Soccer Stadium in Minneapolis (cancelled)

[Tyler]

"Barely surviving"? MLS is growing rapidly. The $100 million thing was just typical owner-speak during CBA. Every league says they're losing money (except maybe the NFL).

[VAStationDude]

The Mls television ratings are comparable to the wnba and their new "big buck" television contract is puny compared to league payroll. The nfl brings in over $6 billion in television and their payroll is under $4.5 billion. Under the new television deal The MLS will bring in 90 million with a payroll approaching $200 million.

Ticket sale revenue is also pretty lousy. Many lower level level tickets for tomorrow's dc United home opener can be had for less than $25 on stubhub.

[Jacobean]

The Mls television ratings are comparable to the wnba and their new "big buck" television contract is puny compared to league payroll. The nfl brings in over $6 billion in television and their payroll is under $4.5 billion. Under the new television deal The MLS will bring in 90 million with a payroll approaching $200 million.

Ticket sale revenue is also pretty lousy. Many lower level level tickets for tomorrow's dc United home opener can be had for less than $25 on stubhub.

You're really comparing apples and oranges here. How was the NFL doing in its 20th year of existence?

And way to establish that "ticket sale revenue is lousy" by pointing to the lowest priced second-hand ticket available at pretty much the only game of MLS opening weekend that wasn't a sellout. That's some solid analysis.

[VAStationDude]

Cable television either didn't exist or was in its infancy when the nfl was in its 20th year. The MLS which, as you noted, has been around for a long time gets horrible television rating. I don't want public money going to a soccer stadium when there is a perfectly good palace being built right now. The prospect of The MLS not existing at some point, which it won't if revenues don't increase substantially, makes me even more skeptical of a soccer stadium.

[Didier]

There is literally no chance of MLS not being around at some point.

[Rich]

I’m not sure if I’d say “literally no chance.”

I’m old enough to have attended Kicks games at Met Stadium. At that time we were convinced that major league level soccer had finally arrived. In 1980 the original NASL drew over 5.5 million fans. That’s close to what MLS drew in 2014. But by 1982 the Kicks folded, and by 1984 the whole league folded.

[HuskyGrad]

I’m not sure if I’d say “literally no chance.”

I’m old enough to have attended Kicks games at Met Stadium. At that time we were convinced that major league level soccer had finally arrived. In 1980 the original NASL drew over 5.5 million fans. That’s close to what MLS drew in 2014. But by 1982 the Kicks folded, and by 1984 the whole league folded.

The NASL demise was generally caused by wealthy teams driving up roster budgets. The teams with weaker financial backing eventually caved when they couldn't keep up. The single entity operator-investor structure allows the league to control expenditures across the league as the revenues improve. MLS investors also operate SUM (Soccer United Marketing) who manages television rights for MLS as well as the national teams. As long as the structure of the league is not fundamentally changed it were persist for the long term.

[Didier]

Besides both being soccer leagues, the operations really aren't comparable.

MLS is a hyper-conservative league that has tightly managed finances and a growing stable of ultra-rich owners who have literally "bought in" to the system. Over two decades, this system has produced a league that has real equity. While the TV ratings are concerning, MLS attendance is way up, franchise fees are $70+ million, and billions of dollars have been spent on public-private soccer infrastructure. Further, ESPN, Fox and Univision have signed a contract to pay MLS $720 million to show its games from 2015 to 2022. And this is to say nothing of the league's marketing arm, called SUM, which profits from just about every big game or tournament that takes place in North America.

So even if not all of the teams are technically "profitable," only some catastrophic event could wipe out the league any time soon.


Edit - What Huskygrad said.

[Rich]

Sound like they’ve decided to survive by treading water rather than drown while attempting to swim. But I guess if that keeps them relevant I’m for it. I do hope you guys are right and MLS does continue to grow. We’ve been on the cusp of a soccer revolution for 40 years. The cusp is getting old.

[Didier]

Soccer has been a major sport in this country for years now. The only metric that is subpar is MLS TV ratings, but even still the league has a TV deal with three major networks.

It's really not been a question of "when" for several years now.

[mister.shoes]

Maybe the TV ratings aren't so good because the people who are really interested in the games can *gasp* afford to go? Unlike the NFL/NBA/NHL/MLB situation, where going costs a fortune. Seems like a stretch, but...maybe?

[Rich]

Maybe. But aren’t ratings somewhat connected with quality of play? When you tune into an NFL, MLB, NHL or NBA game, you’ll see those sports played at the highest possible level with the best athletes on earth at their respective crafts. Not so with MLS.

[HuskyGrad]

Maybe. But aren’t ratings somewhat connected with quality of play? When you tune into an NFL, MLB, NHL or NBA game, you’ll see those sports played at the highest possible level with the best athletes on earth at their respective crafts. Not so with MLS.

One issue with TV ratings has been the lack of a consistent time slot. This has been rectified this year with a double header on Sundays with a game on ESPN and a game on Fox Sports 1. Also, they also now have a time slot on Unimas on Fridays that offers both commentary in Spanish and English. As a result opening weekend resulted in television ratings better than any game last year on ESPN except for the MLS All-star game.

[xandrex]

Maybe the TV ratings aren't so good because the people who are really interested in the games can *gasp* afford to go? Unlike the NFL/NBA/NHL/MLB situation, where going costs a fortune. Seems like a stretch, but...maybe?

Some of it might be cost, but an MLB game (especially the Twins) can be cheap...I went last year and someone from Target Field game my entire group free tickets.

I imagine no small part of it is (at least from what I can tell) the region nature of soccer at the moment. Unlike an NFL team, where fans might be concentrated in a certain area, but sprinkled throughout the country, I'm guessing most of the fans of MLS are currently heavily concentrated in their team's metro and most of them are fairly die-hard. So why tune in when you can go sit outside on a lovely day and watch the game in person? The price is icing on the cake.

[Didier]

Maybe. But aren’t ratings somewhat connected with quality of play? When you tune into an NFL, MLB, NHL or NBA game, you’ll see those sports played at the highest possible level with the best athletes on earth at their respective crafts. Not so with MLS.

What is the implication here, though? Having mediocre TV ratings doesn't indicate that the league is on the verge of collapse. Again, all indications are that the league is healthy and growing.

[Rich]

I wasn’t implying anything. I was just replying to mister shoes.

[Didier]

Sorry if I've been lumping you into VAStationDude's take.

Ultimately, there's really no question that MLS is a stable and growing league, which VAStationDude was trying to refute.

Of course, the league is a fraction as popular or profitable as the NFL, but being smaller than the NFL (or even the NBA or MLB) doesn't indicate that the league is an unhealthy investment.

[HuskyGrad]

According to this article, land purchase options have been secured. http://northernpitch.com/_/minnesota-so ... um-bid-r51


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Didier]

http://northernpitch.com/_/minnesota-so ... um-bid-r51

[nfschauer]

Very exciting! I wonder which buildings would need to be torn down if this did become a reality.