The MVC's Current TV Deal

[IllinoisState]

Since this has received a fair amount of attention I decided to do a quick search and came up with a few links:

http://www.mvc-sports.com/media/2011-12 ... %202015-16).pdf

http://www.kake.com/sports/headlines/Mi ... 54113.html

http://sportsvideo.org/main/blog/2010/0 ... v-network/

The MVC's deal with ESPN guarantees at least 40 games a year. One three year old article says that the MVC is making $1.5 million a year in advertisement revenue.

[rlh04d]

Well that's pretty lacking in information.

I had several other links in a post I had regarding the TV deal on Shockernet. I'm too lazy to go link to the sources, but this is about what I've found:

-- ESPN pays the Valley $190,000 a year for ESPNU (or other channels at their whim) content, and of course ESPN3 content. ESPN had exclusivity on this but this was negotiated away during the last round of contract talks. This number is lower than the previous contract ($200,000).
-- ESPN then charges the Valley $300,000 a year for production fees associated with broadcasting games on the ESPN networks.
-- ESPN provides the Valley with two minutes (if I remember right) of commercial time that they can shop to approved sponsors, plus two 30 second PSA spots, for ESPNU games.
-- I don't believe CBS pays us anything, as they bought the rights from ESPN.
-- I don't know what the Fox contract actually pays us, or who provides the money for production costs. In that article it does mention our advertising being very valuable, but it doesn't mention how much of that advertising revenue that the Valley gets.

All in all, I think we might lose money on our ESPN deal.

[Red]

-- I don't believe CBS pays us anything, as they bought the rights from ESPN.

ESPN gives them 2 minutes too.. This year they took it from the end of our title game.

[rlh04d]

-- I don't believe CBS pays us anything, as they bought the rights from ESPN.

ESPN gives them 2 minutes too.. This year they took it from the end of our title game.

[Ali]

Well that's pretty lacking in information.

I had several other links in a post I had regarding the TV deal on Shockernet. I'm too lazy to go link to the sources, but this is about what I've found:

-- ESPN pays the Valley $190,000 a year for ESPNU (or other channels at their whim) content, and of course ESPN3 content. ESPN had exclusivity on this but this was negotiated away during the last round of contract talks. This number is lower than the previous contract ($200,000).
-- ESPN then charges the Valley $300,000 a year for production fees associated with broadcasting games on the ESPN networks.


All in all, I think we might lose money on our ESPN deal.

So basically we don't have a TV deal. We essentially pay ESPN to cover us.

[rlh04d]

Well that's pretty lacking in information.

I had several other links in a post I had regarding the TV deal on Shockernet. I'm too lazy to go link to the sources, but this is about what I've found:

-- ESPN pays the Valley $190,000 a year for ESPNU (or other channels at their whim) content, and of course ESPN3 content. ESPN had exclusivity on this but this was negotiated away during the last round of contract talks. This number is lower than the previous contract ($200,000).
-- ESPN then charges the Valley $300,000 a year for production fees associated with broadcasting games on the ESPN networks.


All in all, I think we might lose money on our ESPN deal.

So basically we don't have a TV deal. We essentially pay ESPN to cover us.

Exactly.

[agrinut]

Well that's pretty lacking in information.

I had several other links in a post I had regarding the TV deal on Shockernet. I'm too lazy to go link to the sources, but this is about what I've found:

-- ESPN pays the Valley $190,000 a year for ESPNU (or other channels at their whim) content, and of course ESPN3 content. ESPN had exclusivity on this but this was negotiated away during the last round of contract talks. This number is lower than the previous contract ($200,000).
-- ESPN then charges the Valley $300,000 a year for production fees associated with broadcasting games on the ESPN networks.


All in all, I think we might lose money on our ESPN deal.

So basically we don't have a TV deal. We essentially pay ESPN to cover us.

Yep....... The clause that every team gets a TV game must be dropped now.

[Ali]

As we just pointed out the MVC is paying to get the games on tv. Good luck getting schools to agree to pay if they don't get on television.

[agrinut]

As we just pointed out the MVC is paying to get the games on tv. Good luck getting schools to agree to pay if they don't get on television.

You remove the stipulation the contract is worth more. More people will watch WSU over UNI or any team in the MVC for that matter. It was stupid to add the rule to begin with. I'm not saying only televise Wichita games but you cant put two small markets on together. The SIU v UNI game will have no one watching.

[DoubleJayAlum]

I researched this issue last summer when ValleyChamp lectured me about how great the MVC's TV deal was. That post is probably still around somewhere.

As stated above, the MVC essentially buys the time from ESPN. The contract was recently renewed (about two years ago or so) and required the entire conference to participate in bracketbusters for the term of the contract. I don't know what impact the cancellation of bracketbusters has on the number of covered TV games (i.e., did those games count toward the quota or were those on top of the quota?). It was my understanding that ESPN paid the production costs and supplied the air time for bracketbusters games at no cost to the participants.

My understanding is that the conference also buys the time for MVC TV broadcasts (the games on FSN/Comcast) too. The difference is that there are more opportunities for MVC selected commercials during those broadcasts, which is why you see the same Casey's, Ralston-Purina and Hammonds hotels commercials over and over and over again if you watch these games. As a result, there may be a slight profit margin on these games, but I think they are essentially a break even proposition as well.

Almost all of the money distributed by the conference comes from NCAA tourney credits and MVC tourney ticket sales, with a slight amount no doubt attributable to "corporate sponsorships". Incidentally, I has heard that one of the biggest corporate sponsors in past years, State Farm, dropped its corporate sponsorship of the MVC.

This issue really frustrated me last summer when both the A10 and CAA signed TV deals of their own with CBS College Sports and/or NBC's cable station because those deals both paid the conference for content, instead of charging them for the air time. I remember reading that the A10 distributed about 200-300K in TV money alone to its members this year. NCAA tourney credit money comes on top of that figure, which is why it is pretty unlikely that the MVC will ever poach teams from the A10.