ACC, Swofford, Raycom, and TV revenue (Update)

Lou C and NoleOne with a fantastic summary of ACC TV contract.


https://csnbbs.com/thread-850623-page-4.html

"Yes, the 2010 deal was bad, bad, bad. Some of it was just timing and being unaware of market value before the PAC 12 struck, something that also affected the 2008 SEC deal (Slive is revered, but that contract turned out to be garbage), you cannot excuse the Raycom giveaway.
The ACC required their partner (ESPN) to sublease x amount of games to Raycom, which is less than corporate welfare to a business who's model had long run its course. It would be no different than requiring ACC schools to book all their travel at Ye Old Tobacco Road Travel Agency at a +30% cost, because that's how ACC schools travelled in 1970s and we're just going to pretend that the internet doesn't exist because ol' Gus at the travel agency is a good guy and has had season tickets to Tarheel basketball since 1950.
It's especially galling because Raycom then subleased a bunch of those rights to Fox. I have no problem with ACC on Fox, it's better than the Raycom affiliates, but that is absolute garbage paying for two middlemen. It wasn't even like Raycom produced them and it propped up Raycom's reputation and presence...it was a straight cash giveaway in which the ACC forced ESPN to sell rights at below market, simply so Raycom could resell and take a profit.
It is a freaking scandal. It's not like ESPN took the loss selling those games under market value...that was passed on (not passed on) in the contract. And there was absolutely no reason for it other than scratching the back of an old pal. None whatsoever. The fact that his son got a job there is just icing on the cake.
The Raycom giveaway was absolute indefensible garbage at the time, it's indefensible today. It's not something you can look back and say "well, we didn't realize where things were going" like the decision not to start a network. It was a move only the ACC made, and only the ACC would make. Remember, Raycom and JP used to have all the conferences...the ACC is the only one that not only saw fit to maintain the relationship, but literally prop them up financially be giving them underpriced content to sell.
I don't care what the ultimate dollar value the ACC gave away in the scheme, I don't think getting 60% of the value for the generally unappealing Raycom package or whatever they got is the difference between ACC money and SEC money. But it no doubt significantly complicated the ACC Network, it hurt the ACC's branding, and it's highly symbolic of a provincial attitude from the tobacco road folks that set the ACC back for decades of catch up.
And 100%...the leadership of the universities, including FSU and Clemson and everyone else is totally complicit in letting it happen. Of all the poor judgement and bad decisions, no matter how things go in the future, that Raycom giveaway can never be justified. "

Lou C

https://floridastate.forums.rivals.com/threads/fsu-receives-27-2-million-distribution-from-the-acc-for-2016-17.219033/page-6#post-3694742

After doing some research, I can't help but think that this whole thing is about ineffective conference leadership and possible conflicts of interest between Tobacco Road good-ole-boys at the ACC, Raycom and ESPN.

I want to know more about John Swofford's history with Raycom.

I know that the Charlotte based Raycom has had a relationship with the ACC (for better or worse) since 1979. By all accounts, however, Raycom started dying in the late 90's. Once "a giant in the college sports media business," by 2008, Raycom was described as "a shell of its old self. As I understand it, gradually it lost just about all of its conference rights, other than the ACC, to competitors like ESPN and Fox’s regional channels. For example, in 2008, Raycom lost the rights for all SEC content to ESPN. By all accounts, Raycom had a dated financial model and just couldn’t compete financially with bigger national TV networks, like ESPN and Fox.

When Swofford started negotiations for the ACC TV Contract with ESPN in 2009, for some reason Swofford asked ESPN’s John Skipper to "construct something that would keep us in business with Raycom.” Sports Business Daily Reported that “[a]s long as two years before it started negotiating with the conference in earnest, [Raycom] company executives acknowledged that keeping a piece of the ACC’s business was the only way the small, regional TV syndicator and production company could stay relevant in the burgeoning multibillion-dollar college marketplace.” Raycom decided to rely on "the deep, personal relationships" it developed over its three-decade relationship with the ACC. Apparently those personal relationships include hiring Swofford's son, since Chad Swofford was hired by Raycom in 2007 (from Boston College, no less).

Once signed, the 2010 ACC/ESPN deal gave ESPN syndication rights but still allowed Raycom Sports to carry games and maintain its relationship with the ACC. Those ACC television rights that Raycom secured are credited with keeping Raycom alive. Raycom got a sublicensing arrangement with ESPN for $50 million a year. Why?

Anyway, flash forward to present day. Take one wild guess on the main delay for the ACC network? Raycom! Yep. When 2010 ESPN deal was signed, Raycom got the rights to 31 live football games and 60 live men’s basketball games annually through 2027. Raycom also sublicensed 17 of the football games and 25 of those basketball games to Fox. So, with both Raycom and Fox holding ACC rights through 2027, that made the ACC network less viable. They had to re-negotiate everything to cut Raycom (and presumably Fox Sports) out of the deal to make it viable. They did that in the summer of '16. As part of those negotiations, it sounds like ACC’s syndicated content on Raycom Sports will end in ‘19. That's one of the main reasons why the linear network will not start until '19.

It sounds like what Swofford should have been done in '10, wasn't done until the summer of '16, and it is part of the reason why the ACC is dead last in revenues per school among the Power 5.

I also want to know more about John Swofford's relationship with John Skipper at ESPN.

John Skipper is a 1978 graduate of UNC-Chapel Hill and a 2012 N.C. Journalism Hall of Fame inductee. In 2010, John Skipper was ESPN’s executive vice president for content. John Skipper became ESPN president in 2012. In December of 2017, he abruptly resigned and later revealed that he had a cocaine addiction and was the victim of an attempted extortion plot by his drug dealer. In 2010, John Skipper would meet personally with Swofford while negotiating the ACC ESPN deal. Guess what ESPN executive kept telling telling John Swofford that ACC Network is "Full Speed Ahead"?

Anyway, I just can't help but think that John Swofford is a "ninja" in the sense that he leveraged the football schools out of significant and valuable rights to the benefit of Tobacco road basketball schools. The UNC's are happy because their football product stinks and Swofford conned the football schools into giving them their money.

 

236 NoleOne, 2 minutes ago