The 2022 MLS TV thread

That's doubtful, unless the league is interested in partnering with Apple rather than just wanting Apple to be a rights distributor.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/14/nfl-apple-are-at-odds-sunday-ticket-talks.html

From this article:

Apple isn’t interested in simply acting as a conduit for broadcasting games, according to Eddy Cue, Apple’s senior vice president of services. Cue oversees Apple’s media and sports partnerships and its streaming service, Apple TV+. Apple is looking for partnerships with sports leagues in which it can offer consumers more than standard rights agreements — such as having free rein to offer games globally or in local markets. Apple has that type of deal with Major League Soccer, a 10-year partnership that begins in 2023.

“We weren’t interested in buying sports rights,” Cue said this week at a Paley Center for Media panel in New York. “There’s all kinds of capabilities that we’re going to be able to do together because we have everything together. And so if I have a great idea, I don’t have to think about, OK, well, my contract or the deal of interest will allow this.”

 

To remind everyone: 40% of MLS games will be free. You don’t have to pay anything. There will also be some bigger national games that would be simulcast on linear TV. Again, this is free. So, you can see plenty of MLS without spending any more money than you do now.

Admittedly, I was taken aback by the price as well. I was expecting them to go for max volume with a cut rate price. Hopefully, for MLS’s sake, Apple’s analytics and marketing team knows what they are doing, and know they can get 3M+ subscribers around the globe, because that is how many they need to generate $250m to keep Apple happy.

 

I assume they will eventually do something like this. It makes too much sense.

 

I'm curious how that pencils out given that they are also packing everything into being played at 7:30 local time on Wednesdays and Saturdays.

Is a doubleheader on each of those nights 40% of the games? Probably not right?

(And by the way we should mention those games are on Apple TV+, which is not "free", though apparently certain games will be free on the Apple TV app without the Plus. Apple TV isn't performing that well, and some of this confusion is a big part of why, IMO)

The finalization and specifics of that deal are becoming a tad conspicuous by their absence.

To be honest the price is lower than I thought it would be.

Initially there's going to be no viewership and Apple's not going to make any money. But both parties knew that. They believe they can grow together. We'll see.

The trouble with a much cheaper one-team option is that if that becomes a standard in the industry it DRAMATICALLY lowers the revenue potential in streaming. 99% of your subs would be that smaller package.

 

No, that's not it. There will be games for free on Apple TV. There will be games for "free" on Apple TV+ if you're already a subscriber. Then there will be the other 60% that are behind the paywall.

 

I think that's what I said?

Honestly, I sincerely don't understand what non-Plus Apple TV is.

Also is there still a Roku-like smart hardware device also called an Apple TV?

It's confusing!

 

Still not quite accurate. Based on reports from the Athletic and MLS announcements:

40% of the games will be free in the Apple TV platform. That’s the “container” that wraps around AppleTV+, the new MLS service, and allows you to install and sign-up for other non-Apple streaming apps like Showtime.

Some unknown percentage of content above that 40% number will be available to subscribers of AppleTV+ who don’t have a separate subscription to the MLS service

100% of the content will be available to those who subscribe to the MLS service.

 

Yes, there is a device that's an Apple TV, kind of like a Roku player.



I'm not quite sure why they don't go ahead and brand some actual TVs as Apple devices. There's also something akin to the Prime Video app on Roku and some other smart TVs that is the Apple TV app which allows you to watch content via "channels" the way that Prime lets you subscribe to HBO, Paramount+, and other streaming/premium cable options. That feels a bit like putting a hat on a hat if you already have a smart TV where those apps can be downloaded and subscriptions purchased.

It's all very confusing.

 

It is confusing.

I would add the apple device I bought years ago is inferior to the Roku device I bought a year or two later (and still use). Several reasons for this, but one is the Roku remote is a lot better.

Apple TV on the iPad works well though.

 

The Apple TV app is available on Apple devices (of course), plus smart TV platforms like Android TV, Roku, Amazon Fire TV, Samsung Tizen, LG webOS, and Vizio SmartCast TV.

No Apple TV app on Android phones.

 

If Apple wants to be a real player in the content business, they need to cut that kind of nonsense out.

 

You can watch it through any web browser as well.....

Which I'm sure it would come as a shock to many to know just how many people stream content using the web browser on their smart phone or tablet rather than use an app.

 

I know, obviously it's not inaccessible (and internally I'm sure Apple will have viewed making it available on 3rd party smart TV hardware to be a major concession even though it absolutely isn't), but Apple's vision of its future as King Of All Media is in inherent tension with the zombie aughts hardware company dream of forcing every household in America to have every device they own be within one network of products in order for any of them to work properly.

Disney and Netflix and Comcast understand they're in the business of beaming as much stuff into as many brains as possible. Anyone who isn't living by that mantra is destined to be a bit player in this industry.

MLS has pretensions of being a luxury brand in a similar fashion to Apple. The whales Apple wants to score deals with in the future harbor no such delusions and will not put up with them.

 

Apple TV is also available on Xfinity (Comcast). Also, Google is the same as Apple as is the same with Meta, as is the same with Amazon. They all want to rule their corner of the world. Sony and Microsoft are the same way too.

Also, Samsung smart TV's run on Android....the fact that there isn't an Apple TV app available ion the google play store for Android phones may not be because of Apple. It may very well be too of course. We shouldn't assume things we don't know.

 

1594783006492921864 is not a valid tweet id

 

Nope. They run on their own OS called Tizen.

 

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2022/11/state-mls-tv-apple-season-pass-espn-fox/
Update time on the coming season for TV.

 

Well, makes sense that it has a compatible Apple TV app seeing as it's Linux based.

Also there is an Apple TV app available for Google TV's and Android TV's as well......

 

Lots of good info, and it looks like they will have games aired outside of the Apple TV app, as well, via simulcasts:

“Regarding linear TV, MLS is currently in talks with previous linear TV partners (ESPN, FOX, Univision) about a simulcast arrangement. MLS is planning on putting one Saturday and one Sunday game simulcast on linear TV for the regular season with all playoff games, including the final, also to be simulcast — at least through 2026. There have been discussions about changing the MLS postseason formula from 13 games to 30, in part to increase that playoff game inventory. The only event currently planned to air exclusively on MLS Season Pass currently is the MLS All-Star Game.”

 

210 of 493 games will be free (43%) including every games for MLS is back opening week. This will be the most MLS games ever broadcast globally for free I would guess. Imagine if Messi signs with Miami how many views they might get.

 

One infers in the way that that's phrased that postseason expansion may be the cost of the carriage they're seeking from their linear partners.

MLS should think very carefully about whether the juice is worth the squeeze there.

Hard to blame FOX and ESPN, simulcasting Apple produced content they don't have exclusivity or streaming rights to is not their business model at all. MLS is just trying to exploit their hunger for content in this deal, it would be a very one-sided relationship. And I'm sure the networks have more FS2 or ESPNNEWS type destinations in mind for a lot of what they'd show.

I'm not so sure the better version of this isn't more like just giving them a mini-package of weekend and playoff games for network Fox and ABC only, including MLS Cup Final, for something approaching free.

MLS Cup Final should not be a streaming exclusive, I think in that sense a deal with the linear networks is important. Beyond that, be careful.

 

Ummm....What? Fox and ESPN literally simulcast content produced by other producers nearly everyday. F1, NRL, AFL, La Liga, Bundesliga, FIFA Games, Red Bull Events, UFC........etc. ESPN and Fox don't produce those broadcasts. That footage is simulcast all over the world.

 

Yes, but read the entire sentence you bolded.

The UFC, Bundesliga, and La Liga deals are all fundamentally about streaming inventory and building ESPN+

It was also critical for ESPN/Disney in the new deal they just signed with F1 that they get streaming rights.

And in all of the above the content isn't just hanging out on a competing service in the US market.

It's not about them being overly precious about producing the event, they aren't. It's about this content being "theirs" as against their competitors, and orienting themselves in a favorable position toward what everyone in the industry believes is the streaming-based future.

 

Didn't see the official Nielsen number for Telemundo yet but the FS1 Nielsen-reported # for Ecuador/Qatar was 3.071M per ShowBuzz: https://t.co/Fl40KnB4M5

— Sports TV Ratings (@SportsTVRatings) November 22, 2022

That makes the world cup opener the second most watched cable show of the night, way behind Yellowstone and ahead of the walking dead finale.