The Chicago Tribune today wrote that average WUSA attendance was 6700, but that even if it were 20,000 the league would have lost money. This is puzzling given the average attendances at some flourishing men's leagues - England Division 2 7100 England Division 3 5100 Italy Serie C1 A 2600 In terms of the 20,000 number, European clubs that draw fewer than 20,000 attendees on average include - Parma Fulham Sporting Lisbon Standard Liege Celta Vigo I understand that travel costs are greater in WUSA, the stadium deals may not have been favorable, and TV money was lacking ... but? This still seems very odd to me.
ding, ding. most leagues around the world in all sports make lots and lots of money from television and advertising...the wusa didn't have much income from either, hence their income depended almost entirely upon ticket sales.
Those teams also get lots of money from other sources, especially selling players to bigger teams. WUSA never had that option, as it was the biggest game around. Those teams get a lot of money from television contracts. An English Premier team can expect an eight-figure TV contract at the beginning of every season, not to mention the additional millions it gets from advertisers. Any idea how much it costs to get your corporate logo on the shirt of a team like Fulham or Parma?
The No. 1 rule of pro sports these days: Make sure that you turn a profit EVEN BEFORE YOUR TEAM STEPS ONTO THE FIELD. Suggestion to WUSA2 ownership groups: Read Rule No. 1. Also, build your own stadia EVEN BEFORE YOUR TEAM STEPS ONTO THE FIELD. That way, rent, concessions and parking are yours.
Lessons for investors in WPSL or W-League, whoever will make the next try at Division I women's soccer in the US (soon, I hope): 1) Build, buy or become partners in right-sized venues like SAS Stadium. Or partner up with MLS or A-League teams with good soccer venues (Columbus, Rochester, LA, Charleston, just to name a few). Don't be a tenant if it can be avoided. 2) TV revenue will be minimal. Buy TV time prudently to gain exposure in the local markets and recruit fans. Get on Fox Sports World or ESPN2 if possible, but don't bend over backwards to do it. Use the Internet or link up with MLS Shootout to distribute local broadcasts nationally. 3) Complicated deals that give an equity stake to players is a model that has collapsed twice (ABL, now WUSA). Bury it. Get solid investors who will hire and hold accountable professional business managers. 4) While you're at it, drop the single-entity system. Establish salary caps and let the teams compete within those caps. If a team does especially well at the gate, or even turns a modest profit, reward them by raising their cap a bit. 5) Market to many groups at once. Adult rec league players, sports fans (you know, people who are used to buying tickets to sporting events), ethnic communities. Broaden the scope beyond youth league participants and their parents. 6) Be optimistic. The WUSA did not fail because of any flaw in its product. It was exciting, competitive and compelling. The next generation of stars -- the Wagners, Wambachs, the Mittses and Solos -- will take the level of the women's game higher.
Italian serie C1, C2, D, etc... are very regionalized. Teams don't have to pay for airfares, hotels, and meals. Players either travel by bus or they find their own transportation since the games are close enough. Italy is not that big of a country. They also sell sponsorship slots and allow logos on their jersey, but they don't sell them for $2.5 million. That's a lot of money and very few companies in US are profitable enough to allow that kind of luxury.
thats what i never understood about the WUSA...why they would rather make it harder on themselves and expect more money from less sponsors/investors than try to get a reasonable amount of money from more sponsors/investors. also, i bet if they marketed more towards adults and less towards kids and teens with little to no funds and got sponsors such as bud light (a us soccer sponsor) to invest in them, they'd still be up and running
One more lesson for future investors in professional women's soccer: Link up all of the leagues playing women's pro soccer in this country. Specifically, the top league must play in the US Open Cup, especially if that gets Division I's star players into non-Division I markets.
Lots of college sports programs have gone this route. The principle is, if you're just one of a whole gaggle of sponsors, your message is drowning in a sea of logos. Nobody is singling you out, in theory. If you're one of 4-8 sponsors, you're getting more exposure. It's worth the extra money, in theory. Of course, those schools will play in games with significant local exposure, and sometimes some nationally televised games with 2 or 3 ratings. WUSA isn't fortunate in that regard.
Problem: getting US Open Cup matches against teams with players with NCAA eligibility. Note that, amongst amateur soccer teams, only the adult teams get to play in the Lamar Hunt Open Cup. Not Super Y or any D-3 League teams with college athletes. It will be interesting to see if the W League or the WPSL decides to go all-adult (i.e., drop the college/HS players).
But PDL teams with college athletes get to play in the Open Cup, just as they regularly play Pro Select League teams as part of their league schedule. It's a very fine line to split with the NCAA.
That's good, but have you ever driven from Los Angeles to Venezia or Siracusa? And how long did that take?
Nine days, but I wasn't driving a straight route and took time to do sightseeing. A college friend of mine and her sister once drove from Minnesota to Los Angeles in thirty hours. I wouldn't wanna do that...
From LA to Boston is as far as from London to Israel. let's just put the distance argument to rest shall we? Italy is smaller than California.