I switched away from cable about a year and a half ago and have not regretted it so deals like this are right in my wheelhouse. I'm an Amazon Fire stick/Roku/DirecTV Now/HD Antenna guy so it's just a different app I click on. I would have been upset if this was a YouTubeTV/Sling/PS Vue etc exclusive but it's not. Sometimes these things work in my favor (my T-Mobile phone gets me free MLB.tv!), sometimes they don't (can't access CSN+ on DirecTV Now) but I don't think it's a sign of the Fire or MLS being inept. I just think it's the way TV is going. More a la carte, less standard cable/TV. Slighly related - every year people make a big deal that less people watched the World Series or Super Bowl or Academy Awards than years past. But this more of a generational/technological/content increase issue than true cultural shift. The M.A.S.H. finale was the most watched show ever, not because it was the most amazing final episode of the most amazing show but because it was probably the only thing worth watching that night across 3! (wow, 3!) national channels on a Monday evening in February. (just looked it up - it was against 30 minutes of That's Incredible! on ABC and The Night the Bridge Fell Down on NBC - why wouldn't you watch M.A.S.H.? Seriously?) Apropos of nothing, yesterday evening I watched Star Wars ep 8 at home in HD for basically free. The TV world is a much different place and will continue to evolve further. I kind of like having the Fire on ESPN+ with all the other MLS games, but that's just me and because it works out to my advantage this time. If you look back at other threads I got hosed last year because MLS, despite having deals with CSN and DirecTV, did not have a deal with CSN and DirecTV Now. You win some, you lose some. The Fire and MLS are very, very niche programming. A la carte+ seems like a good fit.
Right, and for it not to be niche, you have to have a very low bar for access. I think that soccer is so popular around the world because it requires so little. No equipment whatsoever, no special field to play in, nothing. Not even a ball, just something that you can ball up together (plastic bags). [In primary school, during recess, balls were banned, so we filled plastic bottles with all sorts for plastic garbage, and we would play in the school concrete patio. As soon as a dickish teacher would take it away, we would make another one...and we played soccer...they couldn't ban kids from recess, they couldn't ban plastic garbage used for lunch...] I think the only thing you need is a couple of friends. If you want to grow your fan base, you should make your product as accessible as possible. The NY Yankees can afford to do this type of shit, I'm not sure the Fire can. And the Fire is not new, it is 21 yo.
MLS will always be niche in my lifetime because it's the equivalent of minor league compared to European soccer and it doesn't play during the traditional calendar. It's a soccer snack, not the meal. It's soccer DLC, not the full game. And the new, young fans that you're trying to lure don't subscribe to traditional cable like the old guys that don't know what Roku is. They don't watch over-the-air TV like we did. And my dad is not going to decide he actually likes soccer and the Fire and MLS because they're on WGN or WCIU and he has easy access to it. It's not the way it works anymore, especially for everyone under 30. If you really wanted to penetrate the younger market then free YouTube is where the Fire and MLS should place their games. And the inverse is that the niche programming options are worth more to outlets like ESPN+ because it helps sell their new service. People looking to be cost efficient and only pay for what they want will be drawn to those services. If it wasn't for the Fire/MLS I wouldn't be that interested in ESPN+ - it's a selling point for me. Getting free mlb.tv with T-Mobile is one of the main reasons why I get T-Mobile and not Sprint or whatever. That I would get Fire/MLS, some national MLB and NBA games makes it very cost efficient for what I want to spend on sports entertainment.
I do agree cord cutting is the future, but it’s too soon. Younger kids, immigrants, and older/middle aged people will not be able to watch fire games now. We need to grow the fan base, and that’s going to be nearly impossible now.
Not to be argumentative, but younger kids are more likely to watch on a phone or tablet where ESPN+ would be more natural and immigrants will ALWAYS prefer to watch the leagues from the country of origin and are much more use to finding alternative ways to view their teams (ie Kodi). The amount of older folks that are going to suddenly develop a hankering for MLS is so low that it's negligible and John Kass is a poser.. In a more perfect world I absolutely agree with you that it would be awesome if the Fire were on a station like WGN, WFLD or WCIU which everyone in Chicago (Milwaukee and Gary) can get with a normal HD antenna. I also wish the stadium was closer to my house and the owner loved the team and spent money like water.
If it were on a familiar platform that is free, I can see your point. It's not, the app isn't even available yet. People also have to pay for it so do you think someone who is curious is going to pay a subsciption fee for something they're not certain they even care about? If they were on YouTube or Facebook where many people already go daily that's also different. You could advertise to locals and have videos pop up with keyword searches. Thats not going to happen on ESPN +.
I think someone mentioned it before, but the only “business reason” to televise games is to generate revenue for advertisers. The fact that few people are going to watch this either live or on TV is going to kill sponsorship opportunities for the Fire. Expect Valspar, Toyota, and others to walk away when they figure out nobody is watching. We’re back to the days where the fronts of the jersey will say “Fire” again.
I have the Roku stick and it works great. A little knowm secret is that Comcast has an app on Roku that allows you to watch live TV so you can get rid of all your other Comcast cable boxes. So I have my Comcast DVR box in the great room and the Roku elsewhere. I saved $12 a month by getting rid of the extra Comcast box. Direct Kick goes away as soon as ESPN+ goes live.
But the inverse of that is that the non-MLS loving sports fans that buy ESPN+ for MLB, NBA, etc will also be exposed to MLS more through that avenue, not just in Chicago but nationwide. A non-Chicago living Fire fan can now see the Fire more frequently through ESPN+ than if the Fire were on a local Chicago station, including CSN. I think in the end the Fire may come out ahead. Does anyone have the ratings numbers for when the Fire were on local (both over the air and CSN)? I'll bet the numbers were consistently low (I'd bet that they averaged less than 10K per game, if even that) and year 21 may be a good time to try something different.
Thanks. I needed a laugh today. By the way, MLS is not niche programming (and in your lifetime) if you go to Kansas City, Portland, Orlando, Seattle . . . 20+ years in and the Fire are still less recognizable than the Chicago Wolves in this market. That is not a statement about soccer in the US, that is a statement about the ownership of the Fire. My teenage son gets most of his content through his phone these days. But for sports, he still flips on the tv. It's about the only thing he watches on tv, but there you have it. While cutting the cord is the future, the Fire don't even have a past to build on. The tv viewership numbers were likely small. The streaming numbers on ESPN + will be hard to find with a magnifying glass. I'm all about getting these games onto platforms where the future viewers are located, but you can't do that -- not now -- at the expense of traditional tv. You don't have demand. Howard Stern was able to move to a subscription radio platform because he had an existing, large audience willing to follow him there. He actually built up listenership for the entire satellite service. Outside of the few most dedicated fans that are left (and not all of them will even do it) the Fire don't have the clout to make this move. Total obscurity awaits. I don't think it is too over the top to think that this could be a fatal blow to the club as it stands. Not to Andrew of course. He paid $32-35 million for the rights to a club in the 3rd biggest market in the country. He will make out like a bandit just by selling the rights to operate in this market, even if that team is not the Fire.
I cut the cord/satellite and am pretty happy with Hulu & Youtube apps off my Amazon Firestick. I watched the 1st Fire game with my dad this past weekend with my laptop pc hooked to my big flat screen TV via a HDMI cord. Not too bad, but my 16 month old daughter kept trying to break my laptop pc!
The only people who may see an advantage are the few true soccer bars, that will put in the effort to try to find (and pay for) the games on ESPN+/-x+. I can only presume that there will be a commercial rate for ESPN+/-x At my local bars, if I show up, they will put the game on, assuming it is on some channel on their satellite. Not anymore. I will be forced to go to one of those bars specifically offering it.
Nobody should ever look at Atlanta. The place is disease-ridden den of pus, bile, racism and strip clubs.
Hmmm. I have direct kick and the fire game was blacked out. Then when it searched for a different option, it couldn't find another channel and it was still blacked out.
Is this a smart move where they are really planning to move to the Amazon stadium where the only goal is to sell Amazon Fire TV's?
This is the equivalent of the White Sox and Blackhawks going to OnTV/Sportsvision back in the day. Putting the games on a medium that limits access, & therefore viewership, is dumb. It was a horrific failure for the Sox, & this will be a failure as well for the Bridgeview Hauptmans. For the league/SUM, it will hurt the next TV rights package to have the 3rd largest market be a non-entity on TV. For the casual soccer fan, putting an inferior product (MLS) in competition with other, better leagues for eyeballs is dumb. Why pay $5 for MLS, when I can get the epl or liga mex for free? Why pay $5 for MLS, when I can pay slightly more to watch La Liga or the Bundisliga? Sure, the niche fan, who happens to like the Bridgeview Hauptmans, AND has the requisite hardware, AND already has the requisite viewing habits to use ESPN+ may like this move. But, there is a long history of this type of move being an abject failure.
Well said. I'm content watching Liga MX and all of the Euro leagues I get on my sports package on DirecTv. I'll also watch all of the MLS games that are on ESPN and FS1. I haven't written off the idea of getting ESPN+ and a stick because I do like the idea of getting the equivalent of MLS Live to see the really good games that are not over the air, and also, someone mentioned that there will be a lot of Rugby Union. I'll have to see what rugby leagues are included, but that might be enough for me. A quick question for all you young cord-cutting whipper snappers (I am old, but I don't think I have ever used that term before. ). If I get ESPN+ and a Roku stick or something similar, is there a way to record games, or do you have to watch them live?
Generally speaking the live events available on those sorts of services are available for on-demand replay for awhile afterwards as well. But ESPN+ doesn't exist yet, so we'll see.
You’re giving the FO too much credit. More likely the Chicago USL team sponsored by Amazon will see this and offer free streaming of their games with an Amazon Prime subscription further burying the Fire into irrelevance.
I had erroneously assumed that some agreement had been reached since it’s still called Toyota Park rather than called Bridgeview Stadium again. We are so bush league.
Yep. This, in turn, will help to kill off the small but growing groups of "hools" that have populated these watering holes (Ricochet's, in my case) that would congregate for Fire matches and generate interest from the no-soccer staff and casuals. This kind of infiltration leads to a more soccer-savvy clientele, who learn from those who know the sport and, by extension, team/league. Contrast that with ten years ago. Ricochet's was a typical bears/cubs/bulls local watering hole, opening at noon, later on weekdays. In the decade since, it has hosted SRO crowds for WC matches, and good crowds for Champions League. Fire matches regularly draw 6-10 die-hard and thirsty supporters...and this during the walk through the wilderness that is the Hauptman era. Hell, 20 years ago, the only place in "Germantown" showing WC was on a 13" black and white at the local german restaurant. All of this will be lost...like tears, in rain.