The auto-director says to show the 4th official at the 90' mark so it is what is.
MLS and Apple Broadcasting Deal
- Thread starter Fantazma
- Start date
ZYanksRule
Registered
Exactly. That's my issue with their broadcasts, too. There's no feel for the game. It's like all the directors and producers have been told what to do and they have no autonomy to put together a compelling broadcast.
Insert my usual gripe about the 90 seconds they spend showing the team benches every match - brought to you by Home Depot, which I can actually remember, so maybe it's doing it's job, but also, now I feel like fuck Home Depot for making me miss those 90 seconds every match, so maybe it isn't doing it's job.
Fucking wankers.
No, it's worse. They say "built by Home Depot" which is just not at all true. Infuriating, every time LOL
I didn't have DAZN so assumed I couldn't watch CWC. Then went to site and discovered that they operate on freemium. I wonder about the economics. How much do they make on the ads they are showing me? How many, like me, would never pay for a subscription to watch CWC but are happy to see extra ads? Is this a model that completely wouldn't work for Apple/MLS?
Yep they ask a lot of questions when you sign up though. Just go through your settings and delete your number and turn off all the ads and spam stuff.
Nothing is ever free though. They are sharing and selling out data. Plus their ad revenue.
It appears the FAST streaming apps can generate up to $1/hr in ad revenue. I'm not sure how that would compare to live "premium" soccer, as I'd imagine the average ad is more expensive than classic tv reruns, but the lack of ad space would counteract that premium.
If we make a wild assumption of $.50 an hour per viewer, it would take around 200 hours to generate the $99 annual subscription revenue. Approximately 68 hours of your team, then hopefully they watch other content like 360 as well. However, my guess is that season pass averages far less than $99 per subscription, as I'm sure many get the $79 apple discount, and T-Mobile and MLS teams pay even less per "free" subscription. So the break even is lower.
That being said, they gradually expanded the outside of paywall access this year, and I'm assuming that is driven by ad revenue. A hybrid model is probably our best hope going forward, especially since advertising really doesn't harm a soccer viewer unless they try in-game ads. It seems to be the ideal path these days, with basically all of the major streamers pushing their lower price with ads versions over the ad free versions.
I'll admit it. I paid $24 so I could watch any game or replay I wanted. I've already got a calendar reminder to cancel the day after the tournament is over.
RunningWise
Registered
We’ll get that kind of money when we play a match on the White House lawn.
wow even the PPV's go into paramount + for UFC. so i had it for champions legue europa games, so now i get that too?
I'm guessing we'll see the price spike up soon, just like Peacock right before the NBA.
man, after WWE leaves peacock i might cancel that. EPL im not waking up early any more for games ( too tired) so i just catch highlights. so i may stick with paramount and may even cancel espn+
WWE went to ESPN didn't they?
their "PLE" or the big events like wrestlemania. things is if you get cable and ESPN you should be fine, but i dont and i aint paying $30 a month just to watch those events. i rarely watch ESPN these days, i maaay watch for college football but thats 1/2 games a week. its not worth it for me. ill find my pro wrestling fix it just wont be WWE as much i guess.
Look what the old Red Bulls are saying:
From a newsletter I get. I wonder if this might open a door for Apple and MLS to also allow the public in with ad-supported content.
I think the name change is just a brand refresh, though that's a semi-educated guess.
The "+" designation for streaming services started as a way to distinguish that product from broadcast/cable etc. So, Paramount+, Disney+, etc. It immediately started confusing consumers though. Reddit has countless posts from people who signed up for ESPN+ and assumed they would get all the basic ESPN content, thinking it meant ESPN plus more. Oops. For some services that's how it works, or did at first. Now + might just means streaming, or a special tier of streaming, or something else. It's a cipher with too many meanings.
For Apple it never made sense, because Apple never previously had a movie or TV or broadcast division and AppleTV is a physical product for accessing content, and you never needed the Apple box to access the streaming, though it helps. But I can't figure out how they plan to distinguish the box from the service now that they apparently have the same name.
Apple and MLS already open some games to gen pop via existing broadcast or cable networks. They can do that with ad-supported streaming any time if they want but I don't think it needs a name change.
Last edited:
I look forward to the HBO like name changes... AppleTV+ -> AppleTV -> ApplePlus -> ApplePlusTV -> AppleStreamTVPlusMLS
Similar threads
