Streaming??? How does this make money? Doesn't this require individual subscription? There might be a market for this within the footprint, but I have my doubts about elsewhere. In the here and now of 2016 the two conference networks that are thriving get their money from cable carriage fees and advertising. Cable subscribers from coast to coast, whether they like it or not, are paying money every month to the B1G and the SEC. It's an elegant and uncomplicated extortion. We need to get on that gravy train.
What are the reasons we would pass up the dedicated cable channel scheme? The most likely problem is that there may be difficulty getting carriage. The PAC networks are suffering from that, but they have no affiliation with a huge media company. The ACC has ESPN, a heavyweight, on our side. Did ESPN wear out their welcome with the cable companies when they rolled out the SECN?
The cost of production faclilties, personnel, etc. will be there regardless of the distributon method. It is likely no cheaper to produce a program for a streaming network than for cable. Why choose a delivery method that is guaranteed to bring less revenue. Advertising dollars on a streaming broadcast can't possibly compare to the amount for a cable program being delivered to zillions of households everywhere. Is the ACCN ESPN's "streaming guinea pig"?
Could ESPN convert ESPNEWS into the ACCN cable channel? Sure they could. But then why all the discussion about streaming? It would just be incidental. And again we run into the problem of how does the conference make money with a channel that is owned by ESPN, and content that belongs to ESPN. ESPN is in a position now to just forgo the ACCN branding and show all of the ACC games on their various channels. ESPN might be thinking, "If the ACC wants their non-revenue sports on TV, maybe they should be paying us." They could find the content useful throughout the year, but there is a cost to produce the programming. It can't pay for itself.
There is no easy path forward for this conference. I wonder if the best move would be to scrap the plans for the ACCN and opt for the $45 million bump. That $3 million per school may be better than we could do with a streaming setup. Most important, the conference should make no deal with ESPN that prolongs the current media rights contract. We will make far more money if ESPN has to compete for our content with other serious players. Just ask the B1G.