Hmmm.... I don't know about these numbers. I call BS. River has 45,000 season ticket holders. Rosario Central and Newell's always play in front of full houses. Talleres and Belgrano get massive crowds in the Kempes (Tallers got 60,000 in a 3rd division match 2 years ago) Also remember, people in the US have much more disposable income than in other countries. There are also 300 million people in the US. In Argentina, there are massive amounts of poor people. The poverty in the US can never even touch what we have south of the rio grande (the largest shanty town in the world is in the DF in Mexico). These are the official attendance numbers from 2014. 10 of the 20 clubs are from Argentina. So remember, we now have 30 teams in the primera, which drags the attendance down overall, but still, even Colon is on this list. Way above most MLS clubs. I also don't know how accurate this is, because Colon's stadium is always full, same with Union.
Yeah the small teams are what really drag Argentina's average down. MLS's smallest draws are still around 15K and then they have the Seattle, New York City, and Orlando really pulling them up over 20K as a whole. Those people are paying more for their tickets than in Argentina though I imagine so that's why they can afford to spend more. It's kind of hard to judge MLS's TV ratings compared to Liga MX. There's millions of Mexicans here and it's just way too easy for them to watch their teams back home on Univision for free in Spanish. Meanwhile you need to pay for cable to watch most MLS games and obviously the quality of play isn't as good (though getting better thanks to poaching South American talent and developing academies). MLS even has a hard time topping English soccer for regular season games. It's growing, just slowly. First they have to catch up to hockey and then from there it could snowball. But as far as the culture, it's at least arrived as a sport that people will fill the stadium for regularly, and several cities are clamoring for new teams. Getting the sports media to pay attention and promote it more is still a project, however.
Right now only Seattle. They play in a football stadium that holds 67K and they manage to sell out for games against Portland and the playoffs. Orlando gets over 30K but they are moving to their own stadium next year after playing in a football stadium, and the capacity of the new stadium is only 25K. You can look at the breakdown of cities here. Scroll down for 2016. http://www.kenn.com/the_blog/?page_id=30 Atlanta next year might pull off the same. They're going to play in a brand new football stadium and have sold over 30K seat deposits for the first season. Most other teams are limited by the size of their soccer only stadiums and can only draw 18-25K max as a result.
I don't know, I think those numbers are accurate. You've mention it yourself that the expansion of the league would drag down the overall numbers. So, if we were talking about the league a few years ago, sure, then we can say Argentina outdrew the MLS but as of right now, the numbers say they are quite close. As @Burr stated it is gradually growing. He likely knows more about the league than I do, since I do not follow the sport. But I stated the popularity is gradually growing and that's a good thing considering there are so many sports people are mad about here.
Don't forget the MLS has one soccer team per city, and there are lots of large cities in the USA. In the Argentine league this year you have 13 teams competing in primera A just in the Buenos Aires metropolitan area alone, not counting La Plata. And most teams from the interior of the country - with the exception of Rosario and Cordoba - play in towns that are small, by US standards. It's not a fair comparison to come up with an average of people attending the stadiums. How many people would they average per team in the US if they had 13 professional soccer teams in one city? And that number doesn't even include the teams in the lower divisions that play every week and also compete for fans.
We already know the answer somewhat with New York City. They couldn't even support a third team, the NASL Cosmos, who consistently drew less than 5K last season. The overall demand for soccer here is definitely far more shallow. It's been extremely difficult for lower division teams to survive as a result. People only care about the highest level, and it only works if you have a big city all to yourself instead of dividing the pie, New York (Red Bulls/NYCFC) and soon to be LA (Galaxy/LAFC) notwithstanding.
MLS has a long way to go. I am in the US right now and I can tell you all that "soccer" is just not on the radar. You hear all this stuff about how its growing etc. but people don't care. I have one friend here who is a massive "soccer" fan. He went to the last two world cups. He loves the USMNT and he loves the EPL. I mentioned to him Nico Lodeiro (shout out to the bosteros), and he didn't know who he was. Obviously, if I were in Seattle it would be different, but I am in Washington, which is an MLS city, and he is the most knowledgable soccer fan i know in this town. Forget about asking a regular guy in a bar. On the flip side, I don't think anyone in Argentina doesn't know who Nico Lodeiro is, and he's not even Argentine. And as I posted earlier, Argentina still gets higher crowds, 10 of the top 20 in the americas with average attendances are Argentine. Aguante Argentina carajo.
Well that's the problem in the U.S. There's a big difference between a soccer fan and Major League Soccer fan here. The overlap between the two doesn't always exist. Case in point is how 30 million will watch the World Cup but only 1.5 million will watch the MLS Cup Final. Since EPL (and La Liga and Bundesliga) is so easily available here, many will not settle for MLS quality even though it's in their backyard. But as that improves that's where the short term growth will come, and then eventually it'll start to penetrate the casual sports fan (though arguably it's already done that in places like Portland and Seattle, where young people just see it as a cool/hip/trendy thing to do). Argentina just needs to get their economy going on a consistent basis and cut all the corruption nonsense in AFA and it'll be stronger than ever. That it is so strong in spite of all the anchors put on it is just a testament to what a power it is.
Theres also a big difference in between playing an international cup and watching it on TV. But I will leave you this piece of advice: MIRALA POR FOX
Looks like San Lorenzo may steal Piatti back from MLS. Boca already tried, apparently. http://www.mountroyalsoccer.com/2016/12/22/14043920/san-lorenzo-to-repatriate-piatti-from-the-impact
Grondona's son is Arsenal's new manager: http://www.ole.com.ar/arsenal/feliz-volver_0_1710429120.html They're currently just two places out of the relegation battle, just 5 points ahead of Olimpo while there are a bunch of other teams down there. Lets hope Humbertito take them right to the Nacional B and the club will cease to exist within a few years.
Los 50 equipos más valiosos de América 1 Corinthians (Brazil): $532.7 million 2 Palmeiras (Brazil): $ 480.1 million 3 Gremio (Brazil): $320.9 million 4 CD Guadalajara (Mexico): $273.1 million 5 Monterrey (Mexico): $270 million 6 LA Galaxy (USA): $265 million 7 Seattle Sounders (USA): $260 million 8 New York City FC (USA): $255 million 9 Orlando City SC (USA): $240 million 10 Houston Dynamo (USA): $215 million 11 Sao Paulo (Brazil): $188.3 million 12 Club America (Mexico): $187.6 million 13 Portland Timbers (USA): $185 million 14 Toronto FC (Canada): $180 million 15 Sporting Kansas City (USA): $165 million So the highest Argentine team is River Plate at #21, and Boca at #29. Plenty of American teams above, though overall they're right in the mix with MLS teams and just a notch below Mexico's most valuable teams. As for the criteria:
I find this list to be perplexing. First of all, Argentine and Brazilian clubs have no price tags. They are actual "clubs" and the owners are the members (socios) if some Chinese or Middle Eastern billionaire wanted to buy a club in either country, he simply couldn't. MLS and Liga MX clubs are indeed franchises and are bought and sold like cattle and they have real price tags. Any number put out about the "worth" of an Argentine or Brazilian club is simply speculation. Its obvious here that the stadium, or real estate of the club has a lot to do with the "worth" whoever made this list is making which is why America, which is by far the biggest team in Mexico, and Flamengo, the biggest team in Brazil, are so far down the list because they don't own the Azteca or Maracana. BUT... Come on... You're gonna tell me Atletico Paranense is "worth" more than Flamengo? Or Philadelphia Union? Or Portland Timbers? The brand of Flamengo and America are massive. How many shirts do you think these clubs sell? America vs. Chivas in Liga MX had a TV audience 10x higher than MLS Cup Final. How is it possible that ANY club in MLS is worth more than America, regardless of whether they own the Azteca or not. Whatever rent they pay to use that stadium, I'm sure they more than make up for it when they get a 100,000 people through the gates. In my opinion, the brand of Club America is much, much bigger than any MLS club. TV rights are another issue. Obviously, this effects Argentine clubs because Argentina is a much smaller country than USA, Brasil, and Mexico. Much smaller. Yet, I see Inter of Porto Alegre. They are in Brazil's second division, how much money are they going to make from TV down there? Gremio at number 3? I call BS. They have a nice new stadium, but it is far down the list in terms of popularity of brazilian clubs I also think River's worth is completely off. River has a MASSIVE sports complex in the nicest part of Buenos Aires, right near the Rio de la Plata, right off the most important avenue in the city, Avenida del Libertador. We have a complex that includes a school, a university, training complex for many sports, tennis courts, olympic sized pools, field hockey where many olympic gold medalists train. If River were to sell all that land, as I said in the most expensive part of Buenos Aires, you're telling me it would be worth less than the Portland Timbers Stadium? I know most people on here may not know much about Argentina, but as someone who works in Real Estate, I can tell you that property in the nice parts of greater buenos aires go for rates like new york or london, and i'm not exaggerating. Portland is a backwater when it comes to real estate worth. Not to mention the worth of the players, which is of course pure speculation, but no player at Portland Timbers is worth more than say, 5 million dollars. River has Alario and Driussi, that within a year will go for 15+ million EUROS. But as I said, all this is laughable because Brazilian and Argentine clubs can't be bought or sold, so its completely irrelevant.
Great dissection of the rankings. I think you're spot on with your criticism. In the end it's pretty much impossible to quantify a lot of the value of these clubs. Heck, Forbes does these kind of estimates among franchises of the other American sports and I've seen those heavily disputed as well, even though they are much more quantifiable.
It kind of makes sense, if you look at the 2 biggest factors; the U.S. dollar is very strong right now and American sports team are very over-priced. Just look at the case of the L.A. Clippers selling for $2 billion dollars recently. A team with no NBA champiosnhips, small fan base and sharing their arena with the other more renowned basketball team, the Los Angeles Lakers. Therefore, American sawker teams are valued way higher than they really are worth in the worldview. As for the Mexican teams, Club America and Estadio Azteca are both owned by the giant media company, Televisa, which is why their value is so high. Same with Chivas who have their own, newer stadium built in 2004 that costed $200 million to built so they're rated higher for having newer real estate, I guess.
But don't you think America's "connections" with televisa make it such a massive club? You'd know better than I, but isn't America the biggest club in Mexico, with many more fans than Chivas? It is a much bigger brand than any MLS team. Its, if memory is still intact, the club with the second highest average attendance (behind River ) and second in jersey sales.... I don't think any businessman with even a minimal amount of research would purchase an MLS club over America. I can't believe for the life of me that any MLS team is worth more than Club America, the champions of CONCACAF, owned by Televisa, a team filled with south americans, with an expensive, albeit choke-artist, coach in La Volpe (right @Moishe )
There's WAY more growth potential in MLS though, and certainly more economic stability. NFL literally prints money and laughs at most soccer team's financials, particularly in the Americas. That is the ultimate potential of soccer in United States. Club America is tapped out, they've saturated their market and there's no more gains to be made, unless the Mexican economy becomes a powerhouse.
NYCFC has tripled in value since it's debut. Seattle is worth something like 10x what it's worth was almost 8 years ago. Having your team based in a country with fans that have the most disposable income, is huge, and helps make up for a lot of things. Teams in Mexico are super popular in the US, and that will help their value keep growing.
Apparently Independiente is after Walter Erviti, who is 36 and will be 37 in June. This club has been going nowhere for a while, and now with the signing of Holan, who only ever managed defensa y justicia, and their pursuit of Erviti just shows they are basically irrelevant
That's really sad. I have cousins that are Indepediente fans and I can't bring myself to trash talk them any more. And others that are Huracan fans, lol.
@RiverGaucho is correct. Argentina is similar to some of the Spanish clubs and German clubs where the fans are owned by the members of the club. Unfortunately, clubs like Bayern Munich, FCB and Real Madrid, these clubs make quite a bit more money than the clubs back home in Argentina. If in some other world, where we did have a true form of ownership, which our players were getting paid millions of dollars to stay, that would've been great but that's not the reality we live in. But the numbers are off, nowadays to start a club in the MLS costs excess of over 200 million dollars. I cannot see how a new club in the MLS can be worth more than a club with history in Argentina.
Expansion fees aren't necessarily based on the starting worth of a franchise alone but also as a way to compensate existing teams for the dilution of national TV rights deals, sponsorships, and talent. Las Vegas just paid a $500 million fee for an expansion hockey team and the vast majority of hockey teams are worth significantly less than that.