Why Is The R&A In A Hurry To Sign A New American TV Partner?

Folks in the TV and advertising world are buzzing over the R&A's desire to sign a new U.S. television partner even though ESPN is obligated to televise the next three Open Championships.

The Worldwide Leader is paying $25 million annually, losing money on the deal and it hasn't been a perfect programming fit (what is when you can rack up a Sportscenter rerun?). 

We are expected to believe the R&A is considering making them a three-year lameduck network by as early as late June, reports Ron Sirak.

Interestingly, the IMG man representing the R&A with the networks, Alistair Johnston, speaks pretty candidly with Sirak as negotiations heat up. That could be construed as desperate by some, adding to the mystery surrounding the sudden rush to lock in that 2018-and-beyond television partner. Despite Johnston's claim this week that Bristol is very much interested, ESPN appears ready to say goodbye. Still, Johnston reveals that the R&A hopes to have a decision by the U.S. Open, and jokes that even if they do reach their conclusion no announcement will be made U.S. Open week as the USGA did during the 2013 PGA.

But why else be in a rush for a sports property that doesn't resonate much in the U.S.? Perhaps trying to beat the English Premier League bidding? Or trying to lock in a new partner before the Fox-USGA deal kicks in an the red ink flows? Or maybe the R&A see the cable model and it's lucrative subscription fees leveling off and hopes to cash in? To grow the game, of course.

Or some combination of all the above?

After touching on the slow ad sales for Fox's USGA package, including lukewarm interest from the USGA's corporate partners, Sirak writes:

Asked if Fox would lose money on the U.S. Open, Johnston said: “That sounds a little bit like stating the obvious, but no one will know until 12 years from now [if they overpaid for the USGA contract]. Fox has been aggressive and conscientious in putting together a golf team.”

The source in the advertising community agreed with that assessment, saying Fox will make its money back through subscription sales of FS1 and FS2 and not through advertising.

“If they can grow FS1 and FS2, they can get that money back,” said the source. “On the surface, Fox is going to lose a lot of money. But if FS1 is building an arsenal, they will easily get that money back on cable fees over time.”