MLS 2014 TV Thread (Ratings, contracts etc)

It is worse. FSC was in way more households. FS2 was FUEL which was almost non-existant. FS2 would be an absolute disaster if it happens.

# of households in millions (as of Aug 2013)
Fox Soccer Channel = 53
FS2 = 38
FS1 = 86
NBC Sports = 78
ESPN = 98
ESPN2 = 98

It appears 98-100 million homes is complete saturation as there aren't any numbers higher than that.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-coverage-estimates-as-of-august-2013/199072/

 

Nor should MLS come back. TV money pays for better players which drives quality which drives tv ratings. No amount of production quality will do the league as much good as hard cash.

 

Well, why not use a chunk of the 300M+ in expansion fees coming to the league over the next few years to bump quality, while also staying on NBCSN with better production, higher ratings and EPL lead-ins, even if the contract is less?

Obviously cash will help the league, it would help anyone or any entity, but it's not like there isn't over a 1/4 billion in cash coming the league's way from NYCFC/Orlando/ATL, and that's not even counting Miami. Could be over 400M in the next 4-5 years alone from those four expansion teams.

Now I don't know how expansion fees are allocated(anyone have info on that?), but it would appear to be quite ridiculous to not use some of that 300-400M to boost quality and instead go to a garbage media outlet in Fox over whatever the difference is in the NBCSN and Fox offers, whether it's 10M or 20M as that's a fraction of the cash which will come to MLS through expansion. Use some of the expansion fees to boost quality/depth and take advantage of everything NBCSN offers which Fox doesn't, as they're superior to Fox in every aspect aside from cash in the rumored deal.

 

The Miami payment from Beckham to MLS would be only $25M, no?

 

This. FS2 isn't even carried on cable in MLS' biggest local ratings market (Seattle.)

 

I think that is a huge leap of faith. We have no proof that significant investment in "quality" will mean much if anything for ratings. I'd put lead in as the #1 driver of ratings right now. Nobody has better right now than NBC for the demo MLS is trying to reach.

What we do know is that we're finally seeing some traction with NBC, and to move now would be a huge downer. To go from NBC where MLS has been treated like a first tier property to Fox, where you're behind baseball, nascar, UFC, and lots of football is not appetizing. I'd go further and say that it's not a good demo fit compared to NBC, who has more skin in the "alternative" sports game. If we go to a 3rd tier network like FS2....holy cow what a step down in every possible metric.

 

Because expansion money goes to the share holders. TV money goes to player salaries. That's the typical pro sports setup. If MLS starts using expansion fees for for salaries that's a slippery road to insolvency.

 

FOX has more than 4 options. MLS games could also be scheduled to be carried (or simulcast) on other channels within the Fox family of (entertainment and/or sports) networks.

Not saying it is likely, but FOX could certainly opt to show MLS (or SUM content) matches on Fox Deportes or FX or FXX or even on the syndication broadcaster MyNetworkTV.

Of those, beyond your initial list of four options, the Fox Deportes (simulcast) seems most likely, with the other cable and syndication options being less likely destinations for MLS/SUM content.

 

Don't forget that there are also investors who aren't owners (Horowitz, for example, was still a MLS investor even after they folded the Fusion). They get paid too.

 

Long term, player quality is what drives ratings. I don't think that there can be much discussion about that.

 

Cultural relevance drives ratings.

(But yes, "player quality" can and will help drive cultural relevance here in the USA/Canada for MLS, at some point.)

 

Not sure if posted, but an Interview with the president of Univision’s sports division.

Talks MLS towards the end of the article.

Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/...co-equally-important.html#Jr1sFkt4CcIxIOO6.99

 

Not necessarily. Depends on what % MLS might consider using. We also don't know whether or not tv money from this deal would go to player salaries. It could, but could also go to paying off debt as has been discussed in the YBTD forum. We know what a typical pro sports setup looks like, and that's not MLS either.

Insolvency is a bit of a scare tactic here. Yeah it could happen by directing too much of the expansion fees to player salaries. But until MLS actually opens its books and becomes more transparent, we don't really know how much of a risk that is.

 

Regardless of Fox's production, I think they do an outstanding job cross promoting their sports. I've seen Champions League commercials during an NFL game, UFC commercials during the World Series, etc. Then they'll show graphics during the telecast promoting upcoming sports telecasts. Plus, they also cross promote a lot on their regional sports networks.

I also like on the FS1 bottom line ticker, they show which network is televising the game even if it's ESPN, NBC, etc.

While the production of NBC has been outstanding, I've never felt they've gone out of their way to promote their MLS telecasts. I've seen more F1 commercials/promotions than MLS.

 

I agree to an extent. I do think improved player quality leads to improved ratings at some point but also think it is quite an assumption that improved player quality if funneling ~2M more to each MLS team from this next tv deal into player salaries will lead to higher tv ratings when the games are likely to be shown on FS1/2. I'm not convinced at all that that's enough of a boost in salaries that ratings will increase when considering all the negatives Fox brings to the table.

More likely IMO that ratings drop if MLS signs a deal with Fox, whether there's improved quality or not and while ~2M per team extra would improve quality, how much it would is another question. It's incredibly hopeful to suggest improved quality will lead to higher ratings on Fox if comparing those ratings to the current NBCSN ratings. I also think the EPL lead-ins are undervalued here. Take away the EPL lead-ins and go to Fox and I think ratings drop a decent amount. A slight boost in quality doesn't negate those negatives and bring in the same ratings. Boost quality a hypothetical 5 or 10% but throw Gus Johnson or Wynalda or Dellecamera in the booth with worse production and I'm likely not watching anywhere near as much as I would on NBCSN, and I know a number of fans feel that way too. I'm not watching NT games either with any of those guys in the booth combined with poor production. I'm watching in Spanish or on a UK stream.

 

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/...rld-Cup-plan-US-Mexico-equally-important.html

This is a really good article on Univision's plans. Lots of MLS stuff at the end.

By the way Univision agrees with me.

 

http://www.socceramerica.com/articl...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer



[SOCCER ON THE AIR] The Portland-Seattle thriller averaged 277,000 viewers on NBCSN, pushing the season average for MLS on NBCSN to 223,000 through Week 5, up 94 percent from last year's average for five games.

The Seattle-Sporting KC game (330,000 viewers) on opening day and Portland-Seattle match have both drawn more fans than any MLS game did on NBCSN in 2013.

There is no MLS game on NBCSN this weekend and just three more until MLS's World Cup break.

MLS on NBCSN: First Five Games (2014)
330,000 Seattle-Sporting KC (March 8)
171,000 Seattle-Toronto FC (March 15)
180,000 Real Salt Lake-LA Galaxy (March 22)
157,000 D.C. United-Chicago (March 29)
277,000 Portland-Seattle (April 5)
Average: 223,000.

MLS on NBCSN: First Five Games (2013)
107,000 Houston-D.C. United (March 2)
79,000 Chicago-New England (March 9)
82,000 Sporting KC-Chicago (March 16)
209,000 Seattle-Portland (March 23)
97,000 D.C. United-Columbus (March 30)
Average: 114,800.

 

Sure, if it's a small percentage and only a temporary measure until a tv deal comes in. Like for instance the "player retention funds" from last year. However, you don't want to do that unless you know you will have funds available in a couple of years. What you don't do is take less money in a TV deal, use most of your expansion money to tide you over until the next deal 4, 5 or 10 years later.

 

That was with no EPL lead in right? So that's a 30%ish increase on last year from the exact same game. Might just be due to Seattle's bigger population since this game was in Portland and the last was in Seattle. Still hard to say with this small sample size. Nonetheless, can't argue with the fact that all this year's games have been all a lot higher than last year's average.

 

Good catch on the Fox Deportes, forgot about their Spanish channel. Seems like MLS is prioritizing promotion, added MLS content, and time slots over other concerns and with a long term deal. This might be the best strategy long term. Fox has used it's family of networks as bargaining chips in the past( pulled FX, National Geographic Channel and 19 regional sports networks from Dish) to increase the rates paid by carriers. So it's just a matter of time befor FS2 is on par with FS1 as far as number of households. The bigger question is after this eight year deal is done, will it still be important for MLS games to be on Sports networks. What benefit does it provide? Does ESPN start pimping MLS like it's other properties or just show the games? Same question for FOX, ratings will determine the outcome. If in eight years ratings improve but not enough to change ESPN and FOX's promotion strategy, maybe moving some games to a non sports channel would be a good option. If all you get from the sports channels is game time, then what is the point of being on a network that bounces the games around on multiple networks and times?

 

Agreed. Long term, it's important for MLS to be a top 8 league in quality. importing the kind of player available to MLS right now isn't going to achieve enough in ratings to justify the investment. It's general improvement in the American/Concacaf player pool that will bring the quality up.

Foreign high profile quality should be viewed as the gravy, not the potatoes.