Proposed Apple Deal: How much is enough?

[Roy Rangum]

If the Apple streaming deal comes in at even with the Big12, I think the PAC12 can stay together. But if it comes in too low, it seems likely the conference breaks apart.

My question to poll the crowd is: how low is too low?

Personally, if the deal is for 25 million a school with the potential to increase in the future, I think that could be enough to hold the conference together. But if it’s 20 million a school, I don’t think that will cut it.

What do you guys think?

[Central Coast Ute]

Rumors this morning is $30m base with escalators for subscribers. That’s fine, the problem is 20% linear, but Apple can lease games out to networks. Not sure how comfortable I am with that aspect.

[EagleMountainUte]

I think that would be good. But I think the rumors are what the conference members want. I think Apple is offering a lot less. 

[Central Coast Ute]

Yeah most of what I’ve heard is 20-22m. If Apple really wants the PAC, they have to know that won’t do it.

[EagleMountainUte]

With what the PAC is bringing I don’t see 20 million as realistic. The value isn’t there in my eyes. Especially right now with the actually media deals coming in 2030. Seems like a bad investment short term. 

[AlohaUte]

If it’s 30m base I think the schools take it without question. I’d be shocked if it were that high though.

[Central Coast Ute]

20% Linear will really devalue your brand though even with $30m, so there are definitely questions to be asked.

[RedUte14]

can someone explain what 20% linear means?

[Central Coast Ute]

20% of games will be linear and 80% streaming.

[Ghost of the HEB]

That would mean 20% of the deal is ESPN/FOX, the rest is Apple. So only a few marquee conference matchups per year would be televised on traditional tv services (linear), the rest would be Apple (streaming)

[Central Coast Ute]

I guess it means 2 games per week if it’s a 10 team conference would be linear. You can decide if that’s good or bad.

[alexsmith]

2 on non-conference games, 1 in conference

[PlainsUte]

10 teams is 5 games, so 20% of that is only 1 game is on a national cable/satellite channel?

[Central Coast Ute]

Good point. I guess non conference would be 2 per week. Once conference begins it would only be 1

[alexsmith]

Honestly, I don’t think streaming on Apple is the way to go. Yes, the world is heading in a direction of streaming, but Apple TV isn’t the popular option in streaming. Based upon the MLS deal with Apple TV, individuals are paying $30 a month to get that. The problem with doing that for college football is that you’re already paying that much for the sports package to get ESPN and Fox and all of their channels, so I don’t see many casual viewers purchasing Apple TV to watch a handful of games that they really don’t care about. It would limit the views of the PAC 12 tremendously, which is the opposite of what we want. Personally, I think streaming is a great way to go, I just don’t think Apple is the way to do it

[thirtyfour-thirtyone]

That is a good point.  I do think it might be easier than accessing a lot of our games on the P12 network under the current deal though (especially for people who live out-of-region), so there is that.  If we do have a few marquee games on linear, maybe it will work out OK, and result in fewer early sunday morning EST games.

[PlainsUte]

Yes, very disappointing its not with Hulu-ESPN-Disney, for example.

[J Rocksville]

I agree with all the sentiment about missing eyeballs and an opportunity to get your brand in front of people that aren’t already familiar with your brand. Only people that already care about those teams would be subscribing, and with out LA, that’s going to hurt. The subscription service should be an add on benefit for schools to get a chunk of, not the base package. It’s what the Pac12 Network should have been, and I would pay $99 on day 1 to watch all the Pac12 content for a year. Same for the Jazz.

That being said……as someone who spent half of their career in consumer electronics/marketing, I find it crazy when I hear people still subscribe to some sort of cable/satellite service. That’s as crazy as a fax machine or voicemail to me. I haven’t had cable in at least 6-7 years, and the industry is absolutely going to an a la carte’ programming model. Younger consumer’s (like, 40 and younger) don’t want to click through 100 channels of pointless filler to find what they want. They don’t sit and channel surf. Kids don’t sit and channel surf. They just want to open the channel/app and go straight to what they want. Millennials are the largest consumer generation ever in the US and they are aging directly into the core demo for watching sports at home on weekends. The media companies know this which is why ESPN is moving to streaming only…amongst others. These companies are able to use all of the MILLIONS Of data points they have on all of us to fine tune their marketing messages directly to each screen, which in turn adds value to the advertisers. There will become a tipping point for most networks/channels, probably even the OTA networks, where the money they are spending to be included in cable packages is more than the value they get from it, and they’ll just switch over to their own subscription package. Comcast/Dish/DirecTV as they are currently operating, are going to go the way of the dinosaur.

But as I opened with, I still don’t think that time is today for football and I don’t think a program on the rise like Utah can afford to only be visible to their existing fans. That’s the only thing I see about the Big12 that interests me. None of those programs over there matter to me, but it would put us on daytime Saturday TV which would expose us to a lot of eyeballs that don’t see us now.

[CityCreekUte]

I think what it’s going to take is someone who will put their foot in the ground about the time slots and actually compete with ESPN/Fox. It’s never going to work for an Amazon or Apple or any other streaming service if they give away the marquee games instead of lining them up at the exact same time as B1G and Sec and other conference games are happening especially when a lot of those conference games aren’t really appealing. CBS puts their SEC game at the exact same time as ABC/Fox/Espn do and that’s what a streaming service needs to do. Nobody is going to pay for a new version of the Pac12 network via streaming for the leftovers.

[BoiseUTE]

I could see Apple buying ESPN with all the cash they have. Then things would get real intersting if indeed they were to outright buy ESPN With all the issues ESPN is currently dealing with I think this could be very possible and would be a good thing for ESPN.

[J Rocksville]

There’s also a decent chance that Apple owns ESPN before too long. I suspect in that scenario, if we had a deal with Apple TV, Apple would find a way to push us onto the ESPN platform as well.

But in the end, we just need to keep winning. We’ve been able to win by recruiting our kinds of kids and developing them, and while we are getting better recruits than ever, we’re still not competing for the high 4 star or 5 star guys and probably never will. If we can sustain the type of success we’ve had in the last 5 years, and even get it to the point where 3 or 4 out of 5 years we’re in the playoffs, then it will all take care of itself. I do see how it will be difficult to get to the top 5 without the big money NIL deals causing collegiate free agency, but if we can occupy consistently the 5-15 range by developing the talent we do get, then I just don’t see a world where our program isn’t valuable enough to make it through the next round of consolidation.

[Author]

Posts