TV ratings

[rdavies]

TFC is turning a profit, though, and that probably contributes to its perceived success.

Not this year.

[ArgoRavi]

Indeed, Tim Lieweke has gone on record as saying that TFC will not turn a profit this season. This also came from Zelkovich's column today in regards to why TFC's TV ratings are so low: "The answer: maybe the only ones who care are the 20,000 who show up at BMO Field."

Aren't CFL TV ratings in the U.S. also comparable to MLS ratings in that country? I believe that Mark Cohon alluded to that recently in regards to how MLS has a $90 million TV deal with ESPN but their ratings are similar to those of the CFL in the U.S.

[rdavies]

^Yes and yes

[Tau Ceti]

Hmm. TFC needs about a fivefold increase in average TV numbers to match the Argos while the Argos need about a fivefold increase in STHs to match TFC.

[argolio]

Indeed, Tim Lieweke has gone on record as saying that TFC will not turn a profit this season.

They've got a place to play, and an ownership committed to the team long-term and willing to cover losses

Crowing about the ratings is great, but that won't solve the problems of the Argos.

[Qman]

Make that 40x TV numbers

CFL ruled the week again

Argos 830k
Jays 560k-650k
TFC 22k (yes, 22k for their biggest game of year)

1. CFL, Bombers at Lions, Friday, TSN: 857,000
2. CFL, Argonauts at Roughriders, Saturday, TSN: 830,000
3. CFL, RedBlacks at Tiger-Cats, Saturday, TSN: 670,000

[Tau Ceti]

Make that 40x TV numbers

Best number I can dig up for TFC average this year is 120,000 (although that was significantly expanded by large numbers in the first two games after the Defoe signing.) Their numbers vary significantly from game to game as they switch between channels of varying reach.

Anyway, I don't understand the glee people take in observing how low MLS viewership is. In a perfect world all the teams would thrive. And last I checked TFC was valued at a $100 million while the Argos are facing catastrophe over a $10 million dollar difference of opinion.

Edit: I'm relying on their own thread for TFC viewership numbers: http://forums.redpatchboys.ca/showth...TFC-TV-ratings

[paulwoods13]

The funny thing is that the perception is that TFC is prospering and the Argonauts are faltering. The TV Ratings continue to show otherwise week after week after week...

The Argos are prospering? Come on. The Argos are TFC in reverse. One draws big TV numbers and terrible in-person numbers; the other does the opposite. It's debatable which is better off and which is worse, considering that the CFL seems to rely more on gate over TV (a trend that is lessening somewhat with the new TV deal). But to suggest that the Argos are prospering and TFC is faltering strikes me as a reach.

[argotom]

This proves yet again how the CFL is a huge property for TSN.
Also dare I say again how the league got a bargain at the current what $43M per year.
It should have been upwards of $50M to maybe even $75M.
As for TFC and the MLS, a dying sport in North America as the TV audience is never wrong.
As foe Lieweke, the man is a snake oil salesman and a very bad one at that.

[AngeloV]

Hmm. TFC needs about a fivefold increase in average TV numbers to match the Argos while the Argos need about a fivefold increase in STHs to match TFC.

No kidding. Who's willing to bet Braley would rather be in TFC's situation (in terms of tickets and merchandise sales...you know, things the team would profit on).

[Qman]

Who cares about TFC's numbers.

Argos game at 830k. Thats awesome.
I thank god for Braley everyday, but Rudge has to know, the average Argo fan is basically bouycotting Skydome until they get a proper intimate venue that that can rock like TD Place. Why travel downtown when i get it free at home. Last time their was a big surge in season ticket holders is when everyone thought they were going to varsity and wanted priority. You are selling to two markets i) live event market that wants a rocking venue that is packed and is willing to pay $50-80 and ii) causal fan that watches on TV. Both provide revenue to you through tickets or via TSN rights fees.

[Wobbler]

Not this year.

OK, but I believe they made $4.5M last year and have been profitable for several prior years. Last year Forbes valued the franchise at $121M (which I find to be an astonishingly high number). The low numbers for MLS/TFC TV suggest that they'll have a tough time expanding their attendance, but the good news is that they are viable at current levels.

The Argos' situation, with strong TV numbers but negative operating income and low attendance, is different. There is plenty of *awareness* of the team; I don't think more advertising is needed. There are probably a reasonable number of people who could be converted from viewers to attendees under better circumstances (stadium, cost, accessibility, etc.), and that's very encouraging. The answer, as we all know, is that the team needs to get into an appropriate new venue. We probably don't even need to be *good*, at least initially, since our recent awfulness hasn't impacted the TV numbers much.

[ArgoRavi]

This proves yet again how the CFL is a huge property for TSN.
Also dare I say again how the league got a bargain at the current what $43M per year.
It should have been upwards of $50M to maybe even $75M.
As for TFC and the MLS, a dying sport in North America as the TV audience is never wrong.
As foe Lieweke, the man is a snake oil salesman and a very bad one at that.

Are you saying that MLS is a dying sport, AT? Soccer certainly isn't when you look at the World Cup TV ratings but that has never translated to a significant (or even insignificant?) uptake in interest in domestic soccer. We have been hearing since the 1970s that there will be a huge breakthrough in soccer interest domestically and it still hasn't really happened and doesn't look like it is going to anytime soon. Does that mean that the MLS is dying? I would say no to that. Strangely enough though, I think that much of the strength of that league, like the NHL, is in Canada (although the MLS does very well in Portland and Seattle too). Having said that, the Canadian TV ratings do indicate that the league isn't on many people's radar in this country. I don't think that the MLS will be dead in the near future unless their salaries get way out of control and their TV money decreases considerably. Will there ever be a day when MLS teams are drawing 27k per game and they are drawing half a million on TV in Canada on a regular basis with a comparable amount (taking population into account) watching in the U.S.? I think that we are a long, long way from that. Here are a couple of recent articles about the MLS; one is a positive one about their new TV deal and the other one takes a negative spin about the league's prospects (note the absence of any mention of the three Canadian-based franchises):

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/J...ia/MLS-TV.aspx

http://www.bloombergview.com/article...soccer-popular

OK, but I believe they made $4.5M last year and have been profitable for several prior years. Last year Forbes valued the franchise at $121M (which I find to be an astonishingly high number). The low numbers for MLS/TFC TV suggest that they'll have a tough time expanding their attendance, but the good news is that they are viable at current levels.

The Argos' situation, with strong TV numbers but negative operating income and low attendance, is different. There is plenty of *awareness* of the team; I don't think more advertising is needed. There are probably a reasonable number of people who could be converted from viewers to attendees under better circumstances (stadium, cost, accessibility, etc.), and that's very encouraging. The answer, as we all know, is that the team needs to get into an appropriate new venue. We probably don't even need to be *good*, at least initially, since our recent awfulness hasn't impacted the TV numbers much.

So I guess that if Toronto FC went up for sale tomorrow, someone would pay $121M for them? That seems difficult to believe but anything is possible, I suppose. I don't know how Toronto FC has done in past years financially although them making $4.5 million last year seems a bit off to me. The interesting thing about the Argos is - and I agree with Chris Rudge on this - the team would likely make a tidy profit for MLSE within two years if they took over ownership of the team and moved them to a renovated BMO Field. I think that the Argos may have a better chance of being profitable than Toronto FC does.

[Qman]

Are you saying that MLS is a dying sport, AT? Soccer certainly isn't when you look at the World Cup TV ratings but that has never translated to a significant (or even insignificant?) uptake in interest in domestic soccer. We have been hearing since the 1970s that there will be a huge breakthrough in soccer interest domestically and it still hasn't really happened and doesn't look like it is going to anytime soon. Does that mean that the MLS is dying? I would say no to that. Strangely enough though, I think that much of the strength of that league, like the NHL, is in Canada (although the MLS does very well in Portland and Seattle too). Having said that, the Canadian TV ratings do indicate that the league isn't on many people's radar in this country. I don't think that the MLS will be dead in the near future unless their salaries get way out of control and their TV money decreases considerably. Will there ever be a day when MLS teams are drawing 27k per game and they are drawing half a million on TV in Canada on a regular basis with a comparable amount (taking population into account) watching in the U.S.? I think that we are a long, long way from that. Here are a couple of recent articles about the MLS; one is a positive one about their new TV deal and the other one takes a negative spin about the league's prospects (note the absence of any mention of the three Canadian-based franchises):

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/J...ia/MLS-TV.aspx

http://www.bloombergview.com/article...soccer-popular



So I guess that if Toronto FC went up for sale tomorrow, someone would pay $121M for them? That seems difficult to believe but anything is possible, I suppose. I don't know how Toronto FC has done in past years financially although them making $4.5 million last year seems a bit off to me. The interesting thing about the Argos is - and I agree with Chris Rudge on this - the team would likely make a tidy profit for MLSE within two years if they took over ownership of the team and moved them to a renovated BMO Field. I think that the Argos may have a better chance of being profitable than Toronto FC does.

One thing I think braley is stubborn about is if he sells to MLSE and they team moves to BMO and starts selling out games, then MLSE looks like geniuses and he doesn't look good. If he rents BMO and turns its around they he looks like the genius. Of course, we would get a higher sale price too.

[Neely2005]

Indeed, Tim Lieweke has gone on record as saying that TFC will not turn a profit this season. This also came from Zelkovich's column today in regards to why TFC's TV ratings are so low: "The answer: maybe the only ones who care are the 20,000 who show up at BMO Field."

Aren't CFL TV ratings in the U.S. also comparable to MLS ratings in that country? I believe that Mark Cohon alluded to that recently in regards to how MLS has a $90 million TV deal with ESPN but their ratings are similar to those of the CFL in the U.S.

The CFL actually gets better ratings than MLS on ESPN.

[/FONT]

Best number I can dig up for TFC average this year is 120,000 (although that was significantly expanded by large numbers in the first two games after the Defoe signing.) Their numbers vary significantly from game to game as they switch between channels of varying reach.

Anyway, I don't understand the glee people take in observing how low MLS viewership is. In a perfect world all the teams would thrive. And last I checked TFC was valued at a $100 million while the Argos are facing catastrophe over a $10 million dollar difference of opinion.

Edit: I'm relying on their own thread for TFC viewership numbers: http://forums.redpatchboys.ca/showth...TFC-TV-ratings

Where are you getting that number from? It seems high for a MLS team.

The Argos are prospering? Come on. The Argos are TFC in reverse. One draws big TV numbers and terrible in-person numbers; the other does the opposite. It's debatable which is better off and which is worse, considering that the CFL seems to rely more on gate over TV (a trend that is lessening somewhat with the new TV deal). But to suggest that the Argos are prospering and TFC is faltering strikes me as a reach.

Please show me where I said that.

[argotom]

Are you saying that MLS is a dying sport, AT? Soccer certainly isn't when you look at the World Cup TV ratings but that has never translated to a significant (or even insignificant?) uptake in interest in domestic soccer. We have been hearing since the 1970s that there will be a huge breakthrough in soccer interest domestically and it still hasn't really happened and doesn't look like it is going to anytime soon. Does that mean that the MLS is dying? I would say no to that. Strangely enough though, I think that much of the strength of that league, like the NHL, is in Canada (although the MLS does very well in Portland and Seattle too). Having said that, the Canadian TV ratings do indicate that the league isn't on many people's radar in this country. I don't think that the MLS will be dead in the near future unless their salaries get way out of control and their TV money decreases considerably. Will there ever be a day when MLS teams are drawing 27k per game and they are drawing half a million on TV in Canada on a regular basis with a comparable amount (taking population into account) watching in the U.S.? I think that we are a long, long way from that. Here are a couple of recent articles about the MLS; one is a positive one about their new TV deal and the other one takes a negative spin about the league's prospects (note the absence of any mention of the three Canadian-based franchises):

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/J...ia/MLS-TV.aspx

http://www.bloombergview.com/article...soccer-popular



So I guess that if Toronto FC went up for sale tomorrow, someone would pay $121M for them? That seems difficult to believe but anything is possible, I suppose. I don't know how Toronto FC has done in past years financially although them making $4.5 million last year seems a bit off to me. The interesting thing about the Argos is - and I agree with Chris Rudge on this - the team would likely make a tidy profit for MLSE within two years if they took over ownership of the team and moved them to a renovated BMO Field. I think that the Argos may have a better chance of being profitable than Toronto FC does.

Ravi, yes I am saying how the MLS model is nothing more than a ponzy scheme.
Although a few franchises are doing well, the vast majority are hemorrhaging big time.
Sure there are suckers out there ponying up some reportedly decent money for new teams.
However PT Barnum said it right, there is a sucker born every minute.
The league is doing exactly what its predecessor the NASL did and ultimately was the death knell.
They will not adhere to a salary cap as having a franchise player that turns out to be an over the hill European player coming to North America for one last big contract.
Teams inevitably will compete and fall all over themselves with this stupid mentality and without a big TV contract, never mind the $90M which is peanuts in the US, and it is the beginning of the end.
On top of which, North American fans do not like the sport as per the horrible TV ratings here and in the US.

[paulwoods13]

Please show me where I said that.

Here is what you said: "The funny thing is that the perception is that TFC is prospering and the Argonauts are faltering. The TV Ratings continue to show otherwise week after week after week... "

I took "otherwise" to mean that the opposite was actually true. But it's also possible you meant "TFC is NOT prospering and the Argonauts are NOT faltering," which of course is not the same as "the Argonauts are prospering and TFC is faltering." Saying what something is not is less precise/clear than saying what it is, but regardless, I stand corrected.

[argolio]

Ravi, yes I am saying how the MLS model is nothing more than a ponzy scheme.
Although a few franchises are doing well, the vast majority are hemorrhaging big time.
Sure there are suckers out there ponying up some reportedly decent money for new teams.
However PT Barnum said it right, there is a sucker born every minute.
The league is doing exactly what its predecessor the NASL did and ultimately was the death knell.
They will not adhere to a salary cap as having a franchise player that turns out to be an over the hill European player coming to North America for one last big contract.
Teams inevitably will compete and fall all over themselves with this stupid mentality and without a big TV contract, never mind the $90M which is peanuts in the US, and it is the beginning of the end.
On top of which, North American fans do not like the sport as per the horrible TV ratings here and in the US.

Huge difference: some NASL teams had numerous "franchise players", MLS teams can't do that. There has also been an unprecedented construction of soccer specific stadiums since the MLS began. The NASL never came close to that.

With all the well-heeled ownership in MLS, you're dreaming if you think it's going away. They're in it for the long haul

[Tau Ceti]

Where are you getting that number from? It seems high for a MLS team.

The $121 mil figure for TFC comes from Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmi...aluable-teams/

[Neely2005]

Here is what you said: "The funny thing is that the perception is that TFC is prospering and the Argonauts are faltering. The TV Ratings continue to show otherwise week after week after week... "

I took "otherwise" to mean that the opposite was actually true. But it's also possible you meant "TFC is NOT prospering and the Argonauts are NOT faltering," which of course is not the same as "the Argonauts are prospering and TFC is faltering." Saying what something is not is less precise/clear than saying what it is, but regardless, I stand corrected.

Sorry, what I meant is that the perception is that TFC is thriving when the ratings have repeatedly shown that they are not.

And when you factor in the TFC payroll...

The $121 mil figure for TFC comes from Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmi...aluable-teams/

Thanks, that is surprising. I wonder if they're worth that much if they're not part of MLSE?