Could you be any more condescending? ... NASL has been a different model compared to USL-1... the A-league different from that... why was it called the A-league? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Professional_Soccer_League
How is the business model of these leagues different? I know that different leagues had different franchise fees/capital calls, and that NASL gave owners more control over operations and USL had more league control, but how is their business models different? I don't see how I'm being condescending.
Those numbers, including the expectation to lose half to a full million a year came from the ultimate American Soccer optimist, Mr. Peter Wilt, in a phone discussion a few years ago. I figure he's more knowledgeable on the subject that all other BigSoccer posters. I wish it weren't true, but we know it is. That's why it's so boring to read thread after thread about why "City X should be a contender for MLS/NASL/Whatever". No owner, you're not in contention for shit. Someone has to have the money lose.
Not that you have anything different. You're taking a lot of umbrage at a statement that you can rebut with not a damned thing other than "nuh-uh!" Your words would take on a lot more weight if you could provide a single example, with corroborating evidence, of a team that has not "run at about a 1M a year loss (give or take a few hundred grand)." Until then, your reply is little other than a temper tantrum.
How many years ago? Because my info was from USL-1 and I've spoken with "Mr. Wilt" on the phone as well. Also, if you feel these threads are "so boring," why do you insist on being a boring thread troll?
Previous league info I'd received quoted a different amount based on average attendance of 4500 per game. I assume signing a non-disclosure agreement is supposed to keep others from sharing specifics. But, please... keep on spewing bs... it's what you guys do best...
Yes I think 5K is around the magic number for breaking even (I would imagine travel also makes a difference example LA blues). As of last season very few teams in D2 and D3 averaged 5K or more. Just like Seattle may make many potential MLS owners salivate (and San Antonio for potential NASL owners) teams like them are the exception not the rule.
3, maybe 4, IIRC. Not that it matters so much, the people who can afford to lose a quarter million a year aren't much easier to find that those that can afford to lose a million a year. The people involved in top level professional sports (including soccer), as you know, lose money on the books, and maybe make some, but get their jollies out of the prestige of ownership and a payoff when they sell down the road. Not so much for Division 2 and lower sports, regardless of sport. Shit, if MLB didn't own 95% of AAA/AA/A player contracts, minor league baseball as we know it, would be gone by the end of the year. Why does the wolf hunt?
No, actually YOU and the smarmy little cliques on this site need to get TF over themselves. Thanks for proving my point. Typical.
The league started in fall 2009, when teams split off from USL-1 (and Mr. Marcos, IIRC) to the TOA. 2010 was an "interim" year, and 2011 was really the first full year for the NASL. So, if your info is "3, maybe 4" years old, it hardly can be considered a definitive figure for a league one level below MLS attempting to survive it's first few years in existence. Probably technically correct, but the team losing $250k per year will likely last longer than the minor league team losing $1mil per year... while the franchises losing $50k - $125k per year could write that amount off as "positive publicity" or simply "community relations"..... or they can consider those losses offset by the possibility of one day getting a team in MLS... see Montreal, Portland, Vancouver... and hopefully Indianapolis... Let's say you run a chain of hispanic supermakets or part of your portfolio includes a medical device company with subsidiaries in much of Latin America... or you're a real estate guy... or somebody who would stand to gain a great deal from a successful youth soccer development integrated with the franchise... these advantages don't show on paper. Definitive numbers are elusive and often deceiving ("give or take a few hundred thousand"-- really?). Bob Funk's OKC Blazers of the CHL was part public success story/part civic involvement/part divorce settlement... the Tulsa Talons AFL2 team was chugging along pretty nicely until the league morphed into AFL-1, but the attendance (and corporate sponsor) bump needed to justify higher expenses didn't materialize... ditto for the OKC Yard Dawgz... those organizations were all... well... "job-creators."
No, you sent me unverifiable claims and self-aggrandizing bullshit. That's not the same thing as "information."
http://www.socceramerica.com/articl...es-downtown-soccer-stadium.html?edition=15332 Albuquerque eyes downtown soccer stadium March 24th, 2016 2:26AM
USL sure, but MLS not a chance. I doubt MLS stops at 28, but if they do, they arent getting in. If they go past 28, they will need to include the largest TV markets in hopes of landing a bigger TV contract next time around. Perhaps they could be a MLS affiliate for a Phoenix team.
Being a mile above sea level with low humidity, the summer temperatures are actually more pleasant than in Texas or Kansas City or Washington DC. That being said, I don't see MLS coming here. The best that could be hoped for would be NASL.