MLS/FSW - Information Inside

[Andy_B]

Hi all,

I have some information that I wish to share with you.

The information comes from an anonymous source who can be completely trusted.


1) The FSW world contract is NOT a time buy on MLS's part. It is almost 100% a rights fee. This means that FSW gave MLS a certain amount of money and FSW is responsible for selling all of the adds and in turn keeps all of the add revenue generated.

MLS and FSW both share a bit in some of the resources (web etc), but other than that, it is as close to a traditional rights fee based contract MLS has ever seen.

2) For the ratings conscious among us, FSW is not yet distrubuted widely enough (ie is not in enough households) to garner the traditional nielsen ratings that we all love to swoon over.

FSW does have an internal way of tracking viewership and they are said to be pleased with the viewership to date of MLS and they also like the way that FSW seems to be making a buzz within the US soccer community.

If and when I have more, I will share

Andy

[Sneever Flion]

This stuff gives me a hardon.

[SnakeEyes]

Now i can't say this as fact since these are not my words, but a pretty reliable little birdie told me that FSW recieves TiVo's anonymous data collecting. So if you have a TiVo, FSW knows you like them :)

[mpruitt]

excellent job andy. id love to see this type of information come out on the record in a major outlet but even this information is interesting. The only thing is that, they're not really selling any ads for it right now are they? the only ads that i've seen have been primarily MLS, US Soccer, or FSW ads... I know that FSW doesn't have a whole lot of advertisers to begin with, being a fledgling cable network to begin with.

This leads me to believe obviously that the benifit for FSW are a few things.

MLS on FSW attracts more viewers, which means more subscribers which of course benifits them.

MLS of FSW gives FSW access to all the sponsors and advertisers that MLS has

MLS at least gives them more content to fill when their international games are put to rest in the summer off season.

[QPR Kevin H]

Originally posted by Trevor Dion
This stuff gives me a hardon.
Trevor - I think its pretty safe to say that you need to get out a bit more. :)

[Sneever Flion]

Originally posted by QPR Kevin H
Trevor - I think its pretty safe to say that you need to get a bit more. :)

That's more like it.

[kenntomasch]

Originally posted by Andy_B
1) The FSW world contract is NOT a time buy on MLS's part. It is almost 100% a rights fee. This means that FSW gave MLS a certain amount of money and FSW is responsible for selling all of the adds and in turn keeps all of the add revenue generated.

Wow.

That makes sense from MLS' part, because I can't see them wanting to further extend themselves on broadcasting because of the costs involved.

I also can't see FSW ponying up a lot of money for rights, because they can't hope to generate a lot of money on the back end selling ads (and, while I prefer to watch whatever game it is on the Shootout than FSW, I haven't seen a lot of ads on MLS Wrap, which you'd think they'd put in as a package deal).

Do they have a score/clock box on the FSW games, and are they sponsored? Anyone notice who sponsored them?

FSW is obviously saving some money by picking up somebody's feed of the games (and not producing them themselves...though I imagine they'd be paying somebody for the right to do that) and by not sending anyone other than Christian Miles to the site, but Wheelock and Harkes aren't doing it for free, either.

FSW may just feel that having MLS helps them credibility-wise as they try to build more of an American audience (to go along with the USL and MISL programming, which I believe are both time-buys), and there's a certain value in that.

But they'll eventually have to generate revenue to make it work, because they're not the Red Cross. Nor should they be.

[HalaMadrid]

Originally posted by Andy_B
Hi all,

I have some information that I wish to share with you.

The information comes from an anonymous source who can be completely trusted.


1) The FSW world contract is NOT a time buy on MLS's part. It is almost 100% a rights fee. This means that FSW gave MLS a certain amount of money and FSW is responsible for selling all of the adds and in turn keeps all of the add revenue generated.

MLS and FSW both share a bit in some of the resources (web etc), but other than that, it is as close to a traditional rights fee based contract MLS has ever seen.This is no surprise. This was in the original press release.

[kenntomasch]

Originally posted by HalaMadrid
This is no surprise. This was in the original press release.

Where? I don't see it in MLS' release.

[Andy_B]

This is no surprise. This was in the original press release.

The original press release contained zero information on the financial part of the deal from what I can see.

However, the parties in question were asked during the press conference about the financials and in there they stated that it would not be a time buy but no where in the press conference did they mentioned it was a rights based contract and instead made it sound more like a straight parnership, almost akin to what MLS has with ESPN.

Andy

[kenntomasch]

Originally posted by Andy_B
and instead made it sound more like a straight parnership, almost akin to what MLS has with ESPN.


Or what NBC has with Arenaball, which sounded like a good plan to me.

[Andy_B]

Where? I don't see it in MLS' release.

Hala was mistaken about this I believe. It is not in the press release, at least the one I read.

However, it certainly was talked about in the press conference

http://www.mlsnet.com/content/03/mls0401fsi_quotes.html

STERNBERG ON THE FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENT:
“We didn’t forget to put it in the press release. The financial arrangements are confidential. What I can tell you is that both parties are making a pretty significant investment in this programming venture and it’s something where we both expect there will be substantial returns down the line. It’s certainly a bet by both MLS and Fox Sports International that this sport will continue to grow in popularity … The most important thing to know about the deal structure that we’ve implemented is that there are investments by both sides and that there are also upside opportunities for both MLS and Fox.”

ABBOTT ON THE FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENT:
“The financial terms have not been revealed, however it is not a time buy. But it is one that we believe will financially benefit Fox Sports World, Fox Sports International and MLS. I would simply leave it at that. The primary message we‘ve delivered today is that we are reaching a core audience and getting a highlight show … SUM owns all the television rights to MLS and SUM served as the agent on behalf of MLS in entering into the transaction.”

Andy

[AndyMead]

Originally posted by kenntomasch
and by not sending anyone other than Christian Miles to the site, but Wheelock and Harkes aren't doing it for free, either.

And it's not just salary. Wheelock lives in suburban KC. They have to be flying him out every weekend.

[Bonji]

Does digital cable send usage stats to networks? If so FSW does well in our house!

[AndyMead]

Originally posted by Andy_B
Hala was mistaken about this I believe. It is not in the press release, at least the one I read.

However, it certainly was talked about in the press conference


I was in on the conference, and while the details were explicitly not included, I remember that Sternberg indicated that exposure to MLS's corporate sponsors/partners was something that FSW was looking forward to.

[Andy_B]

I remember that Sternberg indicated that exposure to MLS's corporate sponsors/partners was something that FSW was looking forward to.

Yuppers!

STERNBERG ON THE FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENT:
“This is not a deal where MLS is paying money to Fox to get its programming on the air. We’ve worked with MLS to make sure we get in front of all MLS’ marketing partners and sponsors and we hope that will be converted into significant advertising. Of course the existing advertising base for these two channels is healthy, too. And the combination of the two we think will drive a lot of revenue."