dave, I can't dispute what you say about the "astute" negotiating by the conference representatives. Maybe they covered the bases pretty well. But I can be a little skeptical. We know that the conference "forgot" to retain some Tier 3 content. That was regrettable. They could have forgotten other details. Is the ACCN wholly owned by ESPN? Can the ACC buy a share and split profits (or losses?) Is that in lieu of the current payout?
"Why do you hire a consultant...?" Because the last time you went to the table with ESPN, they ate your lunch.
Radakovich makes a simple statement that the ACC trails in revenue and that a network is a way to mitigate that. This leaves out an unimaginable ocean of details (let's not call them obstacles) that prevent conference reps from even speaking the words "ACC conference channel."
I am speculating that there is no agreement on distribution of revenue to the conference. I think the stumbling block is a demand by ESPN for a long term extension. If they had an agreement on money, what else could hold this up for more than an afternoon of give & take?
From the point of view of the conference this seems like something ESPN should have done already. But put yourself in their shoes. They want to retain "ownership" of the ACC for as long as possible. They won't give us a network out of generosity. They want consideration in return.