I used your figure for earnings to date and the same max of $3 million/yr if they maintain ownership. If you have a link to the reduced production item, I'll willingly eat crow.

The point of my post was to suggest they will ramp up their search for alternatives in their media deal; they hired a consultant and started their review in 2015 because the earnings did not meet original projections; not even close. The latter is NOT my opinion, that comes from the PAC 12 schools themselves.

The woulda-shoulda game is pointless but if you want to play it, the ACC deserves criticism for moving too slowly. The ACC linear network should be going in right now, not 2019. But insisting that the ACC should have done what the PAC 12 did is unwarranted.

If you want to make an argument, argue for the BTN model but you also have to include a partner, a realistic one. The SECN model was not available. There are also consequences to every decision and you consider none of them in your rainbows and unicorns description of the PAC 12. For example, you haven't once considered the cost to build the PAC 12 network or that none of that cost is reflected their earnings. How much is that? I don't know but the B1G invested $45 million per school, which is also close to what ESPN paid to build the LHN.

The "tons" of profit you tout is earnings minus operations. They PAC 12 ATE the construction costs from their endowments and will only recoup it if the ownership is sold (and that profit/loss calculation would also include income forgone from the endowment). And if they do sell, the money will likely go back to the original source, not athletics.

The ACC was theoretically behind the PAC 12 in conference network income through 2015. Beginning this year, if the ACC network related bump in the rights deal is $3 million per school, it would move the ACC ahead. From 2019 on, the ACC projects to be way ahead.

Barring the PAC 12 adding states like Texas to its footprint and/or getting significantly more for its carriage rates, that will be the case for the foreseeable future.



[Post edited by daveinop at 07/25/2016 08:16AM]