The Big Ten Network

Badgers, Packers, Mallards. Paddling, running, golfing. And bikes!
Marvell
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7033
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 11:28 pm
Location: At one with time and space

Postby Marvell » Sat Nov 03, 2007 2:18 pm

jammybastard wrote:(I)f the University is doing so well with all the money the Athletic Dept brings in then why did Whiley and Co. fight like hell when the Republicans tried to cut their budget?
If things are so rosy why don't they lower tuition and fees?


Who the fuck are you - Steve Nass?

I'll be a sport and spot you a clue.

There's no way (no legal way, at least) that the Athletic Department could generate enough money to overcome the financial shortfall that has been created by the slow but steady defunding of the UW by the state legislature. As less and less of the overall percentage of the budget of the UW is covered by the state, that shortfall has to be covered somehow. All that the Big Ten Network contract, or the Addidas contract, or anything - stem cell research grants, jacked-up undergrad tuition, you name it - is going to be is one of a number of different revenue streams that the UW has to cultivate to keep its doors open.

If you're pissed off about tuition, or the Big Ten Network, or whatever, the most effective thing you can do about it is help get Democrats elected to the State House.

I don't necessarily agree with all, or even much, of what John Wiley does - but at least I don't fundamentally misrepresent the situation he finds himself in as Chancellor. I know for a fact that the dude fucking hates football - he's a life-long science geek, for chrissakes.

Wiley's doing this because he honestly thinks it's in the best interests of the University. Whether he's right or not is, obviously, debatable - but his motives are, I think, relatively pure.

jammybastard
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5468
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 12:05 pm
Location: All Up In Your General Area
Contact:

Postby jammybastard » Sat Nov 03, 2007 2:49 pm

Marvell wrote:
jammybastard wrote:(I)f the University is doing so well with all the money the Athletic Dept brings in then why did Whiley and Co. fight like hell when the Republicans tried to cut their budget?
If things are so rosy why don't they lower tuition and fees?


Who the fuck are you - Steve Nass?


1. no
2. can you find the decency to stay out of other people's conversations?
3. Now I'll be a sport and spot you a clue:
Big Ten Network contract, the Addidas contract, etc...
do not help the TUniversity keep it's doors open.
It helps pay the salaries of the Ath. Dept. management and keep the Ath. Dept. funded.
(add to that the fact that they also get money from the University, taxpayers, contracts made through Badger Sports Properties (which is a privately owned subsidiary of a larger corporation and not even owned by the UW, etc...)

The only way that helps the rest of the UW is if you believe that sports loving alums will give money to the rest of the UW out of pride or that sports events will create higher enrollments.
Sure it will...until people can't afford it anymore.
If you ask the alums and fans to buy tickets and then pony up for a seat fee, make them join exclusive supporters organizations and pay more fees, and then ask them o pay more to see games on television by signing exclusive deals with limited air rights, blah, blah, blah...and then expect them to kick into funds to support say the L&S school, or Law, or Chem?

At some point people are going to be able to afford to pony up anymore. It's not that they won't want to, they won't be able to.
Is that what the UW is for? To shakedown the fans, alums, and taxpayers.

And don't give me this "My University, right or wrong" line. That's Steve Nass, absolutist, GOP style thinking. The UW needs to take care of it's students and employees better instead of wasting resources on serving the Ath Dept.


Marvell wrote:Wiley's doing this because he honestly thinks it's in the best interests of the University. Whether he's right or not is, obviously, debatable - but his motives are, I think, relatively pure.


He's a politician. You don't rise to chancellor w/o being one. He also makes alot less than Barry and would never tell him "no" no matter how much he hates football.

thebookpolice
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8597
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East
Contact:

Postby thebookpolice » Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:26 pm

jammybastard wrote:
TheBookPolice wrote:Minority stakeholders. And it's no secret.

No. That's not true.

So, this page's information is more conspiracy to defraud?

And I'm shocked--SHOCKED--that there are state employees who can't get merit-based raises. That goes for pretty much every union-represented position in state government. It sucks all the way around, but it's not just the UW's problem.

I'm not saying all is peachy, and I'm not saying that the UW doesn't need more money. I AM saying that to blame any and all woes on the Athletics Department is silly and intellectually suspect.

jammybastard wrote:I was not implying embezzlement at all.
In fact I made no claim to whether it was legal or illegal.
From what I've heard it's all above board, well as much as it can be hidden in the language of contracts and whatnot so *technically* it's not embezzlement.
Payoff? Maybe.

Read me very carefully:

CAN YOU PROVE THAT ANY INDIVIDUAL POCKETING OF FUNDS IS HAPPENING AT ALL, REGARDLESS OF LEGALITY?

thebookpolice
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8597
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East
Contact:

Postby thebookpolice » Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:33 pm

Oh, and bro, this is a message board forum. Ain't no private conversations here. Anyone is free to waltz in and tell you you're wrong at any time.

Marvell
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7033
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 11:28 pm
Location: At one with time and space

Postby Marvell » Sat Nov 03, 2007 5:37 pm

jammybastard wrote:If you ask the alums and fans to buy tickets and then pony up for a seat fee, make them join exclusive supporters organizations and pay more fees, and then ask them o pay more to see games on television by signing exclusive deals with limited air rights, blah, blah, blah...and then expect them to kick into funds to support say the L&S school, or Law, or Chem?

At some point people are going to be able to afford to pony up anymore. It's not that they won't want to, they won't be able to.
Is that what the UW is for? To shakedown the fans, alums, and taxpayers.

And don't give me this "My University, right or wrong" line. That's Steve Nass, absolutist, GOP style thinking. The UW needs to take care of it's students and employees better instead of wasting resources on serving the Ath Dept.


While following the convolutions of your 'logic' is an exhausting undertaking, I think I've figured out the heart of your fallacy:

I.) The Athletic Department is tangential to the academic mission of the University;
II.) What's more, it abuses the loyalty of its fans;
III.) Providing an ex post facto excuse for the defunding of the core academic of the University;
IV.) Which only increases the pressure on the University to exploit whatever revenue streams may present themselves - even ones coming in from the Athletic Department (which is tangential to the academic mission of the University).

I'm not arguing for 'My University - right or wrong' - that would be a chump move (finally - a topic with which you have proven practical experience). What I am pointing out is that classic 'conservative' truism - actions have their consequences. You want Wiley to slap Barry down? Free up some GPR money so that the Deans don't have to crawl cap and gown in hand to the Athletic Department for some of that folding green.

Your ignorance of how the University actually works is only exceeded by your sense of how entitled you are to lecture everyone else on its operation. So - yes, if you are not Nass himself, you have done an admirable job of Nassholic impersonation.

jammybastard
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5468
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 12:05 pm
Location: All Up In Your General Area
Contact:

Postby jammybastard » Sun Nov 04, 2007 1:27 am

TheBookPolice wrote:
jammybastard wrote:
TheBookPolice wrote:Minority stakeholders. And it's no secret.

No. That's not true.

So, this page's information is more conspiracy to defraud?


You believe everything you read on the internet?
On the surface it's a 49% stake. Below the surface it's alot more than that and that's all I need to say on the matter.

TheBookPolice wrote:I'm not saying all is peachy, and I'm not saying that the UW doesn't need more money. I AM saying that to blame any and all woes on the Athletics Department is silly and intellectually suspect.


I never was. Not sure where you got that from.

jammybastard wrote:I was not implying embezzlement at all.
In fact I made no claim to whether it was legal or illegal.
From what I've heard it's all above board, well as much as it can be hidden in the language of contracts and whatnot so *technically* it's not embezzlement.
Payoff? Maybe.

Read me very carefully:

CAN YOU PROVE THAT ANY INDIVIDUAL POCKETING OF FUNDS IS HAPPENING AT ALL, REGARDLESS OF LEGALITY?[/quote]

define "funds".
Does money from the BTN deal make it into, for example, Barry and Brett's checks?
Of course it does.
Just like other tv contracts, sporting goods deals, etc...
can I prove there's anything below the waterline?
Nope. Never said I could. I said that I *heard*, which meant *rumor* and I never presented it as anything else.
Now do I personally believe there is funny business going on and there's money involved?
You bet but that's because I have yet to see a completely clean major college athletics program.

jammybastard
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5468
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 12:05 pm
Location: All Up In Your General Area
Contact:

Postby jammybastard » Sun Nov 04, 2007 1:44 am

Marvell wrote:
While following the convolutions of your 'logic' is an exhausting undertaking, I think I've figured out the heart of your fallacy:[


Don't assume you can as I don't assume I can follow yours. I do speak from direct experience. If you don't have that same experience it's doubtful you could follow the thread. If I'm guilty of anything it's leaving details out, and that's by design and for protection.

Marvell wrote:I'm not arguing for 'My University - right or wrong' - that would be a chump move (finally - a topic with which you have proven practical experience).


Oh that's cute. Spare me.

Marvell wrote:What I am pointing out is that classic 'conservative' truism - actions have their consequences. You want Wiley to slap Barry down? Free up some GPR money so that the Deans don't have to crawl cap and gown in hand to the Athletic Department for some of that folding green.


HUH? Your seriously projecting and you've gone waaay off the reservation on this one.
I don't care either way.
What I was saying is that Athletic Dept. is a private corporation operating inside of a public institution.
Not unheard of, but also not always desirable to the bottom line if it spends more than it takes in.

Marvell wrote:Your ignorance of how the University actually works is only exceeded by your sense of how entitled you are to lecture everyone else on its operation.


Are you high when you write this stuff because I have no idea where you get this from?
I never, ever said I know how the University works.
I do know how the television business works and specifically how it relates to collegiate sports.
After all that's what this thread is about.
I also have experience with how Athletic Department's work within large state universities.
Again, that's what we are talking about here.

My point of all this was that the fans are being used /leveraged to do the dirty work for the network and the Athletic Dept against Charter.
On the surface it's the classic "good guys" vs. "bad guys" story, but below the surface it's alot more nuanced.
My secondary point is that this type of action will ultimately cost the fans more and more until they can't afford to support the Athletic Dept anymore, which will also dovetail into a negative affect on the University.

thebookpolice
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8597
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East
Contact:

Postby thebookpolice » Sun Nov 04, 2007 8:24 am

jammy, what would you like the University to do, both with the specific issue of BTN, and with the larger issue of the Athletic Department?

Beer Moon
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2032
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:08 pm
Contact:

Postby Beer Moon » Mon Nov 05, 2007 9:48 am

The way I see it, both sides have a point.

BTN wants in the regular tier so they can hit more households and rake in more profits. Think about it this way: whether 1 or 10,000,000 people watch the feed, it is going to cost them the same to broadcast it regardless. Their goal then is to get as many as possible "paying" for it by placing it on the most generic tier possible.

If it were a la carte they'd have a lot more research to do to determine how many customers they were actually likely to get and how much each is really willing to pay. This is the way I personally think all the channels should be run.

Charter wants BTN in their sports tier where they charge customer's more money, so they can pay BTN less to carry their network.

As far as I know, Charter has never had any problems raking in sick profits.

However, they do like to raise rates randomly and for no good reason.

That's one of about 5 good reasons I switched to DirecTV. I actually saved $30 and I have twice as many HD channels!!

If Charter wasn't already raping their customers with a rusty goal post then I would probably have taken their side on this. BTN has no right to demand they are on a specific tier any more than the soap network belongs on the basic tier. Unfortunately, Charter is incapable of packaging anything for less than $60 a month, and none of their basic packages contain any channels of any interest whatsoever, and they force you to buy 100 channels you don't want in order to get the 5 that you do want.

Marvell
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7033
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 11:28 pm
Location: At one with time and space

Postby Marvell » Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:42 pm

jammybastard wrote:Are you high when you write this stuff[...]?


Well, duh.

jammybastard
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5468
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 12:05 pm
Location: All Up In Your General Area
Contact:

Postby jammybastard » Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:47 pm

TheBookPolice wrote:jammy, what would you like the University to do, both with the specific issue of BTN, and with the larger issue of the Athletic Department?


Well what I want, and what is realistic are two very different things. Also, I don't have an *issue* with the Athletic Dept. I actually do alot of work with them and have more than a couple of friends on the payroll. My issue is with the finances.

First, BTN should drop it's demand to carriers for $1.10 per subscriber. That's why Charter/Time Warner won't carry them.
Most channels start on the basic tier because they are willing to give away the signal and be content making money from advertising.
You write off the first 5 years to build your audience then ratchet up the price.
Hell, ESPN didn't make a real profit for 10 years and look at them now.
Now these baby sports channel expect to make current ESPN money for content that is significantly less valuable. One or two marquee games doesn't warrent $1.10 per subscriber. It's pure greed, and IHM detrimental to everyone involved except the BTN.

I also think that the Athletic Dept. should be declared what it is in everything but it's name: a private corporation.
It doesn't need public money, whereas the rest of the University does...moreso than ever.
The Ath. Dept can support itself with alumni donations, tv contracts, shoe deals, ad board revenue, etc...
As it stands now they get public money AND all of the other benefits of having an attractive product.
Good for them, but why should the taxpayers support it when we have to pay for it in so many other ways?

If you look at the way the Ath. Dept and it's business dealings are structured they've already moved alot of the key business to the private sector blurring the line between what part of the Ath Dept. is public and what part is private. Look into "Badger Sports Properties" to see what I mean.
Granted, there are other on campus entities that enjoy this sort of private status as well so I'm not saying they are alone in this practice or are doing something illegal.
They aren't. It's good business to double dip. Make money in the private sector, but not be taxed on it because it's part of the University.

As I've said before, IMHO this is an arms race w/o any winners. The question for fans, and taxpayers is, how much are you willing to pay to support your team?

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 22670
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:04 pm

Here is the Badger men's basketball schedule. It's all BTN until the Big Ten-ACC Challenge.

Paco
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7533
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2001 11:41 am
Location: Whoville

Postby Paco » Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:36 pm

is this thing still on?

I know one thing, the more games that are on cable/BTV(and unseen by me), the farther I see myself drifting away from UW sports.

I do miss the football, the basketball....meh.

white_rabbit
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7487
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 11:44 pm

Postby white_rabbit » Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:46 pm

People who are pissed off about this need to send a message and pick A game to boycott and then spread the word, in the interest of all Badger fans, to not attend A specific game and instead picket outside the Kohl center demanding that the BTN either reach an agreement with Charter to be carried on the local cable franchise or strike a deal with one of the local over the air TV stations to broadcast Badger games.

thebookpolice
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8597
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East
Contact:

Postby thebookpolice » Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:57 pm

white_rabbit wrote:People who are pissed off about this need to send a message and pick A game to boycott and then spread the word, in the interest of all Badger fans, to not attend A specific game and instead picket outside the Kohl center demanding that the BTN either reach an agreement with Charter to be carried on the local cable franchise or strike a deal with one of the local over the air TV stations to broadcast Badger games.

Nice idea on the surface, but what would the placards read?

Image


Return to “Sports, Recreation & Biking”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests