SpringFB vs MLS tv ratings

[4th&long]

https://www.outkick.com/disneys-brutal- ... ming-wars/

>> Clay Travis@ClayTravis
Disney+ lost 4 million streaming subscribers & ESPN+ barely grew. Disney stock is down $5 in after market trading. Increasingly streaming looks like an awful business with low profit margins that is replacing a great business — the cable and satellite bundle — with great profits.
5:06 PM · May 10, 2023 <<

Streaming was supposed to be the next big money maker... breaking news... its not. I've been skeptical from day one... its seems like nothing more than a premium cable channel... with less desirable content. If cable can come up with a hybrid ala cart/bundle pricing package - they may be able to halt and reverse the subscriber slide, or at least compete with an aggregator like YoutubeTV.

[Sykotyk]

https://www.outkick.com/disneys-brutal- ... ming-wars/

>> Clay Travis@ClayTravis
Disney+ lost 4 million streaming subscribers & ESPN+ barely grew. Disney stock is down $5 in after market trading. Increasingly streaming looks like an awful business with low profit margins that is replacing a great business — the cable and satellite bundle — with great profits.
5:06 PM · May 10, 2023 <<

Streaming was supposed to be the next big money maker... breaking news... its not. I've been skeptical from day one... its seems like nothing more than a premium cable channel... with less desirable content. If cable can come up with a hybrid ala cart/bundle pricing package - they may be able to halt and reverse the subscriber slide, or at least compete with an aggregator like YoutubeTV.

I signed up for the Disney bundle because I already had Hulu, was getting Disney+ for my daughter, and ESPN+ thrown in was cheaper than Hulu and Disney+ on their own. The problem with ESPN+ is that it's mostly only beneficial for me to watch NHL games. There's so much 'clutter' that you really get too many option and watch none of them.

Now, ESPN+ is more for cord cutters as you get everything on the main networks but it's still a net loss compared to the cable carriage fees and you're only getting the diehards who sign up specifically where cable got every grandma who wouldn't ever watch sports but had basic cable.

[4th&long]

https://www.outkick.com/disneys-brutal- ... ming-wars/

>> Clay Travis@ClayTravis
Disney+ lost 4 million streaming subscribers & ESPN+ barely grew. Disney stock is down $5 in after market trading. Increasingly streaming looks like an awful business with low profit margins that is replacing a great business — the cable and satellite bundle — with great profits.
5:06 PM · May 10, 2023 <<

Streaming was supposed to be the next big money maker... breaking news... its not. I've been skeptical from day one... its seems like nothing more than a premium cable channel... with less desirable content. If cable can come up with a hybrid ala cart/bundle pricing package - they may be able to halt and reverse the subscriber slide, or at least compete with an aggregator like YoutubeTV.

I signed up for the Disney bundle because I already had Hulu, was getting Disney+ for my daughter, and ESPN+ thrown in was cheaper than Hulu and Disney+ on their own. The problem with ESPN+ is that it's mostly only beneficial for me to watch NHL games. There's so much 'clutter' that you really get too many option and watch none of them.

Now, ESPN+ is more for cord cutters as you get everything on the main networks but it's still a net loss compared to the cable carriage fees and you're only getting the diehards who sign up specifically where cable got every grandma who wouldn't ever watch sports but had basic cable.

Question for you - does ESPN+ carry all the other ESPN networks or do you have to have cable with ESPN to still get all that? I thought it was separate content.

[Sykotyk]

https://www.outkick.com/disneys-brutal- ... ming-wars/

>> Clay Travis@ClayTravis
Disney+ lost 4 million streaming subscribers & ESPN+ barely grew. Disney stock is down $5 in after market trading. Increasingly streaming looks like an awful business with low profit margins that is replacing a great business — the cable and satellite bundle — with great profits.
5:06 PM · May 10, 2023 <<

Streaming was supposed to be the next big money maker... breaking news... its not. I've been skeptical from day one... its seems like nothing more than a premium cable channel... with less desirable content. If cable can come up with a hybrid ala cart/bundle pricing package - they may be able to halt and reverse the subscriber slide, or at least compete with an aggregator like YoutubeTV.

I signed up for the Disney bundle because I already had Hulu, was getting Disney+ for my daughter, and ESPN+ thrown in was cheaper than Hulu and Disney+ on their own. The problem with ESPN+ is that it's mostly only beneficial for me to watch NHL games. There's so much 'clutter' that you really get too many option and watch none of them.

Now, ESPN+ is more for cord cutters as you get everything on the main networks but it's still a net loss compared to the cable carriage fees and you're only getting the diehards who sign up specifically where cable got every grandma who wouldn't ever watch sports but had basic cable.

Question for you - does ESPN+ carry all the other ESPN networks or do you have to have cable with ESPN to still get all that? I thought it was separate content.

I'm not really sure because some stuff IS streamed through both, and some is just ESPN+ but I'm not sure if there's ESPN only content. I have ESPN+ myself and use a relative's cable password to stream several other channels (including ESPN). ESPN networks are available through their providers' app (think streaming cable) and also logging into ESPN+ with their login. But ESPN+ account is also logged in at the same time.

But in my experience the big stuff (NHL/NBA) shows up under both the ESPN and ESPN+ logins when it asks which you want to view it with.

[4th&long]

>> Michael Mulvihill@mulvihill79
If streaming ambitions are scaling back and pay tv subs are declining and sports betting is consolidating….what’s now the case for non-premium sports rights to go up sharply other than: they always have?
Quote Tweet
Square profile picture
Squawk Box@SquawkCNBC
·
May 23
"All of the legacy media companies are scaling back their ambitions," says @RichLightShed on the slimming streaming landscape. "Two years ago, everyone was chasing $NFLX. They wanted to be $NFLX. Now they're scaling back. $NFLX is no longer their north star." <<

Also the consolidation in streaming HBOMax and Discovery+ (WBD) and then right after Paramount+ and Showtime (Paramount Global). Bottomline, like i've posted, streaming channels are nothing more than Cable premium channels w/o the cable (but you still need internet (ie cable). If I pay for cable HBO I should get the new MAX free, otherwise they'll lose more customers. There isn't enough content to justify these separate channels - smart to consolidate. Get ready for Hulu/Disney+ which will come sooner or later.
Ultimately the demise of TV is due to crappy (woke?) content. A Seinfeld could not be made today, yet its still huge, its 25 years off the air, and began over 30 yrs ago.
So news and sports, both live, are dominating TV along with older TV and reality TV.

To Mulvihill point are sports going to be able to justify ever increasing media $$? Look at MLS and Pac12 for example, can't get the TV money. How does this impact alt/winter-spring FB? Likely to slow upside but if they remain cost effective, they can survive. Going big upfront is not the way. Better to start modestly and grow over time. I think both leagues have taken that approach albeit in different ways.

[4th&long]

With the NBA and NHL finished (good for USFL) focus is on MLB and international Soccer and niche sports. Now looking back at spring FB vs NHL we see...

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2023/0 ... -panthers/

>> Tuesday’s Panthers-Golden Knights NHL Stanley Cup Final Game 5 averaged a 1.4 rating and 2.72 million viewers across TNT (2.47M) and TruTV (253K), marking the smallest audience for a Game 5 of the Cup Final in 29 years — since Canucks-Rangers on ESPN in 1994 (2.41M). That was also the previous Game 5 to air on cable. Keep in mind ESPN’s coverage was blacked out in host market New York, where the games aired on MSG Network.
~
Outside of the COVID-era seasons, this year’s Cup Final was the least-watched since Ducks-Senators in 2007 (1.8M) and the second-least watched in at least 30 years — ahead of only 2007 and Rangers-Canucks on ESPN in ’94 (2.4M).<<

With MLS viewership stuck in the 250-300k range before going to Apple. NHL ceiling (at least in nationally televised games) was around 364k on TNT, ESPN a little more and ABC about 1mm.

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/S ... 04/17.aspx
>> ABC/ESPN averaged 583,000 viewers for its games, down 2%. The Disney networks had 50 games this season vs. only 28 last season (no blackouts each season).
~
ABC on its own averaged around 1 million viewers for games this season,
~
TNT averaged 364,000 viewers for its regular season games, up 1% from Season 1 of the new media rights pact in 2021-22. TNT had 61 games this season, which is 20% more than Season 1 <<

Of course that's sans playoffs which had some highs and lows and manay televised games.

NHL combined TV contract is $625mm yr ($400mm Disney). Now its less games but ratings certainly equivalent to ABC/ESPN numbers (sans NHL playoffs) compared to spring FB. So is XFl/USFL worth $80mm a year or 20% of Disney's NHL $$? That's a legit question that GC at RBC is asking, because if either league could get that their values would jump substantially.

Something to consider when looking at long term viability.

[BattleHawks]

FOX pays almost nothing for MLS

7M for 34 games, so only 205K per game

which i am sure they easily recoup with advertising

there are also no production costs

because they use the APPLE TV feed

[johnnyangryfuzzball]

FOX pays almost nothing for MLS

7M for 34 games, so only 205K per game

which i am sure they easily recoup with advertising

there are also no production costs

because they use the APPLE TV feed

Shoot, that's the same price ONE LOCAL AFFILIATE pays to simulcast an NFL night game.

MLS is basically banking on an over-the-hill Lionel Messi to save their league at this point.

[4th&long]

FOX pays almost nothing for MLS

7M for 34 games, so only 205K per game

which i am sure they easily recoup with advertising

there are also no production costs

because they use the APPLE TV feed

Shoot, that's the same price ONE LOCAL AFFILIATE pays to simulcast an NFL night game.

MLS is basically banking on an over-the-hill Lionel Messi to save their league at this point.

Yep, i tend to agree. But Fox likely benefits if they have any Messi matches which MLS should do for more exposure. So far MLS ratings are not great but it fills the schedule and cost minimal like u said.

[Sykotyk]

FOX pays almost nothing for MLS

7M for 34 games, so only 205K per game

which i am sure they easily recoup with advertising

there are also no production costs

because they use the APPLE TV feed

Shoot, that's the same price ONE LOCAL AFFILIATE pays to simulcast an NFL night game.

MLS is basically banking on an over-the-hill Lionel Messi to save their league at this point.

Yep, i tend to agree. But Fox likely benefits if they have any Messi matches which MLS should do for more exposure. So far MLS ratings are not great but it fills the schedule and cost minimal like u said.

Almost every MLS team now has a stadium they control. Ticket prices are far higher than USFL or even XFL. Controlling the stadium gives them a lot of revenue from concessions, concerts, etc.

MLS has 29 teams and only 7 are in stadiums they don't control completely. Though some are controlled by the owner's other team such as New England, Atlanta, etc.

They play a 34 game season plus other competitions. They're not struggling. This idea that XFL or USFL will ever be better than MLS in terms of finances is laughable. They might get good TV numbers but the total revenue matters against expenses. Ticket buying, merch, etc tells you you have fans and not just people pausing on a channel to watch for a while. That's where XFL and USFL have to really work.

It took MLS years to reach this point. Spring Football is nowhere near the ability to build and control their own stadiums. Without that they're renters who are in stadiums I'll suited for them and at the mercy of walk up fans on game day.