wheaton4prez wrote:You're right on the relevance of the subject. However, it hasn't been about Baylor vs. Colorado, in my view, for several posts now. It's more about oregontrack, who has some communication issues running into someone who has the patience to hack it out with him, hopefully to a productive end. I believe it has already been productive. Despite him not wanting to take accountability for his statements to me, I've noticed a marked improvement in the way that he has communicated to the rest of the board in other threads. After the disrespectful approach that sparked this debate, I think his change of tone has been positive for both the board and himself.
LMAO, if you're a day under 85 years old, you've done yourself a disservice here.
I do give Colorado credit for being the flagship school. That's why I would agree that they could demand a higher rate of Colorado viewers. Maybe 2 or even 3 times the rate. However, 5 times as likely doesn't seem plausible to me.
It doesn't need to be. Only a lunatic would argue Baylor command 5 times the viewers Colorado does, even with Baylor's vicinity to such large population zones.
I "don't understand markets." oregontrack, please, stop. You're not even using the correct terms here.
Ah, another sign that it's all unraveling for you. My only error is assuming you fully understood that "markets" meant "television markets." The fact that I shortened it and you used it as a talking point speaks much more towards your own desperation than anything else.
Your mistake with this argument is thinking that there aren't Baylor fans that would subscribe to the network so that they can watch Baylor. As Elduderino points out, Baylor does have a fan base.
Think of it this way, if the Ducks aren't playing a game, but the Beavers are, a lot of Duck fans watch the Beaver game, right?
If the Ducks and Beavers were in different conferences, Duck fans would only pay for the network that shows the Duck games. Not the one that shows the Beavers and vice versa. Baylor would sell network subscriptions too.
I made no mistake, I'm just taking out your advertising argument. When setting up the Pac-10 Network, the potential subscribers in Texas remains 15 million television sets with or without Baylor involved. The number is stationary. With CU, the number jumps upwards. To get off the ground, the Pac-10 is going to have to enter into a deal with ESPN or (god forbid) FSN, if not an entity like Direct TV. All involved will be looking up potential television sets in the given markets under Pac-10 control to try to determine the subscription rate.
Are you trying to say that this assertion is you supporting your claim?
What do you want, a link? Christ, you're annoying.
If it has nothing to do with you being unreasonable, why did my conversation with Mukden go so differently despite him sharing your point of view initially?
Because he played nicer with you. I've worked my way into your head. This will go on until I say it ends, because anything less will be you ceding all points, and you won't be able to handle that.
Here. Argue with this Denver news article for awhile. You'll be aghast to find it supports what I'm saying. I took the liberty of quoting the pieces that will make you tear up.
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/sports/ ... etail.html
Pac-10 has also extended invitations to Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, according to a source familiar with the negotiations.
The moves are all about the money that can be made in TV.
If those Big 12 South schools follow CU into the Pac-10, one estimate has television revenue approaching the $25 million to $27 million range when a new contract is signed, according to the Daily Camera.
The coach said the Pac-10 favored Colorado over Baylor because of the Buffaloes' presence in the Denver TV market.
ha, that one won't sit well with you.
It would take a week to 10 days to finalize the details of a Pac-16. The blockbuster deal would add the nation's No. 5 (Dallas), No. 10 (Houston) and No. 16 (Denver) TV markets to the conference, which already includes No. 2 Los Angeles, No. 6 San Francisco, No. 12 Phoenix and No. 13 Seattle.
With that large population base, the new conference would start its own network and, along with other broadcast partners, likely would distribute around $20 million per member, comparable broadcast revenue to the Big Ten ($22 million) and SEC ($17 million), the source said.