Exactly. If the OTA/ad supported model actually attracted eyeballs (and if the team hasn’t sucked for a decade) perhaps there would not be a need to take the cash. James
Did not see this posted yet. Seem they may have driven a nail in Flo's coffin ... NYRB game has been moved to FS1: https://www.dcunited.com/post/2019/09/23/dc-united-match-against-new-york-red-bulls-switched-fs1
How does this drive a nail in Flo's coffin? They could have chosen any Eastern Conference game to move and they picked the one with the most on the line. I am sure Flo had zero to do with the decision making process.
It is less money for Flo's ever shrinking return on investment. They can't have made their subscriber targets certainly not their break even numbers. So one less broadcast means fewer advertiser dollars for them. Thus a nail in their coffin.
Wayne Rooney leaving was the nail in the coffin. One game makes no difference in he grand scheme of things.
Flo is a cockroach that isn’t going away anytime soon. Rest assured, by hook,’crook or acquisition they’ll see out their DCU and Cincy contracts while probably growing in the process.
This was a decision by MLS/HQ and FoxSports to maximize viewers and advertising dollars. If these two teams were battling it out for last place the game would stay on Flo
hundreds have subscribed specifically for DCU streams is the allegation.... (doesn't)Flo is way more than DCU - this deal will not make or break them. If they can turn it into a deal with many other MLS teams or even the league then it's a big deal. However, NY already has plans in the works for league-wide streaming and IIRC the flo deal was announced just before NY ordered teams not to enter into any new deals in preparation for a league-wide deal.
Yes, exactly. By every metric the Flo deal has been absolutely catastrophic for all parties. Flo is taking a bath, the team is utterly irrelevant in the local market (only one season after being a sensation), and even the fans that have always loved the team can't watch (except for the hundreds who gave Flo money, and even then Flo can't reliably seem to keep a stream up.) They will teach this deal as a lesson in sports business classes for decades. There is almost zero chance that the league switches to Flo as a streaming partner after witnessing DC United's cratered relevance after the deal, IMHO.
DC United is back to irrelevance because the team under-performed on the pitch and did not meet expectations. We've had enough games on National TV to remain relevant but we've either gotten our butts kicked or Benny Balled a win out which isn't great for viewership. I'm also not sure that DC United as a name was all that relevant last year to begin with but Wayne Rooney & later Acosta were the relevant ones. Casual fans aren't tuning in to watch a DC United team that has Lucho on the bench and Rooney back home setting up his Derby deal. It is impossible to measure but if the club was on NBC Sports DC, ESPN + or NC8 that more people would care. DC United fandom is a niche environment and the club is managing to even drive off those folks.
Casual fans couldn't possibly care less about the style of play. Come to think of it, most hardcore fans don't either, except for a couple of people on Bigsoccer. Fans want to watch the team win; that's it. Unfortunately, fans can't WATCH this team, regardless of style.
Style absolutely matters since people want to be entertained. Do you really think Atlanta United would draw 53k a game if they weren't playing an attractive brand of soccer? Do you really believe that their attendance would be the same if they were grinding out 1-0 games to the cup? Everyone wants a winner but people are going to choose a winner that attacks and scores goals over a team who parks the bus for 80 minute (atleast in the states). Casual fans (of the game not DC united) don't understand enough about the game to appreciate a good bunker but even babies understand scoring goals.
If you're at the bottom of the table I don't care how many games you lost 4-3, you are still going to have crummy attendance.
You're completely wrong, of course. I've never met a person who would prefer to see their team lose 4-3 rather than win 1-0 (although I've seen a few silly people type it on soccer message boards.) At any rate, it's academic since the casual fan can't see the team lose 5-4 or win 1-0 because they're behind a $100 paywall on a platform that nobody's ever heard of.
Where did I say anyone would rather watch a team lose 4-3 rather than win 1-0 ? The example I laid out clearly stated winning with wide margin vs winning with a small margin.
Of course, nobody is stating that people will go to see a team lose 4-3. My post stated that winning 'with style' would draw more views than winning without.