Article: Big Ten Network defies early skeptics as audience, profits rise

I'll admit, I'm a little surprised, but I guess I shouldn't be. Big Ten fans are going to watch programming about their school as much as possible, and BTN provides that. The commentary is usually pretty boring or downright bad, but it's content nonetheless.

because of Rotel.

It helps to have some of the largest alumni bases in the nation with UofM and OSU.  I've seen notes stating both have over 400,000 living alumni, but I'd like to make a case for the winged helmet. 

Helmets matter.  When I was a kid I was a Raider fan, until I met actual fans of the team.  I was a Tampa Bay Buccaneer fan until I had been a fan for 2 years and still not seen a win, and finally I was a lion fan, because the Lion on their helmet seemed to come alive and roar when Barry was slashing through defenses.

Kids grow up seeing the Maize and Blue helmet and can't help but want to be a fan.  It is a great advantage in recruiting, and a great advantage for the Big Ten and our network. 

I think a big part of the success is all of the old games they play.  Where else are you going to be able to sit down and watch the entire UM-OSU game from 1969? Now all they need to do is show some of the old Fab Five games. I am guessing they can't (for obvious reasons), but I would love to see that game against Mashburn and Kentucky in the final 4 or that invitational in Hawaii where, if my memory serves me correctly, we beat 3 top 10 teams in 3 or 4 days.

...2009, 2010 profits doubled and ad revenue was up by 30%. Those are ridiculous numbers in this economy.

BTN = Big Ten Platinum Mine

It would work much better if it were a brand name for a roach motel.

As much as I enjoy watching shows about the Wolverines from pre-game, replays, and spring practice game to name a few, I still am a little bitter over not being able to get several games on television in its first year.  Blame Comcast, I know, but I tend to think the blame could be shared by both parties involved.  But, alas, what I'm trying to get to is that for as well as the BTN is doing, they need to drastically improve their programming.  Friday Night Tailgate or whatever its called isn't worth my time to watch.  I think a good term for it is "cheeky".  Anyway, beyond that the color commentary during the games is also sub-par for my tastes, and also the million Rotel commercials often interrupt the game (even during plays!).  There were several times last year where I didn't get to see a punt or first down or the like because they had cut away and didn't come back in time.  So, yes, thank you BTN for making our conference rich and super-powerful, but with that success I'd like to see some progress.  Thank you.

No doubt the BTN is turning into a genius idea by Delany and Co.  If only my GODDAMN CABLE PROVIDER WOULD PICK IT UP.  Honestly, it's f-ing pathetic, every other cable provider in LA has the BTN, except the only cable provider that covers my section of Burbank.  If my apartment didn't face the wrong way I'd have a dish by now, for that reason alone.

Ad revenue is one thing, but the success may have been from adding new cable/distribution systems.  Their costs are fixed, but now they have a new revenue source.

You could switch apartments......it's worth it.

I hate the fact that my parents won't get it at home simply because they don't like football.  I want my A^2 home back...NOW!

I'm glad to see that BTN is turning a healthy profit. Hopefully some of this money makes its way into increasing the production quality of football broadcasts.

The Big Ten network is even carried on Shaw cable in Canada.  Our local company was bought out by Shaw last fall and I was extremely pleased to see BTN get added.  Got it free for the first 6 months, which included the entire football season.

Back in December 2009, ESPN's Outside the Lines (OTL) program stated that the television revenue for the Big Ten Confernce was $242M.   You can see the program (titled " Television Impact on College Sports) at this location:

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=4757335&categoryid=3286128

Divide $242M by 11 programs and you get the total of $22M per program.  This figure has been used in countless newspaper articles and blogs since ESPN reported it seven months ago.  The problem is that the sum isn't correct per the FY 2011 budget for the Michigan Athletic Department located at:

http://www.regents.umich.edu/meetings/06-10/2010-6-X-17.pdf

The budget clearly indicates that the television revenue for football and basketball was $14.89M for Michigan in FY 2010 (ending 30 June).  The total distribution to UM by the Big Ten Conference was $19.97M--this total included television revenue, bowl revenue ($1.88M), NCAA basketball tournament proceeds ($2.85M) and other revenue ($350K). 

For FY 2010, the contracts from ABC/ESPN (football) and CBS (basketball) paid Michigan $8.43M and the Big Ten Network (BTN) paid $6.46M.  Note that this is nowhere near the $14M from the networks (ABC/ESPN/CBS)/$8M from the BTN claimed in the article.  For a good summary of the various contracts, go to http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/58254

Despite the incorrect numbers I think were used in this article, the Big Ten Network has still been a windfall for the conference and for all its members (along with the ten-year contracts signed in 2006 with ESPN/ABC and CBS).  Going back into the past Michigan Athletic Department budget documents, here's the conference distributions through the years with the television revenue in brackens over the last ten years:

FY 2002 - $8.93M ($5.65M)

FY 2003 - $10.08M ($5.75M)

FY 2004 - $10.70M ($6.12M)

FY 2005 - $10.66M ($6.27M)

FY 2006 - $10.68M ($6.14M)

FY 2007 - $14.04M ($9.37M)

FY 2008 - $18.79 ($13.93M)

FY 2009 - $19.17M ($14.43M)

FY 2010 - $19.97M ( $14.89M)

FY 2011 (projected) - $22.20M ($16.60M)

The change in revenues is pretty dramatic between FY 2006 and FY 2008 with the launch of the BTN and the new contracts with ABC/ESPN/CBS.  In FY 2007, the BTN provided $6.13M and the major networks added in about $7.74M.  In FY 2008, the numbers were $6.31M and $8.09M, respectively. 

Has the Big Ten Network been a success?  If you look at the date provided by the Michigan Athletic Department, then the answer is a very solid yes.  The overall conference distribution (which includes television revenue from football and basketball)  will project to more than double between FY 2006 and FY 2011.  Compare the most recent numbers with what Michigan was receiving ten years ago and the difference is even more dramatic.

It will be interesting to see what the athletic department's budget and revenue projections look next year at this time.  With the additon of Nebraska to the conference and a conference championship game, could the FY 2012 projection for Big Ten conference distributions be in the $25M range?   Or will having a 12th member in the conference (and more slices to the pie) moderate the growth somewhat?  We'll know more in a year's time.