Not a bad price for expansion teams at least on the D2 level. Some of those teams make somewhat of a profit. I think.......
Citation needed. It think it's a stretch to say that any are turning a profit: NuRock's league fees are hefty and competition is getting higher: both on the field and off (stadiums, academy, etc.). The teams that joined pre-2011, sure, possibly. But they also tend to be among the lowest attendance.
Maybe you are right to a point but I always hear and read the same thing. I think some of the teams that draw decent numbers for D2 would make something of a profit. I doubt owners would continue to invest in a team that loses or bleeds money.
https://www.soctakes.com/2018/07/30/usl-franchise-fees-shepard-tone-or-progress/ https://www.soctakes.com/2018/04/18...s-of-owning-a-lower-division-pro-soccer-team/
My point is , if teams and leagues continue to “lose” or “not make money”, how long can they withstand or put up with the losses? Sooner or later , wouldn’t owners want to drop out? I mean why keep throwing money away without seeing a return on an investment? Especially now during this Pandemic , if teams are losing money, won’t they start folding?
I'm not sure you start a lower division soccer team to make money, but there currently 4 general categories of ownership in USL: Big budget, speculative possibly angling towards MLS bid, like Indy XI, Phoenix Rising, NCFC, Louisville, etc. Schedule padding for a MiLB owner avoiding dark nights at the ballfield: Reno, Memphis, El Paso Legacy operations: Charleston, OCSC, Pittsburgh Everyone else (Birmingham, Hartford, Colorado Springs, etc.) It's those last two groups that have huge question marks: we've seen two legacy clubs fall by wayside in the last couple of years (Rochester, Penn FC) and Fresno. Charleston just left their long paid for stadium, so I think they're in a risky spot. Tulsa is now in a kind of similar situation that Fresno was in (they were previously a MiLB sidepiece) and they don't draw well. Austin and Charlotte are almost certainly doomed. RGV may be, as well, with the rumor that the Dynamo plan to field their own reserve team. USL is very hit or miss, but even where it hits, the clubs are spending a lot.
***Soccer in the US is very hit or miss... In the history of MLS, it has NEVER made a profit. How can we expect anyone in USL to make a profit? Their "media deal" is ESPN+ streaming that supposedly pays out $1m a year. That's puny. Take into account how much each USL franchise pays to stream each year, it's maybe not break-even. The money is made from USMNT, USWNT, El Tri, and all these international events that US Soccer tries to host (ICC, Campeones Cup, etc.). Unfortunately, American soccer fans just don't support the sport at a domestic pro level.
I didn't realize Penn FC folded. They didn't last very long under that name. My cousin tried out for the Harrisburg City Islanders and I think they were about to sign him but he decided not to play for them as he was from the West Coast and they weren't going to pay enough to live on. I still don't see how owners will want to continue to shell out money to keep a franchise going, especially now during Covid. Again I don't know anything about the USL but as far as MLS is concerned at least until last year, I doubt that the league as a rule loses or doesn't make money. To me anyway, that is beginning to be such an old tired line. Maybe they aren't making what they want to be making or could make but with their stadium ownership, revenue etc, I believe they were making someone of a profit. Maybe not with soccer but with other things like concerts, friendlies monster truck rally's and firework shows held at the stadiums....
Business owners need some losses, it helps their taxes. That's always been a thing. We don't know how much they are losing, but we also don't know how much they are spending. Some of it is just hopes and dreams that it will eventually turn a profit down the road. You know, "invest in the future." Seven MLS entities turned a profit in 2019. Seven. Atlanta is one of the biggest spenders and they made a whole $7m operating profit on $78m in revenue. Like I've stated, MLS isn't making a profit. These billionaire owners are interested in one thing and that's how they can eventually get more money. Arthur Blank already had a stadium, so, why not occupy more dates by putting soccer in it? Makes sense. It brings more money in via concessions and advertising for what really matters -- his Falcons. The same for many other owners. Additionally, the marriage of SUM and MLS and USSF allows the profits to roll in elsewhere. It's not through domestic pro soccer though.
I've never once read or heard a sports owner brag about how much they make but I constantly hear them complain on how much they lose. I believe Atlanta, Seattle , AEG and others for a fact are making or made a killer profit. The revenue made from the non MLS stuff though is never revealed. When teams hold friendlies with Mexican or international soccer teams for example, those are profits but they are not shown as MLS profits. From what I recall in the 90's, international games are only sanctioned by FIFA and you had to have the license to schedule the games. Former Quakes GM Peter Bridgwater held the license for years making a killing off of international games. He used the old Quakes name and logo as a front with the amateur team , showed it as a loss but was really turning a profit. He did the same thing when MLS started up in 1996 until at least 2003 when he became ill.. AEG also turns profits from concerts and other stuff happening at their stadium but of course they won't show that in their MLS financial sheets. With this pandemic though, things could change drastically. I hope teams won't start folding because of it.
================== Yet recently USL president talked about capping USL-C and adding 5-10 teams to USL-1 ( or something like that) The league is starting to border line "churning teams" like has happened in the lower leagues in the past.. Keep taking new owners and the expansion fees in, yet watching team fail or drop leagues. Its the same old problem. Solidify what you have before you move on. Especially the USL, they simply don't have the revenue sources MLS has, like SUM, and there are days are still worry about some MLS teams.
The thing with the older USL team; City Islanders, Kickers, Rhinos, Battery, is that they got by for so long operating with very little budget. They won championships with little money and they have tried to stay in the past and not spend any money and it has hurt them. Once the newer teams came in and started spending they could no longer compete. Penn and the Rochester are gone. Richmond self relegated so they didn't have to spend money. Only Charleston is still there and who knows how much longer. You can see it with the OG MLS teams as well. DC, New England, Chicago, none of them like to spend money on players because they were competitive for years without having to. Seattle, Toronto, LAFC and Atlanta come in, spend money and win trophies. The former three don't.
Looking at the Chicago Fire renting out Soldier Field , they are paying out a lot of money to play there paying $210k if they draw 25,000 fans. I don't think they will sell 20k tickets a game though and they never have in over 20 years. I read Joe Mansueto is worth $4 billion so maybe he has other ways of making money or doesn't care about losing it or maybe he has bigger plans somewhere down the line.
What's going to happen to FC Wichita? They had fan support and building an infrastructure in Wichita. Will they turn up in USL-2 or maybe even USL 1?
The Charleston Battery playing at MUSC Health (or former Blackbaud) Stadium seemed really cool as they had an on-site pub called "The Three Lions". So now that the stadium no longer exists, what will they do with the pub? Did it close as well?
CSUMB isn't in the city of Monterey, so the population of one tiny city isn't the way to analyze the market. The university is on the former US Army base Fort Ord, straddling the cites of of Seaside and Marina. It's approximately equidistant from Monterey and downtown Salinas (pop. 156K), about 10 miles in different directions. The Salinas MSA, which is simply Monterey County, has a population of 434K, slightly bigger than Reno's MSA. There isn't much non-student residential population near the campus, so they will need to draw from Salinas and various other towns. It will be pretty much the opposite of putting a team in a centrally-located downtown-type place. They likely would try to draw fans from Santa Cruz County on the north side of the bay, which isn't terribly far away but isn't counted in the MSA stats.
I've seen this argument made elsewhere, and since I have never been to the area will defer to those that know better. However, this an ownership group that had trouble drawing crowds in downtown Fresno. Historically, expecting soccer fans to travel out of cities to pay money to follow a team hasn't had much success, at any level. Maybe they've figured it out.
I'm skeptical, too. My main point was that "They're putting a team in a town with 28,000 people!" isn't a great take. I know that's not your take, just what was in the tweet you quoted.
USL Expansion - at any level - is probably not the biggest concern right now. I'm more concerned with the leagues being able to survive not having a season this summer. Minor League Baseball is more firmly entrenched, and even its highest-level clubs are being to question whether they can return after a year of no business.
If all three pan out along with the Buffalo group and the Jacksonville Armada find a pro league to play in, Green Bay and New Orleans would be the only TV markets with a team in one of the big four major sports to not have a team in one of the four outdoor professional leagues.
Jacksonville could have joined anytime. I don't think they have the stomach to try the USL.... I think they are holding out for a NY Cosmos, Puerto Rico, San Francisco, and Hawaii long distance travel league.
------------------- Puerto Rico, Hawaii and such will never be back. Lower divisions can not support the travel costs. Look at the issues Detroit City FC are facing trying to come up a notch and play enough teams, some very scattered. Some of USL-Championship teams in the East need to drop to USL-1 I am thinking NYRB-2, Union-2, ATL-2, maybe Loudon. Heck, I'd love to see Detroit City FC join USL-1 also(politics) This helps beef up USL-1 USL & MLS need to figure out about these MLS owned teams at some point. I think they hurt USL-C, who wants to be an investor in that level when some of your "competitors" are drawing less than 1,000 people a game ? This in turn will allow the likes of Buffalo, Providence, maybe Baltimore to slide right in. Then, it would be so awesome for NY Cosmos and Jacksonville to join like Miami FC did. Good size markets and a really nice Eastern Conference to cut down on travel and maybe build some rivals. Yes, I know, they have issues with USL/MLS , but if that were done, your pyramid really starts to take shape MLS > USLC > USL1 If some of these teams had issues with pro/rel, then maybe this actually would be the time to try it in USLC & USL1 to see what version of it could work and we can put that issue to bed finally one way or the other. It either succeeded or it failed. And I came up with all of this with only 2 beers involved
Are we still spewing this nonsense? Has it hurt USLC's growth up to this point? Everything I've seen from attendance figures have not seen drops when hosting a MLS2 team vs an independent team. They've got more revenue from TV/Streaming than any lower division league in the history of this country I believe ... all while housing MLS2 teams. MLS2 teams have built stadiums and developed players for both USLC independents and MLS teams ... I struggle with the "who wants to be an investor with MLS2 teams around" argument. Optics are the only thing that people come up with as the reason ... and it's just not proving out. I say ALL of that and I'd love for there to be so many well run independent teams that MLS2 teams naturally down into USL L1 due to not being able to compete at the D2 level ... but we're not there yet.
This is also a double edged sword: NYRBII, Monarchs, and (usually) SPR are actually extremely competitive at the USL-C level. NTSC absolutely dominated L1 last season: they lead by 10 points after a 28 game season. Effectively, the entire playoffs would be MLS reserves teams. If people think the reserves teams are bad for the Championship (which, like you, I don't see any real evidence of), I think they would absolutely strangle independent teams in L1.