AppleTV+ to be the Home of MLS through 2032

yes their MLB coverage has a lot of room to grow, from what I have noticed the picture is very crisp and better then the local teams coverage, they really emphasize the game by using an attractive sports bug, that compliments the game instead of taking up a lot of real estate like the Bally sports channels where it looks like the game takes a back seat to their betting coverage.

they also use a lot of stat numbers during the game like ballplayer one, swings at a fastball 75 percent of the time thrown and ballplayer two only swings 20 percent of the time, and fans seem to be split on it, I myself don't mind it as baseball is a stat driven sport.

the downside is the announcing, it feels like they are trying to cater to the casual fan with stories and sometimes it feels like they forget a baseball game is going on and it seems to alienate the hardcore baseball fan and I'm also not to keen on a 3 person booth plus an on field commentator that they are going with but I really think Apple TV will make changes as they grow and learn.

I'd say overall I like what Apple TV is trying to do and I know its going to be another extra expense for me but if it means better coverage, I'm willing to pay a little extra

I also like the no bullshit watch all the games, I'd really like the NHL to follow this model as well, baseball, basketball and football are so entrenched in American society there is no way the owners of those franchises would give up their local TV rights and they're asinine blackout rules


also on a side note, I think the NFL will be watching to see how Apple TV handles MLS as the highly lucrative NFL Sunday Ticket is up for grabs and Apple TV is one of the front runners, if the MLS venture goes off without a hitch, we may see a shift in sports streaming and coverage

 

As people are finding and sharing little pieces of info here and there, the picture is becoming clearer as to what the league did today. I'm still processing it, but I think MLS has made what will ultimately be seen in retrospect as a quantum leap. We've come a long way since Andrew Shue suited up for the G's.

MLS is becoming a broadcaster.

In less than 30 years, we went from buying broadcast time from ESPN to establishing a 10 year $2.5 billion global media rights deal with Apple. Money-wise, this deal just turned the Big Four into the Big 5.

I'm not an Apple fan-boy, but I have a feeling that they'll give the premium treatment to the MLS product. Our league will finally have a whip-around show. There will be a way to watch match replays. Matches will be streamed, live or archived. Rain or shine, near or far, you can watch the G's wherever you are.

On the surface, it's still considerably less than the ~ $625 million rights deal per year for the NHL, but this $250 million figure is the base figure. There's still potential for a whole lot more. The dinosaur reporters in the sports world that hate soccer have no idea how massive this deal is, but I have every confidence that what I'm about to describe to you will be copied by the biggest leagues in the world. Allow me a moment to paint a picture.

Like it or not, the NFL continues to be the standard of success that all other sports leagues aspire to match ($113 BILLION for 11 years) and MLS has been able to thrive and succeed by implementing some of the NFL's successful strategies. Controlling your venue was a biggie; controlling the presentation of the product appears to be the next one.

The NFL built NFL Los Angeles, which serves as the league's west coast headquarters, on the site of SoFi stadium. Some here may recall that when Stan Kroenke wanted to move the Rams to LA, building this media center on the site of SoFi stadium was part of the sales pitch. From this venue, the NFL has pre-game and post-game shows. So now consider this: it was stated elsewhere that MLS is going to handle the production in-house, from a central location, which is just like what the NFL does.

...and even if MLS chooses to rent a facility instead building one for themselves, the key point is this: through the vehicle of Apple TV, this agreement means that MLS will now become a broadcaster of their own matches and generate their own revenue streams while doing it.

They can sell advertisement time to sponsors for all content they broadcast.
...and as a broadcaster, they can bid for the English-language broadcasting rights to tournaments, including the FIFA World Cup.

We are at the threshold of a new era. Remember when Don Garber said that a goal for MLS was to become a destination league? If you make money, you can spend money on players. I believe this deal may prove to play an important part towards that.

 

Then we are going to have to return to the practice of signing more 29yo-35yo international mega-stars for this to happen. Because we still won’t be able to afford the salaries of in-prime household name players. And young but quite promising unknowns are not - by definition - big TV draws.

 

I want a really savvy scouting dept. One that does their due dil and keeps an eye out for those players who maybe are not in their prime but not retirement poster boys either is key. Those players that for whatever reason are relatively unknown, have fallen through the cracks or simply didn't get picked up. Galaxy has to work smarter and harder. Make the team a winning team and people will notice and be drawn to watch and follow. Even the casual fan that understands a little bit about the game.

BTW I hear that the MLS Next Pro will also be available through Apple.

 

Apparently this was in the beta for Elden Ring but was cut after a slew of hardcore Dark Souls veterans were found curled up in the fetal positions, quivering, catatonic, faces soaked with tears, mumbling "It's just... too... difficult...".

 

*Dives for cover, then remembers this isn't twitter*

 

Whoa... @barroldinho sighting.

 

That's where the sweet TV money comes in!!!

 

You are talking about what would help the Galaxy. I was talking about what would help MLS TV ratings. Two very different things.

Wait, wouldn't winning more games increase eyeballs for the Galaxy? Yes it would but a team winning is another team losing so that argument is a zero sum game for MLS as a whole. The only way to get more of the non-obsessed soccer people to watch MLS games is to have something that draws them in. Ibra and Beckham and Donovan and David Villa and Henri and Rooney and even Chich do/did that. Jeremy Obibisse, Ola Kamara, Adam Druksa and Sebation Driussel don't do that.

 

Yeah, we are talking apples and oranges. I took off on a tangent because I wanted to make that point which always irks me to no end how useless we are at scouting.

Having said that my wonder is if lower tier or smaller market teams going to justify spending huge monies from lucrative tv deals or whathaveyou on these Trikhog DPs. I don't see a team like San Jose or Austin spending millions on some older famous player just for the optics of it. Maybe it would not make sense to them given their situation and this could happen at many a club across MLS. What then?

 

What sweet money are you referring to? Maybe for some clubs, but this $250mm divided by next year's 29 teams is $8.6 million. If you subtract the $5mm the Galaxy used to get from Spectrum and their old share of the national rights this is practically a push with no real gain and may be a loss if you factor in inflation and the players gaining a share of the tv revenue.

 

Without doubt the "2.5 billion dollars" figure, like lottery payouts, can sound more impressive than it really is once you take into account the fine print. As you note it will "only" be ~$8 mil/team on average however it is split. The contract also specifies that MLS will be responsible for producing the games, which I am told is very expensive.* Between regular season and playoffs MLS put on around 950 games. The cost of producing almost a thousand games has to be enormous and it will come out of that $250 mil.

But on the other side of the ledger is additional income. MLS will also be paid by ESPN, Univision, Fox and maybe Turner to show games as well. Likely they will they pay less per game than currently because the games are also shown on Apple+ but how much less? I have no idea. Also possibly additional ad income as LAA suggests? I would imagine the Apple shown ads $ would go to Apple, not MLS though, right? (I'm obviously ignorant about the entertainment indusrty.)

* Trickhog or you other entertainment industry folks jump in here - What falls under the term "produce a soccer game?" Apple is apparently doing its own in house announcing so that leaves what? Filming the games and sending the resultant feed to Apple studios and what else? Is replay generation done on site or would that be done by Apple studios? Other tasks?

 

It doesn't always have to be either/or name recognition vs club contribution. It can be both. Some of the 29yo+ international stars can still really produce at the MLS level. Ibra, Henri, Villa, Keane (what a player!), Giovinco, Chicharito, Drogba, Rooney and even Beckham were major international stars who came in and produced for their clubs, with many of them rating in the top 3 or so players in the league.

 

Would it be worth it for MLS or each team or a combination thereof to invest in their own equipment and personnel? I would certainly look into that. I mean if each MLS team has their own team and equipment there is not need for Galaxy to pack up their equipment on road games. Each MLS venue has their own setup.

 

This.

The same high standard equipment across all venues, including the Hawkeye technology VAR cameras.