MLS going all-digital with 10-year Apple deal

[Chileiceman]

The thing that I don't like is that it's not fully included with an Apple TV subscription. You have to buy an add-on subscription if you want to watch all your team's games. At least on ESPN+ you don't have to pay an added fee for things aside from UFC PPV's. Likewise I think WWE Network is fully included with a paid Peacock subscription.

 

[PCSPounder]

I’m going to be so back-and-forth on this that I’ll look like I’m riding the fence, but not actually pay the painful price for it.

Cord-Cutting Getting Worse in 2021-22: S&P Report

Legacy MVPDs to lose 8.2% of subscribers in 2020

www.nexttv.com

Cord cutting is accelerating. A little. Enough that this is probably forward-looking rather than “too soon.”

 

[nickp91]

Blackouts are a product of the 60's & 70's and have no place anywhere in sports today

 

[OG6ix]

Blackouts are a product of the 60's & 70's and have no place anywhere in sports today

Blackouts protect regional sports networks. If you are a league like MLS who have had less interest from the Regionals than you can do away with them. But MLS teams are losing out on potential extra revenue.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

That seems like a very short-sighted move to me, but I guess they couldn't turn down the iBucks.

 

[Kirk Van Houten]

Does this also mean MLS will leave RSN's since there are no local blackouts? Sounds like it will apply for Canada as well.

It's a global deal I think



This is intresting

 

[BKIslandersFan]

I am a pretty casual NYCFC fan. If they aren't on any TV channels I won't bother subscribing to Apple TV just to watch them.

 

[sh724]

All media rights for $250MM a year for 10 years
Virtually all games are behind a stand alone paywall with no other content included
No local broadcast or local announcers
No games on in bars hotels, etc
Apple TV doesnt play well with Android

The lack of blackouts are nice but that is only bc there is only one broadcast, that is behind a paywall, so its not like there is anything to blackout.

From my irrelevant opinion, this is going to kill any growth and the vast majority of casual fans are going move on to other things. We dont have a price point yet so its possible this will costs more than ESPN+. It wouldnt surprise me if it did since it does away with local broadcast revenues, though not all markets have much.

I do not see ESPN, FOX, etc offering up anything of real value to simulcast a game from ATV. Euro leagues draw better ratings in the US than MLS and research has shown the most die hard of soccer fans in the US would rather watch Euro leagues than MLS.

The only people that are going to sign up for this are die hard MLS fans, which there cannot be that many of.

I could see ESPN saying you want us to simulcast ATV's broadcast? Pay us. You want us to simulcast your championship that is produced by our competitor? How much is worth to you?

If you are a soccer fan there are far higher quality leagues games available everywhere you look. This seems like a very bad deal for MLS in the long run. Short term $ gain for long term fan losses

 

[WarriorofTime]

Pretty bad move by AppleTV but I guess I can see why they are desperate for live sports. I doubt MLS gains too much traction in North America. All of the best American and Canadian players are going to Europe, now more so than ever. With deals on Paramount+, Peacock and ESPN+, watching high-level European soccer is more accessible than ever, and the EPL and Champions League even put games on at times that are accessible to be watched live by American audiences as well.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Blackouts are a product of the 60's & 70's and have no place anywhere in sports today

You are thinking of "blackouts" incorrectly. This doesn't refer to "no games on TV because the team did not sellout" which is the 60s/70s version. This is "game not on national TV because the local provider has rights"

 

[LadyStanley]

Apple TV doesnt play well with Android

Would hope that Apple will release Android app.

(I had free AppleTV after buying a new computer and only watched one thing in the year I had it.)

I'd assume there will be a deal with bars/etc., for streaming games, eventually.

 

[Canes]

Couple more details. This article is saying don’t overlook the fact that the international rights are part of this too.

MLS signs 10-year, $2.5-billion-plus global deal with Apple for all MLS matches, with some available in base AppleTV app and some requiring a separate subscription

Beginning in 2023, Apple will have global rights to all MLS matches, which they'll show for one subscription with no blackouts.

awfulannouncing.com

It probably should be. $250 mill per year for the domestic market alone seems like it would be a huge overpayment. But then again, I'm not sure how popular MLS will ever be internationally.

 

[oknazevad]

Overly bold move if you ask me. Too soon for any league to go all-streaming, especially on Apple TV+, which is easily the least significant of the major streaming services, and especially for this league, which still struggles to attract the casual viewer.

That said, The Athletic's report on the deal indicates that there will still be ESPN and Fox Sports (and Univision) involvement as well in the form of simulcasts of a game a week each, so this is really more about squeezing out the RSNs it appears. Probably a case of the league not wanting to deal with Sinclair's Bally Sports anymore. Might be the first domino to fall in the RSN exodus. We'll see.

 

[oknazevad]

The thing that I don't like is that it's not fully included with an Apple TV subscription. You have to buy an add-on subscription if you want to watch all your team's games. At least on ESPN+ you don't have to pay an added fee for things aside from UFC PPV's. Likewise I think WWE Network is fully included with a paid Peacock subscription.

WWE Network requires the one-step-up-from-the bottom subscription on Peacock. From what I'm seeing here, it seems one game a week will be free outright (no subscription needed, just download and register the app), while another one or two will be included in the $5/month base-tier subscription, but it'll be an additional charge to get all 15 games a week.

 

[PCSPounder]

All media rights for $250MM a year for 10 years
Virtually all games are behind a stand alone paywall with no other content included
No local broadcast or local announcers
No games on in bars hotels, etc
Apple TV doesnt play well with Android

The lack of blackouts are nice but that is only bc there is only one broadcast, that is behind a paywall, so its not like there is anything to blackout.

From my irrelevant opinion, this is going to kill any growth and the vast majority of casual fans are going move on to other things. We dont have a price point yet so its possible this will costs more than ESPN+. It wouldnt surprise me if it did since it does away with local broadcast revenues, though not all markets have much.

I do not see ESPN, FOX, etc offering up anything of real value to simulcast a game from ATV. Euro leagues draw better ratings in the US than MLS and research has shown the most die hard of soccer fans in the US would rather watch Euro leagues than MLS.

The only people that are going to sign up for this are die hard MLS fans, which there cannot be that many of.

I could see ESPN saying you want us to simulcast ATV's broadcast? Pay us. You want us to simulcast your championship that is produced by our competitor? How much is worth to you?

If you are a soccer fan there are far higher quality leagues games available everywhere you look. This seems like a very bad deal for MLS in the long run. Short term $ gain for long term fan losses

We’re hearing that you can opt for local broadcast crew of the telecast (but same cameras).

Your bars/hotels thing is speculation.

What casual fans? Frankly, the fans MLS has targeted in 2.0 and on are younger and probably didn want to pay for the cord in the first place.

One Euro league draws better ratings. The rest are streamed these days.

The people I know who have raised objections are older. That’s not where the base is, or will be, anyway. The risk, of course, is the out-of-sight out-of-mind issue, but that’s happening to everyone.

 

[Deep Blue Metallic]

As a cable-cutter NHL fan, I'm jealous that their streaming service will include every game, including playoffs, with no regional blackouts.

 

[OG6ix]

ESPN is not going to be doing them any favours...

 

[Reaser]

re: potential growth/out-of-sight-out-of-mind, we won't know until the linear part is announced. ESPN is apparently close, FOX is apparently a maybe. Think everyone agrees there's not going to be any major fees for whatever games they get and it's already been said it'll be much less total number of games than what they have now. It'll just be about having 'some' presence on TV. If it's just a handful of random games and MLS Cup, not great.

Otherwise everything is with Apple. No one who isn't already a fan is going to pay specifically to watch MLS. A lot of current MLS fans won't pay either. STH get it for free so it really boils down to being something for current fans. Not a grow-the-league deal.

A lot of the spin in other places goes too far in each direction, naturally. The one that people aren't getting is that you have x-amount of people that watch MLS on TV now, and everyone spinning positive is acting like 100% of those people will transfer over to Apple, buy the MLS package and PAY to watch MLS. It doesn't work like that.

Within it not working like that is how many people think of things. Even though they're paying for cable or youtubeTV, etc., they don't view it as paying to watch MLS.

(note: another thing people don't get is that not every MLS teams local deal is with a RSN. Plenty are with local ABC/NBC/FOX/CW/Ind. affiliates, that's OTA.)

So they watch their local MLS team on "FOX" (local FOX affiliate), watch them when they play on ABC and FOX (national games), ESPN/2 and FS1. They "think" they watch their local MLS team 'for free'. Now tell them they have to PAY to watch their local MLS team. That'll be more of an issue/lost fans than people are realizing.

Plus, just because 58% of the MLS fan base is Gen-Z/Millennials doesn't mean that all 58% are cord-cutters or that anywhere near 100% are going to be willing to pay for a product they currently get included as part of their streaming service(s) of choice, or of course sat/cable because plenty of that 58% still watches things via sat/cable provider.

 

[WarriorofTime]

ESPN is not going to be doing them any favours...

View attachment 558745

Americans (and Canadians by extension) are blessed in that the best leagues in the world in Basketball, Baseball, (American) Football and Hockey are all based in their country, so fans can go to local games and see the best players in the world, timezones, all that good stuff. Asking Americans to buy into a League that is not the best in the world is a losing proposition. Some MLS teams have good local fan support, but it's all centered around the experience of going to the games, watching MLS on TV and following the League as a whole just isn't popular.

 

[John Price]

 

[BKIslandersFan]

If they let local on air network get linear broadcast rights for low fee then this might work.

 

[Kirk Van Houten]

Something to consider

 

[sh724]

We’re hearing that you can opt for local broadcast crew of the telecast (but same cameras).

Your bars/hotels thing is speculation.

What casual fans? Frankly, the fans MLS has targeted in 2.0 and on are younger and probably didn want to pay for the cord in the first place.

One Euro league draws better ratings. The rest are streamed these days.

The people I know who have raised objections are older. That’s not where the base is, or will be, anyway. The risk, of course, is the out-of-sight out-of-mind issue, but that’s happening to everyone.

I did see that you can opt for a radio broadcast as oppose to the ATV announcers. I am curious how well that will align

Not many bars/hotels are going to be paying an extra subscription just to have the option of playing MLS one or two nights a week.

The younger generation that are sports fans are much more likely to subscribe to ESPN+ for sports than ATV.

I use "ratings" as in eyes watching, that could be on TV or streaming.

From what i have seen those not raising objections are the more die hard MLS fans that are fine with paying for ATV to watch MLS. Most of the more casual fans arent going to run to the internet and comment on it

Would hope that Apple will release Android app.

(I had free AppleTV after buying a new computer and only watched one thing in the year I had it.)

I'd assume there will be a deal with bars/etc., for streaming games, eventually.

There is an ATV app for Android however depending on the device you are using it may or may not be available and it may or may not work well. If you are using a chromecast only the newest version plays well with the ATV app

 

[LadyStanley]

I did search for what hardware I'd need to watch Apple+ on (smart TV) and it seems to be the $100+ Apple TV device.

Definitely not high on my list as opposed to adding another app to my existing (TiVo 4k, uses android apps) streaming device.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

I did search for what hardware I'd need to watch Apple+ on (smart TV) and it seems to be the $100+ Apple TV device.

Definitely not high on my list as opposed to adding another app to my existing (TiVo 4k, uses android apps) streaming device.

You don't need an Apple TV, a Roku or Amazon Fire are much cheaper.

MLS Season Pass on Apple TV | MLSsoccer.com

Everything MLS. All on Apple TV.

www.mlssoccer.com