It’s no secret that television rights are the cash crop for sports. If you are not convinced, check out the revenue being pulled in by the NFL or NCAA from it’s television partners. The NY Times recently reported that the YES network is being valued at 3 billion dollars. That is 2.5x the valuation that Forbes has placed on the Yankees franchise. All of a sudden, the Yankees are a media empire that happens to have a baseball team. The Sports Industry has taken notice. Just about every conceivable sports entity from the NFL to the Mountain West Conference to the Ski Channel have created a television network. Now they want the cable operators to pay them a hefty subscription fee to widely carry their networks on their basic packages. For the most part, cable companies aren’t budging unless they own an equity stake in the networks. Hence, we have a good old Mexican standoff. The opening keynote panel on “understanding tomorrow’s sports media consumer” was laced with so much double talk and posturing I thought a presidential debate was about to break out.

On the road to ubiquitous sports coverage and super serving the sports fan, there certainly seems to be a few fumbles, interceptions and technical fouls. Sports fans are often a primary driver for penetration of new technologies such as online video and mobile data devices. When Sling Media Co-Founder and CEO Blake Krikorian was asked what Sports can learn from the entertainment industry, he actually flipped the question and said that sports is way ahead of the curve in adopting new technologies and understanding their customers. At the same time, the NFL has limited it’s out of market package exclusively to one channel and it’s damn near impossible to watch a Thursday night game on the NFL network. After years of having no problem watching my alma mater, Michigan, play football on television in NYC, I now have to scramble to find bars that carry the Big Ten Network. What happened to that “any place, any time, anyway…power to the consumer” chant that media executives used to throw around like it was the next verse of take me out to the ballgame?

There certainly are some exciting events on the digital side of sports that were debated during the conference. A panel on online networking communities discussed the new and interesting ways that fans are conversing with each other through new online platforms and tools. My favorite panel was on the impact of the blogosphere. Will Leitch (Deadspin) and Henry Abbott (TrueHoop) didn’t mince words in explaining what’s happening in sports journalism and how the power is shifting to the fan. The faster that big media admits they have lost control the better they’ll figure out how to adapt to the new landscape. They engaged in a great conversation with Chris LaPlaca, a twenty-seven year veteran of ESPN and a Senior VP, Communications. Mr. LaPlaca seemed nervous of the changing landscape, excited by the new opportunities, and eager to learn from the little guys. It was awesome to see a senior executive at ESPN taking notes from upstart bloggers. That’s the kind of stuff that made this conference worthwhile.

The conference also featured extensive fantasy sports coverage with multiple panels devoted to the thriving industry. It’s hard to be a sports fan these days without sinking your time, life and money into fantasy sports. It’s an ideal online application for media companies and advertisers as it is highly engaging, sticky content and incites so much (maybe even too much) passion. The Fantasy Sports Association released research that over 11 million people are playing fantasy football and millions more participate in fantasy baseball, basketball, NASCAR and golf. While fantasy has been dominated by the big three (Yahoo, ESPN, CBS Sports), a burgeoning crop of upstart companies are entering the space to create new applications, support existing games with content and statistics, or making a play to aggregate the industry and create new advertising opportunities.

Many interesting NYC based sports start-ups were represented at the conference including Takkle, Fantasy Sports Ventures, Sportsvite and Sports Technologies. New York City is the ideal location for a digital sports start-up. With access to sports media companies, major advertisers and the top sports market in the world, conditions are ripe for innovation, new products and to leverage market opportunities. It will be interesting to see how these companies capitalize in the space.

Unlike music and entertainment, the sports industry is still living off the fat (think of Oliver Miller) of traditional media. With the importance of live viewing (no DVR), the penetration of HD, strong ratings and a passionate consumer base the future for sports media is very healthy. Hopefully, the sports world will push forward with digital and technological innovation and continue to allow me, as a fan, to enjoy my sports experience in new and exciting ways.

After a few days of feeling out the features and getting her bearings (why would you poke somebody?) she is now a believer. She even bragged to me the other day about how many friends she has on Facebook!

This got me thinking some more about Facebook. I do this a lot. Just ask my younger sister. I’ve interrogated her and her friends for years their obsession and addiction to Facebook. She was a Freshman in college when Facebook hit the scene. I had my own college basketball website at the time so she was quick to show me how this new website worked. I watched from a far as it spread from college to college. In the fall of 2005 I was part of a team at CSTV that was close to working out a deal to become only the second sponsored group ever on Facebook (after Apple). I also signed up for an account by dusting off my college e-mail address but felt like an outsider from the start. Afterall, I left the friendly confines of Ann Arbor in 2003 (1 year BF – Before Facebook). Finally, as Facebook opened it service I’ve seen my friends, colleagues and business associates pop up with profiles.

Miraculously, everybody seems to love Facebook. College students are as engaged as ever. Those who were introduced to Facebook in college may have graduated but their love and use of Facebook remains. The TechCrunch minions never have a negative thing to say. Developers have flocked to the open API. I recently attended a Facebook Hackathon in NYC and the feeling in the room was unanimously bullish that Facebook was a perfect platform to build upon. Web 2.0 businesses see their Facebook strategy as the key to growth and success. A ten billion dollar valuation has been brandied about and many believe that Facebook’s successful and lucrative exit will be via an IPO.

I don’t see it. I don’t get the fascination. Might Facebook be overrated and overvalued? I’ll try to explain myself. But first I do want to put a disclaimer on my argument. As I mentioned, I had already graduated college when Facebook popped up. I didn’t have the opportunity to fall in love with the service like most college kids. Perhaps it’s like learning a second language. No matter how good you get you still wonder if you understand and appreciate the language as well as a native speaker. I’m still relatively young in the professional world and have been privileged enough to be square in the middle of the Napster/AIM/Blogs/Text Message/RSS/Friendster-MySpace-Social Networking scene. I’m confident and knowledgeable when discussing any of these mediums or applications from my natural experiences using them. I’ve become great at rolling my eyes and snickering at media executives who struggle to comprehend the digital world. The same can’t be said for Facebook. For example, I was explaining the new Sportsvite Facebook Application to my sister and her friend. They’re not into these applications to begin with (other than the “cool ones” like graffiti) but they flat out laughed at me when I said the phrase “facebook app”. They told me that sounded weird and dorky and nobody calls them “apps”. This I didn’t know. By the way, I’m still not sure if it is cute or sketchy to poke somebody? G-d forbid I get labeled a “stalker”!

Those who used Facebook in college use it as a way to keep track of their social life. It’s like Outlook for your friends. You can keep tabs on what the people around you are doing. Since your Facebook scene mirrors your college life it’s actually a pretty useful way to follow the scene on campus. It’s not about self-expression like MySpace. The majority of college students I know don’t fill out their profile details and until recently there was very little ability to customize a profile. I always thought that Facebook would be a great place to rate professors, trade textbooks, and create a campus marketplace. But that idea teeters too close to the concept of work and Facebook is fun. Kids will click on over to eBay or Craigslist if they have to take care of errands. You go on Facebook to see when, where and with whom you friends are hanging out. It’s perfect if you have a large group of friends and are really interested in how they are spending their time. Hence, it’s magical in the college environment (also would be remiss not to include high school here).

My big sister signed up for Facebook after returning from a group trip to Israel. She joined because everybody on her trip was on it. It was a convenient way for her to stay in touch. It doesn’t hurt that she can also dig up info on old acquaintances from high school and college and maybe even find a few cute gentlemen in her scene. In many ways this scenario is very similar to college. Add to that the novelty of Facebook and it makes sense why she digs it.

Adults (defined here as people who didn’t use Facebook in college) seem to missing the point. They want Facebook to be everything and do everything and think it’s the answer for everything. Yet, most adults are doing the same pointless things on Facebook that they did on Friendster and MySpace. They try to get as many friends as possible and try to fill out their profile as much as possible. It doesn’t seem like Facebook allows adults to better integrate their digital profiles with their real life. In fact, most adults seem to be trying to copy the college crowd yet they don’t even use the site to organize their social life (the reason it is so popular with college kids). This makes sense as adults are often married or in serious relationships and are also more career focused and thus their social life takes somewhat of a back seat. Facebook hasn’t proven to be especially successful at making business connections (LinkedIn), meeting new people (your favorite dating site), as a great form of self expression (MySpace or personal blog), catalyst for debates (message boards) or enabling real life opportunities (MeetUp, Job Site). So I’m having a hard time understanding how it is that much better and sustaining than Friendster, MySpace or any other social network. I hope it’s more than just cleaner CSS code!

Maybe Facebook is the social network where the masses will congregate and settle. Maybe the open API makes it a platform and an aggregator of people’s online data. But can’t Facebook just as easily be the hot place to park your digital profile and grab your time and attention for a quick minute? It’s amazing how MySpace’s flash of popularity lasted less than a year. I haven’t received one non-spam/porn MySpace request in the last four months. Furthermore, I’m now receiving Facebook friend invites from the same people who sent me Friendster friend invites three years ago and MySpace invites last year. Who knows what the cool site will be next year?

So there you have it. Facebook is a perfect platform to help high school and college kids figure out their social lives in college and continues into those fun, social years immediately after college. In terms of being a platform that will rule the web and should be worth billions? Well, I guess you can call me old and out of touch and tell me that when it comes to the digital world I just don’t “get it”.

A few months ago I decided I wanted to organize an event around sports and digital media. I enjoyed speaking to members of nextNY but I rarely had the opportunity to discuss the sports industry. I’ve also attended sports conference but never seem to get my fill of digital media. So the premise would be to hold an event that was dedicated to the convergence of technology, media and sports. More specifically, I wanted to focus on how digital media is changing the business and fan experience of sports through innovation, new distribution channels, enhanced broadband, and digital communities.

I got the ball rolling by floating out an email on the nextNY google group (a great resource to stay abreast of the NYC digital scene). The response was favorable and there seemed to be enough interest to hold an event. I received some great advice and tips from nextNY founder and event expert Charlie. Basically, I needed to secure a date, a venue, speakers and attendees. Charlie also recommended I follow the community conversation format that is used at most nextNY events. About six conversation leaders are dispersed throughout the crowd but there are no tiers. Everyone is part of the audience and everyone can participate. The event relies on audience participation, questions, etc. to move things along.

The most difficult aspect was securing a location. It’s tough to find a spot in NYC to hold 60 people. Luckily, my friend Marc is a lawyer at Weil Gotshal and was eager to participate in the event. He navigated through law firm bureaucracy to secure a pretty nifty conference room on the 24th floor of their offices in the GM Building. After a bit of haggling Marc even made sure refreshments and beverages were served.

Inviting people to speak was actually one of the easier tasks. With the help of a bunch of Nexters I sent out invites to 10-12 speakers. Although many people declined it seemed that everybody was flattered when asked to participate. This is also a great excuse to contact executives in your industry that you are interested in meeting. Up until the very last day I was rotating speakers in and out, but there always seemed an ample supply of qualified conversation leaders.

Getting people to attend the event was not a problem. Between nextNY, networking through my sports contacts and some nice coverage from Silicon Alley Insider we easily reached the maximum of 50 guests. Most of the crowd had not previously attended a nextNY event so it was great to recruit some new members and hopefully add a sports influence to the group.

The actual nextSports event was great. The conversation was interesting and the balance between the conversation leaders and the participants was perfect. I managed not to butcher the introductions and must have done an adequate job playing moderator because everybody seemed to get right into the swing of things. At some point during the event, as I scanned the room and saw over 50 engaged and interested faces, I realize that this was going super well! Afterwards a few people mentioned how passionate everybody in the room is about the issues and the industry. That’s nice to hear.

After the conversation ended people stuck around for over one half hour to network and chat. I was a bit overwhelmed as a group of people rushed up to speak with me. I’m usually the pushy guy who jumps out of nowhere to attack an important executive. Everybody I spoke with had kind words and seemed to have enjoyed and appreciated the event. My lunch hour is booked up for the next few weeks and I was invited to a few more networking events.

Big thanks to Marc Rosen and Weil Gotschal for providing a great venue. Thanks to Ken, Dan, Mike, Ed and Charlie for helping organize the event and securing speakers. Also want to again thank all of our conversation leaders. They were very compelling and set great examples for many of the young professionals in the room.

So, as Charlie often points out, it’s not all that hard to plan a nextNY event and the reward is well worth it. I’ve been asked a few times if I’m going to plan another event. It’s a loaded question. I’m not trying to get into the conference business. But you can bet that I plan to continue to help stimulate interesting conversation within my industry, connect people and listen and learn from executives. Please get in touch if you would like to do something similar.

I was especially excited to learn how the leading executives in sports media plan to utilize the innovative technology and trends in digital media to enhance their products and brands and create cutting-edge sponsorship solutions for their corporate partners. I’m a firm believer that sports are a perfect platform for the convergence of media and technology. The live aspect of sports combined with a passionate consumer base makes sports a catalyst to change consumer behaviors and drive innovation in media. In addition, two recent web 2.0 success stories have come from the sports realm as both fannation and maxpreps were acquired by major sports media companies for hefty eight figure acquisition prices.

I came away with mixed feeling on how innovative the sports world is in regard to new media progress. Part of this is because the sports industry is thriving in many facets all across the globe. Traditional media and attendance numbers are at an all-time high and corporate advertisers are flooding the market with dollars. Unlike other media industries, most people in sports seem to be doing ok. Therefore, there is less of an urgency to innovate and to try and figure out the future of sports. Combine that with the fact that the sports industry is a close-knit fraternal bunch that is somewhat weary of outsiders and it becomes even harder to crack the shell.

The major media issues at the conference surrounded MLB’s pending Extra Innings package with DirecTV in which all MSO’s would be shut out from carrying the out-of-market subscription package. MLB also restricts web site the right to provide fantasy baseball. Closed off distribution? Limiting access? Doesn’t sound like the future of media. But the Extra Innings package is a $700 million deal. It’s a bit tougher to experiment with new media when you are throwing around those kinds of numbers.

Executive used the words Facebook and Myspace like they were enigmas and fads that were too dicey to embrace. ESPN exec John Skipper stated that “We are a content company trying to figure out how to deal with a generation who doesn’t understand what they’re putting up [on the Internet].” Many do see the value though as sports executive Dave Checketts (former President of MSG) believes that social networking is the language of a new America. Overall, I get the sense that many sports executives are deathly afraid of user-generated content. After all, there brands and relationships are too valuable to jeopardize with experiments on social networks.

There was a panel dedicated to digital media called “Digital media: content, distribution and the business models that make sense.” I was pumped to hear some of the experts dissect the industry but thought most of the conversation to be lackluster. All the panelists admitted competition is stiff and that they must innovate to survive. It seems like they are trying new things more as a defensive tactic than an offensive maneuver. All parties were very conservative in regard to digital rights (for good reason as that is a main revenue source in sports media) leaving the Google representative squirming a bit uncomfortably. Finally, there were gripes about traffic reporting and indifference to digital sponsorship opportunities. It was almost as though the panelists could have been having a conversation about the television space.
I still believe that sports will be a driver of new media in the future but it might not happen as fast as I would like or expect. Unlike publishing, and news and entertainment media, sports is thriving in traditional media. Motivations and dollars are still flowing from television, event sponsorship, franchise ownership and event operations. I’m pretty sure that digital media will grow. Actually, it must grow for sports to remain on top.
For a full recap of all the panels and to get a great recap of the conference check out the Sports Business Journal All-Access Blog.