Well once you "catch the bug" with something, it can be really hard to let go.. Very quickly I'll tell you that I worked for a Formula 1 team for years and after it was over it took me about 4-5 years to move on 100% from the sport.. People in soccer are no different.. they think they can be the one to make it work, and they want it so badly that they throw their money on the table and give it a go.. And therein lies the problem.. they're usually soccer people and not business people, as we've all said and heard before.. the main problem they have is that they believe they're running a soccer team and not an entertainment business, and then before they know it they're screwed. You're right about the lack of support, but that's because owners often worry more about hiring a coach and recruiting players than building support.. but it's not that there isn't potential support, it's that they put too little focus on building it.. Everyone on here laughs at the Dayton Dutch Lions FC because of their miserable performance in USL Pro in 2011. But what few people see is that the team is totally focused on building their economic base: their Youth Academy. I'm not saying they don't care about their USL Pro team but it's a secondary concern to that group. In year 1 their Academy had 7 teams and in year 2 it had 18. If 18 teams have an average of 14 players, and each player pays $1,500/year (this is what the DDL charged in 2011) then that is $378,000 in revenue. Not to mention I happen to know what their revenue was from certain key sponsors.. so I'd frankly state that the Dutch Lions were absolutely in the Top 10 in the entire USL in revenue and most likely top 5.. My point is that there's different ways to go out and build support for your team.. but that if your main concern as an owner is to win USL games then you're destined to fail.. if you spend your time instead focusing on revenue generation and the game day experience then you'll be much better off in the long run.. I'm not saying everyone needs to operate a full-fledged academy, but at least the Dutch Lions are more worried about making money than they obviously were about USL wins.. I'd personally like to see the team put more emphasis on their USL Pro team this year, and I know for a fact they want to do better in all areas there, but to tell the truth I'd rather see them continue to build the core of their business again in 2012 and worry about the pro team next year or the year after that..
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. Ah, you're pleasantly surprised, not incredulous that someone wouldn't see the value in giving this a shot. I gotcha. Look at the trends over time: Where there once was a huge disparity between the number of pro teams and the number of amateur teams (favor the pro teams, which outnumbered amateurs 79-33 in 1998), the shift over time has been towards the PDL. Last year was the first year since 2001 that the "advantage" PDL teams enjoyed actually shrank (from +34 to +26). If (as rumored), USL Pro has 11 teams in 2012 and PDL has about 65, the advantage will rise slightly, but the number of pro teams will remain at 38 (highest since 2004, when it was also 38) because Montreal's move to MLS and replacement by San Antonio offsets New York's rumored drop. Only a handful of things could be causing this: Investors (and potential investors) are finally realizing it's a fool's errand most of the time USL is actually not trying to force the issue I can't think of a third reason USL had 100 total teams in 1998. It should be right around 75 or 76 this year, with around 84% or so of its total teams at the PDL level (in 1997, it was just under 33% - two-thirds of USL's teams were professional at one level or another). Obviously, opting out of 2nd division land had some impact on that, but the trend was heading that direction every single year even prior to the split with the TOA. Maybe - just maybe - people on both ends of the equation are wising up.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. This is not the time or kind of economy to start an NASL or USL Pro team from scratch and play this year. Moving up from PDL is just as bad and can actually ruin what might otherwise be a viable PDL program. NASL and USL Pro clubs cost far more than most people realize, the competition is better than many think and it's difficult to sustain adequate fan support to even approach being profitable. I estimate a new club in NASL or USL Pro needs to expect 3-5 years of losses if not done properly. Budgets can be from $1-3 million per annum. Players command more money and teams look to upgrade players every season so the cost is driven up as more internationals come on board.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. $1 to $3 million per year? For a USL Pro team? Maybe if you paid the full USL Pro franchise price.. and if you were stupid enough to do that then you probably weren't smart enough to make that kind of money in the first place to buy the team any way.. Taking out the franchise fee, there is no way you would need $1,000,000 to operate a USL Pro team.. let alone $2 million or $3 million..
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. All I know is this...in 1999, the Minnesota Thunder had an operating budget of $1M. That was at the D2 level (with more travel), but that was 12 years ago. I don't think you would need to spend $2-$3M on a D3 team in 2012 unless you were just paying silly money to players (Orlando still had legacy second division contracts from Austin in 2011, don't know if they'll adjust things in 2012 or not). The entire point of USL Pro was to make costs more manageable, and your two biggest line items are salaries and travel (salaries would include front office as well as players, and the payroll taxes and workman's comp that go along with those). Most D3 teams don't have the robust front offices that even some A-League teams used to have and they're surely not breaking the bank on players. And with the exception of the trips to LA (and, again, it's demand, not distance, that drives the cost of most air travel), a lot of your travel is far more economical than it was in D2. But even in USL Pro, there's a disparity between budgets (as there was in the A-League, as there's almost always going to be in lower-level soccer). Rochester is spending far, far more than Pittsburgh. You'd probably have to put Orlando and Rochester in the very top tier. LA probably spent a bunch (between travel and their player costs, which weren't insignificant). Charleston was likely in the upper half because they actually have a staff, but they're probably not spending $400,000 on players like I was told they did back in the late 1990s. Wilmington does things right, I would imagine they spend more than the bottom tier. And you could likely lump FCNY (just because everything's more expensive there), Richmond, Antigua, Harrisburg, Dayton, Charlotte and Pittsburgh into a group and not have a whole lot of difference between their budgets. But this is more expensive than you think. Unless a newbie has prior experience with this that is not in evidence, I wouldn't be quite so quick to discount how expensive this can be. So, I wouldn't say "no way," I'd say you don't have to if you don't want to, but the five teams I put into the upper-half category all had success on the field. Charlotte probably gets the most bang for its buck - they're an amazing organization, to get what they get out of being as thrifty as they are. Harrisburg would probably be right behind them in that regard. But if you want to actually have success, and not be a Dayton/NY/Antigua situation, you're going to have to spend a bit more most of the time. And I could see you getting into the mid to high six figures, if not more, to get that done. And here's usually where someone does back-of-the-envelope calculations that are always too low. Because they've never handled an actual team budget before.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. I don't have to tell you that things change so much from year to year in minor league sports that anything which happened in 1999 is largely not applicable today. I obviously agree with you that you'll be well in to the six figures in USL Pro.. and we agree that you COULD go over $1,000,000 if you wanted to.. I've handled several pro team budgets. I've seen a team budget $xx,000 for "miscellaneous" and I told the team president he needed to fight for an amount at least four times that high with the owners to pay for stuff.. Because it's always something.. and if it's not something, it's something else.. And sure enough they weren't even through the off-season and the misc portion had been spent.. The number one "back of the envelope" mistake you can make is to assume you'll reach certain levels in sponsorship revenue.. because you won't.. The number two "back of the envelope" mistake you can make is to assume people will want to fork over cash to you early in to your existence.. I've seen a team owner launch a new team, hold his press conference to introduce the team (and the coach) to the fans and media.. and then he wanted to be in the office first thing in the morning because he felt since it was on TV the night before that his phone would be ringing with companies wanting to partner, and with people wanting to buy tickets.. all he got was emails from people wanting jobs, people wanting to sell him stuff, and a few potential players asking how to reach the coach.. The number three "back of the envelope" mistake you can make is to assume that venues really, really want you there so you can play there for cheap.. They do want you, but at a premium price for them.. they're not going to give you a big cut of concessions or let you play there for just a token amount of money because they're glad the stadium won't be "dark" for 10 to 12 days.. Anyway those are my top 3.. obviously I could go on but I invite you (or anyone) to add to the list!
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. If only I had thought to add that disclaimer. Oh, wait, I did. It was to give a frame of reference. It was 12 years ago, and Minnesota was not at the top of the budget for D2, but they were at a million. The passage of time has raised the prices of many things you need to have, but have also resulted in teams cutting back on some of those items. Point being, a D2 team these days could easily spend a million. I didn't say spend it well, but it could be easily spent. D3 you'd be at the high end. But it could be done. In terms of revenue, yes. People always figure they're going to do $x dollars, but you won't. You'll get a lot in kind that you thought you'd get cash for, but this product simply doesn't make people say "Where do I sign?" And most people who don't have the experience and patience to close a big deal think a ton of little deals aren't worth their time. But little deals are all you can hope for, at least at first. Exactly. I love teams that put "Be a sponsor!" links on their websites, too. As if companies with money have someone surfing and looking for those opportunities. "Hey, we're better than having another home decorating show or something!" No, you're really not. Not to them. A pro sports franchise is nice to have as a tenant if it's not too big a pain in the ass, but nowadays, most that aren't bringing a track record with them are a pain in the ass. Plus, over time, many of the old municipal arenas have been phased out and torn down to be replaced by buildings that aren't going to be cheap and don't have to give you the time of day. If you want to play on Tuesday nights, they'll be happy to accommodate you, but that's not going to do you much good. Or, you could play at a high school field somewhere with permanent football lines. Your choice. Coaches who try to convince the powers that be that they can get this guy for just a couple thousand more, that's all it will be. It ends up being several thousand more, usually, and the guy doesn't produce. Visas and other expenses just to get international players to you. And they're not always as good as advertised. Thinking "local players" will bring fans in, when my experience has been "local players" have "local friends" who figure that because they're friends/former teammates/former coaches/family of the "local players," they should be entitled to what we call "free tickets," and if they don't get them, they won't come. Thinking of ticket sales people as an expense that you can't afford. "Why should I pay these people $X?" Well, because they generate the revenue you need to stay in business, genius. Unless there's some massive TV deal out there I'm not aware of. Ditto for marketing budgets. You can't cut through the clutter and stand out without a variety of professional ads in a variety of mediums. You can't just spend $25,000 on billboards and sit and wait for the phone to ring. It doesn't work that way. And even if you do spend and have a major ad campaign, it takes time to work, and it only works well if you follow up on it and not just sit and wait for the phones to ring. And when they don't see an immediate return, the phones ringing immediately, they slash that line item. And things go from bad to worse. Nearly every team owner I've ever been around has panicked when the place didn't sell out on opening night (or when game two had 1/3 the crowd of game one). Hey, this is how it works. You want 5,000 people there? Better pre-sell 4,000 or more. Those are just a few.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. If only *I* had thought to add a disclaimer of "I don't have to tell you ..." Oh, wait, *I* did. When I read this I immediately knew that this actually should have been number 1 on my list.. great point.. Ah yes, good times.. Come on people.. join in the fun and add your own to these lists!
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. I do too. My experience says - you guys have hit the nails on a lot of heads. I think in my years I had two sponsors call me first and say they had "X" to spend. two. I must have called or contacted a several hundred, maybe a 1,000 and although my numbers were pretty good, they surely weren't great.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. TWO? Wow! I had one. I took over an account and the business owner said "hey I really want to support this team. In fact, I was the one who called the team last year and ..." I don't remember the rest of what he said because I fell out of my chair. (kidding) But come on! Add to the list! Current and potential team owners will read this.. you'll be doing front office staffs around the world a huge favor..
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. Other things people do wrong: Expecting not just to get extensive media coverage, but expecting that to drive ticket sales in a meaningful way. And then raking the media relations person over the coals when the team gets what the owner doesn't consider to be sufficient coverage* or when it doesn't result in a sellout for the next game. Using a good promotion on a bad date to try to make a bad date into a mediocre or decent date rather than using that promotion to make a really good date into a potentially great date or a potentially great date into an awesome date. Doing things to goose walk-up customers, when walk-up customers are the single worst type of customer you can have. Thinking that a great sponsorship transaction happens when the sponsor gives you money and you put their logo somewhere and that's that, rather than using the sponsor's money to really create something special that will associate the sponsor with the experience in the mind of the potential customer. Thinking that if a competitive team draws x number of fans, that if you spend exponentially more on players and create the best team, you'll draw exponentially more fans. Not realizing that your likely front office payroll budget isn't going to get you a lot of superstars and that you're going to either have to get lucky with some people overachieving or live with the fact that some people are going to wash out and you're going to have to replace them early on. And now we've gotten way off the original topic, for which I apologize to the mods, but Jeff started it. While I have no inside info, it looks like there's no expansion of USL Pro for 2012 and 2013 and beyond is just speculation. *Which is usually defined as "what you can reasonably expect" x 10
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. All good stuff that was being discussed. Maybe I'll start the "misconseptions on running a minor league soccer team" that I've been thinking of starting. One of my items to add to the list is the mistaken belief that if you give away tickets that will encourage people to buy in the future. All it does is create the expectation that they can get free tickets. My first job in the business was in ticket sales. I went along to clinic to the team was giving to a new soccer club we were working with. I was trying to get some contacts for groups and they were even letting me sell individual tickets to an upcomong game. About an hour in the clinic, the GM came up to me and took all the tickets and promptly gave them away. I gave out a bunch of business cards and group orders for the upcoming game. Then I did get some calls from coaches that they thought they could get free tickets because we had given away tickets to the same game. Fun stuff. And to keep this on track with the thread. Still doesn't look like there will be any expansion this year.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. Ooooh, forgot that one. Too many people think "If you give them a ticket one time, the next time they'll pay for it." Only they don't. The next time they look for a free ticket. And they don't buy any going forward. They just don't go. I know we all then hear the anecdote about "That's how I got turned onto it and now I'm a die-hard fan and go to every game" and blah blah blah or they tell you about their friend or how they personally turned three people onto it. It's a bad strategy. It effectively sets the value of your ticket at $0. What you want is people who have become convinced of the value of your product to the point where they are willing to spend discretionary income on it and to make the necessary time commitment. You're wasting time and poisoning the well if you give scads of tickets away. On that note, Washington Capitals/Bullets owner Ted Leonsis touched on this over a year ago on Bill Simmons' podcast:
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. I know, the best part is I can still remember the people who called. 1) Soccer store in town called because I was their rep for Diadora when I left to go back to the team. They loved me and called me right away. 2) Was a guy who did business with the city, the city owned the team, he wanted to keep his business going.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. Not to beat a dead horse: a $million budget is not out of the question, even for a small-budget USL-Pro team team. Pay 24 guys of varying levels of experience a salary of $16,000 per year. That's $384,000. Add coach for $40,000 and assistant for $30,000. That's rockbottom annual payroll of $450,000 per year excluding transfer fees, visas, agents etc. A talented team like Orlando or perhaps Rochester could easily surpass a million budget with higher salaries, especially with Orlando's travel cost and stadium rent. I wouldn't be surprised if Orlando is in the range of $2mill. Rochester and Charleston saw what the investment was going to be long-term in the NASL and opted to move back down to USL-Pro and a smaller budget business model. Teams cut corners by signing guys to one year deals then releasing them as soon as season is over. Guys who sign multiyear deals either get full salary or get a payoff when released after season. It saves money but not a way to build continuity and a successful team. Add living costs - most teams put players up in houses during the season at little or no cost to them. There's per diems when traveling and travel can be quite hefty, even by bus! If players stay under contract they usually coach and run clinics for their pay and this actually MAKES money for most clubs if properly organized/run. Owners bank on parking fees and overly priced tickets (e.g., who wants to see a D-3 match at $12 + $3 parking when they can see a MLS match for $15 + $5 parking), and the better the venue the higher the operating cost (security, ticket booth, snack bars, cleaning crews, etc.). Season ticket sales are generally negligible as fans want to see the product before investing in season tix. There's also league/team policies of "comp" tix for players and members of the organization. Also, a big "back of the envelop item" often overlooked is the US teams play spring-summer, competing not only with youth/club soccer but lacrosse, baseball, and "SUMMER VACATIONS". All of which compete for attendance. Lastly, scheduling glitches can be a "big" problem. Look at Harrisburg City Islanders whose weekend home opener was postponed due to torrential spring rains and was scheduled three days later for a mid-weeknight match the following week. The same thing happened days later for a second home match. Talk about a loss of revenue and interest at a key time. And, at the end of the season the team's home field was under water due to hurricane/floods. Had the rain been a few weeks sooner, it's likely they would have missed having a home playoff match (as did the baseball team that sits on the same site and was flooded causing them to play their games in Richmond VA).
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. I don't believe a small-budget USL-Pro team (or "team team") has 24 players, to begin with (Pittsburgh only used 21 this year), and I can assure you Pittsburgh wasn't spending $450k on players. I don't know if they're still doing it, but standard procedure has usually been to only pay guys during the season (so April - August, five months) and if they made $2,500 a month and got an apartment, that would be pretty good. And I'd love to see the assistant who's making $30k in Pittsburgh or Dayton. At the other end, the (internet, so caveat emptor) reports of FC Clip Art's demise said they had a total operating budget of $100 - $200k, which I have a hard time believing is humanly possible because (a) it's New York and ( b) if it was, they'd have been out of money by Independence Day. But there's a reason you get a lot of local players on third-division teams. They already live there. And they work cheap. Until I see some serious evidence to the contrary, I'm not buying that you can't go below $450k for players.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. Not to continue the thread jack, but for all of you guys who have behind the scenes experience with lower division clubs, keep the tidbits coming. They're fascinating. If ever you want to write some longer stories out your experiences, I know one at least one person who would love to read them.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. My D3 team in 2002 spent -$88,000 on player salaries, off course my Worker's comp was $90,000 - gotta love Connecticut. One knee injury and we were screwed. With our $88k budget we had several former MLS players making $400.00 a week or so, plus camps, apartments, etc. We've touched on the ticket sales, but it bears reiterating - you need to hire people to sell tickets. I had better success selling tickets than other because a) I knew sales, b) I loved soccer. If I had a soccer person I could usually help them make sales. If they were a sales person only, they struggled. Passion sells. Housing is a pain in the ass - free apartments are sometimes possible, but if I were running a team, I'd budget at least 10 apartments. If I can do some trade, great. But the key problems with apartments is the players damaging the places, in some cases more than their last paychecks. Venue - a good venue can help you sell tickets, and a bad venue can kill your team. Smaller is better. I think the USL would do well with a 3,000 seat minimum and grow from there. We had a 4,000 seater one year, and the atmosphere with 2,500 was great. Our tickets had value and we had one game where we hit 3,800. Our owner had a play a friendly in a 26,000 seat stadium against the US Olympic team, we drew about 6,000 or so. Brian McBride and some other future stars were out there. He moved the team to the giant stadium, 2,500 average attendance in a 26,000 seat stadium... death. We moved to a baseball stadium for a couple of open cup matches, packed the house - we actually spent money on advertising, the baseball team helped us sell group tickets (our leads- but they made the calls - and they didn't split the commissions, and kept our leads for later use as well), but we hit 7,500 or so on a Tuesday night. Sure enough baseball guy buys team, and gets rid of soccer staff after two games. Team died the following year. In CT we averaged almost 2.300, but the place sat 9,000 - high was just over 5,000, but we could never get the atmosphere from that much smaller venue. Had our last home game not been affected by a tornado I think we would have had another big crowd as we were playing Western Mass for first place, and those games always drew well. So my thought, smaller is better. I need sleep 14 hour work day.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. I've always thought (and moreso now, as housing prices are lower) that a team should just buy a big ol' house that could maybe hold 10 guys, maybe more. Just a big house, which you could probably get for a song or a short medley in this day and age. Doesn't have to be a mansion, but it could be permanent and you could shuttle guys in and out easily. If you can do it right and have it increase in value over time, it might end up the most valuable asset you have.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. I know Richmond uses host families, for the non local guys anyway. I don't know any details like how or if the host family is compensated, although I'm sure they are. its one way to cut down on the costs.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. haha, those big houses are pretty expensive no matter where you live In one place the owner of the team, also owned 10 apartments. After the first season the damages, minor stuff only, cost him too much money, so he used an apartment complex the next year. === One other experience - if you can sign local players, they may not draw more fans, but you save money on housing. We had the chance to sign a kid from UConn - would have cost me $200 per week. Instead we signed a pro from Ireland, cost me $450 per week, housing, and the visa. UConn kid went to play A-League has a bunch of assists. His friend, who I could have gotten for $200 and he would have lived with the other guy - went on to win A-league rookie of the year scoring 9 goals (the a-league back then was USL 1). We signed an ex-MLS player for $450 per week, housing, etc - he scored 2 goals, 1 a PK, damaged his apartment, was a problem in the locker room causing two fights - because his teammates told him was lazy. Faked he was injured and I had to release him after the deadline in our division. Yeah, that was fun.
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. And, yet, at some point, if all you're doing is looking for a way to save $250 a week and you put together a team of guys who all already live there and who you don't have to put up....why have a team? It's like War Games: the only way to win is not to play. I mean, if you're just going to have what's basically a glorified U19 team, why do it? So you can say you own a team? Run a team? Owned a team once? Ran a team once? It was fun? So you don't have to go sell insurance or sheet metal or plastics? There comes a point at which you say, "WTF am I doing this for?"
Re: 2012 USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking. When your biggest obstacle in surviving is cash flow, saving money is good, plus the two players I mentioned would have been done better for us then the two gents we signed with all the added expenses. Team lost $60k. Additoonal salaries of the crappy players plus housing: Let's say $400 per week, 20 weeks - $8,000 apartments - $600 (2/3 of an apartment) $2,400 Visa - $2,000 That's $12,000 out of my $60k loss and less tension in the locker room, less medical expenses and more production. Now you may give me apples to oranges, but in most of the soccer playing world, teams use mostly local players in the lower divisions. It may not be the case in the NPower league now, but at one point, even the biggest clubs in the world used mostly local players. Kids who came through their youth department, or guys who may have developed at another club but wanted to play at the highest level. === New point - I think Jeff pointed this out with Dayton, but youth club and camps are vital for any club to survive. I think he said Dayton has 18 teams, with 18 kids on a team, roughly 340 kids in the club. Parents, sibling, friends - adds another 1,000 bodies to their club support. If Dayton developed this properly, that would be their core season ticket holders, and would help their club develop very nicely. The camps bring in additional revenue, and entice more kids to play for the club. The professional coaching keeps them developing, and the professional product on the field will further enhance the image. It won't happen over night, but given time, this is the model that should work in the US.