The travails of PAC 12 Network have been discussed in a number of articles over the last couple of years. The consensus is that it has underperformed relative to predictions, with varying levels of optimism for its future. Publicly, the PAC 12 leadership is standing pat for now.

The popular theory is that for PACN to make more money they need to increase distribution, cut production or both.

Getting on Direct TV would increase their distribution (which is all profit) by about 4 million households and double their profit, up to about $3million/school. They need that. $1.5 million/school (their 2015 distribution) is less than 30% of what they originally projected to earn ($5+ million).

Their production costs have been excessive, $15K to $25K per Olympic event. They could cut events, but that is not as simple as it sounds. The PACN is actually 7 networks, a base network and then six customized networks featuring schools in various localities...if you live in Beaverton Oregon, you get base PACN plus PACN Oregon. They purportedly have 70 different current contracts with local providers. Each school also has an individual contract for Tier 3 content. Many if not all of these contracts contain requirements for certain numbers of events. Cutting production is possible, but it is complicated. And which schools/sports are going to have their content reduced?

A popular thought is that the PAC could sell half the network to someone else. For the sake of discussion, we’ll assume there is a buyer, that it would be a 50/50 endeavor, and that the partner would also agree to continue production at the current level. In order to make the current level of profit, they have to add 2 million households (PAC carriage rate is around $0.40/mo.).

How does that compare to the ACC? For this discussion we’ll assume that the ACC gets a $3 million per year bump/school in rights fees for three years (since that has been the persistent rumor) as “compensation” for the ACCNX. Then it adds the linear network in 2019. [We’ll also assume that the onsite production capabilities at member ACC and PAC 12 schools are equal and that conference distribution methodologies are the same relative to overhead (see why it is so difficult to compare apples to apples?)]

The bottom line. As it stands today, PAC 12 schools stand to have made a total of some 9-10 million per school by the time the ACCN comes on line in 2019. If they get on Direct TV tomorrow, that will get that number closer to $14 million.

ACC schools will have made $9 million.

Through 2019, advantage PACN.

On a per year basis, the ACC is receiving for ACCNX, the same distribution as the PAC 12 schools would get if they add Direct TV. If not, beginning in August 2016, the ACC schools will be getting double what the PAC 12 schools get for their respective networks$3 million v. $1.5 million.

Overall: Barring a significant move by the PAC 12 in the interim, the ACCN/ACCNX should leave the PACN in the dust beginning in 2019.

Prediction: Look for the PAC 12 to have (in private) the same intensity of discussions regarding their network as the Big is currently having in public regarding their membership.

What's missing from this? The woulda, shoulda, coulda's if the ACC had tried to fund it's own network in 2009 because no one will ever know and living life is about what we do next.
[Post edited by daveinop at 07/23/2016 10:17AM]