Big 12 Network

[doneagain]

The Big 12 (at least some of the members in the Big 12) wants a conference network.

The Pac-12 has a network, but have struggled to find carriers due to lack of demand on the part of viewers.

I would suggest the two parties discuss combining inventory onto a "Big/Pac-12 Network"

The Big 12 and Pac-12 both need larger markets to sell their networks.

The way the Pac-12 is set up, they have regional channels in addition to their main parent network, so Texas could have its channel. For example, Oregon and Oregon State, I believe, share a regional channel together.

Oklahoma could have its own channel (maybe even partner with Oklahoma State).

Tech, Baylor and TCU could have a regional channel.

Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State (maybe even WVU for inventory purposes as I don't think WVU needs its own channel) could have a regional deal together.

For WVU, it would be carried in the Pittsburgh market I would assume since Root Sports Pittsburgh currently airs WVU's tier 3 programming, and the flagship channel for the whole conference would be carried in Pittsburgh. Both would be carried in WV's Charleston-Huntington market as well, and while not a top 50 market, is not too far behind at #65, nationally.

It would boost subscribers to the Pac-12 Network, and would provide a network for the Big 12.

It would hopefully quell expansion talk for the Big 12 (although I suppose the desire to add a couple of schools in large markets might be a draw as far as further selling subscriptions to the network.

Regardless, it should put an end to the speculation that Texas or Oklahoma might leave for the Pac-12 one day.

The Big 12 could continue to have its round robin schedule.

It still has the freedom to stage a championship game.

Nobody has to be concerned about breaking a grant of rights.

And even in ACC or Big 10 country, sports fans would be interested in subscribing to a network featuring Oklahoma, Texas and USC along with the other cast members in the two conferences. For example, I subscribe to the Big 10 and SEC networks via a sports tier package through my cable company. No, it is not the premium price they pay in those regions, but it still makes money for those two conferences.

And considering our chief financial rivals are the B10 and SEC, it would make sense to combine efforts to offer a product that compares or exceeds what they can offer.

Most of all, I think it gives David Boren and the rest of the league the best of all worlds. For the schools like Kansas State, Iowa State and WVU, it gives us a little better feeling of security, I would think, that we don't have by not being a flagship school like Oklahoma or Texas.

 

[Plainosooner]

I would suggest that the compartmentalization defeats the purpose of having a conference network. And you can't make your suggestion work. OU's abbreviated network is part time and affiliated with FOX. LHN is part of ESPN. As they say in east Texas, that dog won't hunt.

Big Ten's network and the SEC Network work because they show everybody in all sports. It gives an outlet for something excellent like the SEC's women's gymnastics teams and softball teams. It showcases the conference. Same thing with the BIG, though they have less to showcase except maybe men's basketball, but it really helps them there.

I have wanted to watch the Pac 12 Network a couple dozen times but can't because it's not offered on my carrier. I couldn't even pay for it, which I likely wouldn't, but don't even have that option. Both the SEC Network and BIg Ten Network are free on my carrier.

A friend of mine from Wisconsin told me that the Big Ten Network is free here, but you have to pay for it in Big Ten territory. Don't know if that's still the case. But I wouldn't count on any Pac merger.

Part of their problem is just an overall lack of interest. Los Angeles has two great athletic programs, and generally non sold out home games. Maybe SC in national championship seasons, but seldom even then. Cali makes up half or more of the people in their footprint, but that's where there is the least interest. Kind of like OU basketball. If you're great, we'll get around to selling out the gym. Otherwise, we'll maybe catch five minutes on tv.

 

[doneagain]

I understand what you are saying, but what I was getting at was not that Texas would keep its LHN as is in present form, but rather with a set up like the P12 has, they could have a similar set up featuring longhorn programming on their own regional network.

I agree that ideally if we could have something to ourselves like the SEC and B10, it would be great, but we don't have the market footprint for that, obviously.

As for getting those networks free, nobody actually gets them free as the price per subscriber for the network is factored into your cable bill. In most cases, cable subscribers are paying about $0.44 per household in non-B10 footprint markets, such as in my market. In New Jersey, they are paying $1 or more.

Quote:
"In expanding its scholastic footprint, the Big Ten also increased the value of the BTN's New York and D.C. subscribers. According to SNL Kagan data, cable operators pay an estimated "in-market" rate of $1 per sub per month, more than double the $0.44 fees charged outside the conference's home markets. Cablevision alone serves 2.64 million video customers in New York, New Jersey and southwestern Connecticut; with the upgraded fee in place, BTN sees its annual payout from the operator rise to around $31.7 million from $13.9 million."

 

[topdecktiger]

I understand what you are saying, but what I was getting at was not that Texas would keep its LHN as is in present form, but rather with a set up like the P12 has, they could have a similar set up featuring longhorn programming on their own regional network.

I agree that ideally if we could have something to ourselves like the SEC and B10, it would be great, but we don't have the market footprint for that, obviously.

As for getting those networks free, nobody actually gets them free as the price per subscriber for the network is factored into your cable bill. In most cases, cable subscribers are paying about $0.44 per household in non-B10 footprint markets, such as in my market. In New Jersey, they are paying $1 or more.

Quote:
"In expanding its scholastic footprint, the Big Ten also increased the value of the BTN's New York and D.C. subscribers. According to SNL Kagan data, cable operators pay an estimated "in-market" rate of $1 per sub per month, more than double the $0.44 fees charged outside the conference's home markets. Cablevision alone serves 2.64 million video customers in New York, New Jersey and southwestern Connecticut; with the upgraded fee in place, BTN sees its annual payout from the operator rise to around $31.7 million from $13.9 million."

It wouldn't matter about Texas keeping the LHN in any form. The problem is that Texas is signed up with ESPN, and Oklahoma is signed up with Fox. ESPN isn't going to release content for Fox to start a network, and vice versa

 

[Plainosooner]

I understand what you are saying, but what I was getting at was not that Texas would keep its LHN as is in present form, but rather with a set up like the P12 has, they could have a similar set up featuring longhorn programming on their own regional network.

I agree that ideally if we could have something to ourselves like the SEC and B10, it would be great, but we don't have the market footprint for that, obviously.

As for getting those networks free, nobody actually gets them free as the price per subscriber for the network is factored into your cable bill. In most cases, cable subscribers are paying about $0.44 per household in non-B10 footprint markets, such as in my market. In New Jersey, they are paying $1 or more.

Quote:
"In expanding its scholastic footprint, the Big Ten also increased the value of the BTN's New York and D.C. subscribers. According to SNL Kagan data, cable operators pay an estimated "in-market" rate of $1 per sub per month, more than double the $0.44 fees charged outside the conference's home markets. Cablevision alone serves 2.64 million video customers in New York, New Jersey and southwestern Connecticut; with the upgraded fee in place, BTN sees its annual payout from the operator rise to around $31.7 million from $13.9 million."

Well, yes and no on the payment. I still don't get to choose which channels I get. I'm divorced and 64 and I don't think I've ever watched the food networks or chick flick stations. My son is here four days every two weeks and the only shows he watches on tv are on one of the broadcast networks. Otherwise, he watches stuff on Netflix. But I still pay for food network shows and chick flick shows and probably 100 other networks that I pay for but never watch. So lumping B10 Network in with them doesn't mean I'm paying for it or not. I'm paying for the service and don't pay extra for it. Nor for ESPN's view of the SEC.

Yet I was promised Fox's three college sports networks, had them for maybe 10 weeks, then had them taken away, because Verizon gets to choose. I don't. If I want them, I now have to pay for an additional package. So they'd cost me a whole lot more than 44 cents apiece. The taxes would be more than that.

So it's not 44 cents. They have their price point, and I choose what clumps I want to pay at more like $12 per level. B10 is in my basic coverage. So I don't pay extra for it.