Fox EVP of marketing says attendance has beaten expectations

[herns]

Do you honestly believe all the things you say on this board? Or are you consciously carrying water for the USFL? Just trying to parse if you're snowing yourself or trying to snow us.

I have no idea what you are talking about, but I suggest trying RIF. The USFL agreement has virtually no ticket rev- that goes to the city (premium ie seats charged) - If i recall correctly, and I do.

https://www.al.com/sports/2021/10/usfl- ... ngham.html

>> BJCC will retain all revenues from stadium concession and parking and some revenues related to advertising and premium seating. <<

Since Fox is charging $10 (ie a near giveaway) for Gen Admission seats which includes 2 free kids tickets (an actual give away) the only revenue in the stadium is ads, premium seating which is $25 a seat, concessions and parking. Its NOT League rev.

Clearly USFL IS NOT looking to make any money off attendance - only the local government has any real interest. USFL does want attendance for the all obsessed optics.

Then where are they making their money? They're not making TV rights fees, they're not making attendance money. How does this become sustainable?

Nbc is paying a reportedly significant amount for tv rights fees but being they’re owned by fox commercials is the big thing, and eventually team ownership which they reportedly have bidders lined up already, but essentially in the short term it’s sustainable the same way a tv show is

[GDAWG]

If the USFL gets individual team owners, they need to be owners who are financially stable and thoroughly vetted.

[Tank55]

Nbc is paying a reportedly significant amount for tv rights fees

Do we know how much?

[4th&long]

I have no idea what you are talking about, but I suggest trying RIF. The USFL agreement has virtually no ticket rev- that goes to the city (premium ie seats charged) - If i recall correctly, and I do.

https://www.al.com/sports/2021/10/usfl- ... ngham.html

>> BJCC will retain all revenues from stadium concession and parking and some revenues related to advertising and premium seating. <<

Since Fox is charging $10 (ie a near giveaway) for Gen Admission seats which includes 2 free kids tickets (an actual give away) the only revenue in the stadium is ads, premium seating which is $25 a seat, concessions and parking. Its NOT League rev.

Clearly USFL IS NOT looking to make any money off attendance - only the local government has any real interest. USFL does want attendance for the all obsessed optics.

Then where are they making their money? They're not making TV rights fees, they're not making attendance money. How does this become sustainable?

Nbc is paying a reportedly significant amount for tv rights fees but being they’re owned by fox commercials is the big thing, and eventually team ownership which they reportedly have bidders lined up already, but essentially in the short term it’s sustainable the same way a tv show is

Correct Herns.

In addition to charging for commercials on Fox/FS1 games the USFL/Fox got paid a "significant" rights fee from NBC, that is multi-year per reports.

Also look at this thread: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3623

[herns]

Nbc is paying a reportedly significant amount for tv rights fees

Do we know how much?

No, according to Yahoo and a few other sites the amount is significant though. Murdoch said the leagues first 3 years of expenses have already been underwritten I wonder how big a factor the NBC deal is with that

[GregParks]

I have no idea what you are talking about, but I suggest trying RIF. The USFL agreement has virtually no ticket rev- that goes to the city (premium ie seats charged) - If i recall correctly, and I do.

https://www.al.com/sports/2021/10/usfl- ... ngham.html

>> BJCC will retain all revenues from stadium concession and parking and some revenues related to advertising and premium seating. <<

Since Fox is charging $10 (ie a near giveaway) for Gen Admission seats which includes 2 free kids tickets (an actual give away) the only revenue in the stadium is ads, premium seating which is $25 a seat, concessions and parking. Its NOT League rev.

Clearly USFL IS NOT looking to make any money off attendance - only the local government has any real interest. USFL does want attendance for the all obsessed optics.

Then where are they making their money? They're not making TV rights fees, they're not making attendance money. How does this become sustainable?

COMMERICIALS - Its a MADE FOR TV product, Its OWNED by a broadcast network because they want CHEAP SPORTS PROGRAMMING. That's 100% it. You know that. They traded ticket sales for reduced cost and reduced risk.

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.

[johnnyangryfuzzball]

Nbc is paying a reportedly significant amount for tv rights fees

Do we know how much?

No, according to Yahoo and a few other sites the amount is significant though. Murdoch said the leagues first 3 years of expenses have already been underwritten I wonder how big a factor the NBC deal is with that

Fox and Comcast are publicly held corporations. If there is truly money being exchanged between the two to carry the USFL, it would show up in their public financial filings with the SEC. Instead, we're left with vague statements of "substantial" money.

[4th&long]

Then where are they making their money? They're not making TV rights fees, they're not making attendance money. How does this become sustainable?

COMMERICIALS - Its a MADE FOR TV product, Its OWNED by a broadcast network because they want CHEAP SPORTS PROGRAMMING. That's 100% it. You know that. They traded ticket sales for reduced cost and reduced risk.

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.

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.

[4th&long]

Do we know how much?

No, according to Yahoo and a few other sites the amount is significant though. Murdoch said the leagues first 3 years of expenses have already been underwritten I wonder how big a factor the NBC deal is with that

Fox and Comcast are publicly held corporations. If there is truly money being exchanged between the two to carry the USFL, it would show up in their public financial filings with the SEC. Instead, we're left with vague statements of "substantial" money.

They are not required to list every revenue deal.

[GregParks]

COMMERICIALS - Its a MADE FOR TV product, Its OWNED by a broadcast network because they want CHEAP SPORTS PROGRAMMING. That's 100% it. You know that. They traded ticket sales for reduced cost and reduced risk.

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.