ESPN to pay $80 million annually for Rose Bowl rights

Donate To GopherHole


well, wasn't the game already on abc previously? and doesn't disney own both abc and espn? so to me i guess this just sounds like disney shifting the broadcasting rights from abc over to espn and extending them. obviously not on the cheap. or am i missing something here?
 

That's insane. Who are they paying to get the rights?
 

mattw1067 said:
That's insane. Who are they paying to get the rights?
Click to expand...

Quote from the linked article:
"The revenue goes exclusively to the Big Ten and Pac-12 except in years when the Rose Bowl is played as a national championship semifinal game."
 



Do the math...

Prado89 said:
That is 960 millions for 12 years. It is pretty huge number.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sport...for-rose-bowl-rights-20120716,0,6481570.story
Click to expand...

Counting some of the pregame, it's a 4 hour telecast. Conservatively, that's 15 minutes of commercials an hour. 20 minutes might be more accurate. But that works out to at least one hour of commercials during the game, or 120 thirty second spots. That's $666,666 per commercial! Just for ESPN to break even on the money they're forking over to Delany & the Pac 12. That doesn't count all the dinero they have to pay for their on air "talent" and production costs.

So assuming ESPN wants to actually make a profit, they'll be charging upwards of $1,000,000 per commercial. That's almost Superbowl money. And it's not like the Rose Bowl is the only game on Jan 1. That'll put more pressure on the folks choosing the teams for the Rose Bowl. Obviously, they won't want a blowout, but they'll probably be more focused on attracting marquee teams. Not that we're anywhere near getting to the Rose Bowl, but if we are on the bubble and they can choose someone else, we're fugged. ND will get to Pasadena before we do.
 

Too Long in the Wasteland said:
Counting some of the pregame, it's a 4 hour telecast. Conservatively, that's 15 minutes of commercials an hour. 20 minutes might be more accurate. But that works out to at least one hour of commercials during the game, or 120 thirty second spots. That's $666,666 per commercial! Just for ESPN to break even on the money they're forking over to Delany & the Pac 12. That doesn't count all the dinero they have to pay for their on air "talent" and production costs.

So assuming ESPN wants to actually make a profit, they'll be charging upwards of $1,000,000 per commercial. That's almost Superbowl money. And it's not like the Rose Bowl is the only game on Jan 1. That'll put more pressure on the folks choosing the teams for the Rose Bowl. Obviously, they won't want a blowout, but they'll probably be more focused on attracting marquee teams. Not that we're anywhere near getting to the Rose Bowl, but if we are on the bubble and they can choose someone else, we're fugged. ND will get to Pasadena before we do.
Click to expand...

If the Gophers win the B1G title, and don't make the national semi-finals (and the Rose Bowl isn't a semi-final) then the Gophers go to the Rose Bowl. There is no choosing.
 

supadupafly said:
well, wasn't the game already on abc previously? and doesn't disney own both abc and espn? so to me i guess this just sounds like disney shifting the broadcasting rights from abc over to espn and extending them. obviously not on the cheap. or am i missing something here?
Click to expand...

It hasn't been on ABC for at least 2 years. I think they moved it to ESPN the last time the BCS rights contracts went into effect but I'm not sure. But yes, ABC and ESPN are both owned by the mouse ears which is why all the sports on ABC have been branded as ESPN on ABC for a number of years now.
 



So down the road, does ESPN make it a pay per view event?
 


supadupafly said:
well, wasn't the game already on abc previously? and doesn't disney own both abc and espn? so to me i guess this just sounds like disney shifting the broadcasting rights from abc over to espn and extending them. obviously not on the cheap. or am i missing something here?
Click to expand...

They are on ABC right now, as the Rose Bowl has a separate contract from the rest of the BCS. The big deal is that ABC had previously paid $300 million for 10 years back in 2004. That's a hefty jump!

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/bowls/2004-08-04-abc-rose_x.htm

I would assume that contract gives ESPN the right to the radio broadcasts as well, for whatever that might be worth...
 

Here comes the mailman with a notice from your cable company..............

Oh, Look - ESPN jacked up the rates they charge to your cable company, and the increase is being passed along to the customers. (i.e. you and me.)

They keep paying more and more money for events, because they know they can jack up their rates, and the cable companies and dish providers will pay the ransom to keep them on their systems.
 



Lakeville Goldy said:
They are on ABC right now, as the Rose Bowl has a separate contract from the rest of the BCS. The big deal is that ABC had previously paid $300 million for 10 years back in 2004. That's a hefty jump!

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/bowls/2004-08-04-abc-rose_x.htm

I would assume that contract gives ESPN the right to the radio broadcasts as well, for whatever that might be worth...
Click to expand...

This is no longer true. As I already noted, the 2010 and 2011 Rose Bowl games were both on ESPN. Key graph from the link:

While FOX had the broadcasting rights to the other Bowl Championship Series games from 2007 to 2010, the Rose Bowl, which negotiates its own television contract independent of the BCS, agreed to keep the game on ABC. The 2005 Rose Bowl was the first one broadcast in HDTV. Beginning with the 2010 season, ESPN, which is majority-owned by ABC's parent company, will have the contract to broadcast the BCS games, including the Rose Bowl game. The Rose Bowl game contract with ESPN was extended to 2026 on June 28, 2012 for a reportedly $80 million per year.
Click to expand...

The Wiki entry also notes that ESPN radio has the broadcast rights for that media as well.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Here comes the mailman with a notice from your cable company..............

Oh, Look - ESPN jacked up the rates they charge to your cable company, and the increase is being passed along to the customers. (i.e. you and me.)

They keep paying more and more money for events, because they know they can jack up their rates, and the cable companies and dish providers will pay the ransom to keep them on their systems.
Click to expand...

Because ESPN (Disney) knows that out of all the stations or bundles of related stations out there, they have a HUGE market (pretty much any male between 15 and 65) that really wants to watch what they broadcast. And they take that money and invest it in new equipment, more broadcast teams, etc that allow them to cover more games than ever before - allowing us the viewers to see quality broadcasts of football, basketball, etc in HD with multiple camera angles, replays, and announcers. Do I think they are quite greedy and forceful in how they strong-arm DirecTV, Comcast, et al for their content and use some for unnecessary stuff (3D, anyone?)?? Yes. Yet as someone who doesn't have cable or satellite right now, I feel like I'm missing out on some decent sports out there that I could be catching... and will absolutely have my satellite back before Sept 1 rolls around. Watching at a bar or restaurant simply isn't as convenient or cheap as paying $80 a month for 2 HD DVRs with DirecTV for college football Saturdays + bowl games.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom