MLS and Apple Broadcasting Deal

[moogoo]

I think it was missed in my post above? so i'll make it separate.

Apple TV works on any non-apple, non-smart TV/device using a web browser.

Android phones can access tv.apple.com using the web browser. You can also do the same using a PC through a web browser. essentially any device you would normally be able to view current technology web pages/apps, you can use it to watch apple TV at tv.apple.com

I have zero apple devices and have been enjoying an appleTV+ free trial (4 months worth!) through my android phone and PC/chromebook browser. You can cast your browser (chrome browsers for sure, not sure about others cause I only use chrome) to your TV and voila, it's on your TV.

The only pain in the ass thing non-apple users will get to experience is creating an Apple ID, which is required to sign into apple TV. that in and of itself is a pain in the ass if you don't have an apple device because it requires going through an agreement process that is not presented when signing up for an apple ID through the web. In my case, I had to install itunes on my PC and go through the agreements required to completely activate my apple ID. itunes can be uninstalled after, but this could be a pain or obstacle for some. YMMV of course.

 

[BC19]

MLS is going to stagnate and die. What casual fans who MLS need to attract, are going to pay for Apple TV to watch MLS?

Who is going to promote MLS on national TV on NFL games, MLB games?

Madness. I won't be subscribing.

What planet are you living on that people advertise mls games while other league’s games are going on? ESPN/disney had the show rangers playoff run to advertise a single abc game from this past weekend. It never happened

 

[KevinJRogers]

I think it was missed in my post above? so i'll make it separate.

Apple TV works on any non-apple, non-smart TV/device using a web browser.

Android phones can access tv.apple.com using the web browser. You can also do the same using a PC through a web browser. essentially any device you would normally be able to view current technology web pages/apps, you can use it to watch apple TV at tv.apple.com

I have zero apple devices and have been enjoying an appleTV+ free trial (4 months worth!) through my android phone and PC/chromebook browser. You can cast your browser (chrome browsers for sure, not sure about others cause I only use chrome) to your TV and voila, it's on your TV.

The only pain in the ass thing non-apple users will get to experience is creating an Apple ID, which is required to sign into apple TV. that in and of itself is a pain in the ass if you don't have an apple device because it requires going through an agreement process that is not presented when signing up for an apple ID through the web. In my case, I had to install itunes on my PC and go through the agreements required to completely activate my apple ID. itunes can be uninstalled after, but this could be a pain or obstacle for some. YMMV of course.

I use the Edge browser and had no trouble signing up for AppleTV+ (I don't remember any iTunes issues, by the way). I watch shows in my browser all the time -- 'Foundation' was mostly excellent, btw, hope there's a Season Two! -- so I think even for us old guys it should be no problem. For the demo they're targeting it should be a snap.

I won't lie, I'm pretty excited, and not just for being able to watch all the games and all that. This is a serious move by the league. They're going for it.

 

[moogoo]

I use the Edge browser and had no trouble signing up for AppleTV+ (I don't remember any iTunes issues, by the way). I watch shows in my browser all the time -- 'Foundation' was mostly excellent, btw, hope there's a Season Two! -- so I think even for us old guys it should be no problem. For the demo they're targeting it should be a snap.

I won't lie, I'm pretty excited, and not just for being able to watch all the games and all that. This is a serious move by the league. They're going for it.

There's a difference between signing up for AppleTV+ and getting an Apple ID. If you already had an apple ID and just signed up for a subscription for AppleTV+, that's easy. getting the Apple ID is the part that gave me issues.

 

[SoupInNYC]

Another thing that's interesting with the free subscriptions if you're a season ticket holder, is it seems like the league is still acknowledging the single most important aspect for it to grow, and it's the in-game experience. Create the fun environments and do so by incentivizing people to be there in person. That also translates to a more fun product to watch on tv.

Additionally (and I realize it's not as simple as I'm about to make it out to be), it effectively cuts down season ticket costs by $40-$50/month. Maybe there are season ticket holders that want to cut cable but opted not to because that's how they get their NYCFC games. Maybe there are season ticket holders who subscribe to ESPN+ for the 4.99/month to watch the away games (via vpn, or maybe they are Connecticut/other regions considered "out of market"). Factor that in and it cuts down on the "season ticket price tag"*

*Yes, I realize that some would still keep cable, some still wouldn't drop ESPN+ even with this deal, etc.

 

[moogoo]

Additionally (and I realize it's not as simple as I'm about to make it out to be), it effectively cuts down season ticket costs by $40-$50/month.

until they raise season ticket prices for 2024 due to "rising cost of business" or something

 

[Kenny]

Warming up to the idea of the strict Wednesday evening /Saturday evening schedule. The regularity, like the NFL with Sunday/Monday night/Thursday night, could help to establish the league better for viewers. Also love the whiparound show!

 

[Brooklyn Blue]

How many fans that needs to be convinced to watch MLS buys season tickets bro?

The fans MLS needs stream content far more often than they access it via cable or broadcast television. As noted, the deal won't require a subscription to Apple TV for current fans, but will open up an option for existing Apple TV subscribers - which is an ideal streaming base to target.

Further, as noted above a few times, MLS is still working on linear options (ESPN, Univision, etc.). The deal with Apple is in large part a replacement of YES and equivalents, not ESPN and FS1.

For a league that was looking at projected 200 million yearly for rights, to secure a 250 milion per year streaming option (less production costs) before any supplemental linear payment is massive. There is no reasonable way to view this deal as bad for the league. Is it possible that MLS remains below hockey in 5 to 8 years? Sure, but it won't be due to this agreement.

Another benefit to consider - this deal greatly increases international exposure for the league. That will only benefit MLS, especially leading up to WC2026.

 

[Revfugee]

There's no reason Apple should create a subpar app for other platforms, and they have every motivation to get it right.
OTOH, there's no reason YES should create a subpar app, and they have every motivation to get it right, and it sucks.
I think we're just going to have to wait and see.

Apple TV across IOS, Roku, and Fire Tv is already way better than any Yes app. And now I can cut the cord on cable. The Rangers are the only thing keeping me on Cable TV now.

 

[ZYanksRule]

The complaints about app games/Yankees conflicts notwithstanding, I think we're really going to miss the YES games. Joe and Ian were a joy to listen to, and the rest of the production was really good, too. They did a very nice job televising our games, and I will miss their coverage. I'd be surprised if Apple TV did a better job than YES. Especially the last few years, I feel like their coverage has really improved with interviews, features, the graphics have been top-notch ... YES did a really nice job for us. Especially if Joe and Ian aren't a part of the Apple games, there's a high probability we're going to dislike this coverage.

 

[mgarbowski]

Additionally (and I realize it's not as simple as I'm about to make it out to be), it effectively cuts down season ticket costs by $40-$50/month. Maybe there are season ticket holders that want to cut cable but opted not to because that's how they get their NYCFC games. Maybe there are season ticket holders who subscribe to ESPN+ for the 4.99/month to watch the away games (via vpn, or maybe they are Connecticut/other regions considered "out of market"). Factor that in and it cuts down on the "season ticket price tag"*

*Yes, I realize that some would still keep cable, some still wouldn't drop ESPN+ even with this deal, etc.

Depending on the cost of the MLS service it is almost certainly a potential cost saver if you drop cable/satellite regardless of whether you are an STH.
YTTV runs about $80-$100 less monthly than my DirecTV package for roughly comparable programming, with YES and MSG being the biggest difference. If NYCFC (or Red Bulls) is the main reason you want the RSNs then there's little reason to stay with satellite or cable. That leaves a lot of space for Apple to price the MLS service and still offer people a major value.

One limitation on this benefit is how many people mostly want RSNs for MLS and are happy to lose, eg, the Yankees, Knicks, Rangers, etc. A second limitation is a lot of MLS teams have deals with local broadcast stations, or Bally. I scanned a r/MLS thread on this and people were all over the place in their reactions, partly based on their local MLS TV situation. The people in Bally cities are ecstatic. Nobody likes ther coverage and apparently they fail on the technical side often. People who follow teams with local OTA broadcast coverage are concerned, because the local stations who carry MLS games usually also do a solid job of covering and promoting the team and league on the local news and everyone assumes that will be greatly diminished.

But for this point, if the games are on local broadcast you can get them literally for free with an antenna, and if you want additional service you already have the Hulu or YTTV option. So those folks will have little cost savings. In NY, and if you really just want RSNs for MLS, then it's huge.

 

[Gotham Gator]

There's no reason Apple should create a subpar app for other platforms, and they have every motivation to get it right.
OTOH, there's no reason YES should create a subpar app, and they have every motivation to get it right, and it sucks.
I think we're just going to have to wait and see.

Comparing Apple and YES in terms of making streaming apps is like comparing Shake Shack and J Crew in terms of making hamburgers.

 

[Gotham Gator]

Depending on the cost of the MLS service it is almost certainly a potential cost saver if you drop cable/satellite regardless of whether you are an STH.
YTTV runs about $80-$100 less monthly than my DirecTV package for roughly comparable programming, with YES and MSG being the biggest difference. If NYCFC (or Red Bulls) is the main reason you want the RSNs then there's little reason to stay with satellite or cable. That leaves a lot of space for Apple to price the MLS service and still offer people a major value.

One limitation on this benefit is how many people mostly want RSNs for MLS and are happy to lose, eg, the Yankees, Knicks, Rangers, etc. A second limitation is a lot of MLS teams have deals with local broadcast stations, or Bally. I scanned a r/MLS thread on this and people were all over the place in their reactions, partly based on their local MLS TV situation. The people in Bally cities are ecstatic. Nobody likes ther coverage and apparently they fail on the technical side often. People who follow teams with local OTA broadcast coverage are concerned, because the local stations who carry MLS games usually also do a solid job of covering and promoting the team and league on the local news and everyone assumes that will be greatly diminished.

But for this point, if the games are on local broadcast you can get them literally for free with an antenna, and if you want additional service you already have the Hulu or YTTV option. So those folks will have little cost savings. In NY, and if you really just want RSNs or MLS, then it's huge.

This is entirely correct.

You have to wonder if Apple is going to come out with a YouTubeTV type product given all their other moves in streaming.

 

[Gotham Gator]

Getting a consistent set of viewing windows is and has been essential.

Making all those viewing windows at night is not necessary and overly restrictive.

MLS needs a set of times when soccer fans can reliably turn on the TV and find games. Other leagues benefit from this, but the league was not getting it from its linear partners - and was never going to get it from them. The league's ratings aren't high enough for ESPN or Fox to do anything more than slot MLS games into whatever window doesn't have anything else going on. It's a Catch 22 - higher ratings depend in part on a consistent schedule, but pinning down viewing windows over a 9-month season requires higher ratings.

People compare the scheduling to the NFL, which is correct. I go with my familiar sport - college football. Reliable windows at noon, 3:30, 7-8, and then a few late west coast games. I know the 3:30 window on network TV has the best games, save perhaps for the 8pm games. I don't need to look at a schedule in advance to find something good. I just turn on the TV.

MLS is going to do the same, but why restrict to Sat night. How about games on Saturdays at 3, 5, 7 and 9. With 14-15 games each weekend, that allows for 3-4 games a window and the ability to pull one out for a Sunday linear broadcast.

 

[Gotham Gator]

On the other hand, MLS is limiting games to a single service that doesn't yet exist and is linked to a streaming service with a smaller subscriber base than its rivals. This could be challenging for a league that is trying to grow its reach in the United States. Current MLS fans will know how to find the service. Other soccer fans won't bother. Non-soccer fans will be able to continue ignoring the league's existence.

 

[Gotham Gator]

The $250 million/year is a big number. It will grow larger once ESPN & Fox bid for linear games, although how attractive they find the games given the streaming option is TBD. It will also grow larger because MLS is getting a cut of each subscription, so if it works out long term, the numbers can improve considerably.

On the other hand, there are going to be substantial production costs for the game broadcasts and all the new content, and it's not clear how much the league is paying for that.

 

[mgarbowski]

OMG this "linear" word is starting to piss me off.
Yes I know I'm ridiculous. Indulge me or skip this post.
The reason some networks are called "linear" is that they show different programs at specific times in serial fashion one after another and in a perfect world for the networks, people watch them live with all the commercials and no skipping - they are linear in time. Once DVRs were invented, linear TV mostly disappeared regardless of the network or platform that provides it.
But all sports programming is "linear" regardless of the platform, because it is one of the last types of programming most people watch live which is the whole reason linear programming exists and that is what makes it worth distinguishing it from "watch any time" TV. As a result, identifying certain platforms for sports programming by using the word "linear" is meaningless and stupid and just a bunch of people - mostly idiot sportswriters - who just learned a new piece of industry jargon yesterday and want to look clever. And now I've seen this word about 147 times in <24 hours times as if everyone actually knows what it means and why.
/end rant

If you want to use "linear" go ahead. But it's like calling artificial grass "turf" as distinct from real grass, when grass and turf literally mean the same f#cking thing. That's why they first started calling it "artificial turf" instead of artificial concrete or artificial wood. Calling artificial grass "turf" is like calling artificial Christmas trees "evergreens" to distinguish them from the real ones, which are evergreens. It's stupid.

/end second rant

 

[FredMertz]

MLS is going to do the same, but why restrict to Sat night. How about games on Saturdays at 3, 5, 7 and 9. With 14-15 games each weekend, that allows for 3-4 games a window and the ability to pull one out for a Sunday linear broadcast.

I'm pretty sure this is what they are talking about.

 

[Seth]

it's like calling artificial grass "turf" as distinct from real grass

You know, I’ve heard that said somewhere. Don’t quite recall where though. Give me a minute…

 

[FredMertz]

You know, I’ve heard that said somewhere. Don’t quite recall where though. Give me a minute…

It's a famous Shakespearean quote:

"Aye Hamlet, Prince of the Danes, turf literally means grass, and the faire pigeon is found in all the great cities of this world."