, for starters.

by GigoloJoe on Jan 24, 2011 11:23 AM CST reply actions  

ESPN bought off Texas for $300 Million Dollars to maintain the Big 12 and their control over college football broadcasting. Plain and simple. Not sure if this is good for the long run.

by LonghornXXX on Jan 24, 2011 11:39 AM CST reply actions  

Good stuff as always, Steve.

I expect that ESPN will use the ESPN studio near DKR to host Central time zone specific SportscCenters (they currently only have eastern in Bristol and Pacific in LA).

Valuable insight into deal by SBJ too: http://bit.ly/goEPjM

by BRAGGonUT on Jan 24, 2011 11:40 AM CST reply actions  

Out of curiosity, srr, how many Longhorn fans not on BC or shaggybevo realize that UT isn’t actually going to get $15 million a year?

by NateHeupel on Jan 24, 2011 11:42 AM CST reply actions  

$12 million a year is hardly chump change.

You seem to be nit picking for the sake of it.

by RichUT on Jan 24, 2011 11:48 AM CST reply actions  

“I just went on the I am the 12th Man site and saw their preseason rankings. The funny (and sad) thing is that they capitalize the names of every school but "texas". Somehow I don’t think it’s an accident. How much dick envy do you have to have to be so petty.”

Yeah, Aggy’s are petty.

by ColoradoAg on Jan 24, 2011 12:00 PM CST reply actions  

RichUT (what an apropos name for the discussion at hand):

My point is that there’s a whole lot of folks not looking at this deal with a critical eye.

by NateHeupel on Jan 24, 2011 2:48 PM CST reply actions  

Nate: We can quibble over numbers — but the real bottom line on this deal is that it will provide extra income for UT, help further the “brand” and keep the risk exposure at a manageable level.

by srr50 on Jan 24, 2011 3:37 PM CST reply actions  

“One of the more pleasant consequences of this part of the agreement for Texas is that any Aggie, Sooner, Red Raider, etc in-state who has the basic sports digital package will be helping ESPN pay the $300 million to the Longhorns.”

Ha ha ha. Stupid aggies and sooners. Ha ha. Daddy does what daddy wants.

by Zombie Horn on Jan 24, 2011 8:46 PM CST reply actions  

Nate,

Texas is getting paid 15 million. There is just some cost
Involved in capitalizing their third tier rights.

by The General on Jan 25, 2011 7:25 PM CST reply actions  

The rules say nothing about 8-tracks. That’s a win right there.

by txasis on Jan 30, 2011 7:21 AM CST reply actions  

UT got hosed in this deal, mostly because it is way too long. Everyone remembers how ND’s deal with ABC was enormous and drew similar derision. It doesn’t look all that great now.

We’re in the same boat with this new contract, though perhaps not in terms of absolute dollar value. We signed away our freedom during what is likely to be a period of massive transition in sports and broadcasting in general. All of the big players in TV are from an ongoing era in which the distributor needed massive capital investments to move content from providers to viewers. That situation has, in recent years, run in parallel with an emerging model in which subscribers pay for content to be moved to them without regard for where that came from. This is called the internet.

This market has changed a lot of society, but it has not touched television. The reasons are twofold: one, most people don’t have the >3Mbps connection needed to stream HD content and two, there is a lot of money tied up in protecting the television content monopoly. Look at the proceedings at the FCC over content, where there is a huge push to stop the distribution of content over the internet (e.g. bribing lawmakers to stop NetFlix). Those roadblocks are changing, and the market is likely to decide in favor of content distribution via the internet. The reasons are simple: internet distribution is cheaper and offers more choices to both content providers and consumers.

So UT signed its content away to the arch-enemy of the Next Big Thing for 20 years. That’s a mistake, but not because of the parties involved. Internet distribution is still at least 5 years away from eclipsing television, and UT stood to make a lot of money during that period. But that’s not what we did: we signed on for the long haul in an agreement that will put us behind other players that we should not be behind.

The agreement was a good thought, but fucked in the details.

by MaduroUTMB on Jan 31, 2011 2:08 AM CST reply actions  

Now this is going to be cool I am a huge Longhorn fan and with my DISH Network system this will be a breeze because I have TV everywhere. Being a DISH employee I have some insight on how this works with your DISH system. First you have to have a 722 or 722k receiver connected to a Sling adapter and download are free app at are website and that’s it. There is no monthly fee if you don’t have a sling adapter you can purchase one for $99. This will work on a number of mobile devices that you can find on our online website.

by Nate on Feb 2, 2011 11:13 AM CST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

An SB Nation blog mostly about the Texas Longhorns.

Managers

Archer_290_small Scipio Tex

Bc_logo_257x257_small Sailor Ripley

Editors

Nobis_small nobis60

Link2_small BrickHorn

Propeller_helmet_small Huck L Berry

Picture_016_small srr50

Boyd_small Vasherized

Justified-olyphant_small jc25

Billlittle0_small Fake Ken Tremendous

Authors

Williams_ranger_dugout_small WWMcClyde

Jonathan_tjarks_small tjarks

Small ColoradoAg

Long_illustrated_beard_small LonghornScott

Small Nickel Rover

Small John Kocurek

Thumbnail_small Drew Kelson

Barker Emeritus

Tn_homeimage7_small Parlin

220px-henry_james_by_john_singer_sargent_cleaned_small HenryJames

Small Doperbo