News Corp Buys 49% of YES Network

Submitted by Gameboy on November 20th, 2012 at 9:17 PM

I was wrong.

I thought Maryland (and DC/Baltimore Market) was the main target and Rutgers was the add in. It was the other way around.…

With Rutgers as the token local team, News Corp can offer YES Network as a bundle deal (with BTN, which News Corp also owns 49%) only. This pretty much guarantees that BTN will be part of the expanded basic cable in NY/NJ area. The added revenue from this deal will more than pay for Rutgers joining the conference.

The deal finalized today, and no, the timing is not by coincidence.

The thought of Delany working hand in hand with Murdoch does creep me out a bit...



November 20th, 2012 at 10:29 PM ^

In the short-term, yes. But, just as Brian said, the way people consume TV is changing and will continue to change. The parallels to newspapers are obvious. I didn't have a TV the last 2 years I lived in America, nor for the last 2 years abroad because I don't need to. I only care about .5% of the programming on TV and I can watch that easily enough via the internet. Some of it I pay for, some of it I simply can't so I download it (the idiots in charge prefer to stay in their old ways instead of getting some money that I actually tried to find a way to give them out of fairness), and some of it I simply don't. One that I pay for is the Big Ten international package.  And if they were to raise those rates because of more content like Maryland lacrosse, they can kiss my subscription goodbye.


November 21st, 2012 at 9:20 AM ^

Would you prefer the BigTen be reactive and be left in shambles like the ACC and the BigEast?  Delaney has done a heck of a job keeping the BigTen ahead of the curve even among it's worst time of on the field performance.  He is positioning the league to remain relevant as others fail.  I understand tradition but that would go away as well if the league didnt make moves to protect itself and help secure it's future.  


November 20th, 2012 at 9:39 PM ^

They have a significant financial advantage, now it is time to use that within the rules to create a competitive advantage. Key words within the rules, no SEC funny business.

My name ... is Tim

November 20th, 2012 at 11:41 PM ^

I think you underestimate how much more eyeballs 140 something Yankees games get in the NY/NJ/CT area versus say, 2 Rutgers games and a bunch of other games that casual NY/NJ/CT college football fans are likely not interested in. I am a New Jersey local (grew up here as well) and believe me, the two aren't comparable. Also, BTN is already on the basic cable packages in NJ at least of all but one of the providers. I'm just not sure that the increase in revenue will be as enormous in this area as predicted.

Stephen Y

November 20th, 2012 at 10:28 PM ^

I know we are supposed to keep religion and politics out of this blog, but dude... I'm beginning to suspect that Jim Delaney is the anti-Christ, and his new world order proves it.


November 20th, 2012 at 11:00 PM ^

The crazy thing is now, just about any two east coast schools with resources to be competitive in 2 of either basketball, football or hockey make this expansion insanely well worth it.

Georgetown, UConn, Syracuse, Boston College, Duke, UNC, Virginia, VaTech, Georgia Tech, FSU, Clemson.

Any two of those will provide fair enough B1G scheduling in the 3 major sports to increase cable revenues drastically. I think the discussion for mgoblog should be which two do we prefer. My hat is in the ring for a UNC/Duke package deal.

From a markets standpoint following Maryland/Rutgers, UConn and Boston College would be a fair play. But so is Syracuse/Pitt. FSU/Clemson would be an unexpected BCS coup, considering eastern expansion sets the stage for 2 basketball, not football, schools.

Then again, the state of Virginia is ripe and a solid bet assuming the DC market will eat it up along with Maryland.

Then again, what do we make of Maryland? They had long existing rivalries worth preserving in the state of North Carolina. Can the B1G preserve them? We certainly have the most lucrative appeal, these days.

So many directions Delaney can go and still hit a bullseye no matter what. Rutgers sets up the market, Maryland sets a stage for interesting match ups and regional allegiances within the new B1G footprint, and we can only wait with bated breath for the two Crown Jewels to arrive of this B1G eastern expansion.

Michigan Arrogance

November 20th, 2012 at 11:22 PM ^

I'm starting to think that the end game is 18 or 20-


UConn, Cuse, UVa, VaTech, Duke, UNC are the 6 to go for. Maybe NC St.


UNC, Duke Get the Cakalackies and of course have national (and VERY strong Eastern appeal)

UVa & VT get Verginny

Cuse & Uconn lock up the Eastern market, brings in the Conn population, solidifies the NYC market.

Even if we get 4 of those 6, that's your market footprint. Then you have the East and West divisions that are something like

M, MSU, OSU, Minn, NW, NU, W, PU, IU, Iowa

PSU, Mary, RU, UConn, Cuse, UVa, VaTech, Duke, UNC


Play 8-9 in your division +1-3 in the other, expand to 13 reg season games + Conf title + playoff.

the ACC could be viable with ND and Uconn, but I could see FSU & Clemson bailing for the SEC, even VaTech and NC St. I know UNC and Duke and to a lesser extent UVa may be stubborn about hoops and controlling their tradition, but the ACC could be in big trouble without FSU, VT, NCSt. I think ACC stability will determine the outcome, much like the B12 did 2 years ago. Will the ACC keep enough schools and be willing to pick up some smaller ones? or will they crumble completely?




November 20th, 2012 at 11:07 PM ^

The Feds should anti-trust the fuck out of any attempt to hold Yankees fans hostage until cable companies pick up BTN. I doubt it gets past regulators to begin with.

Ed Shuttlesworth

November 21st, 2012 at 8:39 AM ^

Same key, different notes of the "bundling strategy."  The natural value of the BTN/YES bundle is the value of BTN plus the value of YES.  Whatever extra price you can extract from the two bundled is temporary and destined to disappear.

Coaches, observers, fans, administrators, ADs -- all of them -- have seen "unfulfilled potential" in Maryland and Rutgers for years, primarily because of their proximity to major metropolitan areas filled with talent and potential fans.  This is nothing new, and that "unfulfilled potential" is not going to be recognized in this deal, either.  Those programs are what they are, which isn't much.

Ed Shuttlesworth

November 21st, 2012 at 9:26 AM ^

The danger of the Big Ten being left in shambles is and always has been ... zero.  The ACC and Big East are in shambles because interest in college football in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic is far below interest in college football in the Midwest.