The $50M question

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

So, I heard it AGAIN on the local sports talk that WSU, specifically an econ professor, was the one that came up with the $50M valuation that is now retrospectively being regarded as the reason that the TV deal never got done.

So, I have a couple of questions: where is this information coming from? I'm not saying it is wrong, but who leaked it and is it true? Who is reporting it?

Second: I'm not sure that for the life of the contract that a $50M valuation was wrong or bad. Yes, its over-valued in year one but probably undervalued at the end of the contract. Taking a lowball bid of $30M was never feasible, especially for the big 4 in our conference, as it would be undervalued the minute we signed the deal. It was a bullshit deal and perhaps presented for the sole purpose of destroying any reasonable talks or further negotiations. Or perhaps for destroying a conference.

I know that many will come back and say that $50M was an insane number, but if you look at how things played out I'm fairly confident that if the P12 would have countered with $30,000,000.01 the network would have walked away. It wasn't about honest dealings, it was about screwing a conference one way or another.

And yes, I like my tinfoil hat just fine, thank you. Now excuse me while I go track the helicopters that keep flying over my house.

 

[COUGinNCW]

The BIG had just come up with a number of $59M. I can see why U types would feel $30M was a huge low ball but in reality, FOX over paid with the BIG in a bidding war and ESPN new they wouldn’t be overly intersted in the PAC. Putting a value on the PAC w/out SoCal takes a lot of subjectivity. Would SoCal viewers stop watching Utah vs ASU bc there are no longer implications for USC? Etc etc.

curious where you’ve seen it WSU and a Schulz pushing the $50M, not that it really matters at this point but he’s an idiot if he was aggressively selling that idea.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

The BIG had just come up with a number of $59M. I can see why U types would feel $30M was a huge low ball but in reality, FOX over paid with the BIG in a bidding war and ESPN new they wouldn’t be overly intersted in the PAC. Putting a value on the PAC w/out SoCal takes a lot of subjectivity. Would SoCal viewers stop watching Utah vs ASU bc there are no longer implications for USC? Etc etc.

curious where you’ve seen it WSU and a Schulz pushing the $50M, not that it really matters at this point but he’s an idiot if he was aggressively selling that idea.

I specifically said that I've heard it on the local sports talk radio, and they've said it more than once. Its the narrative they are going with, so apparently they heard it somewhere. Probably that dipshit from WV on twitter... ?

What's more interesting is when I just did a google search for "WSU $50M professor", it brings up a bunch of reddit threads that think it was Crow @ ASU. So I guess the local radio honks are a-holes?

 

[longtimecoug]

seattle radio?

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

seattle radio?

Portland

 

[COUGinNCW]

I specifically said that I've heard it on the local sports talk radio, and they've said it more than once. Its the narrative they are going with, so apparently they heard it somewhere. Probably that dipshit from WV on twitter... ?

What's more interesting is when I just did a google search for "WSU $50M professor", it brings up a bunch of reddit threads that think it was Crow @ ASU. So I guess the local radio honks are a-holes?

They probably have shitty reading comprehension. Schulz is the only President that’s talked about it publicly that I’m aware so they assumed it was WSU?

 

[chugspig]

It was Oregon

 

[longtimecoug]

Portland

I havent heard it, but i dont listen to TheFan too much

 

[Coug90]

Makes sense. That’s a years worth of chicken strips for Softy

 

[mikalalas]

So, I heard it AGAIN on the local sports talk that WSU, specifically an econ professor, was the one that came up with the $50M valuation that is now retrospectively being regarded as the reason that the TV deal never got done.

So, I have a couple of questions: where is this information coming from? I'm not saying it is wrong, but who leaked it and is it true? Who is reporting it?

Second: I'm not sure that for the life of the contract that a $50M valuation was wrong or bad. Yes, its over-valued in year one but probably undervalued at the end of the contract. Taking a lowball bid of $30M was never feasible, especially for the big 4 in our conference, as it would be undervalued the minute we signed the deal. It was a bullshit deal and perhaps presented for the sole purpose of destroying any reasonable talks or further negotiations. Or perhaps for destroying a conference.

I know that many will come back and say that $50M was an insane number, but if you look at how things played out I'm fairly confident that if the P12 would have countered with $30,000,000.01 the network would have walked away. It wasn't about honest dealings, it was about screwing a conference one way or another.

And yes, I like my tinfoil hat just fine, thank you. Now excuse me while I go track the helicopters that keep flying over my house.

ALL THE MAIN CREDIBLE EXPERTS SAID THAT THE 30 MIL PER TEAM WAS THE REALITY OF WHAT THE PAC 12 WAS REALLY, ACTUALLY WORTH.

IF THE PAC 12 HAD COUNTERED AT 35 MIL, MEDIA WOULD HAVE COUNTER OFFERED 32.5 MIL PER TEAM. 32.5 MIL WAS MORE THEN THE 31.7 THE BIG 12 WAS GETTING.

IF IT WAS WSU, THEN THAT ECON PROFESSOR SHOULD BE INSTANTLY FIRED.

 

[longtimecoug]

It was Oregon

SC would be my guess, maybe washington

 

[COUGinNCW]

SC would be my guess, maybe washington

SC was out of the conference when ESPN floated the $30M offer.

 

[Wazzubrooz]

Sc was always looking for a better deal. They are like Texas, always want a better deal than everyone else. It’s why they are so good at cheating. Also, Reggie lying Bush, STHU, you broke the existing rules that others were bound by. You don’t have a case. Cheater.