- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
TV markets don't matter
Posted on 9/27/11 at 9:00 pm
Posted on 9/27/11 at 9:00 pm
I really wish that discussions about teams like Missouri and NC state would end. They WILL NOT bring more money to the SEC. The reason CBS and ESPN have huge deals with the SEC are because of the large number of marquee matchups that occur each year.
The only way the SEC expands is if it brings more money to 12(13) schools already in the conference.
Tex AM has been a school that has shown that its on the cusp of being a dominate team. The SEC is gambling that in a conference without Texas, Texas AM will become a superpower that will draw in viewers from around the country to watch them play in big games. It's a gamble.
However, Missouri(and the St Louis market blah blah blah) isn't a team that is ever expected to be a dominate force in CFB. Everyone keeps talking about the St Louis TV viewers. So what? They'll tune in to watch Missouri get torn to pieces by the SEC powerhouses while the rest of the country watches CSI. CBS will pay more for the rights to broadcast SEC games, but you are kidding yourself if you think it will be enough to give Missouri it's share AND have some left over for the rest of the SEC. This doesn't bring any extra money to the other schools. Whatever market (revenue) they would bring to the table, just gets sent right back to them.
The only way an increase in the number of SEC schools is acceptable, is if the team brings along with it a strong fan base that watches every game even when playing Vandy. BUT it must also bring in more NATIONAL viewers whenever there is a marquee matchup.
Teams like Oklahoma and Florida St bring more national interest when playing big name schools.
Are you more likely to watch Oklahoma vs Bama or Missouri vs Bama?
The game you would more likely watch is same one that the National TV audience would watch. That is what CBS pays for when it deals with the SEC. And that is how you get the current members of the SEC a bigger paycheck. A larger paycheck is the only way the SEC expands.
The only way the SEC expands is if it brings more money to 12(13) schools already in the conference.
Tex AM has been a school that has shown that its on the cusp of being a dominate team. The SEC is gambling that in a conference without Texas, Texas AM will become a superpower that will draw in viewers from around the country to watch them play in big games. It's a gamble.
However, Missouri(and the St Louis market blah blah blah) isn't a team that is ever expected to be a dominate force in CFB. Everyone keeps talking about the St Louis TV viewers. So what? They'll tune in to watch Missouri get torn to pieces by the SEC powerhouses while the rest of the country watches CSI. CBS will pay more for the rights to broadcast SEC games, but you are kidding yourself if you think it will be enough to give Missouri it's share AND have some left over for the rest of the SEC. This doesn't bring any extra money to the other schools. Whatever market (revenue) they would bring to the table, just gets sent right back to them.
The only way an increase in the number of SEC schools is acceptable, is if the team brings along with it a strong fan base that watches every game even when playing Vandy. BUT it must also bring in more NATIONAL viewers whenever there is a marquee matchup.
Teams like Oklahoma and Florida St bring more national interest when playing big name schools.
Are you more likely to watch Oklahoma vs Bama or Missouri vs Bama?
The game you would more likely watch is same one that the National TV audience would watch. That is what CBS pays for when it deals with the SEC. And that is how you get the current members of the SEC a bigger paycheck. A larger paycheck is the only way the SEC expands.
8
Posted on 9/27/11 at 9:01 pm to Tigershatebama
Well, come help me be sarcastic about this subject in my hypothetical thread. 
Posted on 9/27/11 at 9:08 pm to Tigershatebama
quote:
TV markets don't matter
Makes sense.
To add to that:
Revenue, television ads, and expanding the conference foot print is worthless.
Posted on 9/27/11 at 9:14 pm to arwicklu
Did you even read it? Expanding the conference footprint doesn't necessarily add revenue on a per school basis
Posted on 9/27/11 at 9:19 pm to Tigershatebama
quote:
TV markets don't matter
Sure they don't... quote:Then why does the PAC12 have a better TV contract currently than the SEC? It matters, but viewers matter more. Missouri adds to the SEC footprint, which brings in more viewers to watch SEC games because they will be part of the conference.
The reason CBS and ESPN have huge deals with the SEC are because of the large number of marquee matchups that occur each year.
quote:That's why the SEC added Arkansas and South Carolina 10 years ago also.
However, Missouri(and the St Louis market blah blah blah) isn't a team that is ever expected to be a dominate force in CFB
quote:Missouri playing LSU/Bama/Auburn/UGA will bring in a national audience. How is that any different than A&M?
BUT it must also bring in more NATIONAL viewers whenever there is a marquee matchup.
Again, adding large markets increases the footprint of the SEC. I bet Missouri fans watch Big12 football because of conference affiliation. If they moved to the SEC, that viewership will follow.
Posted on 9/27/11 at 9:22 pm to Tigershatebama
College football is a toss-up the ranked teams get more viewers, If you can get a program that is constantly ranked top 25 year in and year out its common sense that it will bring in more viewers. SEC is already broadcasted nationally.
Ranked teams = Higher viewers. Higher viewers = More $$.
Ranked teams = Higher viewers. Higher viewers = More $$.
This post was edited on 9/27/11 at 9:24 pm
Posted on 9/27/11 at 11:50 pm to 870Hog
Again, markets and TV is the ONLY reason for any of these conferences adding teams.
Mizzou brings a state of 6 million people...and most of them are cable subscribers who will pay a bunch for the new SEC Network that WILL happen. Adding TAMU was all about selling the SECN to a state with 25 million people and their cable providers.
Thus, TV markets matter...a lot.
Mizzou brings a state of 6 million people...and most of them are cable subscribers who will pay a bunch for the new SEC Network that WILL happen. Adding TAMU was all about selling the SECN to a state with 25 million people and their cable providers.
Thus, TV markets matter...a lot.
Posted on 9/27/11 at 11:51 pm to GeauxTigersLee
quote:
Then why does the PAC12 have a better TV contract currently than the SEC?
The Pac12 has a larger contract because of the fumble the SEC made in allowing CBS to air the marquee SEC matchup in the afternoon and not primetime where advertising costs more. Still, CBS pays alot more money for 1 game a week than any other network.
quote:
It matters, but viewers matter more. Missouri adds to the SEC footprint, which brings in more viewers to watch SEC games because they will be part of the conference.
Which is a wash in terms of revenue. Yes, those extra viewers bring in more money, but the SEC would still need to pay Missouri. Missouri doesn't have the fanbase outside of market to increase the per school tv revenue of the SEC. I highly doubt that Kentucky vs Bama brings in much more viewers outside of Kentucky and Bama. Oklahoma vs Bama however would bring in a national audience. Do you really believe that Missouri vs Bama will do very well outside of those 2 states? Remember, the SEC revenue may increase but it needs to be split 14 ways instead of just 12. Bringing in more viewers from Missouri only helps to pay for Missouri's share of the pie. An extra team needs to be able to generate its share of the pie AND increase the share for everyone else.
quote:
That's why the SEC added Arkansas and South Carolina 10 years ago also.
They were added to get a 12 team conference for a championship game. That 1 extra game has generated alot of revenue.
quote:
Missouri playing LSU/Bama/Auburn/UGA will bring in a national audience. How is that any different than A&M?
It's a gamble with A&M. There is the thought that out of the shadow of Texas they can be dominate. Will they be? I don't know, but it's at least a high risk high reward. Missouri is no sleeping giant. It has always been a middle of the road team, and there is really no reason to believe that will change.
quote:
I bet Missouri fans watch Big12 football because of conference affiliation. If they moved to the SEC, that viewership will follow.
Yes they will watch SEC football, but they don't bring anything up and above that. They don't gain new national viewers to the SEC. CBS will increase the payout to the SEC for these new viewers, but all of the new payout just goes right to Missouri's share of the pie.
Posted on 9/27/11 at 11:59 pm to Jwho77
quote:
Again, markets and TV is the ONLY reason for any of these conferences adding teams.
I agree with you if an SEC network were to exist, but in the current SEC TV model, no, markets do not matter.
Networks pay gobs of money to show the game of the week. LSU fans will always watch LSU games and Missouri fans will always watch Missouri games. The national interest, however, is in the big games. Marquee matchups and the chance to air them are the only thing that matters to the networks.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 12:20 am to Tigershatebama
quote:
I agree with you if an SEC network were to exist, but in the current SEC TV model, no, markets do not matter.
Right.. That's the whole reason why markets do matter because the SEC wants to move towards the Big 10 model with the SEC Network, and this is the first step towards doing that.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 10:55 am to jturn17
errr. Here's my $.02.
Top TV markets:
21 St. Louis -- Missouri
22 Portland, OR
23 Pittsburgh
24 Charlotte, NC
25 Indianapolis
26 Baltimore
27 Raleigh-Durham
28 San Diego
29 Nashville
30 Hartford-New Haven
31 Kansas City -- Missouri
Misery U has potential viewers. Means more advertising dollars to the networks, which means more TV money for the products shown (SEC Football).
Carry on.
Top TV markets:
21 St. Louis -- Missouri
22 Portland, OR
23 Pittsburgh
24 Charlotte, NC
25 Indianapolis
26 Baltimore
27 Raleigh-Durham
28 San Diego
29 Nashville
30 Hartford-New Haven
31 Kansas City -- Missouri
Misery U has potential viewers. Means more advertising dollars to the networks, which means more TV money for the products shown (SEC Football).
Carry on.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 11:10 am to Jwho77
quote:
TV markets don't matter
Again, markets and TV is the ONLY reason for any of these conferences adding teams.
Mizzou brings a state of 6 million people...and most of them are cable subscribers who will pay a bunch for the new SEC Network that WILL happen. Adding TAMU was all about selling the SECN to a state with 25 million people and their cable providers.
Thus, TV markets matter...a lot.
This is absolutely true. TV markets are the driving force behind this entire shift in conferences.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 11:28 am to KaiserSoze99
The problem is advertising dollars to networks doesn't pay as well as network subscriptions in certain markets.
The Big 10 receives 5.5x more money per subscription for their network in team markets than in non-team markets. This is where the Big 10 makes most of the money from their network. That's why the SEC is trying to add teams from Populous states with large TV markets.
The Big 10 receives 5.5x more money per subscription for their network in team markets than in non-team markets. This is where the Big 10 makes most of the money from their network. That's why the SEC is trying to add teams from Populous states with large TV markets.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 11:33 am to Tigershatebama
if the current SEC tv model never changed, then you're right. But it's obvious that an SEC cable channel is coming eventually, and in that scenario (as others have pointed out), market size matters a lot
Posted on 9/28/11 at 11:45 am to Tigershatebama
quote:
TV markets don't matter
Say what?
Posted on 9/28/11 at 12:14 pm to Tigershatebama
There's a reason A&M was the gold mine in this and not Oklahoma.
TV markets matter
TV markets matter
Posted on 9/28/11 at 12:23 pm to Tigershatebama
quote:
TV markets don't matter
Yes, they do.
See the Big Ten Network.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 1:13 pm to Tigershatebama
For all the people so impressed with the CFB market in Missouri-
Mizzou averaged 60,000 in attendance last year, 10k under capacity.
SL and KC are not Birmingham or Atlanta or New Orleans. The people there don't give a damn about CFB and certainly not Mizzou.
Mizzou averaged 60,000 in attendance last year, 10k under capacity.
SL and KC are not Birmingham or Atlanta or New Orleans. The people there don't give a damn about CFB and certainly not Mizzou.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 1:15 pm to Jwho77
quote:
Mizzou brings a state of 6 million people...and most of them are cable subscribers who will pay a bunch for the new SEC Network that WILL happen.
But they won't pay to fill up their stadium?
I don't buy it, and neither will CBS.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 4:36 pm to attheua
You don't understand the mechanics. Do some google searches about how the Big 10 network works.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News