Fox EVP of marketing says attendance has beaten expectations

[4th&long]

This may be the first time I've seen someone refer to owning and operating an entire sports league as "cheap sports programming."

Cheap in comparison to the NFL, NHL, NBA, and the other major leagues? Yeah, sure. But that's not the USFL's competition for its timeslot; it's other, cheaper programming that FS1 could use in its place, like bowling, poker, cornhole, what have you (and for USA, L&O reruns). It's the cost-benefit I referred to in a previous post on the topic.

And it's not just the USFL, but the XFL too if it ends up getting a paying TV deal. It's great if you can get a TV deal that pays; the problem is, there's more pressure to produce and make it worth that $$. XFL 2020 was a boon for the networks because it brought in good ratings for a minimal cost on their end.

No it's not, I've said it for 2 years after XFL bailed on 2021 and Fox tapped TSL. And no cornhole is not an option - LOL. And don't forget Cable Carriage rights fees, L&O reruns can't justify the $10 per subscriber fee that ESPN gets.

I was being a little glib by throwing cornhole in there, but my point stands about other, cheaper programming than even the USFL out there (which I believe you cited costing $35-70 million just this year to start up). If Fox can get programming, pick whatever lesser sport you want, that costs 1/3 of that and gets around the same viewership, maybe a little less, is it still worth it to pour money into the USFL?

I'm not sure why you're bring up cable carriage fees here. To my understanding (and I know you'll correct me if I'm wrong), carriage fees are negotiated in part based on the leverage cable networks have depending upon their viewership numbers. We are a LONG way from the USFL affecting FS1 or USA in that way (not sure what L&O reruns have to do with ESPN? If L&O reruns draw big viewers - and it's my understanding they do - they're of value to USA in these discussions with cable companies about carriage fees)

Agreed on XFL but the nets were correct in end for not paying as XFL 2.0 which went belly up (covid yes but still). Spending $35-70mm on the USFL before getting commercial $ and NBC rights fees is pocket change in the world of sports rights fees 2022.

Annual rights fees:
NHL rights fees $625mm
NFL $11 billion
NBA current $2.6 billion, looking to reup for $8 billion
EPL $450mm U.S. rights deal
MLS $90mm - asking for $300mm
MLB $2 billion annual- includes...
MLB's AppleTV/NBC is $115mm just to stream 100 games with amateur play-by-play

So yes - USFL is cheap programming - rights fees are just HUGE right now.

I think there was a story about how much the USFL/FOX was charging for ad rates, but I can't seem to remember where it was. Again, I could be wrong here, but I'd be surprised if they were able to charge a healthy $$ for TV spots for a league with no ratings track record. Maybe for the prime time games because prime time slots are always more valuable to advertisers, but bringing up ad revenue as if that's some substantial windfall for the league in its first season...I'm skeptical about that.

And my point, again, is NOT to compare the USFL to the MAJOR sports leagues - yes, it's cheaper compared TO THEM - but that's not the alternative for FS1 and USA. It's not MLB OR USFL or NFL OR USFL; it's other, cheaper sports programming that I suggested above. All of this is hypothetical, of course, and if the USFL's ratings increase or steady at the numbers they've been drawing, then this discussion is moot.

GP,

I disagree on FS1 and USA using non-sports programming - FS1 needs original content sports and to a less extent USA does. You could say the same for MLS or NHL or MLB why pay that when reruns will do.
Carriage fees are not just ratings driven its specific content driven, people wants sports channels. When I pick a cable package it has to have sports and specific channels. Notice how Warner added NHL to TNT/TBS before the merger to Discovery - its content that drives viewers and cable system demand (along with MLB/NBA), adding the sports packages made Warner more attractive.

Here's the Ad rate thread: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3623

[GregParks]

You're arguing against something I never said - I brought up L&O as an example for USA (similar to how Big Bang Theory reruns do boffo ratings on TBS), which is not a dedicated sports channel (it may become more of one in the future, but it's not there yet). But for FS1, I made it clear my point about other cheaper SPORTS programming. Nowhere in there did I mention FS1 or Fox going with NON-SPORTS programming.

And I still fail to see what the USFL has to do with whatever you're arguing about carriage fees - it seems like you're making the point that FS1 and the like are able to get more in carriage fees because people want sports channels as part of their package but FS1 is still a sports channel with or without the USFL.

[4th&long]

You're arguing against something I never said - I brought up L&O as an example for USA (similar to how Big Bang Theory reruns do boffo ratings on TBS), which is not a dedicated sports channel (it may become more of one in the future, but it's not there yet). But for FS1, I made it clear my point about other cheaper SPORTS programming. Nowhere in there did I mention FS1 or Fox going with NON-SPORTS programming.

And I still fail to see what the USFL has to do with whatever you're arguing about carriage fees - it seems like you're making the point that FS1 and the like are able to get more in carriage fees because people want sports channels as part of their package but FS1 is still a sports channel with or without the USFL.

This kinda comes full circle with the Streaming/TV-Cable threads we had.

The sports channels need original sports programing (similar to sports streaming) in order to justify carriage fees and customer demand. USA needs original sports programming too to be a TBS/TNT competitor. W/O NBCSN, NBC wasn't going to dish out $225mm for the secondary NHL pkg. But Warner did.

FOX, is the lone broadcaster w/o a movie studio, which is why they likely aren't going deep into streaming with a dedicated service. They also don't have ties to parks and stuff.

The FOX sold the 20th Century Fox and FX etc to Disney their remaining business had 3 main focuses: Sports, News and Reality TV.
Sports is a priority to FOX and it also helps their betting investments. They need programming to fill FS1 and FS2. Look how much they replay USFL games on FS1 during the week, they have a lot of free time to fill.
What the TSL and now USFL provides FOX and to lesser extent NBC is inexpensive (ie cheap) live unique sport programming, that they control. By Control I mean: when its on, the costs, and who gets on. That is what they really like about the USFL.
The talk is cable cord cutting will level out at 50-60mm households (and in reality OTT cable like versions will include more). So Fox seems to be running full bore on its 3 TV goals and USFL fits right in. They need FS1 to be in demand by customers just like NFLN. NFLN took the big Amazon money and lost alot of games on NFLN. Their carriage arrangements require 7 games a year. NFLN needs programming too and may look to XFL as a source.

Back to Fox/USFL If it fails would XFL be an option? Yes but it could be more costly and opens them up to competition long term and a time of year that they don't necessarily want and they lose flex control.

So FOX wants the USFL to work and isn't going to lay down without a fight and these numbers so far are realistically what they should be expecting Yr 1. Similar for NBC.

[MGB01]

Speaking of which the May 21 game was moved to prime time, so NBC must be good with everything going on.

[4th&long]

Speaking of which the May 21 game was moved to prime time, so NBC must be good with everything going on.

At that time NHL and NBA is winding down

[4th&long]

Speaking of which the May 21 game was moved to prime time, so NBC must be good with everything going on.

Good catch.

Hmm At that time NHL and NBA is winding down, makes some sense.

No dates / times on wk 5 yet

[MGB01]

Speaking of which the May 21 game was moved to prime time, so NBC must be good with everything going on.

At that time NHL and NBA is winding down

NHL playoffs start Monday night, so ABC could actually have a prime time game opposite. Would be great for the USFL if they could notch that going into year two.

[Tank55]

Going back to the original set of tweets that started this thread, it's interesting how he frames all of these metrics. With attendance (or rather, just the Stallions attendance), he says that internal expectations have been exceeded.

We expected to have modest fan turnout for Bham Stallion games, so far the support for the Stallions has exceeded expectations.

But with television ratings, he pivots to external comparisons:

As many of you have pointed out, TV ratings are key to building this league. When comparing USFL viewership to a host of well-established, legacy spring sports properties (thanks @mulvihill79)... well that paints a very, very bullish picture about this leagues viability and value

What's omitted there, of course, is whether the internal expectations for television ratings are being met.

[johnnyangryfuzzball]

What's omitted there, of course, is whether the internal expectations for television ratings are being met.

Those expectations were (if I recall right) 700k for cable, and I think somewhere around 1M for over-the-air.

The Easter weekend/inaugural season gave a bigger boost than I was expecting. Week 2 was around 1M, so that's on target, but cable has consistently fallen short of that.

Remember, NBC also has a deal with FCF, which right now they have stuffed off on its free outlets Xumo and LX, but it has better marketing potential. They don't really need the USFL to keep doing spring football. They could in theory cancel the USFL at any time without serious loss (I can't imagine Comcast agreeing to pay Fox for the USFL and assume that degree of risk without some sort of out clause).

[herns]

What's omitted there, of course, is whether the internal expectations for television ratings are being met.

Those expectations were (if I recall right) 700k for cable, and I think somewhere around 1M for over-the-air.

The Easter weekend/inaugural season gave a bigger boost than I was expecting. Week 2 was around 1M, so that's on target, but cable has consistently fallen short of that.

Remember, NBC also has a deal with FCF, which right now they have stuffed off on its free outlets Xumo and LX, but it has better marketing potential. They don't really need the USFL to keep doing spring football. They could in theory cancel the USFL at any time without serious loss (I can't imagine Comcast agreeing to pay Fox for the USFL and assume that degree of risk without some sort of out clause).

Ya I think you’re right that expectations are around those numbers. I don’t think nbc is that enthusiastic about fcf just due to fcf having to pay nbc to be in nbcLX and peacock. I would be interested too see what fan Controlled Football would get for viewership on a main channel