------------------------ Seen some other posts and opinions elsewhere, but I wonder if this is the beginning where TV networks, cable, streaming service all final realize they are way over-paying for sports leagues. I could see a shake out on this in the future- ticket prices go up as TV revenue goes down and maybe player salaries as well.. Should be interesting. As for MLS, never had a lot of over the air TV $, now lets hope Apple doesn't run into problems and continues to pay MLS for the length of this 10 year deal..
To say stuff like ever is in itself absurd. Where's your crystal ball that can predict the future. Please give me the winning power ball numbers.
----------------------- I am hoping for consistency of the TV product over the 10 years of the deal, but yet, I think some adjustments, marketing related could and should happen. Season Ticket holders are getting this... maybe in the future if you buy an Apple product you get this as a deal. Agree, local team option would be good. Or maybe you have a 2nd favorite team as a package. Or even crazier, you look over the whole season schedule and decide out of the hundreds of game you only want certain game- like a pick 20 package or something. I am sure marketing will figure something out. But right now $79 for 10 months is a killer deal with the other stuff they are offering just beyond the basic league games.
----------------------------- Will be fun to see if MLS is successful with this, will other leagues follow Also, did I see somewhere MLS is or will be in over 100 countries with this? How does that compare to other US sports, especially NFL? MLS should have the advantage in that the world watch soccer, only selected folks watch NFL around the world.
After reading all the stuff on Big Soccer and other media site regarding this and then todays drop of what seems the rest of the announcing staff, my overall conclusion is that MLS is nimble enough to give this a try. Lets face it, over the air numbers were never that great. So trying a system with no black outs and every game available everywhere is a MLS fans dream. Sure, I like my local team, but yea, if I see that the Charlotte at Montreal game finished 6-4 last night, I normally would never be able to watch it. Now I can check it out. Plus some MLS Next Pro , Nations Cup and the new MLS-LMX thing. Probably going to be more soccer than I can ever find time for. Anyone know how long games will be kept for? In otherwords since every game now is Wednesday and Saturday and lets say there were 14 games on Saturday, will they only be available up to Wednesday when the next batch of game are on? No ideas yet on Wrap around show times and any other "filler" shows that I would also need time to watch.
More broadcast talent announced today: https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/apple-and-major-league-soccer-add-31-broadcasters-for-mls-season-pass Remember when some were panicing or saying that MLS/Apple was running out of time to get everything all together?
How many significant dollar TV sports rights deals right now are being signed without the networks or cable channels having streaming rights to the games? Zero. The channels are not spending big dollars on TV without streaming rights included in them, and MLS has sold its streaming rights until 2032 to Apple exclusively. Its not a crazy prediction to say MLS has effectively capped off additional traditional TV revenues for the next decade
How about you wait and see and stop making declarations. Let the space play out as they say. Then you won't ever have to end up back tracking
1. If Apple runs into problems and can’t pay MLS the total $2.5 billion the country and the economy will have bigger problems. Apple has $200 billion cash on hand, had $394 billion in revenue, and earned almost $100 billion in 2022. $250 million a year is about 1/4 of 1% of Apple’s most recent annual revenue. 2. If the revenue from the local sports channels disappears, it is going to be very interesting to see if some of the giant contracts that MLB and NBA teams have signed will decrease. The players in those leagues will not be happy to see their salaries go down. Could lead to some owner/player conflict as teams come to grips with less TV income. Of course if those leagues figure out how to replace that revenue with streaming money, it may end up not being an issue.
That's Bollocks. The networks are shelling out BILLIONS of dollars for the rights to broadcast the NFL and the NBA. They're not shelling out those billions of dollars for streaming rights. The only games they currently can stream are the ones that they are broadcasting on TV. Which are simulcasts of their cable or OTA broadcasts. In the case of the NFL, the only game available on streaming is the one being broadcast in your local market.
I think you actually confirmed my point. Streaming rights are included in their deals. If Lakers-Suns is on ABC or ESPN, they are the only ones who can stream it. NFL same thing, who streamed this weekends games? The networks that owned the rights. Name me a major property where the broadcaster doesn’t have in-market streaming rights. And I’m not talking about Sunday Ticket and out of market rights. The reason the networks pay big money is because you have to watch the game on their network, their local affiliates, or have to buy cable with their channel included. If you can bypass that by just streaming with an outside provider, it undercuts the economics of the deal.
You realize that you can stream your in market NFL broadcasts through the NFL's app right? Which is free. Also, the streaming for the games on CBS is exclusive to Paramount+, same with ESPN's streaming being exclusive to ESPN+. Interestingly it appears that Fox doesn't really care a whole lot about streaming rights. https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-tv-rights-deals-explained/z4rlycwog3jz1f6pqdqoegbxf At the end of the day, it's very evident that ESPN, Fox, NBX, CBS, etc. don't vire MLS as a valuable property and/or partner. ESPN really only wanted the out of market package for ESPN+. It's pretty evident that they didn't value MLS as a linear cable property. Apple does appear to value MLS, and additionally wants to be a partner with the league to help it grow. Which in turn will help grow Apple TV+.
Do you want an actual response or are you posting rhetorically? Have you taken a minute and think it through?
I’m at a loss how to respond to a post that attempts to argue yet actually agrees with my point that the in-market streaming is free because over the air is free. Do you think the local CBS affiliate would be fired up to pay their affiliate fees up if instead of watching on TV or steaming thru a portal which shows their ads that you just watch on Apple TV?
https://www.coloradorapids.com/news/balboa-angeli-moor-headline-rapids-on-air-personalities-in-2023 Rapids announce their On Air personalities for 2023. Jordan Angeli returns to Colorado after having spent time with the Crew and will be the primary host of whatever the Rapids produce in-house. She'll be joined by Drew Moor and/or Marcelo Balboa at times, and she'll also work as a sideline reporter for some games. Connor Cape and Brian Crookham will continue to do the radio broadcast which will be available as alternate audio through the MLS channel on AppleTV. (Balboa will be working directly for Apple/MLS on gamedays as a Spanish analyst on whichever game he's assigned)
What happens if the deal with Fox becomes profitable for Fox because they save on production and Leagues Cup becomes a big deal? What if the new deal with CONCACAF and CONEMBOL turns into.... No one even thought ten years ago that streaming would pay more than cable did they?
Well I take that back then....As it turns out...in order to stream your local NFL games you have to PAY for OTA streaming services now. Can't stream for free any longer. Need NFL+, ESPN+, Paramount+ and/or Peacock. https://www.latimes.com/entertainme...our-mobile-device-are-going-behind-a-pay-wall Also, the Apple TV App allows you to switch over to your favorite shows on network TV using your providers log in. Streaming has never been "free." You've almost always needed a service providers subscription to get access. Whether you stream via the Xfinity App, Hulu Live, Youtube TV, etc. you're paying for the access. As far as I've noticed, YouTube TV has very limited to no local TV ads on the local ABC, Fox, CBS and NBC feeds, or ESPN and Fox Sports channels for that matter. Make no mistake, I'm not agreeing with you.
Of course it will do almost nothing for Apple TV plus and apple knows that. mls is a separate service and the 6 games they put on plus won't sell a single subscription.
So you really don't want to know how that will work because you've already decided it will do "almost nothing" before it even gets started? So the original "question" was rhetorical.
No. However if 40% are free, how many can we possibly expect to have on plus and still sell enough full season packages... Or is the 40% on plus OR free?