This is one of those times where there are still lingering questions and doubts that I give Pollard the benefit of the doubt that he knows how to add and subtract, I mean, he was/is an accountant afterall.
Iowa State's contract with Learfield includes all of the above mentioned rights (radio, local media, third-tier TV rights, corporate sponsorships, and in-stadium and arena signage.)
So that $5 million number is all-encompassing.
And what would those rights be worth to Texas and Oklahoma? Sounds like we only got $20 million from Fox for the football games previously. Really bad deal there.
I agree that we need to get a substantial amount for those rights. Learfield has done a decent job IMO. And I am not sure how Fox would do and how much they would try to extort from those wanting to broadcast our games. Bundling all those rights into a conference agreement might not be in our best interests.
At WORST it is a push with the opportunity for a bigger upside.
I'm not complaining one iota about that.
And LOL to the guy above, no it's not a really bad deal. Let's say no new contract even comes up, and NOTHING changes at all with our TV deals. We would STILL be getting more money because we are splitting the pot 10 ways instead of 12. So if nothing changed, we'd still be essentially guaranteed a roughly 2 million dollar increase in revenue. Pollard/GG said as much in the news conference.
Again, a note to everyone; do not let sportstalkmatty get you all worried about this.
So this says we will be $1 million ahead of where we are now correct? I assume this is when the 'new deal' is actually put into place. I would hope when the deal is put into place we would be much higher than the $14 million but I am not counting on it. Basically that is saying our Learfield contract with the $5 million would be the same in 2012 compared to 2009 #'s with only an additional $1 million in TV money.
Cloned4life, I am not taking sportstalkmatt's word on this. I am skeptical by nature and something smells bad about this whole Big 12 deal. I was thinking this stuff before he talked about it yesterday.
It says that FSN would like these other rights when they come available. It doesn't say that they are aren't going to pay additionally for those rights when the get them (like IMG, ISP, and Learfield do now), or that the money proposed now includes payments for those rights in the future. Yet everybody is assuming that the money FSN has proposed now includes payment for the future media rights. Have there been any other reports besides this one about these third-tier rights that actually says this?Quote:
As part of its proposed deal, FSN has asked to take control of the conference's third-tier rights that are currently controlled by rights holders IMG, ISP and Learfield, sources said. These rights include radio, local media, third-tier TV rights, corporate sponsorships, and in-stadium and arena signage. It is not known when these rights will be available.
If ISU's makes $5 million off this stuff, what do you think UT makes, with their monster video board? They aren't going to just give that away...
I listened to the second hour M&M podcast from yesterday to hear the Chip Brown interview. It seems pretty clear that SportsTalkMatt's angle is to paint all this stuff and ISU in particular in as bad as light as possible.
I would imagine if FSN takes control of the the third party contracts as well, the amount of the TV contract would be much, much higher than the suggested $140 million and I have no idea if FSN even has the people in place to manage the those additional contracts. They can ask all the want, but who knows if it is feasible.
Pollard and his staff obviously are privy to the numbers and know exponentially more than anyone else. I'm comfortable knowing that they would make sure this will benefit Iowa State.