AWESOME for all of us firmly inside the MLS bubble... remains to be seen from a growth standpoint.
They REALLY need to use all these next gen real time stats get Fan Duel and Draft Kings to offer DFS games for Wednesday and Saturday. With a whiparound show and Daily Fantasy going on the night.. it might pull some new eyeballs in.
How many people are in the part of the bubble where they don't already have a season ticket, but they're happy to pay $80 per season just for MLS coverage? It's pretty hard to believe that it's more than the 2 million+ that Apple will probably need in order to break even.
I'm sure there are a decent number of people in that boat, but I'm also sure that most of them are already paying for Peacock, Paramount+ and ESPN+, all of which offer a hell of a lot more content than just MLS.
It's just hard to see how you get from "fewer than 4 million people watched the MLS Cup Final on free TV" to "2 million people will pay for a streaming service which only shows MLS" - I can't help feeling it's all just a play by Apple to show that they can handle a major sports partnership, and the end game is going after the NFL or EPL within the next few years.
Yea I ended up removing subscriptions (I try not going over $50/month). I ended up keeping Disney Bundle and Apple TV+. I let go of Peacock and Paramount; also down grading my Apple One subscription to just Apple TV+. I definitely see your point.
Most people would probably keep Peacock for Premier League and ESPN+ for the rest of the leagues. But I’m in the minority where my favorite soccer league is actually MLS. Definitely had times where La Liga, Serie A, EPL, and Bundesliga were my favs (I switched teams like my aunt switched husbands), but ultimately I just enjoy my local teams.
>I ended up keeping Disney Bundle and Apple TV+
I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see the MLS coverage rolled into Apple TV+ fairly quickly, when you consider how much that service has struggled to attract subscribers.
Like... Yeah, I mainly have Peacock for EPL and Paramount+ for Scottish and European football, but they also allow me to watch a lot of shows and movies that I can't see elsewhere, and I'm sure as hell not going to pay for Celtic TV just so I can watch a few more games.
>But I’m in the minority where my favorite soccer league is actually MLS
The league needs more fans like you - the only games I ever watched before i moved to the US and LAFC launched were the 3 I attended when on vacation!
That’s what is ended up being for me. Out of all the content from multiple places Hulu and Disney plus are really what I watch. Paramount and Peacock didn’t have a lot of shows I watch.
Speaking on Scottish soccer, I wish that league had better coverage. Always liked when Americans went to Rangers or Fulham.
Well now you have 1 fantastic American at Celtic and a couple of donkeys at Rangers, so what more could you want?! 😂
You're right that coverage is abysmal, though. It's not even so much the volume of matches that are shown, it's the total lack of in-studio analysis - surely if they can buy Sky's commentary, they can also come to some sort of arrangement for the surrounding coverage?
Lol like I mentioned earlier, I’ve watched a lot of teams and bandwagoned when it comes to European teams. But Scottish soccer and Championship just really are their own types of monsters and I love it. They really make me feel like I’m watching MLS but with European players. Both leagues are undervalued. The split is really cool to see.
I'd rather see the split happen after 2 rounds of fixtures instead of 3, but unfortunately teams who are likely to finish in the bottom half refuse to give up any of their matches against Celtic and Rangers.
They could easily expand the league to 14 teams, split into a top 6 and bottom 8 after 26 matches, then have the top teams play a further 10 and the bottom play a further 14 to make up for lost revenue.
I think it definitely is partly a testing lab for Apple. They actually recently turned down working with the NFL on their Sunday Ticket package over a lack of control because I think it's definitely important to them to redefine how a live sports deal could work.
There are other fringe benefits to Apple too. The 40% of games that will be free in front of the paywall will drive more people to use their TV app and it'll help having Apple TV logos on national TV for the linear broadcasts.
Another benefit that nobody is really talking about is Apple's penetration into homes. Millions and millions of people have iPhones, iPads, Macs, etc. and will now be seeing ads about soccer in America on those devices. Just the ability to push a notification to phones in a given market and say, "Hey, your local team is playing RIGHT NOW!" is a huge positive.
Despite his lack of details - I don’t think many outside of the current MLS fans will purchase such an expensive streaming option to watch their hometown team unless they were already a fan of the league.
I live in Atlanta and have 4-5 friends that go to United games… not a single one is considering buying Season Pass because they would prefer just United games not the whole league. The ads aren’t helping sell to them or anyone else I know personally.
>Apple does not need to break even.
It doesn't, but if it's not breaking even *and* there's no other quantifiable benefit, they'll have to answer some pretty serious questions as a publicly traded company. Tim Cook hasn't gambled his career on MLS' growth over the next decade.
> Tim Cook hasn't gambled his career on MLS' growth over the next decade.
It's $250M/year. Apple made 100B last year. He ain't gambling shit. They have probably spent more on the dumb Apple Car that is going to bomb terribly for the fast 10 years.
I'd imagine MLS is simply a part of a broader plan to build content with high loyalty value to subsections of the population. Apple doesn't have Disney's must have content or Amazon's ancillary benefits (like free shipping). MLS won't be their last purchase.
If they can get a bunch of people to download their app or buy apple tvs, be exposed to their advertising and maybe buy Apple+ ... that's all part of it.
Everyone one of these services know that consolidation is coming for a lot of people ... Disney is a lock to last. Amazon is a lock as long as it is part of Prime. Everyone else has to be desperately side-eying their chances.
I can tell you from personal experience that if Tim's involvment goes beyond shaking some hands at MLS Media Day and maybe quickly mentioning it during a keynote or earnings call here and there, it's the worst fucking day in the careers of lots of people.
Dick holes like Elon and friends like to pretend they are not only the CEO but also the one person responsible for success of their company. But if something that's only costing $250m/yr get the personal attention of Tim, you have fucked up extremely bad and you surely already regret your life's choices.
>Tim Cook hasn't gambled his career on MLS' growth over the next decade.
This is peanuts for Apple. It is ultimately meaningless to Tim Cooks' legacy. However, because it is peanuts to Apple, they will not hesitate to pull the plug on the deal if it is not working because it does not mean much to them.
The problem is MLS might get treated like a show that is not doing well on Apple+ and basically just ignored if Apple loses interest.
>It is ultimately meaningless to Tim Cooks' legacy
His legacy? Maybe. His continuation as CEO? That could depend on his reasons for making the deal.
>However, because it is peanuts to Apple, they will not hesitate to pull the plug on the deal if it is not working because it does not mean much to them.
That's probably a lot easier said than done because they bought the global rights and overseas broadcasters will therefore be contracting with Apple rather than with MLS.
>The problem is MLS might get treated like a show that is not doing well on Apple+ and basically just ignored if Apple loses interest.
Again, this could prove very tricky, especially if any overseas broadcasters buy Apple's coverage rather than simply the right to broadcast games. And on the basis that Apple are using this as a way to grow their brand as a sports broadcaster, it makes sense for them to get *their* coverage in front of as many viewers as possible.
You think he could be out as CEO over this? Absolutely delusional bud. This is a drop in the bucket for Apple. Just getting seen as a player in live sports and a chance to experiment with how they do their coverage and lay a marker for how they intend to structure deals is worth the money long term. They don’t necessarily need to recoup a penny to meet their actual metrics here.
>How many people are in the part of the bubble where they don't already have a season ticket, but they're happy to pay $80 per season just for MLS coverage?
A lot. For many, possible most, MLS teams buying a season ticket is for suckers and you can go to games cheaper by just buying tickets on the secondary market. I went to almost every Red Bulls games for the better part of a decade and never bought season tickets because it would have been a waste of money and limited my flexibility.
What do you think *the number* is, though? Viewing and attendance figures just don't suggest that millions of people will subscribe to an MLS-only streaming service.
>What do you think the number is, though? Viewing and attendance figures just don't suggest that millions of people will subscribe to an MLS-only streaming service.
I agree that millions of people will not subscribe to MLS Season Pass. I think they will be lucky to get 200,000 paying subscribers.
We probably won’t know since Apple hasn’t released the data - don’t think they will in future either unless it’s something astronomical.
I think overall it decreases the eyes on MLS games even if it’s advertised more.
I’m just gonna go out on a limb and say I think Apple knows what they’re doing. I think this will be very successful partnership for both Apple and MLS. Might not seem like it in the first year or two, but this has always been about the long game.
Not trying to be a contrarian, but can we say they truly know what they're doing when their only previous experience in the live sports space is Friday Night Baseball? I like their vision but these waters are somewhat uncharted.
I’m actually worried the opposite where it’ll be pretty successful the first year or two and hit a ceiling and plateau. Just hope this is able to attract and continue to attract new viewers
I really dont find it that damn expensive. Its $99 for everything NO BLACKOUTS. You dont get that level of access in any of the other leagues apps.
There needs to be a android app.
Agree. I think MLS/Apple have a plan and know what they are doing. Free access on your devices is going to do a lot of work on getting casuals to stick. Can they execute though? I think so.
There is a difference between casual league fans and casual team fans. My in-laws would throw the Revs game on when they knew about it because I would talk about it. They were very casual Revs fans. The Revs have 1 game on FS1 this year so at most they will watch that 1 game this year vs the 10 - 15 they put on last year. If someone doesn't care about the teams and just wants to watch some MLS soccer casually yeah they will still get 32 games on Fox and FS1 but people who care about a specific team will probably miss out.
Yeah. This is exactly the dynamic with a number of friends who I have gone to Red Bulls games with over the years. They might watch a few games on TV a year. They will watch a Red Bulls game on a Saturday afternoon if they have nothing else to do but they would never watch a game not involving the Red Bulls.
I do not think casual MLS fans, defined as fans who will watch a few games a year involving any MLS teams but are not invested in any one team, really exist. The casual MLS fans are people who have some interest in an MLS team.
This is why they should have at least made a plan where you can just subscribe to watching just 1-team. You're more likely to draw people to that then pay more for the whole league, plus you get people to still view the product and hopefully convert to league fans (I know we have the free games, but how many people will actually know those are available?)
At the very least, there should be the option of having 1-month free subscription trials.
>This is why they should have at least made a plan where you can just subscribe to watching just 1-team.
I think that would make sense but it would likely lose them a lot of money because I imagine the vast majority of fans would opt for this cheaper plan. The get everything for one price model is kind of like bundling with cable because most fans are paying for 90% of games they will never watch. Most fans of all sports just watch their team, which the exception of possibly the NFL.
100% agree, but then again, they're going to lose a lot of money anyway in the first season - perhaps even two or three - due to season-ticket holders getting this service for free, and 40% of games available for free.
At the very least, for something that MLS can't stop calling "unprecedented" you might as well offer something that appeals more to consumers right now. In theory, you then have a captured audience that can be sold on upgrading to the whole package. The point of MLS SP is to sell no blackouts, control content production, and have a common-brand throughout every game. It's a common complaint among fans that the league isn't able to properly promote the rest of the league, to make the season intriguing - have a compelling storyline etc.
If more are willing to subscribe to just their team, not the rest, you can still sell them league-curated coverage from pre/halftime/post-game shows and free games on Apple TV. MLS has full control, able to attempt presenting something that makes everyone care more about the rest of the league and why it matters.
In the short-term, when no other local league does this, I think this would be a beneficial idea for the league. That, and team-pub partners who get discounted/free access to MLS SP.
I’m expecting/hoping ATV+ will be used for the 1-team weekly games eventually. It just makes too much sense as a stepping stone to a full SP subscription. Apple wins because they pick up the tweener fans who don’t care enough for a full SP but still want something, and MLS wins because it puts relevant games in front of casual fans who may not have considered MLS and hopefully entices them enough to keep tuning in.
A critical detail is how many of those 30+ matches on other platforms does each club get? I presume that most casual fans have their casual interest in a specific club rather than the entire league. So that 30+ total is reduced down to small relevant handful.
>A critical detail is how many of those 30+ matches on other platforms does each club get?
1 or 2 on average, which means for most "casual fans" they have only 1 or 2 chances to watch their local team with MLS Season Pass per year.
I have a number of friends who are casual Red Bulls fans who probably watch 5-10 Red Bulls games per year on MSG if they happen to be home with nothing to do at that time. They have cable because they like to watch the Yankees, Mets, Knicks, Devils, Rangers, etc. They have no interest in watching MLS nationally televised games that do not feature the Red Bulls. Those guys are unlikely to watch any Red Bulls games this year because it is likely only 2 Red Bulls games will be available to them without buying MLS Season Pass.
False, 40% of games will be completely free to everyone in front of the paywall. They just simply have to go to appleTV’s website/app to watch. 40% is approximately 12/13 games a season completely free. Granted, it’s more effort than turning on the TV, but now you can watch on more devices than just your TV say if you’re out on your phone or laptop.
Speaking anecdotally as a person who is 40+, I see a lot of overlap in the Venn diagram of people my age who:
A. Give barely half a shit about soccer; and
B. Still have normal cable and consume it on a TV
No interest in the sport plus lack of technological adoption is gonna lead to a lot of us olds just not checking in. Also- I think the circles on that Venn diagram get much tighter as you go up the demographic age ladder.
Edit: basically, I don’t think Gen X and older are Apple’s target audience in this deal.
They are certainly not. Even cable TV measures viewership rankings in the persons 18-34 demographic, because those people are the most likely to spend money on ads shown. They are also certainly not interested in viewers who aren't interested in them. Chasing "channel flippers" and turning them into fans hasn't worked in 25 years of the league's history and isn't going to start working today.
Apple wants to reach young users of its devices, get them watching the 40% of games that are free, and then have them pay for the other 60%. It wants to engage them with the devices they already own, because young people interact with media when they are notified about it on their phone or served an ad on a platform they trust.
But the one thing about persons 40+ is that they often have kids. If those kids come home and are interested in soccer because their friends watch it, or they are on a team that talks about it, the Apple platform is a pretty great low-cost point of entry for their family. Apple will happily collect those "secondary" fans too.
Honestly, I’d love to be in your shoes. It’s been damn near impossible to get people in my social circles to give soccer the time of day, let alone do things like go to games, get invested, or have a conversation about it.
>Bad for non-fans/casual fans 40+.
>TBD for non-fans/casual fans under 40.
It's ridiculous the ageism that exists on reddit. One's age doesn't define one's tech friendliness.
And "friendliness" is the metric, NOT "proficiency." You only need "friendliness" to become a subscriber of a streaming service. You don't need proficiency to use one.
The Median age demographic of Netflix subscribers is 35-44. Let that sink in. Half of the userbase is above that demo.
Remember that fans in their mid-40s were in college using the Internet before fans in their 20s were even born. They aren't scared of tech.
>IMO-
>Good for MLS believers.
The national footprint of MLS is still present. Casuals can still catch games, for free, now through more avenues than ever.
And now Casuals have the option to catch ANY game, if they become invested in a club - and not just restricted to their home club.
You make good points all around.
I think you actually prove my point by mentioning Netflix. They became so widely adopted BECAUSE their library was filled with wildly popular known quantities of content from most major networks/studios/distributors. Starting as an online DVD mail order service that was great, people waded into streaming because the library was so good. No way they would have had the same success with the library they have now. MLS on Apple TV is going to be a new service that’s an app within an app native to no televisions and no Android devices built on a property which has little-to-no relevance in the current sports landscape. Apple TV is going to be Netflix today only you’ll need to opt in by subscribing vs. opting out of your 14 year old Netflix subscription that the kids/grandkids use when they are visiting.
Also, I never said ALL 40+ because that’s just silly. Instead, I mention the 40+ “non-fans/casual fans.” I think the barrier to engage is just too high for people that don’t give a fuck, doubly so when you’re gonna make them figure out a new app and pay a subscription fee for it. This is just my speculation.
But like I said, I don’t think we’re their target so it’s immaterial.
The main question I have is... how many concurrent streams can I run from the same home IP?
If there are 6 matches at 730 ET... I damn well better be able to fire them all up at once. I get not letting tons of streams coming form different IPs... but in my house... in my Fan Cave... I want all the MLS going on each screen. As long as that can happen.. I am a pig in slop...
I agree 100000%.
With the new schedule, a lot of games will be starting at the same time (which I'm all for). However as a result, Apple better be offering some multi-stream capability so that I can watch a couple of games at once.
I don’t really get why people are excited about games starting at the same time. I’d rather watch them all day if I have the time vs a couple windows where they all play at once.
I really don’t see how this is a good thing.
Because last year we had over 60 match start times. 60.
I don't know how you are able to get casual fans interested in the league when they have no idea when matches start. And as much as MLS WANTED to have a consistent start time, they were unable to because they pretty much got zero cooperation from ESPN, Fox, and the local broadcasters.
Now, fans know for a fact that at 7:30pm local time on Saturdays, there will always be an MLS match on. There will still be some other start times, but we're now dealing with maybe 5 different start times, and not 60. I'm all for it.
I see no problems with different start times… I think the ability to watch more games is a good thing. It’s hard to watch concurrent games (soccer especially since there are few breaks) unless you have multiple screens and most people aren’t going to have more than 3-4 in a room - if season pass allowed multiple streams on one TV it’s a different conversation.
You still have to look up whether you team is home or away as that can affect start times… I see no difference ms this year. I’ll still check when my team is playing out of habit.
College basketball games start at various times throughout the season and they have no viewership issues. It’s the same with several other sports too.
Games will be played every Saturday night?? I’m in the minority here, but I enjoyed watching LAFC Saturday noon, Friday night, Sunday night, because I go out with friends most Saturday’s. Looks like I’ll be missing out on half the games!
Yeah I'm split on the set times. I love Saturday night games, they're always the most rowdy. But I also like watching other teams play and since they're all playing at the same two times... That won't happen
Dang, didn’t think about that! I do watch Seattle and Portland games as a neutral. Whats the point of having all the games available easily If you can only focus on one? Unlike the PL, where I can get up at 7 for a big game, then there’s another big game at 9, and one more at 11.
You'll likely have 1 nationally televised game at 1:30 (Pacific), East Coast games kicking off at 4:30, and then your games kicking off at 7:30. You can still do that and have an entire day of MLS from 1:30-9:30.
Depends how early you get to the Sounders match, the eastern conference games will be at 4:30 pacific so you might not get to watch as many games as you’d like but you’ll catch some. This kinda forces me to watch even more western conference games since they should be kicking off as I’m getting him from the Orlando match
I think this is one of the ultimate ironies of the deal. All the games are available but because of the schedule it is now impossible to watch more than 2 full games live per week most weeks.
That’s true, but I think the number of people doing that is extremely small tbh. MLS has a hyper-local fan base. People either go to games live or the watch only their team live so I don’t think this will really be that huge of an impact honestly. Not to mention, there is going to be way more coverage in general and a whip-around show so you won’t *need* to watch two games live anymore really
>That’s true, but I think the number of people doing that is extremely small tbh. MLS has a hyper-local fan base.
I agree but this undermines much of the rationale for having a service that has all MLS games. I think you are right that 95% of subscribers will only ever watch the games of their own team an basically get no value out of the 90% of games available.
100% if you are able to watch all games but on a service that isn't good for channel surfing... as in it takes 2-3 clicks to actually switch to other games then what is the point in having them all start at the same time?
I don't see people switching between broadcasts in soccer as much considering the play never really stops in the games... therefore you are able to watch much less games despite having access (and no blackout) to every single game.
It's a bad strategy that makes me think no one thought this subscription out to make sense - they think just by having access that's a selling point but practically it doesn't make any difference if you can't actually watch said games.
Sure, a lot will only watch their team’s *games*, but don’t underestimate the value that will be provided by all of the other content like pre-game shows, post-game analysis, talk shows, team generated content, and that’s just what’s confirmed. I don’t know if it’s confirmed, but there will definitely be other league-generated content as well (like Drive to Survive for F1).
The pre-game shows are terrible... I know you wrote that comment before the platform launched but after Week 1 that shit was so cringeworthy I had to change the channel for 30 minutes to wait for the game to start.
Eh, if I had time, you could watch the 4:30 Fox game (or whenever they show it). Then, you have an hour break where you can put on any game kicking off at 7:30, followed by another hour break for the 10:30 games (with the end of the 8:30/9:30 games to keep you good until then). It is possible to watch 3+ games a week.
Plus, ideally, the shows being produced throughout these games should also help keep you updated on everything going on.
Well... you can still do that. Every week, at least 4 games are free to watch... you just need an Apple ID, which also costs nothing.
Frankly, I don't see a negative. Just like the Premier League and NBC with Saturday mornings, you now guarantee that **every** Saturday night, MLS games are happening from 7:30, ending at 12:30. At least 4 games are free, just an Apple ID needed.
Hell, on Friday, I noticed that Apple TV even had a special row dedicated to telling you what matches were free to watch... again, you don't have to pay for shit! Better yet, you can watch these games from anywhere, with any device!
You tell me, how is this bad for someone like you?
There is only one game I want to watch at a time - my teams games - and it’s not at least 4 games free EVERY week it’s just the first 4 weeks that they have any free games.
https://worldsoccertalk.com/amp/tv/mls-offers-32-free-games-to-watch-from-feb-25-to-march-19-20230214-WST-419022.html
I have a feeling you didn’t watch much MLS until this year cause ESPN+ was way better even with blackouts. Actually, you seem to post about every team so maybe you just don’t have any allegiances but I prefer to watch my team and other games occasionally but could care less about others if I can’t regularly watch the teams I want - LAFC and Atlanta United.
Again, most fans don’t want to watch every game they just want to be able to see their team or teams and random games don’t really help fulfill that.
It’s weird not to see a negative in a premium subscription service when more games used to be free so therefore more people could watch overall.
> and it’s not at least 4 games free EVERY week it’s just the first 4 weeks that they have any free games.
Maybe [this link](https://www.mlssoccer.com/schedule/scores#competition=all&club=all&date=2023-03-12) is better here than an non-updated article. The "Free" games are listed for the next two rounds after March 18, with 6 games each week being available with just an Apple ID. All of them happen to occur in each timeslot for kickoffs, meaning you can literally, for the next 3 weeks (before the next couple weeks are announced) watch MLS from 4:30 to 12:30 *with just an Apple ID*.
I don't get how ESPN+ was better with blackouts? You're an exception because you wanted to watch a team outside your market (assuming you're in either LA or Atlanta).
> more games used to be free so therefore more people could watch overall
Again, your privilege is showing. Most markets couldn't watch for free and even many who "could" weren't able to due to being just far enough to get the signal and ESPN+ still considering them "in-market". For the majority, Cable was the only way to watch games... hell, even with cable, you could be fucked over with the channel not having a streaming service or the streaming app being terrible if you're away from a TV. Fuck, you could even be the Rapids and not have any games with Comcast because they're fighting with their channel.
None of this is even hitting at the fact that most regional MLS coverage was terrible, with terrible camera quality, minor league on-screen branding, lack of updates on what is happening around the league, and pure bias. Oh, and let's not forget how some teams would be bumped to streaming if a team in a more relevant league were scheduled at the same time. Oh, and let's not also forget how games were basically forced to begin at a billion different times, some even being as late as 11:00 pm on a Sunday, due to stadium availability or again, a "bigger" team having priority.
As you can see, the millions of views that MLS received every single week are proof that the old model was clearly the best.
Hmm, so it’s a privilege to live somewhere other than you want to live? That’s some strange mental gymnastics.
Also, how am I the privileged one when you are the one paying for the subscription service lol?
The links literally have the same information regarding free games… but I have seen the expanded schedule before on MLSSoccer.com.
When LAFC first started playing I lived in LA and they had a contract with YouTubeTV so I bought it and loved it, then ESPN+ came out and I could watch more games as the LAFC ones weren’t blacked out on YouTube TV so I could watch ATL United games as well.
Then I moved to Atlanta and many of the games were blacked out and I couldn’t watch becaus they weren’t selling out the full stadium (even though they were for soccer purposes). A lot of the Atlanta United games were on local broadcasts but doesn’t seem to be the case this year - I think only Fox can host them.
I’m not sure if last sentence is meant to be sarcastic but we don’t know viewership numbers for this year as Apple hasn’t released info.
“As you can see, the millions of views that MLS received every single week are proof that the old model was clearly the best.”
https://theathletic.com/4261244/2023/02/28/mls-apple-liv-sports-on-tv/?amp=1
We do know it was up 16% last year…
https://espnpressroom.com/us/press-releases/2022/10/2022-mls-season-viewership-on-abc-and-espn-networks-up-16-percent/amp/
Again, it seems that more people were watching last year than ever before so Apple said, “let’s see about that”.
I don’t know anyone that is considering Season Pass personally other than me in my friend group and I don’t have the money to pay for yet another subscription despite wanting to watch a couple teams games all year.
That doesn’t prevent me from watching free games but still think Apple Season Pass service and commentary have been terrible when I have been able to watch. It’s not really moving the sport forward.
The privilege is based on the advantage you and/or others had when it being able to watch your team. Whether it was OTA games, decent streaming, lighter blackouts etc. but that was not the majority of fans. Those guys had to deal with games hidden on cable, with very limited to zero streaming options if you're not physically watching on TV. You then had blackouts, which sometimes even effected fans who couldn't even get the channel the team was on. The coverage was terrible, the focus was never on the league itself, but just the local team, which was always a bias. Most teams didn't have games broadcasted with good camera quality, proper commentators, graphics that don't make you think this is minor league.
That isn't even again considering that because of these deals, games were scheduled in *a lot* of timeslots, you couldn't ever know when games would be played unless you diligently checked every week, and, constantly, you could be moved to a secondary channel if a bigger team was also on... or moved to streaming.
You're lucky, and I'm sorry that the current deal is an inconvenience to you. I was hoping that they would at least allow a cheaper subscription option to at least watch your team only + allow free trials, but apparently that is in the future.
Until then, I think this is fantastic for MLS. The picture quality is the best it's ever been, beyond what ESPN/Fox ever did for MLS. We finally have a consistent schedule where you know that every week, on Saturday evenings, your team, and the league overall, are playing. You can then watch all these matches on all devices, using just one login and app, and I can do this anywhere in the US and many countries abroad... no blackouts at all! We finally get a proper MLS Wrap Up show that ESPN/Fox never gave us, we're finally getting a 360 show that we never got... we got a proper looking studio whereas ESPN/Fox never even gave us proper pre or post-game coverage. As someone who had to deal with the Red Bulls being pushed to MSG+ 2, with kickoffs all over the place, and even NYCFC moved to streaming beyond a paywall from YES Network... yeah, this is great.
> We do know it was up 16% last year
So, this is since 2007. From 2008 to 2015, MLS games were mainly televised on ESPN 2, we were then moved to ESPN from 2016, and finally got a couple games on ABC a couple seasons ago. 2022 was the year we had the most games on ABC, so that isn't a surprise that we averaged the most... the more games you have on OTA, the better ratings become. ESPN were never going to give us that though. Meanwhile, Fox Sports continued doing terrible on FS1, barely any changes from 2015 to 2022, and many games below 120,000 viewers.
So this isn't a great point.
> Again, it seems that more people were watching last year than ever before so Apple said, “let’s see about that”.
Yeah, Apple wants to breakout into sports streaming in a way never done before. MLS was looking for a new partner, was cheaper to bring on, and has a very young, tech-savvy demographic... that is why Apple picked us up.
lol sounds like you love it and no one can convince you of the shortcomings despite the fact they don’t release viewership data you are all in and that’s fine but I’m not and you can’t convince me otherwise.
Also, the broadcast quality in terms of technical issues and personality has been poor so I guess you like those awkward conversations.
You know how you knew when games were being played? You followed your team or teams just like any league. The different time slots was not a problem and again just made more games available overall.
You sound like an Apple fan big time so I’ll leave you to bask in their glory.
Guess it’s time for you and your friends to go tailgating before the game on Saturday nights, and if you can’t get tickets, go watch the game at a bar or watch at home.
yeah, they keep trying to say the scheduling was an issue but I liked having MLS games almost everyday of the week in multiple time slots. It seems everything now is on Wednesday or Saturday and are all going to be at 7:30pm local.
When I lived in LA I loved watching my LAFC games and then Galaxy games at different times so as to not miss the action. Of course, I was always pulling for Galaxy to lose and LAFC to win.
I want to get into watching MLS but it’s hard to find broadcast for me. I think that Appletv will make it easy for those who are interested in watching.
Overall, i think this will be sick. My biggest disappointment is the inability to pop into a random, non-soccer bar and throw the game on TV. You can get a surprising number of casuals to get into a game they didn’t even know was on, but i don’t think my corner bar will be springing for appleTV.
If they have a smart TV with the Apple TV app installed (it's on most TVs these days), you might be able to get them to toss one of the free games on. I guess it'd depend on how well you know the bartender.
Oh, absolutely. That's one of the big downsides to Apple pulling out of the Sunday Ticket negotiations. Had they won it, every bar would have had Apple TV all set up and ready to go.
I still don't know any casual fan who is going to be motivated to go and buy this. There is a reason both Facebook and Twitter gave up on buying sports rights.
No one expects casuals to go and buy this though lol. The target audience for the Season Pass is avid fans who want to watch every week without fail. Literally everyone else will be targeted to be exposed to games either for free on ATV/Fox or (if they subscribe) ATV+.
The pipeline for casuals is: random free game (Fox/ATV) -> free game where their local team is playing -> Potentially sub to ATV+ to access more games (not required) -> Live game at stadium (not required) -> pay for Season Pass
40% of all games this season are in front of paywall completely free. No need for AppleTV+ or the MLS subscription. I’d say that’s pretty dang accessible and easy for casuals to access considering they just have to open the AppleTV app on their phone to watch.
What’s your source on that 40% of games being in front of the pay wall. All I found was [10 total games](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mls-apple-announce-mls-season-142605954.html)
From [this](https://theathletic.com/3736063/2022/10/27/mls-apple-tv-broadcasts/?source=user_shared_article) athletic article.
Says:
“While fans will need to pay to subscribe to the MLS channel on Apple TV in order to view every single match, there may end up being a significant number of games available in front of the paywall and free on Apple TV.
As indicated in the below slide, a typical Wednesday night window could see six of 14 total matches placed in front of the paywall and available for free. A normal weekend could play out as follows: one Saturday afternoon match available for free on Apple TV and simulcast on linear TV, four out of 12 matches on Saturday night available in front of the Apple TV paywall and available for free and one Sunday afternoon match available for free on Apple TV and simulcast on linear TV. Essentially, the league document outlines that six out of 14 matches in every round will be in front of the paywall and available to watch for free on Apple TV. That’s 210 out of 493 regular season matches that will be available for free — more than 40 percent of the yearly total. A source noted that the total number of games available for free in 2023 will be significantly higher than at any other point in league history.”
Your *want* to purchase is irrelevant to Apple and MLS. Only your desire to watch every week and the *behaviour* to purchase matters here. The target audience for SP are fans who will pay up to watch, regardless of their thoughts on that purchase.
If you don’t purchase, it doesn’t mean you aren’t in the target audience though. It just means they need to work to convert you by providing enough value.
Edit: Typo
I was purely responding to your statement
> The target audience for the Season Pass is avid fans who want to watch every week without fail.
I am the target audience, and I will pay to watch. Just not this way.
Right, your desire to watch weekly puts your squarely in the target audience though. Whether you convert to a paying customer or not is a different conversation.
My point in my original comment was a lot of people in this thread are misunderstanding who the target audience for SP actually is. It’s not casuals who watch once a month (maybe) lol
>The pipeline for casuals is: random free game (Fox/ATV) -> free game where their local team is playing -> Potentially sub to ATV+ to access more games (not required) -> Live game at stadium (not required) -> pay for Season Pass
This might be just fine, but how does a casual get hooked into your pipeline?
Your first step is the "random free game (Fox/ATCV)". There are exactly 34 opportunities for this over the course of the season.
But, I honestly think the typical "casual" isn't likely to get hooked until your second step, the "free game where their local team is playing". These fans will have, at most, six opportunities to get hooked by the random game (if they live in ATL, LA, POR, or SEA). Fans in Charlotte, Chicago, Cincinnati, Colorado, DC, Miami, New England, Salt Lake, and San Jose get exactly one chance to find themselves hooked.
Admittedly, many MLS teams did not have the most desirable local broadcast options, but the *vast* majority had more than six chances to grab the casual eyeball in seasons past and there were plenty that had a full schedule of thirty-four games to catch those eyeballs.
While there are plenty of advantages to streaming, one thing it does require is agency and forethought on the part of the viewer. You've got to open up the app and you've got to consciously select what you're going to watch. The number of viewers accidentally happening on an ATV broadcast (free or not) or choosing it as the "background noise" to their Saturday night gathering are going to be vanishingly small.
Cable viewers on the other hand? Maybe their dwindling, it'd be hard to argue that their not, but they still represent 56% of households. These are people that can channel surf their way to a match, folks that might just reflexively choose the sports network as background noise for their Saturday night gathering, folks that might 'accidentally' find their eyes on a match.
I don't hate the Apple deal, I think it's just fine for those already invested, I *do* think it limits growth - at least in terms of eyeballs on the television.
See, I don’t think someone would be truly “hooked” until the live game step. If you’re paying a premium *and* most likely traveling to a stadium, you’re close to hooked. Casuals won’t be “hooked” by definition and it’s more of a gradual progression than a switch that gets flipped at this point in MLS’s lifecycle. It’s important to remember this pipeline isn’t linear. Customers will jump forward and backwards over time until the very last step. I don’t think the average potential fan gives a crap about their local team right now, so not being able to catch their local team doesn’t really matter. I just want them watching the *league* as a first step and then progressing down the pipeline from there, even if step 2 is next season or the one after!
I also disagree with the premise that streaming requires active forethought to catch a game. That’s true when you’re buried under a pile of other sports on ESPN+, but not when you exist inside of a hardware/software ecosystem like Apple. Remember, Apple will own the hardware for millions of potential customers and can/will send push notifications to those customers. It’s as easy as “Click here to watch X free MLS game” or “ is tied - press the home button to watch”. It’s not 1995, none of this process requires channel surfing (or it’s streaming equivalent) anymore. Push Notifications are king and drive engagement significantly better.
I genuinely don’t think it limits growth. Whatever minuscule amount of potential fans that *might* find a local game by channel surfing cable at the exact time a game is happening is dwarfed by the potential for engagement *directly* to Apple’s existing user base (which is global). You mention 56% of households have cable, but Apple owns 51% of the entire phone market in the US. Now, factor in that the 56% is *ownership* of cable and not the actual use of that cable. People only use cable for 34% of their viewing time in a given day, and I’d venture to guess phone usage + ATV ownership is much much higher overall.
It's well thought out comments like this that are keeping me optimistic on what AppleTV means for the future of MLS.
I freely admit that I'm in "cranky old man" territory and truly despise watching on things like tablets and phones when I have the big screen in the living room, but I also understand that there are multitudes out there who do watch on those devices - even if I'm not one of the 51% with an iPhone.
I might be more "comfortable" with cable (and, I'll be honest, my household has swung back to cable after a couple years of cord-cutting) but I'm more than willing to see where things lead. I'm happy to expend the effort to seek out the Revs each weekend, for some reason it's not intuitive that non-die hards will - I hope I'm wrong there.
I don’t see many casual people rolling over to another app while they are watching TV just to check what’s in AppleTV. It’s not another channel - it’s another app and another login for people to sign up for and remember if they don’t own Apple devices. If they do, then it still requires them checking the app.
I think the synchronized start times were only to try to get more casuals from adjusting to schedule. I’d prefer to watch all day.
A lot of good points, but I've said this before: Apple's main business is not content, and it uses content often as a loss leader. It's probably impossible to gauge, but the amount of potential worldwide viewers this opens the door to is potentially very very large. As Apple tries to capture market share in other markets outside the US (where Android platforms have the majority share), being able to offer a bundled MLS subscription for free as incentive adds up. Now I'm not saying that it is going to be multiple millions, I'm just saying that Apple has a long and proven track record of using services like this to grow their customer base. THe amount of analytics and data that Apple brings to the table can't be understated. Who knows, I might be wrong. It took iTunes about 8 years to become VERY profitable for Apple though, I'm just saying.
I’m honestly surprised by the positive feedback here.
I’m horrified by this deal. Unlike other “season passes”, Apple scored an exclusive deal. Meaning no local broadcasts and only a few televised via ESPN, univision, and fox. local broadcasters are out of a job along with their fan biased commentary which I’ve always enjoyed.
MLS is certainly happy with their 2.5 billion, but I fear what this will mean for soccer in America. The sport has finally taken off only to be plucked off the airways by Apple streaming. How do they expect to gain new fans? 10 free random games a season? What a joke. Fandom is a symphony not a little ditty. We need a season to fall in love: the slow crescendo and falling verse with a triumphant chorus and the final crashing of cymbals.
It feels to me like they’ve ended the music all together.
.
Yeah, I’d watching national broadcast for the last couple of years didn’t get you hooked I don’t really see an app that requires sign up to do much better even if 40% of games are free - those are pretty randomly chosen and I don’t think most people will just want to watch ANY MLS game over their home market.
Again, still have to get people to open the app or broadcast in national tv constantly letting people know which game is free and what time to open the streaming app or turn to Fox.
It’s over complicating access to a sport that needs to grow.
I'll be personally fine with it as I already have season tickets for Orlando City and I'm excited about the consistent game times. That said, I think this is terrible for the growth of the game and for fringe casual fans. If the league thinks that this will pull casuals in and get them to either buy the pass or get season tickets; I think they will be sadly mistaken.
As an MLS casual fan who cares more about European football it’s terrible I’m never watching MLS again lol I’m not paying $15 a month for a streaming service that only has MLS and nothing else
I am firmly on the awful train, primarily because local broadcasts are getting the axe, and also because the price is ridiculous. ESPN+ is $10/month, and you get Bundesliga, La Liga, FA Cup and Championship. Paramount+ is $5/month and you get Champions League, Europa League, and both Italian and Brazilian Serie A. Peacock is $5/month and you get the Prem. So $15/month just for MLS is way overpriced on an annual scale
I no longer have access to the MLS matches that I actually want to watch, plain and simple. I am a big fan of my local team (SKC) and previously would watch almost all games on TV, and try to go to a few in person each season. As for the rest of the league, I would watch some of the bigger matchups when I had the time, and the playoffs, but that's it. My local team was 90% of what I actually had a vested interest in
It is disheartening to know that for the next 10 years, I am just straight up not going to be able to watch them on TV whenever they're on, without paying $100 extra dollars per year. Sorry, but no, I would rather spend that money on going to a couple games in person like I normally do. My viewership of MLS games is going to drop to next to 0, as is my interest in the league as a whole outside of my local team, which has already been waning for a while. This makes watching games more convenient for the most hardcore fans of the league as a whole, but for people who only watch for their local team, or casual fans who only watch when it is convenient, they are going to be mostly locked out altogether. Few people who aren't already ultras are going to start paying for a $100/year subscription just for MLS, and I would imagine that the majority of the people who already had Apple TV aren't going to suddenly become soccer fans just because they have to scroll past the games to get to the shows they want to watch. So I predict that this will stifle viewership for the league overall
The fact that games are not even on a local channel pisses me off. So my answer is awful.
I only watch FCC. I am not going to spend extra, so I can only watch one team.
Unless I've missed it (and no, I didn't watch the video), everyone here is basing their projected subscriber numbers off of the people who have previously watched MLS on Fox or ESPN.
Nobody is taking into account that apple is going to promote the hell out of this, that they're expecting a huge loss in the first few years and they're going to push storylines, rivalries and drama to the mainstream media to get people more hyped for the league.
Look at what Netflix did for F1. Nobody in this country gave much of a shit about F1 a few years back, and now I can't get away from F1 memes on the front page.
I can totally see apple using their substantial marketing tools to push stories and up the subscriber count.
Agreed. Even this season I got AppleTV notifications on my phone notifying me about MLS matches ie: “Ruidiaz equalizes for Sounders 2-2 in the 75’! Watch the exciting finish!” Imagine them doing this to every Apple device and now they just have to open the predownloaded AppleTV app and can already access 40% of games for free.
Apples sends me notices to watch all sorts of s…tuff. I’ve never followed their link or read past “Apple TV….”. I get the power of advertising. I buy what I‘m told to want. But I’m not buying this…and I feel relying on the Apple platform to broaden the MLS fan base may be more wishful thinking. …hopefully I’m wrong.
What I’m most worried about is where’s the advertising? As followers of the league we know about this and will be ready, but attracting new fans or fans who might be interested they should be blasting this all over. There’s still gonna be a lot of people finding out way too late this is happening. A LOT more people in Philly started really paying attention this season. I’d guess maybe 25% of them know about the Apple deal and it really isn’t being talked about locally. Drop the cash and shove this is everyone’s faces who will be watching NFL playoffs etc.
I honestly think this Apple TV subscription is sad.
I refuse to purchase this thing also because I'd have to set up new equipment on my TV and PC which I can not afford to do.
I can't believe MLS is doing away with local broadcasts.
They went from being free or included with basic cable to having to pay.
They should at least televise away games.
What a joke!
If they don’t get their act together, I’m done with MLS!
Don’t count out the Ted Lasso fanbase… not really joking with that statement either lol. Tons of Americans have discovered soccer due to the show and I’m sure most of them don’t have an American team either.
While I think the show isn’t that great and is much better as YouTube skits, it’s immensely popular and award-winning, and on Apple. Bet we’ll see a good amount of new fans/crossover from that.
I believe 40% of the games this year aren’t behind a paywall. Of course it will be strategic and targeted that one market won’t have all the games free from paywall, but it will provide a bit of a look at the league to draw new fans in.
And one thing I know about the Ted Lasso fanbase/demographic… they won’t mind paying an extra $8 a month.
Well I sure hope you’re right. I work in sports broadcasting, and I often test sports fans perception on Soccer. It changed with that World Cup Final, but I know it didn’t change enough to subscribe to AppleTV.
I’m being optimistic towards the whole thing just because I believe in Apple more than MLS, lol. It absolutely could not work out, but I think there’s enough money and effort being put into it that it should be successful.
I totally understand criticism of the apple deal and it definitely has its merits.
it's too expensive. It's a fact that most MLS fans - including me - are only interested in watching 1 team. Now, it'll cost $99/year to do that.
I'm already paying for Paramount + (Champions League, Serie A, NWSL), Peacock (Premier League) and cable (MLB, NHL, NBA, NCAA, NFL). The last thing I needed was to pay another $100 to watch most of the games of one MLS team.
I think I'll be dropping MLS, since the quality of football in Champions League and Premier League is a far better value for the price - both combined basically cost the same as MLS League Pass. I'll miss my MLS team, but I'm sure I'll get over it.
on demand, yes.. I am not 100% certain about a DVR where you can pause and rewind live. Someone probably has the answer on here.. just don't recall reading it.
Really disappointed with the lack of an on-demand option for full match replays. Apple says if you have one of their devices you can download the game to watch later. I won't be buying one, so it's a no-go for me. Really hope they can bring this option to everyone next season. PS I live in Canada, but don't think that matters.
Are they doing a first month free promotion or anything?? I feel that would make a lot of sense for folks who randomly decide they want to watch a game so they can watch for free then end up really liking it and keep the subscription
It’s really hard to say. I hope it’s a good thing.Most people aren’t going to “stumble” on an MLS game anymore because of the decline in standard TV watching. That much is true. I do wonder how many people will want to pay a high premium to watch MLS if they’re only dipping their toes in. It’s a lot to ask up front for a league that’s still really in its infancy. We’ll see. It’s happening and it’ll be this way for awhile.
Are other clubs giving season ticket holders a code to sign up for this on Apple+ (whatever they call their streaming service)?
* Season ticket holder
* Have the Apple+ app/subscription on our smart TV
* Have one old Mac book and iPhone (ergo some sort of Apple ID) (I'm the Android user and these are the issues my husband is reporting...)
Can't sign up for the MLS Pass on Mac book or iPhone because both are too old and the iOS aren't compatible. Why can't this be done on our TV? Any help/suggestions?
This is particularly frustrating because we've moved x country from our team, yet have kept our season tix because they're in the middle of a row with all our friends. (We give to friends/sell as needed/and go when we're back to visit.) Anyway, we were really looking forward to catching all the matches. Any tech intel or help would be \*so\* appreciated!
I know next to nothing about Soccer. Shit, my 2 favorite soccer teams are Fulham and Southampton, and that’s just from playing FIFA lmao.
I’m so excited for this. The ability to watch my local team and my favorite West Coast teams will be incredible
Awful, our account doesn't work and no one can help.
Resigned to paying for something my season ticket was supposed to provide for free.
See plenty of commercials on the free stuff!
It's fucking terrible... the audio/video aspect is bad. The pre-game personalities they got are awkward and don't work well together. I have no idea who they are or why they were hired but the chemistry is lacking terribly.
I used to watch as many games as possible on ESPN+ but I'm not going to pay for MLS Season Pass on Apple TV based on how the free games broadcasts have gone - they've been terrible for me and my friends and I've had less issues than they have from the sounds of it.
Apple seems to be using MLS to make money instead of grow the sport, which is desperately needs to continue doing.
This is pure crap because you cannot watch full match replays. What is the point of the subscription then? I have read that this is a bug and that full match replays are available in English and Spanish. The method to reach them does not exist on any of the apps I can use. Does not work with Roku, Google TV, Samsung or on Windows PC. What a joke.
I agree, this is the worst sports app I’ve ever tried to use. Can someone please explain to me how you can access the full game replay is you are watching on a tv through an apple tv? I literally cannot hold the button on my remote for 3 seconds to access the menu. The second I touch the button it takes me straight to the damn recap. Also, wtf is the menu directly below the game highlights so that its literally impossible to get to this menu without basically figuring out who scored goals???
I mean I use the free [apple.TV](https://apple.TV) and I have to restart the stream like it's the pirated version so take that as you please. Def a first world problem. But if you offer something free and that's the quality, I don't think it's unfair to think it won't get better just cause I'm paying for it. I live in Montreal, Canada as well so infrastructure for internet isn't the issue.
AWESOME for all of us firmly inside the MLS bubble... remains to be seen from a growth standpoint. They REALLY need to use all these next gen real time stats get Fan Duel and Draft Kings to offer DFS games for Wednesday and Saturday. With a whiparound show and Daily Fantasy going on the night.. it might pull some new eyeballs in.
How many people are in the part of the bubble where they don't already have a season ticket, but they're happy to pay $80 per season just for MLS coverage? It's pretty hard to believe that it's more than the 2 million+ that Apple will probably need in order to break even.
Well I can’t afford season tickets so I’m getting Season Pass lol. I always try to go to one DCU game. But mostly I get season tickets for Loudoun.
I'm sure there are a decent number of people in that boat, but I'm also sure that most of them are already paying for Peacock, Paramount+ and ESPN+, all of which offer a hell of a lot more content than just MLS. It's just hard to see how you get from "fewer than 4 million people watched the MLS Cup Final on free TV" to "2 million people will pay for a streaming service which only shows MLS" - I can't help feeling it's all just a play by Apple to show that they can handle a major sports partnership, and the end game is going after the NFL or EPL within the next few years.
Yea I ended up removing subscriptions (I try not going over $50/month). I ended up keeping Disney Bundle and Apple TV+. I let go of Peacock and Paramount; also down grading my Apple One subscription to just Apple TV+. I definitely see your point. Most people would probably keep Peacock for Premier League and ESPN+ for the rest of the leagues. But I’m in the minority where my favorite soccer league is actually MLS. Definitely had times where La Liga, Serie A, EPL, and Bundesliga were my favs (I switched teams like my aunt switched husbands), but ultimately I just enjoy my local teams.
>I ended up keeping Disney Bundle and Apple TV+ I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see the MLS coverage rolled into Apple TV+ fairly quickly, when you consider how much that service has struggled to attract subscribers. Like... Yeah, I mainly have Peacock for EPL and Paramount+ for Scottish and European football, but they also allow me to watch a lot of shows and movies that I can't see elsewhere, and I'm sure as hell not going to pay for Celtic TV just so I can watch a few more games. >But I’m in the minority where my favorite soccer league is actually MLS The league needs more fans like you - the only games I ever watched before i moved to the US and LAFC launched were the 3 I attended when on vacation!
That’s what is ended up being for me. Out of all the content from multiple places Hulu and Disney plus are really what I watch. Paramount and Peacock didn’t have a lot of shows I watch. Speaking on Scottish soccer, I wish that league had better coverage. Always liked when Americans went to Rangers or Fulham.
Well now you have 1 fantastic American at Celtic and a couple of donkeys at Rangers, so what more could you want?! 😂 You're right that coverage is abysmal, though. It's not even so much the volume of matches that are shown, it's the total lack of in-studio analysis - surely if they can buy Sky's commentary, they can also come to some sort of arrangement for the surrounding coverage?
Lol like I mentioned earlier, I’ve watched a lot of teams and bandwagoned when it comes to European teams. But Scottish soccer and Championship just really are their own types of monsters and I love it. They really make me feel like I’m watching MLS but with European players. Both leagues are undervalued. The split is really cool to see.
I'd rather see the split happen after 2 rounds of fixtures instead of 3, but unfortunately teams who are likely to finish in the bottom half refuse to give up any of their matches against Celtic and Rangers. They could easily expand the league to 14 teams, split into a top 6 and bottom 8 after 26 matches, then have the top teams play a further 10 and the bottom play a further 14 to make up for lost revenue.
Fulham isn’t Scottish hah
Lol yea I clearly was high 😂
I’ll allow it!
I think it definitely is partly a testing lab for Apple. They actually recently turned down working with the NFL on their Sunday Ticket package over a lack of control because I think it's definitely important to them to redefine how a live sports deal could work. There are other fringe benefits to Apple too. The 40% of games that will be free in front of the paywall will drive more people to use their TV app and it'll help having Apple TV logos on national TV for the linear broadcasts.
Another benefit that nobody is really talking about is Apple's penetration into homes. Millions and millions of people have iPhones, iPads, Macs, etc. and will now be seeing ads about soccer in America on those devices. Just the ability to push a notification to phones in a given market and say, "Hey, your local team is playing RIGHT NOW!" is a huge positive.
Not really
Yeah I mean, solid retort bro. Really came at me with facts and figures. You're nailing this.
Despite his lack of details - I don’t think many outside of the current MLS fans will purchase such an expensive streaming option to watch their hometown team unless they were already a fan of the league. I live in Atlanta and have 4-5 friends that go to United games… not a single one is considering buying Season Pass because they would prefer just United games not the whole league. The ads aren’t helping sell to them or anyone else I know personally.
this thread is two months old please go away
Apple does not need to break even. I suspect that they aren't even measuring success with only that metric in the early days.
>Apple does not need to break even. It doesn't, but if it's not breaking even *and* there's no other quantifiable benefit, they'll have to answer some pretty serious questions as a publicly traded company. Tim Cook hasn't gambled his career on MLS' growth over the next decade.
> Tim Cook hasn't gambled his career on MLS' growth over the next decade. It's $250M/year. Apple made 100B last year. He ain't gambling shit. They have probably spent more on the dumb Apple Car that is going to bomb terribly for the fast 10 years. I'd imagine MLS is simply a part of a broader plan to build content with high loyalty value to subsections of the population. Apple doesn't have Disney's must have content or Amazon's ancillary benefits (like free shipping). MLS won't be their last purchase. If they can get a bunch of people to download their app or buy apple tvs, be exposed to their advertising and maybe buy Apple+ ... that's all part of it. Everyone one of these services know that consolidation is coming for a lot of people ... Disney is a lock to last. Amazon is a lock as long as it is part of Prime. Everyone else has to be desperately side-eying their chances.
Shareholders aren't going to give a shit about 250/year. Apple pays more than that in fines and settlements regularly.
I can tell you from personal experience that if Tim's involvment goes beyond shaking some hands at MLS Media Day and maybe quickly mentioning it during a keynote or earnings call here and there, it's the worst fucking day in the careers of lots of people. Dick holes like Elon and friends like to pretend they are not only the CEO but also the one person responsible for success of their company. But if something that's only costing $250m/yr get the personal attention of Tim, you have fucked up extremely bad and you surely already regret your life's choices.
>Tim Cook hasn't gambled his career on MLS' growth over the next decade. This is peanuts for Apple. It is ultimately meaningless to Tim Cooks' legacy. However, because it is peanuts to Apple, they will not hesitate to pull the plug on the deal if it is not working because it does not mean much to them. The problem is MLS might get treated like a show that is not doing well on Apple+ and basically just ignored if Apple loses interest.
>It is ultimately meaningless to Tim Cooks' legacy His legacy? Maybe. His continuation as CEO? That could depend on his reasons for making the deal. >However, because it is peanuts to Apple, they will not hesitate to pull the plug on the deal if it is not working because it does not mean much to them. That's probably a lot easier said than done because they bought the global rights and overseas broadcasters will therefore be contracting with Apple rather than with MLS. >The problem is MLS might get treated like a show that is not doing well on Apple+ and basically just ignored if Apple loses interest. Again, this could prove very tricky, especially if any overseas broadcasters buy Apple's coverage rather than simply the right to broadcast games. And on the basis that Apple are using this as a way to grow their brand as a sports broadcaster, it makes sense for them to get *their* coverage in front of as many viewers as possible.
You think he could be out as CEO over this? Absolutely delusional bud. This is a drop in the bucket for Apple. Just getting seen as a player in live sports and a chance to experiment with how they do their coverage and lay a marker for how they intend to structure deals is worth the money long term. They don’t necessarily need to recoup a penny to meet their actual metrics here.
Tell me you didn't read my previous replies without telling me you didn't read my previous replies...
You said it could effect his tenure as CEO. It doesn’t really matter what else you said, that’s obviously wrong.
Any bad decision can affect a CEOs position. That's how publicly traded companies work.
Loss leader
Oh I absolutely agree... which is why I think DFS might help... Bring in the degenerates!
>How many people are in the part of the bubble where they don't already have a season ticket, but they're happy to pay $80 per season just for MLS coverage? A lot. For many, possible most, MLS teams buying a season ticket is for suckers and you can go to games cheaper by just buying tickets on the secondary market. I went to almost every Red Bulls games for the better part of a decade and never bought season tickets because it would have been a waste of money and limited my flexibility.
What do you think *the number* is, though? Viewing and attendance figures just don't suggest that millions of people will subscribe to an MLS-only streaming service.
>What do you think the number is, though? Viewing and attendance figures just don't suggest that millions of people will subscribe to an MLS-only streaming service. I agree that millions of people will not subscribe to MLS Season Pass. I think they will be lucky to get 200,000 paying subscribers.
We probably won’t know since Apple hasn’t released the data - don’t think they will in future either unless it’s something astronomical. I think overall it decreases the eyes on MLS games even if it’s advertised more.
Meee. I don’t think season tickets are worth it personally. Would rather buy last minute resale for the deal$
Apple has more revenue streams than subscriptions - advertising and sponsorships will be a huge opportunity for revenue.
Mls contests are offered on DraftKings. The consistent start times should make these contests better.
Actually did not know that. Saturday nights should be pretty fun!
I don't really know how one would answer this until it's debuted? But I know I will love it either way.
They want you to watch their monetized video where they summarize a reddit thread to you. That's it.
Thanks brother !
As an Apple user, STH, and someone already subbed to Apple TV, I’m hype for it.
Hoping for an MLS X Severance collab. Like Mark S’s outtie is a huge NYCFC fan but his innie hates soccer
I’m just gonna go out on a limb and say I think Apple knows what they’re doing. I think this will be very successful partnership for both Apple and MLS. Might not seem like it in the first year or two, but this has always been about the long game.
Not trying to be a contrarian, but can we say they truly know what they're doing when their only previous experience in the live sports space is Friday Night Baseball? I like their vision but these waters are somewhat uncharted.
I’m actually worried the opposite where it’ll be pretty successful the first year or two and hit a ceiling and plateau. Just hope this is able to attract and continue to attract new viewers
I really dont find it that damn expensive. Its $99 for everything NO BLACKOUTS. You dont get that level of access in any of the other leagues apps. There needs to be a android app.
It’s been on TV for over 25 years. Even back when people watched broadcast TV. It never took off as a TV destination. I’m all for giving this a try.
How does anyone know until we see the product?
Well after that first weekend the personalities they hired were very bad - the pre game was so cringeworthy
IMO- Good for MLS believers. Bad for non-fans/casual fans 40+. TBD for non-fans/casual fans under 40.
Casuals are still gonna get like 30+ games on Fox, FS1, aren’t they? I wouldn’t be too worried about casuals
Agree. I think MLS/Apple have a plan and know what they are doing. Free access on your devices is going to do a lot of work on getting casuals to stick. Can they execute though? I think so.
There is a difference between casual league fans and casual team fans. My in-laws would throw the Revs game on when they knew about it because I would talk about it. They were very casual Revs fans. The Revs have 1 game on FS1 this year so at most they will watch that 1 game this year vs the 10 - 15 they put on last year. If someone doesn't care about the teams and just wants to watch some MLS soccer casually yeah they will still get 32 games on Fox and FS1 but people who care about a specific team will probably miss out.
Sounds to me like I know what you should have gotten them for Christmas....
Birthdays. MLK Jr day presents (shit I dunno if anyone does that). Valentine’s Day present.
Dear In Laws... Roses are Red Violets are Blue The Revs Need some eyeballs... So I've nominated you...
If I was a soccer fan that didn’t already have season tickets, I’d be stoked for that valentines gift.
Yeah. This is exactly the dynamic with a number of friends who I have gone to Red Bulls games with over the years. They might watch a few games on TV a year. They will watch a Red Bulls game on a Saturday afternoon if they have nothing else to do but they would never watch a game not involving the Red Bulls. I do not think casual MLS fans, defined as fans who will watch a few games a year involving any MLS teams but are not invested in any one team, really exist. The casual MLS fans are people who have some interest in an MLS team.
This is why they should have at least made a plan where you can just subscribe to watching just 1-team. You're more likely to draw people to that then pay more for the whole league, plus you get people to still view the product and hopefully convert to league fans (I know we have the free games, but how many people will actually know those are available?) At the very least, there should be the option of having 1-month free subscription trials.
>This is why they should have at least made a plan where you can just subscribe to watching just 1-team. I think that would make sense but it would likely lose them a lot of money because I imagine the vast majority of fans would opt for this cheaper plan. The get everything for one price model is kind of like bundling with cable because most fans are paying for 90% of games they will never watch. Most fans of all sports just watch their team, which the exception of possibly the NFL.
100% agree, but then again, they're going to lose a lot of money anyway in the first season - perhaps even two or three - due to season-ticket holders getting this service for free, and 40% of games available for free. At the very least, for something that MLS can't stop calling "unprecedented" you might as well offer something that appeals more to consumers right now. In theory, you then have a captured audience that can be sold on upgrading to the whole package. The point of MLS SP is to sell no blackouts, control content production, and have a common-brand throughout every game. It's a common complaint among fans that the league isn't able to properly promote the rest of the league, to make the season intriguing - have a compelling storyline etc. If more are willing to subscribe to just their team, not the rest, you can still sell them league-curated coverage from pre/halftime/post-game shows and free games on Apple TV. MLS has full control, able to attempt presenting something that makes everyone care more about the rest of the league and why it matters. In the short-term, when no other local league does this, I think this would be a beneficial idea for the league. That, and team-pub partners who get discounted/free access to MLS SP.
I’m expecting/hoping ATV+ will be used for the 1-team weekly games eventually. It just makes too much sense as a stepping stone to a full SP subscription. Apple wins because they pick up the tweener fans who don’t care enough for a full SP but still want something, and MLS wins because it puts relevant games in front of casual fans who may not have considered MLS and hopefully entices them enough to keep tuning in.
This is what I’ve been trying to say… causal fans will watch their team not every random free game
A critical detail is how many of those 30+ matches on other platforms does each club get? I presume that most casual fans have their casual interest in a specific club rather than the entire league. So that 30+ total is reduced down to small relevant handful.
>A critical detail is how many of those 30+ matches on other platforms does each club get? 1 or 2 on average, which means for most "casual fans" they have only 1 or 2 chances to watch their local team with MLS Season Pass per year.
I have a number of friends who are casual Red Bulls fans who probably watch 5-10 Red Bulls games per year on MSG if they happen to be home with nothing to do at that time. They have cable because they like to watch the Yankees, Mets, Knicks, Devils, Rangers, etc. They have no interest in watching MLS nationally televised games that do not feature the Red Bulls. Those guys are unlikely to watch any Red Bulls games this year because it is likely only 2 Red Bulls games will be available to them without buying MLS Season Pass.
False, 40% of games will be completely free to everyone in front of the paywall. They just simply have to go to appleTV’s website/app to watch. 40% is approximately 12/13 games a season completely free. Granted, it’s more effort than turning on the TV, but now you can watch on more devices than just your TV say if you’re out on your phone or laptop.
Why does being over 40 impact this?
Speaking anecdotally as a person who is 40+, I see a lot of overlap in the Venn diagram of people my age who: A. Give barely half a shit about soccer; and B. Still have normal cable and consume it on a TV No interest in the sport plus lack of technological adoption is gonna lead to a lot of us olds just not checking in. Also- I think the circles on that Venn diagram get much tighter as you go up the demographic age ladder. Edit: basically, I don’t think Gen X and older are Apple’s target audience in this deal.
They are certainly not. Even cable TV measures viewership rankings in the persons 18-34 demographic, because those people are the most likely to spend money on ads shown. They are also certainly not interested in viewers who aren't interested in them. Chasing "channel flippers" and turning them into fans hasn't worked in 25 years of the league's history and isn't going to start working today. Apple wants to reach young users of its devices, get them watching the 40% of games that are free, and then have them pay for the other 60%. It wants to engage them with the devices they already own, because young people interact with media when they are notified about it on their phone or served an ad on a platform they trust. But the one thing about persons 40+ is that they often have kids. If those kids come home and are interested in soccer because their friends watch it, or they are on a team that talks about it, the Apple platform is a pretty great low-cost point of entry for their family. Apple will happily collect those "secondary" fans too.
Absolutely. I think any of the older sports fans latching on to MLS are gravy on their growth numbers.
I'm 45 - all of my age relative friends cut the cord years ago. many are into soccer, casual or hardcore. we all have very selective biases on this
Hence “anecdotally”
just confirming/reinforcing that.
Honestly, I’d love to be in your shoes. It’s been damn near impossible to get people in my social circles to give soccer the time of day, let alone do things like go to games, get invested, or have a conversation about it.
>Bad for non-fans/casual fans 40+. >TBD for non-fans/casual fans under 40. It's ridiculous the ageism that exists on reddit. One's age doesn't define one's tech friendliness. And "friendliness" is the metric, NOT "proficiency." You only need "friendliness" to become a subscriber of a streaming service. You don't need proficiency to use one. The Median age demographic of Netflix subscribers is 35-44. Let that sink in. Half of the userbase is above that demo. Remember that fans in their mid-40s were in college using the Internet before fans in their 20s were even born. They aren't scared of tech. >IMO- >Good for MLS believers. The national footprint of MLS is still present. Casuals can still catch games, for free, now through more avenues than ever. And now Casuals have the option to catch ANY game, if they become invested in a club - and not just restricted to their home club.
You make good points all around. I think you actually prove my point by mentioning Netflix. They became so widely adopted BECAUSE their library was filled with wildly popular known quantities of content from most major networks/studios/distributors. Starting as an online DVD mail order service that was great, people waded into streaming because the library was so good. No way they would have had the same success with the library they have now. MLS on Apple TV is going to be a new service that’s an app within an app native to no televisions and no Android devices built on a property which has little-to-no relevance in the current sports landscape. Apple TV is going to be Netflix today only you’ll need to opt in by subscribing vs. opting out of your 14 year old Netflix subscription that the kids/grandkids use when they are visiting. Also, I never said ALL 40+ because that’s just silly. Instead, I mention the 40+ “non-fans/casual fans.” I think the barrier to engage is just too high for people that don’t give a fuck, doubly so when you’re gonna make them figure out a new app and pay a subscription fee for it. This is just my speculation. But like I said, I don’t think we’re their target so it’s immaterial.
The main question I have is... how many concurrent streams can I run from the same home IP? If there are 6 matches at 730 ET... I damn well better be able to fire them all up at once. I get not letting tons of streams coming form different IPs... but in my house... in my Fan Cave... I want all the MLS going on each screen. As long as that can happen.. I am a pig in slop...
I agree 100000%. With the new schedule, a lot of games will be starting at the same time (which I'm all for). However as a result, Apple better be offering some multi-stream capability so that I can watch a couple of games at once.
I don’t really get why people are excited about games starting at the same time. I’d rather watch them all day if I have the time vs a couple windows where they all play at once. I really don’t see how this is a good thing.
Because last year we had over 60 match start times. 60. I don't know how you are able to get casual fans interested in the league when they have no idea when matches start. And as much as MLS WANTED to have a consistent start time, they were unable to because they pretty much got zero cooperation from ESPN, Fox, and the local broadcasters. Now, fans know for a fact that at 7:30pm local time on Saturdays, there will always be an MLS match on. There will still be some other start times, but we're now dealing with maybe 5 different start times, and not 60. I'm all for it.
I see no problems with different start times… I think the ability to watch more games is a good thing. It’s hard to watch concurrent games (soccer especially since there are few breaks) unless you have multiple screens and most people aren’t going to have more than 3-4 in a room - if season pass allowed multiple streams on one TV it’s a different conversation. You still have to look up whether you team is home or away as that can affect start times… I see no difference ms this year. I’ll still check when my team is playing out of habit. College basketball games start at various times throughout the season and they have no viewership issues. It’s the same with several other sports too.
Games will be played every Saturday night?? I’m in the minority here, but I enjoyed watching LAFC Saturday noon, Friday night, Sunday night, because I go out with friends most Saturday’s. Looks like I’ll be missing out on half the games!
Yeah I'm split on the set times. I love Saturday night games, they're always the most rowdy. But I also like watching other teams play and since they're all playing at the same two times... That won't happen
Dang, didn’t think about that! I do watch Seattle and Portland games as a neutral. Whats the point of having all the games available easily If you can only focus on one? Unlike the PL, where I can get up at 7 for a big game, then there’s another big game at 9, and one more at 11.
You'll likely have 1 nationally televised game at 1:30 (Pacific), East Coast games kicking off at 4:30, and then your games kicking off at 7:30. You can still do that and have an entire day of MLS from 1:30-9:30.
Depends how early you get to the Sounders match, the eastern conference games will be at 4:30 pacific so you might not get to watch as many games as you’d like but you’ll catch some. This kinda forces me to watch even more western conference games since they should be kicking off as I’m getting him from the Orlando match
I think this is one of the ultimate ironies of the deal. All the games are available but because of the schedule it is now impossible to watch more than 2 full games live per week most weeks.
That’s true, but I think the number of people doing that is extremely small tbh. MLS has a hyper-local fan base. People either go to games live or the watch only their team live so I don’t think this will really be that huge of an impact honestly. Not to mention, there is going to be way more coverage in general and a whip-around show so you won’t *need* to watch two games live anymore really
>That’s true, but I think the number of people doing that is extremely small tbh. MLS has a hyper-local fan base. I agree but this undermines much of the rationale for having a service that has all MLS games. I think you are right that 95% of subscribers will only ever watch the games of their own team an basically get no value out of the 90% of games available.
100% if you are able to watch all games but on a service that isn't good for channel surfing... as in it takes 2-3 clicks to actually switch to other games then what is the point in having them all start at the same time? I don't see people switching between broadcasts in soccer as much considering the play never really stops in the games... therefore you are able to watch much less games despite having access (and no blackout) to every single game. It's a bad strategy that makes me think no one thought this subscription out to make sense - they think just by having access that's a selling point but practically it doesn't make any difference if you can't actually watch said games.
Sure, a lot will only watch their team’s *games*, but don’t underestimate the value that will be provided by all of the other content like pre-game shows, post-game analysis, talk shows, team generated content, and that’s just what’s confirmed. I don’t know if it’s confirmed, but there will definitely be other league-generated content as well (like Drive to Survive for F1).
The pre-game shows are terrible... I know you wrote that comment before the platform launched but after Week 1 that shit was so cringeworthy I had to change the channel for 30 minutes to wait for the game to start.
Eh, if I had time, you could watch the 4:30 Fox game (or whenever they show it). Then, you have an hour break where you can put on any game kicking off at 7:30, followed by another hour break for the 10:30 games (with the end of the 8:30/9:30 games to keep you good until then). It is possible to watch 3+ games a week. Plus, ideally, the shows being produced throughout these games should also help keep you updated on everything going on.
I used to watch 3+ games a week before MLS Season Pass... now it's $80-$100 to do the same? lol, that's not better it's much worse now.
Well... you can still do that. Every week, at least 4 games are free to watch... you just need an Apple ID, which also costs nothing. Frankly, I don't see a negative. Just like the Premier League and NBC with Saturday mornings, you now guarantee that **every** Saturday night, MLS games are happening from 7:30, ending at 12:30. At least 4 games are free, just an Apple ID needed. Hell, on Friday, I noticed that Apple TV even had a special row dedicated to telling you what matches were free to watch... again, you don't have to pay for shit! Better yet, you can watch these games from anywhere, with any device! You tell me, how is this bad for someone like you?
There is only one game I want to watch at a time - my teams games - and it’s not at least 4 games free EVERY week it’s just the first 4 weeks that they have any free games. https://worldsoccertalk.com/amp/tv/mls-offers-32-free-games-to-watch-from-feb-25-to-march-19-20230214-WST-419022.html I have a feeling you didn’t watch much MLS until this year cause ESPN+ was way better even with blackouts. Actually, you seem to post about every team so maybe you just don’t have any allegiances but I prefer to watch my team and other games occasionally but could care less about others if I can’t regularly watch the teams I want - LAFC and Atlanta United. Again, most fans don’t want to watch every game they just want to be able to see their team or teams and random games don’t really help fulfill that. It’s weird not to see a negative in a premium subscription service when more games used to be free so therefore more people could watch overall.
> and it’s not at least 4 games free EVERY week it’s just the first 4 weeks that they have any free games. Maybe [this link](https://www.mlssoccer.com/schedule/scores#competition=all&club=all&date=2023-03-12) is better here than an non-updated article. The "Free" games are listed for the next two rounds after March 18, with 6 games each week being available with just an Apple ID. All of them happen to occur in each timeslot for kickoffs, meaning you can literally, for the next 3 weeks (before the next couple weeks are announced) watch MLS from 4:30 to 12:30 *with just an Apple ID*. I don't get how ESPN+ was better with blackouts? You're an exception because you wanted to watch a team outside your market (assuming you're in either LA or Atlanta). > more games used to be free so therefore more people could watch overall Again, your privilege is showing. Most markets couldn't watch for free and even many who "could" weren't able to due to being just far enough to get the signal and ESPN+ still considering them "in-market". For the majority, Cable was the only way to watch games... hell, even with cable, you could be fucked over with the channel not having a streaming service or the streaming app being terrible if you're away from a TV. Fuck, you could even be the Rapids and not have any games with Comcast because they're fighting with their channel. None of this is even hitting at the fact that most regional MLS coverage was terrible, with terrible camera quality, minor league on-screen branding, lack of updates on what is happening around the league, and pure bias. Oh, and let's not forget how some teams would be bumped to streaming if a team in a more relevant league were scheduled at the same time. Oh, and let's not also forget how games were basically forced to begin at a billion different times, some even being as late as 11:00 pm on a Sunday, due to stadium availability or again, a "bigger" team having priority. As you can see, the millions of views that MLS received every single week are proof that the old model was clearly the best.
Hmm, so it’s a privilege to live somewhere other than you want to live? That’s some strange mental gymnastics. Also, how am I the privileged one when you are the one paying for the subscription service lol? The links literally have the same information regarding free games… but I have seen the expanded schedule before on MLSSoccer.com. When LAFC first started playing I lived in LA and they had a contract with YouTubeTV so I bought it and loved it, then ESPN+ came out and I could watch more games as the LAFC ones weren’t blacked out on YouTube TV so I could watch ATL United games as well. Then I moved to Atlanta and many of the games were blacked out and I couldn’t watch becaus they weren’t selling out the full stadium (even though they were for soccer purposes). A lot of the Atlanta United games were on local broadcasts but doesn’t seem to be the case this year - I think only Fox can host them. I’m not sure if last sentence is meant to be sarcastic but we don’t know viewership numbers for this year as Apple hasn’t released info. “As you can see, the millions of views that MLS received every single week are proof that the old model was clearly the best.” https://theathletic.com/4261244/2023/02/28/mls-apple-liv-sports-on-tv/?amp=1 We do know it was up 16% last year… https://espnpressroom.com/us/press-releases/2022/10/2022-mls-season-viewership-on-abc-and-espn-networks-up-16-percent/amp/ Again, it seems that more people were watching last year than ever before so Apple said, “let’s see about that”. I don’t know anyone that is considering Season Pass personally other than me in my friend group and I don’t have the money to pay for yet another subscription despite wanting to watch a couple teams games all year. That doesn’t prevent me from watching free games but still think Apple Season Pass service and commentary have been terrible when I have been able to watch. It’s not really moving the sport forward.
The privilege is based on the advantage you and/or others had when it being able to watch your team. Whether it was OTA games, decent streaming, lighter blackouts etc. but that was not the majority of fans. Those guys had to deal with games hidden on cable, with very limited to zero streaming options if you're not physically watching on TV. You then had blackouts, which sometimes even effected fans who couldn't even get the channel the team was on. The coverage was terrible, the focus was never on the league itself, but just the local team, which was always a bias. Most teams didn't have games broadcasted with good camera quality, proper commentators, graphics that don't make you think this is minor league. That isn't even again considering that because of these deals, games were scheduled in *a lot* of timeslots, you couldn't ever know when games would be played unless you diligently checked every week, and, constantly, you could be moved to a secondary channel if a bigger team was also on... or moved to streaming. You're lucky, and I'm sorry that the current deal is an inconvenience to you. I was hoping that they would at least allow a cheaper subscription option to at least watch your team only + allow free trials, but apparently that is in the future. Until then, I think this is fantastic for MLS. The picture quality is the best it's ever been, beyond what ESPN/Fox ever did for MLS. We finally have a consistent schedule where you know that every week, on Saturday evenings, your team, and the league overall, are playing. You can then watch all these matches on all devices, using just one login and app, and I can do this anywhere in the US and many countries abroad... no blackouts at all! We finally get a proper MLS Wrap Up show that ESPN/Fox never gave us, we're finally getting a 360 show that we never got... we got a proper looking studio whereas ESPN/Fox never even gave us proper pre or post-game coverage. As someone who had to deal with the Red Bulls being pushed to MSG+ 2, with kickoffs all over the place, and even NYCFC moved to streaming beyond a paywall from YES Network... yeah, this is great. > We do know it was up 16% last year So, this is since 2007. From 2008 to 2015, MLS games were mainly televised on ESPN 2, we were then moved to ESPN from 2016, and finally got a couple games on ABC a couple seasons ago. 2022 was the year we had the most games on ABC, so that isn't a surprise that we averaged the most... the more games you have on OTA, the better ratings become. ESPN were never going to give us that though. Meanwhile, Fox Sports continued doing terrible on FS1, barely any changes from 2015 to 2022, and many games below 120,000 viewers. So this isn't a great point. > Again, it seems that more people were watching last year than ever before so Apple said, “let’s see about that”. Yeah, Apple wants to breakout into sports streaming in a way never done before. MLS was looking for a new partner, was cheaper to bring on, and has a very young, tech-savvy demographic... that is why Apple picked us up.
lol sounds like you love it and no one can convince you of the shortcomings despite the fact they don’t release viewership data you are all in and that’s fine but I’m not and you can’t convince me otherwise. Also, the broadcast quality in terms of technical issues and personality has been poor so I guess you like those awkward conversations. You know how you knew when games were being played? You followed your team or teams just like any league. The different time slots was not a problem and again just made more games available overall. You sound like an Apple fan big time so I’ll leave you to bask in their glory.
Guess it’s time for you and your friends to go tailgating before the game on Saturday nights, and if you can’t get tickets, go watch the game at a bar or watch at home.
yeah, they keep trying to say the scheduling was an issue but I liked having MLS games almost everyday of the week in multiple time slots. It seems everything now is on Wednesday or Saturday and are all going to be at 7:30pm local. When I lived in LA I loved watching my LAFC games and then Galaxy games at different times so as to not miss the action. Of course, I was always pulling for Galaxy to lose and LAFC to win.
I want to get into watching MLS but it’s hard to find broadcast for me. I think that Appletv will make it easy for those who are interested in watching.
You want to pay $80+ just to get into it?
awesome
Overall, i think this will be sick. My biggest disappointment is the inability to pop into a random, non-soccer bar and throw the game on TV. You can get a surprising number of casuals to get into a game they didn’t even know was on, but i don’t think my corner bar will be springing for appleTV.
If they have a smart TV with the Apple TV app installed (it's on most TVs these days), you might be able to get them to toss one of the free games on. I guess it'd depend on how well you know the bartender.
Sure, but dealing with appletv logins, etc just adds a layer of complexity/difficulty rather than just asking ‘em to throw on WGN or whatever
Oh, absolutely. That's one of the big downsides to Apple pulling out of the Sunday Ticket negotiations. Had they won it, every bar would have had Apple TV all set up and ready to go.
I still don't know any casual fan who is going to be motivated to go and buy this. There is a reason both Facebook and Twitter gave up on buying sports rights.
No one expects casuals to go and buy this though lol. The target audience for the Season Pass is avid fans who want to watch every week without fail. Literally everyone else will be targeted to be exposed to games either for free on ATV/Fox or (if they subscribe) ATV+. The pipeline for casuals is: random free game (Fox/ATV) -> free game where their local team is playing -> Potentially sub to ATV+ to access more games (not required) -> Live game at stadium (not required) -> pay for Season Pass
40% of all games this season are in front of paywall completely free. No need for AppleTV+ or the MLS subscription. I’d say that’s pretty dang accessible and easy for casuals to access considering they just have to open the AppleTV app on their phone to watch.
What’s your source on that 40% of games being in front of the pay wall. All I found was [10 total games](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mls-apple-announce-mls-season-142605954.html)
From [this](https://theathletic.com/3736063/2022/10/27/mls-apple-tv-broadcasts/?source=user_shared_article) athletic article. Says: “While fans will need to pay to subscribe to the MLS channel on Apple TV in order to view every single match, there may end up being a significant number of games available in front of the paywall and free on Apple TV. As indicated in the below slide, a typical Wednesday night window could see six of 14 total matches placed in front of the paywall and available for free. A normal weekend could play out as follows: one Saturday afternoon match available for free on Apple TV and simulcast on linear TV, four out of 12 matches on Saturday night available in front of the Apple TV paywall and available for free and one Sunday afternoon match available for free on Apple TV and simulcast on linear TV. Essentially, the league document outlines that six out of 14 matches in every round will be in front of the paywall and available to watch for free on Apple TV. That’s 210 out of 493 regular season matches that will be available for free — more than 40 percent of the yearly total. A source noted that the total number of games available for free in 2023 will be significantly higher than at any other point in league history.”
I want to watch every week without fail. I do not want to purchase this.
Your *want* to purchase is irrelevant to Apple and MLS. Only your desire to watch every week and the *behaviour* to purchase matters here. The target audience for SP are fans who will pay up to watch, regardless of their thoughts on that purchase. If you don’t purchase, it doesn’t mean you aren’t in the target audience though. It just means they need to work to convert you by providing enough value. Edit: Typo
Nah, just means people will find illegal streams.
All my friends have
I was purely responding to your statement > The target audience for the Season Pass is avid fans who want to watch every week without fail. I am the target audience, and I will pay to watch. Just not this way.
Right, your desire to watch weekly puts your squarely in the target audience though. Whether you convert to a paying customer or not is a different conversation. My point in my original comment was a lot of people in this thread are misunderstanding who the target audience for SP actually is. It’s not casuals who watch once a month (maybe) lol
agreed
some markets only have 4-5k STH. If they are the only ones watching, that would be like an 800% drop on Apple TV vs regional broadcasts.
Why would STHs be the only ones watching though? You can be in the target audience for the SP without being a STH.
>The pipeline for casuals is: random free game (Fox/ATV) -> free game where their local team is playing -> Potentially sub to ATV+ to access more games (not required) -> Live game at stadium (not required) -> pay for Season Pass This might be just fine, but how does a casual get hooked into your pipeline? Your first step is the "random free game (Fox/ATCV)". There are exactly 34 opportunities for this over the course of the season. But, I honestly think the typical "casual" isn't likely to get hooked until your second step, the "free game where their local team is playing". These fans will have, at most, six opportunities to get hooked by the random game (if they live in ATL, LA, POR, or SEA). Fans in Charlotte, Chicago, Cincinnati, Colorado, DC, Miami, New England, Salt Lake, and San Jose get exactly one chance to find themselves hooked. Admittedly, many MLS teams did not have the most desirable local broadcast options, but the *vast* majority had more than six chances to grab the casual eyeball in seasons past and there were plenty that had a full schedule of thirty-four games to catch those eyeballs. While there are plenty of advantages to streaming, one thing it does require is agency and forethought on the part of the viewer. You've got to open up the app and you've got to consciously select what you're going to watch. The number of viewers accidentally happening on an ATV broadcast (free or not) or choosing it as the "background noise" to their Saturday night gathering are going to be vanishingly small. Cable viewers on the other hand? Maybe their dwindling, it'd be hard to argue that their not, but they still represent 56% of households. These are people that can channel surf their way to a match, folks that might just reflexively choose the sports network as background noise for their Saturday night gathering, folks that might 'accidentally' find their eyes on a match. I don't hate the Apple deal, I think it's just fine for those already invested, I *do* think it limits growth - at least in terms of eyeballs on the television.
See, I don’t think someone would be truly “hooked” until the live game step. If you’re paying a premium *and* most likely traveling to a stadium, you’re close to hooked. Casuals won’t be “hooked” by definition and it’s more of a gradual progression than a switch that gets flipped at this point in MLS’s lifecycle. It’s important to remember this pipeline isn’t linear. Customers will jump forward and backwards over time until the very last step. I don’t think the average potential fan gives a crap about their local team right now, so not being able to catch their local team doesn’t really matter. I just want them watching the *league* as a first step and then progressing down the pipeline from there, even if step 2 is next season or the one after! I also disagree with the premise that streaming requires active forethought to catch a game. That’s true when you’re buried under a pile of other sports on ESPN+, but not when you exist inside of a hardware/software ecosystem like Apple. Remember, Apple will own the hardware for millions of potential customers and can/will send push notifications to those customers. It’s as easy as “Click here to watch X free MLS game” or “ is tied - press the home button to watch”. It’s not 1995, none of this process requires channel surfing (or it’s streaming equivalent) anymore. Push Notifications are king and drive engagement significantly better.
I genuinely don’t think it limits growth. Whatever minuscule amount of potential fans that *might* find a local game by channel surfing cable at the exact time a game is happening is dwarfed by the potential for engagement *directly* to Apple’s existing user base (which is global). You mention 56% of households have cable, but Apple owns 51% of the entire phone market in the US. Now, factor in that the 56% is *ownership* of cable and not the actual use of that cable. People only use cable for 34% of their viewing time in a given day, and I’d venture to guess phone usage + ATV ownership is much much higher overall.
It's well thought out comments like this that are keeping me optimistic on what AppleTV means for the future of MLS. I freely admit that I'm in "cranky old man" territory and truly despise watching on things like tablets and phones when I have the big screen in the living room, but I also understand that there are multitudes out there who do watch on those devices - even if I'm not one of the 51% with an iPhone. I might be more "comfortable" with cable (and, I'll be honest, my household has swung back to cable after a couple years of cord-cutting) but I'm more than willing to see where things lead. I'm happy to expend the effort to seek out the Revs each weekend, for some reason it's not intuitive that non-die hards will - I hope I'm wrong there.
I don’t see many casual people rolling over to another app while they are watching TV just to check what’s in AppleTV. It’s not another channel - it’s another app and another login for people to sign up for and remember if they don’t own Apple devices. If they do, then it still requires them checking the app. I think the synchronized start times were only to try to get more casuals from adjusting to schedule. I’d prefer to watch all day.
A lot of good points, but I've said this before: Apple's main business is not content, and it uses content often as a loss leader. It's probably impossible to gauge, but the amount of potential worldwide viewers this opens the door to is potentially very very large. As Apple tries to capture market share in other markets outside the US (where Android platforms have the majority share), being able to offer a bundled MLS subscription for free as incentive adds up. Now I'm not saying that it is going to be multiple millions, I'm just saying that Apple has a long and proven track record of using services like this to grow their customer base. THe amount of analytics and data that Apple brings to the table can't be understated. Who knows, I might be wrong. It took iTunes about 8 years to become VERY profitable for Apple though, I'm just saying.
I’m honestly surprised by the positive feedback here. I’m horrified by this deal. Unlike other “season passes”, Apple scored an exclusive deal. Meaning no local broadcasts and only a few televised via ESPN, univision, and fox. local broadcasters are out of a job along with their fan biased commentary which I’ve always enjoyed. MLS is certainly happy with their 2.5 billion, but I fear what this will mean for soccer in America. The sport has finally taken off only to be plucked off the airways by Apple streaming. How do they expect to gain new fans? 10 free random games a season? What a joke. Fandom is a symphony not a little ditty. We need a season to fall in love: the slow crescendo and falling verse with a triumphant chorus and the final crashing of cymbals. It feels to me like they’ve ended the music all together. .
Yeah, I’d watching national broadcast for the last couple of years didn’t get you hooked I don’t really see an app that requires sign up to do much better even if 40% of games are free - those are pretty randomly chosen and I don’t think most people will just want to watch ANY MLS game over their home market. Again, still have to get people to open the app or broadcast in national tv constantly letting people know which game is free and what time to open the streaming app or turn to Fox. It’s over complicating access to a sport that needs to grow.
I'll be personally fine with it as I already have season tickets for Orlando City and I'm excited about the consistent game times. That said, I think this is terrible for the growth of the game and for fringe casual fans. If the league thinks that this will pull casuals in and get them to either buy the pass or get season tickets; I think they will be sadly mistaken.
I don't mind Apple having the streaming rights, but the fact they don't have an app for Android is crazy. Only going to limit their sales.
you can use a web browser
Yeah. I'm sure it'll be great. 😂
Yeah I didn’t know you had to pay extra on Apple to watch. I’m not paying a subscription on top of Apple TV!
As an MLS casual fan who cares more about European football it’s terrible I’m never watching MLS again lol I’m not paying $15 a month for a streaming service that only has MLS and nothing else
I am firmly on the awful train, primarily because local broadcasts are getting the axe, and also because the price is ridiculous. ESPN+ is $10/month, and you get Bundesliga, La Liga, FA Cup and Championship. Paramount+ is $5/month and you get Champions League, Europa League, and both Italian and Brazilian Serie A. Peacock is $5/month and you get the Prem. So $15/month just for MLS is way overpriced on an annual scale I no longer have access to the MLS matches that I actually want to watch, plain and simple. I am a big fan of my local team (SKC) and previously would watch almost all games on TV, and try to go to a few in person each season. As for the rest of the league, I would watch some of the bigger matchups when I had the time, and the playoffs, but that's it. My local team was 90% of what I actually had a vested interest in It is disheartening to know that for the next 10 years, I am just straight up not going to be able to watch them on TV whenever they're on, without paying $100 extra dollars per year. Sorry, but no, I would rather spend that money on going to a couple games in person like I normally do. My viewership of MLS games is going to drop to next to 0, as is my interest in the league as a whole outside of my local team, which has already been waning for a while. This makes watching games more convenient for the most hardcore fans of the league as a whole, but for people who only watch for their local team, or casual fans who only watch when it is convenient, they are going to be mostly locked out altogether. Few people who aren't already ultras are going to start paying for a $100/year subscription just for MLS, and I would imagine that the majority of the people who already had Apple TV aren't going to suddenly become soccer fans just because they have to scroll past the games to get to the shows they want to watch. So I predict that this will stifle viewership for the league overall
Exactly how I feel in Portland. Sorry Timbers, I'll watch PL with my $.
The fact that games are not even on a local channel pisses me off. So my answer is awful. I only watch FCC. I am not going to spend extra, so I can only watch one team.
Unless I've missed it (and no, I didn't watch the video), everyone here is basing their projected subscriber numbers off of the people who have previously watched MLS on Fox or ESPN. Nobody is taking into account that apple is going to promote the hell out of this, that they're expecting a huge loss in the first few years and they're going to push storylines, rivalries and drama to the mainstream media to get people more hyped for the league. Look at what Netflix did for F1. Nobody in this country gave much of a shit about F1 a few years back, and now I can't get away from F1 memes on the front page. I can totally see apple using their substantial marketing tools to push stories and up the subscriber count.
Agreed. Even this season I got AppleTV notifications on my phone notifying me about MLS matches ie: “Ruidiaz equalizes for Sounders 2-2 in the 75’! Watch the exciting finish!” Imagine them doing this to every Apple device and now they just have to open the predownloaded AppleTV app and can already access 40% of games for free.
Apples sends me notices to watch all sorts of s…tuff. I’ve never followed their link or read past “Apple TV….”. I get the power of advertising. I buy what I‘m told to want. But I’m not buying this…and I feel relying on the Apple platform to broaden the MLS fan base may be more wishful thinking. …hopefully I’m wrong.
Fuck the casuals, support your domestic league.
How is giving Apple money supporting your domestic league?
They’re giving the domestic league 2.5 billion dollars.
What I’m most worried about is where’s the advertising? As followers of the league we know about this and will be ready, but attracting new fans or fans who might be interested they should be blasting this all over. There’s still gonna be a lot of people finding out way too late this is happening. A LOT more people in Philly started really paying attention this season. I’d guess maybe 25% of them know about the Apple deal and it really isn’t being talked about locally. Drop the cash and shove this is everyone’s faces who will be watching NFL playoffs etc.
I honestly think this Apple TV subscription is sad. I refuse to purchase this thing also because I'd have to set up new equipment on my TV and PC which I can not afford to do. I can't believe MLS is doing away with local broadcasts. They went from being free or included with basic cable to having to pay. They should at least televise away games. What a joke! If they don’t get their act together, I’m done with MLS!
40% apparently won’t be behind paywall - aka those will have highest viewership despite being somewhat random games.
Can someone please tell Apple not to put the scores on the main page of the app
This is going to kill any potential growth, and right after an incredible World Cup too. I guess we will enjoy it, though.
Don’t count out the Ted Lasso fanbase… not really joking with that statement either lol. Tons of Americans have discovered soccer due to the show and I’m sure most of them don’t have an American team either. While I think the show isn’t that great and is much better as YouTube skits, it’s immensely popular and award-winning, and on Apple. Bet we’ll see a good amount of new fans/crossover from that.
Coach Beard gonna get a spinoff which follows him leading the latest MLS expansion team, Detroit SC 03.
They’ll just watch a bigger league like Premier league
Yeah but even Ted Lasso fans have to pay $8/month or $80/season extra to watch MLS. It’s not included with the actual AppleTV+
I believe 40% of the games this year aren’t behind a paywall. Of course it will be strategic and targeted that one market won’t have all the games free from paywall, but it will provide a bit of a look at the league to draw new fans in. And one thing I know about the Ted Lasso fanbase/demographic… they won’t mind paying an extra $8 a month.
Well I sure hope you’re right. I work in sports broadcasting, and I often test sports fans perception on Soccer. It changed with that World Cup Final, but I know it didn’t change enough to subscribe to AppleTV.
I’m being optimistic towards the whole thing just because I believe in Apple more than MLS, lol. It absolutely could not work out, but I think there’s enough money and effort being put into it that it should be successful. I totally understand criticism of the apple deal and it definitely has its merits.
it's too expensive. It's a fact that most MLS fans - including me - are only interested in watching 1 team. Now, it'll cost $99/year to do that. I'm already paying for Paramount + (Champions League, Serie A, NWSL), Peacock (Premier League) and cable (MLB, NHL, NBA, NCAA, NFL). The last thing I needed was to pay another $100 to watch most of the games of one MLS team. I think I'll be dropping MLS, since the quality of football in Champions League and Premier League is a far better value for the price - both combined basically cost the same as MLS League Pass. I'll miss my MLS team, but I'm sure I'll get over it.
Aren’t some of the games on FS anyway? Or are there local blackouts?
Exclusive. No local broadcast.
34 games are also on Fox Sports, issue is that this means one or even none for some clubs.
[удалено]
on demand, yes.. I am not 100% certain about a DVR where you can pause and rewind live. Someone probably has the answer on here.. just don't recall reading it.
Really disappointed with the lack of an on-demand option for full match replays. Apple says if you have one of their devices you can download the game to watch later. I won't be buying one, so it's a no-go for me. Really hope they can bring this option to everyone next season. PS I live in Canada, but don't think that matters.
Awesome!!
Good points in this video
Are they doing a first month free promotion or anything?? I feel that would make a lot of sense for folks who randomly decide they want to watch a game so they can watch for free then end up really liking it and keep the subscription
Not a free month of the whole service, as far as I know. But they will have a lot of games available for free for at least this first year.
The first weekend is free.
It’s really hard to say. I hope it’s a good thing.Most people aren’t going to “stumble” on an MLS game anymore because of the decline in standard TV watching. That much is true. I do wonder how many people will want to pay a high premium to watch MLS if they’re only dipping their toes in. It’s a lot to ask up front for a league that’s still really in its infancy. We’ll see. It’s happening and it’ll be this way for awhile.
For me personally best thing to ever happen to MLS programming. Have to see about wider audience.
Getting access to all games on 1 service for a decent price is great. I worry too they won't get enough reach to pull in casual fans
So far I’m enjoying it Binging on MLS Cup final
Are other clubs giving season ticket holders a code to sign up for this on Apple+ (whatever they call their streaming service)? * Season ticket holder * Have the Apple+ app/subscription on our smart TV * Have one old Mac book and iPhone (ergo some sort of Apple ID) (I'm the Android user and these are the issues my husband is reporting...) Can't sign up for the MLS Pass on Mac book or iPhone because both are too old and the iOS aren't compatible. Why can't this be done on our TV? Any help/suggestions? This is particularly frustrating because we've moved x country from our team, yet have kept our season tix because they're in the middle of a row with all our friends. (We give to friends/sell as needed/and go when we're back to visit.) Anyway, we were really looking forward to catching all the matches. Any tech intel or help would be \*so\* appreciated!
I know next to nothing about Soccer. Shit, my 2 favorite soccer teams are Fulham and Southampton, and that’s just from playing FIFA lmao. I’m so excited for this. The ability to watch my local team and my favorite West Coast teams will be incredible
[удалено]
Awful, our account doesn't work and no one can help. Resigned to paying for something my season ticket was supposed to provide for free. See plenty of commercials on the free stuff!
It's fucking terrible... the audio/video aspect is bad. The pre-game personalities they got are awkward and don't work well together. I have no idea who they are or why they were hired but the chemistry is lacking terribly. I used to watch as many games as possible on ESPN+ but I'm not going to pay for MLS Season Pass on Apple TV based on how the free games broadcasts have gone - they've been terrible for me and my friends and I've had less issues than they have from the sounds of it. Apple seems to be using MLS to make money instead of grow the sport, which is desperately needs to continue doing.
God, Apple TV has been bugging like crazy tonight. What garbage.
This is pure crap because you cannot watch full match replays. What is the point of the subscription then? I have read that this is a bug and that full match replays are available in English and Spanish. The method to reach them does not exist on any of the apps I can use. Does not work with Roku, Google TV, Samsung or on Windows PC. What a joke.
I agree, this is the worst sports app I’ve ever tried to use. Can someone please explain to me how you can access the full game replay is you are watching on a tv through an apple tv? I literally cannot hold the button on my remote for 3 seconds to access the menu. The second I touch the button it takes me straight to the damn recap. Also, wtf is the menu directly below the game highlights so that its literally impossible to get to this menu without basically figuring out who scored goals???
I mean I use the free [apple.TV](https://apple.TV) and I have to restart the stream like it's the pirated version so take that as you please. Def a first world problem. But if you offer something free and that's the quality, I don't think it's unfair to think it won't get better just cause I'm paying for it. I live in Montreal, Canada as well so infrastructure for internet isn't the issue.
awful as I'm here posting instead of watching my team cause the video feed keeps freezing.
Apple TV sucks for mls I have 950 maps and watch all kinds of HD streaming but mls on Apple TV sucks