?
http://www.foxsports.com/college-fo...onghorn-network-is-all-hat-no-cattle-051115On
The Longhorn Network Is All Hat, No Cattle
Aug. 26, 2011, the Longhorn Network, a joint partnership of Texas and ESPN, launched to equal parts acclaim and controversy. ESPN had inked a 20-year deal that guaranteed Texas $300 million for the newly christened LHN, an average of $15 million a year over the life of the partnership. Texas Longhorn administrators and fans heralded the new network as the product that would make Texas a truly national brand. Sportswriters wrote feverish columns speculating on who the next school to follow in the Longhorn footsteps and launch its own network would be. It was truly a proud day for Longhorn supporters -- the beginning, they believed, of a generation of dominant athletics.
But the rest of the Big 12 eyed the new network apprehensively. Having recently chosen not to join the Pac-10's audacious expansion bid to 16 schools, Texas had driven a high price to remain in the Big 12 -- the Longhorn Network was its prize. While ESPN has received much of the criticism for the LHN's launch, if ESPN hadn't partnered with Texas on the channel then it's likely Fox or Comcast or another major media company would have stepped up to launch the channel. Those other companies may not have paid as much as ESPN, but one thing was certain -- if the Longhorns were staying in the Big 12, Texas was going to have its own network.
So as we near the four-year anniversary of the network's launch, it's worth asking: How's the Longhorn Network doing?
The answer depends on who you ask.
According to SNL Kagan, the Longhorn Network now has 6.5 million in-state subscribers paying an average rate of .29 a month. Based on SNL's numbers, that means in 2015 the Longhorn Network will bring in $22.6 million in revenue from those 6.5 million subscribers in Texas. ESPN doesn't comment on particular revenue numbers for channels, but ESPN says the LHN actually has 20 million subscribers. That's a big difference in subscriber numbers, but when you parse the difference between those subscriber numbers, the revenue isn't much different. That's because, according to SNL Kagan, all of the national subscribers outside the state of Texas -- that's roughly 13.5 million subscribers -- are paying $0.02 a month, or $0.24 a year, for the Longhorn Network. Those 13.5 million subscribers would add just $3.2 million more a year in revenue, meaning after four years the Longhorn Network is still just doing $25.8 million a year in revenue. (Putting that number in a sports TV context, the Longhorn Network is on pace to do less revenue in 20 years than Mayweather-Pacquiao did in one night of pay-per-view boxing.)
Lulz
http://www.foxsports.com/college-fo...onghorn-network-is-all-hat-no-cattle-051115On
The Longhorn Network Is All Hat, No Cattle
Aug. 26, 2011, the Longhorn Network, a joint partnership of Texas and ESPN, launched to equal parts acclaim and controversy. ESPN had inked a 20-year deal that guaranteed Texas $300 million for the newly christened LHN, an average of $15 million a year over the life of the partnership. Texas Longhorn administrators and fans heralded the new network as the product that would make Texas a truly national brand. Sportswriters wrote feverish columns speculating on who the next school to follow in the Longhorn footsteps and launch its own network would be. It was truly a proud day for Longhorn supporters -- the beginning, they believed, of a generation of dominant athletics.
But the rest of the Big 12 eyed the new network apprehensively. Having recently chosen not to join the Pac-10's audacious expansion bid to 16 schools, Texas had driven a high price to remain in the Big 12 -- the Longhorn Network was its prize. While ESPN has received much of the criticism for the LHN's launch, if ESPN hadn't partnered with Texas on the channel then it's likely Fox or Comcast or another major media company would have stepped up to launch the channel. Those other companies may not have paid as much as ESPN, but one thing was certain -- if the Longhorns were staying in the Big 12, Texas was going to have its own network.
So as we near the four-year anniversary of the network's launch, it's worth asking: How's the Longhorn Network doing?
The answer depends on who you ask.
According to SNL Kagan, the Longhorn Network now has 6.5 million in-state subscribers paying an average rate of .29 a month. Based on SNL's numbers, that means in 2015 the Longhorn Network will bring in $22.6 million in revenue from those 6.5 million subscribers in Texas. ESPN doesn't comment on particular revenue numbers for channels, but ESPN says the LHN actually has 20 million subscribers. That's a big difference in subscriber numbers, but when you parse the difference between those subscriber numbers, the revenue isn't much different. That's because, according to SNL Kagan, all of the national subscribers outside the state of Texas -- that's roughly 13.5 million subscribers -- are paying $0.02 a month, or $0.24 a year, for the Longhorn Network. Those 13.5 million subscribers would add just $3.2 million more a year in revenue, meaning after four years the Longhorn Network is still just doing $25.8 million a year in revenue. (Putting that number in a sports TV context, the Longhorn Network is on pace to do less revenue in 20 years than Mayweather-Pacquiao did in one night of pay-per-view boxing.)
Lulz
