ESPN cutting more costs with the Longhorn network

39,192 Views | 245 Replies | Last: 8 yr ago by aggiehawg
The Fife
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Junction1956 • 11:52a, 6/21/16
quote:
Texas is dangerous now.

Think about it. Texas is now realizing the feces is going to hit oscillator and ESPN could care less about the LHN. Perrin has to think what is Texas going to do should Disney pull the trigger on ESPN by selling the network.

Back channels are being activated and Texas is looking for a place to land. If I was any AD in the Big 12, I would start looking for crash landing. Kansas and Iowa State are the most attractive since they both have AAU status.
The rest are screwed.

The B1G and SEC are set and I really don't see any school in the Big 12 being a quality addition to either conference since both conferences already have the TV markets.

Interesting times are a coming.

Roll Tide.
Reply Quote
11
Cynical_Texan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:58a, 6/21/16
AG
I could see tu getting into every conference but the SEC.

PAC - would probably take them without the LHN.
B1G - I don't know how they allow new members in if other members vote no (see Nebraska)?
ACC - Probably best chance outside the PAC.


I'd love to see them go Indy, doubt they would, but they have always over valued their stock.

If not Indy, like to see them go PAC so they could enjoy all those 11am and 9pm start times.

If the sips had their way, they'd want in SEC or B1G... all about the $$.

Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cynical_Texan • 12:15p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
PAC - would probably take them without the LHN.
B1G - I don't know how they allow new members in if other members vote no (see Nebraska)?
ACC - Probably best chance outside the PAC.
PAC is the most likely. The window for Delany to bring the horns into the fold passed somewhere between the end of 2009 and early spring of 2010. Why Nebraska got the spot instead.

ACC is very iffy. Sips will likely want the same type of deal that ND has. Doubt the rest of the ACC goes along with that. ND was worth it, especially at the time the deal was made. Sips are not, not without a conference network and some percentage of money and eyeballs they might bring.

If ESPN forced the ACC to take tu, it would be tu only. Stop and hold at 16 members.
Reply Quote
goodAg80
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:18p, 6/21/16
AG

Reply Quote
8
AgOutsideAustin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:24p, 6/21/16
dmart90
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Token • 12:29p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
quote:
quote:
UT has ALL of the leverage. They're getting paid regardless of what ESPN says. The financial terms of this arrangement were absolutely genius for Texas, as they made sure the contract was iron clad. Even if ESPN pays them 15M per year, they can still double dip and get another part of the third tier rights contract that would come through a big 12 network or whatever new conference network. It's like being cut from a team in the NBA with 6 years left on your contract. You still getting paid a settlement, and you can go find new work that would compliment that income
So you believe the tu lawyers were better at negotiating a media deal than the Disney/ESPN lawyers? Huh.
Reply Quote
8
superunknown
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to The Collective • 12:41p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
quote:
ESPN does receive internal metrics to give network officials an idea how programming is doing. "Longhorn Extra" has long been a low-rated program, if it scored any ratings at all. However, the nightly 30-minute show was a terrific platform for UT's Olympic sports, coaches and athletes who may not get attention otherwise. LHN still plans on airing a weekly magazine-styled show to feature those sports.


Someone reconcile these two statements for me, please.


Most damning info was that the LHN is not Nielsen rated. Without Nielsen ratings it's very difficult to get any ad buys because ad agencies buy on ratings/performance. So you're basically relying on being a throw in on another buy or running a shhtton of DR/PPC ads. Direct response or pay per call ads are those that a station runs for free and get a cut of whoever calls the 1 800 #s. I'm sure you've seen those ads...thr consolidated debt relief or adt security or life alert bracelet ads. The true bottom feeders.

So...to answer your question....they don't mind having a platform for the Olympic sports because it's not like they were making money anyway?
Reply Quote
1
The Collective
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:56p, 6/21/16
AG
I don't think SECN is Nielsen rated either.
Reply Quote
3
2wealfth Man
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rocco S • 12:59p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
If ESiPN pays them $125 mil to not have a network that's a huge win for the sips.


If they do settle for that much, it'll be over the rest of the life of the LHN contract (14 years left now?). It won't be a lump sum settlement. IMG will still likely get a cut of that money along with academics getting a share.

You're looking at ESPN maybe paying the sip athletics department around $5 million a year and ESPN probably keeping one or two sip home football games as part of the deal.

UT isn't holding all of the cards here. ESPN could decide to can the whole thing and blackout these same events while paying UT the minimum for the next 14 years which would be detrimental to nearly every sport. You would essentially have Longhorn sports radio silence for over a decade except for 10 football games a year, a handful of basketball games and even smaller handful of baseball games.

That isn't worth the 30-40% cut UT athletics gets after IMG and the academic side get their cut of the "15 million/year"
UT has ALL of the leverage. They're getting paid regardless of what ESPN says. The financial terms of this arrangement were absolutely genius for Texas, as they made sure the contract was iron clad. Even if ESPN pays them 15M per year, they can still double dip and get another part of the third tier rights contract that would come through a big 12 network or whatever new conference network. It's like being cut from a team in the NBA with 6 years left on your contract. You still getting paid a settlement, and you can go find new work that would compliment that income
So you think ESPN signed a $300MM contract that didn't have an out clause in it at all?

I'm sure the guy that sold/leased you your Prius had a great break room story after you walked out of the dealership.
I love how you didn't even pretend to understand what I said so you could throw some dumbass insult. I guess it's hard when you're trying to police six message boards from momma's basement
4 minute response time.

Roughly the same time it takes a Prius to hit 60 mph.
More like a Tesla in ludicrous mode........
Reply Quote
Token
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dmart90 • 1:21p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
UT has ALL of the leverage. They're getting paid regardless of what ESPN says. The financial terms of this arrangement were absolutely genius for Texas, as they made sure the contract was iron clad. Even if ESPN pays them 15M per year, they can still double dip and get another part of the third tier rights contract that would come through a big 12 network or whatever new conference network. It's like being cut from a team in the NBA with 6 years left on your contract. You still getting paid a settlement, and you can go find new work that would compliment that income
So you believe the tu lawyers were better at negotiating a media deal than the Disney/ESPN lawyers? Huh.
espn is paying $15M a year to them for a network no one watches. They got worked over on the deal and now have to pay out the ass to correct their mistake
Reply Quote
dmart90
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Token • 1:26p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
UT has ALL of the leverage. They're getting paid regardless of what ESPN says. The financial terms of this arrangement were absolutely genius for Texas, as they made sure the contract was iron clad. Even if ESPN pays them 15M per year, they can still double dip and get another part of the third tier rights contract that would come through a big 12 network or whatever new conference network. It's like being cut from a team in the NBA with 6 years left on your contract. You still getting paid a settlement, and you can go find new work that would compliment that income
So you believe the tu lawyers were better at negotiating a media deal than the Disney/ESPN lawyers? Huh.
espn is paying $15M a year to them for a network no one watches. They got worked over on the deal and now have to pay out the ass to correct their mistake
That was a business mistake. ESPN could not, rightfully, believe tu sports in general was about to take such a nose dive. Clearly they completely over-estimated their value. But don't confuse that with contract and exit terms. Two very different things.
Reply Quote
2
Great White Buffalo
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:25p, 6/21/16
Yeah I am really going to miss Vince Young and Ricky Williams bong discussions in the"green" room.
Reply Quote
1
AlaskanAg99
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 2:26p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
quote:
The sips will go independent. It follows with their current line of thinking as it is the most irrational option they could take based a a burnt orange worldview not backed by any facts. Thus it is the most likely path they will take. Don't let a crappy program or a dying network get in the way of hubris. Ever.
Who is going to play them? In all sports? Besides Baylor, tech, TCU, UofH, Rice, UTEP, UTSA and OU in football?

They may still think they can go independent but ESPN will rapidly disabuse them of that notion, in the current environment. Way different that 2010 when the LHN deal was being negotiated. ND was still indy, then. BYU is struggling with the indy thing, but have the Mormon Church to fall back on.


I said it was irrational and thus the most likely outcome because they don't think their **** stinks.
Reply Quote
3
Rocco S
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Token • 2:31p, 6/21/16
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
UT has ALL of the leverage. They're getting paid regardless of what ESPN says. The financial terms of this arrangement were absolutely genius for Texas, as they made sure the contract was iron clad. Even if ESPN pays them 15M per year, they can still double dip and get another part of the third tier rights contract that would come through a big 12 network or whatever new conference network. It's like being cut from a team in the NBA with 6 years left on your contract. You still getting paid a settlement, and you can go find new work that would compliment that income
So you believe the tu lawyers were better at negotiating a media deal than the Disney/ESPN lawyers? Huh.
espn is paying $15M a year to them for a network no one watches. They got worked over on the deal and now have to pay out the ass to correct their mistake


So in your mind there is no way there is a bail out for ESPN in the redacted portion of the contract?
Reply Quote
JD05AG
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AgCat93 • 2:34p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
Has Chimp sent a Tweet about this?

Has Ketch weighed in on the subject?
If that fat **** weighed in on the subject the scale would break.
Reply Quote
4
Flexbone
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rocco S • 2:37p, 6/21/16
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
UT has ALL of the leverage. They're getting paid regardless of what ESPN says. The financial terms of this arrangement were absolutely genius for Texas, as they made sure the contract was iron clad. Even if ESPN pays them 15M per year, they can still double dip and get another part of the third tier rights contract that would come through a big 12 network or whatever new conference network. It's like being cut from a team in the NBA with 6 years left on your contract. You still getting paid a settlement, and you can go find new work that would compliment that income
So you believe the tu lawyers were better at negotiating a media deal than the Disney/ESPN lawyers? Huh.
espn is paying $15M a year to them for a network no one watches. They got worked over on the deal and now have to pay out the ass to correct their mistake


So in your mind there is no way there is a bail out for ESPN in the redacted portion of the contract?


He also assumes that ESPN's goal was to pay Texas what they valued them at, rather than other possible motives.
Reply Quote
2
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dmart90 • 2:37p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
That was a business mistake. ESPN could not, rightfully, believe tu sports in general was about to take such a nose dive. Clearly they completely over-estimated their value. But don't confuse that with contract and exit terms. Two very different things.
The only business mistake ESPN made with the LHN was underestimating the backlash from the Big XII and the NCAA and how many eyeballs they would lose as a result.
Reply Quote
2
Wildmen03
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dmart90 • 2:42p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
That was a business mistake. ESPN could not, rightfully, believe tu sports in general was about to take such a nose dive. Clearly they completely over-estimated their value. But don't confuse that with contract and exit terms. Two very different things.
I forget the exact timeline, but wasn't there a period when forming the LHN that they expected a bunch of live t.u. vs A&M rivalry games on there? That would account for a bunch of lost views.
Reply Quote
MaterialAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:43p, 6/21/16
AG
It's pretty enjoyable to look upon Dodds' legacy.



Reply Quote
4
ABATTBQ11
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:46p, 6/21/16
AG
When does the name change to ESPNTexasClassic?
Reply Quote
7
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ABATTBQ11 • 2:53p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
When does the name change to ESPNTexasClassic?
Well, until Chollie wins some games, they won't have much new football content to add to the loop. They might have to resort to <gasp> showing games where the horns actually lost!
Reply Quote
goodAg80
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:55p, 6/21/16
AG
Can't they just point the camera up at the UT tower? They would probably get as many viewers.
Reply Quote
2
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Wildmen03 • 2:58p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
quote:
That was a business mistake. ESPN could not, rightfully, believe tu sports in general was about to take such a nose dive. Clearly they completely over-estimated their value. But don't confuse that with contract and exit terms. Two very different things.
I forget the exact timeline, but wasn't there a period when forming the LHN that they expected a bunch of live t.u. vs A&M rivalry games on there? That would account for a bunch of lost views.
Dodds thought he'd be able to get away with most home games, including Big XII games, being exclusively on the LHN. That included us obviously. Losing nearly a half-million alumni base worth of eyeballs was quite a dent in potential demand.

They also thought the high school content highlighting the top ranked recruits would be popular with scouting sites and the top programs who recruit nationally. Not to mention the mommies and daddies being able to watch little Jimmy and little Jennie on TV.
Reply Quote
2
Aggie87
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to The Collective • 3:07p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
quote:
ESPN does receive internal metrics to give network officials an idea how programming is doing. "Longhorn Extra" has long been a low-rated program, if it scored any ratings at all. However, the nightly 30-minute show was a terrific platform for UT's Olympic sports, coaches and athletes who may not get attention otherwise. LHN still plans on airing a weekly magazine-styled show to feature those sports.


Someone reconcile these two statements for me, please.

In other words, they know this show has no viewership or interest, but have no alternative. You can only show quidditch so many times.
Reply Quote
Wildmen03
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:08p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
Someone reconcile these two statements for me, please.

It was apparently a great show that no one watched.
Reply Quote
2
DayAg!
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:18p, 6/21/16
S
quote:
Frees them up to sell more ad space to Lonnell's Hair & Nails and Rufie

Joe's SoCo Food Truck.
You forgot Chico's Bail Bonds.

This gets better every day I'm alive. As some have touched all the bases pryor to my post, tu options are very limited. The bottom line in any and all decisions made in the future is strictly based on the bevo channel and nothing else. If it goes away then their options open up. If they keep it, then they will eventually die on the vine one season at a time. Limited exposure and no advertising is not a very good business model if you look at it in that light. It's just not sustainable. Nor was it ever. I still am not sure about ESIPN's motive from the beginning. Whether they just underestimated the demand for something they thought would sell. (they should have consulted this site, where they could have heard the truth on the matter). Or they did it for reasons within their office that no one really will know. Either way, it works to A&M's advantage.

One other item. If they go independent, it will be the move that will put them into the grave and dirt being pushed in. Why, because of the crappy network. No one is gonna want to play them on a network no one watches. And even if they did, you know tu would demand the lions share of the monies. Under those circumstances, who will want to play them but some small P5 schools or other lower tier programs. So if they cant schedule good games, it will compound the problem they already face of exposure. What network will want to pick up tu and some directional school and give it any play. NONE.

Dodds, that network, and Bowtie,have been the single most propagator of A&M's success in the history of the school. That network, no matter how Randolph tries to spin it has been the biggest detriment to their progress since it's inception. And continues to be just that today. Long live the bevo channel, all hail the Dodds. And God bless the man with the bowtie.
Reply Quote
12
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DayAg! • 3:21p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
Long live the bevo channel, all hail the Dodds. And God bless the man with the bowtie.
AAAAAAAAAAAMEN!
Reply Quote
7
EVA3
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to The Collective • 3:44p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
However, the nightly 30-minute show was a terrific platform for UT's Olympic sports, coaches and athletes who may not get attention otherwise.

Just because you put it on tv doesn't mean anyone watches.
Reply Quote
2
MSU/SECALUM
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 3:45p, 6/21/16
quote:
quote:
When does the name change to ESPNTexasClassic?
Well, until Chollie wins some games, they won't have much new football content to add to the loop. They might have to resort to <gasp> showing games where the horns actually lost!
Well we won't be able to watch Iowa State bend them over this year.
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
ABATTBQ11
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MSU/SECALUM • 4:17p, 6/21/16
AG
Pretty sure that kind of pron is illegal
Reply Quote
2
Bonfire1996
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:27p, 6/21/16
AG
ESPN made a mistake with the LHN. Until you look at the contract. Both Texas and ESPN enjoin themselves to prevent a competing network arising from other big 12 member schools.

Pay $15 million per year to Texas so you don't have to pay $50 million more per year to the Big 12 for a conference network.

Texas didn't get worked. ESPN didn't get worked. The other nine schools got worked by a legal document that they weren't party to.
Reply Quote
31
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bonfire1996 • 4:30p, 6/21/16
AG
Excellent point, as usual.

Beebe did sign off on the LHN contract, on behalf of the Big XII.
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
WestAustinAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Token • 4:48p, 6/21/16
AG
quote:
quote:
quote:
If ESiPN pays them $125 mil to not have a network that's a huge win for the sips.


If they do settle for that much, it'll be over the rest of the life of the LHN contract (14 years left now?). It won't be a lump sum settlement. IMG will still likely get a cut of that money along with academics getting a share.

You're looking at ESPN maybe paying the sip athletics department around $5 million a year and ESPN probably keeping one or two sip home football games as part of the deal.

UT isn't holding all of the cards here. ESPN could decide to can the whole thing and blackout these same events while paying UT the minimum for the next 14 years which would be detrimental to nearly every sport. You would essentially have Longhorn sports radio silence for over a decade except for 10 football games a year, a handful of basketball games and even smaller handful of baseball games.

That isn't worth the 30-40% cut UT athletics gets after IMG and the academic side get their cut of the "15 million/year"
UT has ALL of the leverage. They're getting paid regardless of what ESPN says. The financial terms of this arrangement were absolutely genius for Texas, as they made sure the contract was iron clad. Even if ESPN pays them 15M per year, they can still double dip and get another part of the third tier rights contract that would come through a big 12 network or whatever new conference network. It's like being cut from a team in the NBA with 6 years left on your contract. You still getting paid a settlement, and you can go find new work that would compliment that income
almost none of this is true. ESPN can keep Texas out of any other conference networks...
Reply Quote
2
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to WestAustinAg • 4:54p, 6/21/16
AG
Meh, it's Token. He's rarely correct about the sips. Still thinks they are "The Joneses."
Reply Quote
5
The Notorious A.G.G.I.E.
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:56p, 6/21/16
AG
nothing to see here

quote:

It's called business. Longhorn nation was top 10 in almost every sport it competed in for 15 years when the deal was inked. Made sense at the time. Investment looks bad now due to last 5 years of performance but baby, that check still cashes!
Reply Quote
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.