Canadian Premier League

[Cheeta]

10 hours ago, dyslexic nam said:

I am not sure everyone views all star games quite that critically.  Most people recognize that it isn't that telling to take a group of talented individuals that never play together and put them up against a team that works together constantly - where in pre-season form or not.  Throw in the fact that people on both sides are trying to avoid getting injured in a game that doesn't really matter, and I suspect that most people see them for what they are - a bit of a spectacle that doesn't really matter.

 

I would also note that in 2012, the MLS all-stars beat Chelsea, in 2014 they beat Bayern, and in 2015 they beat Arsenal.  All just to say that these games have not been an embarrassment to MLS on the basis of results. 

Echo that.  Bit of fun, or can be, especially when viewing options are limited but that's about it.

[lazlo_80]

3 hours ago, Complete Homer said:

http://vocalminority.ca/episode-181-an-evening-with-bill-manning-part-two-170406-jasonstatham/

Bill Manning: "My original thought...was a Canadian division of USL"

BBTB = Manning confirmed

But seriously, some interesting some stuff. One interesting thing is that Manning said he was interested in affiliating with a team in CPL if/when they are fully blocked from CPL

I thought this was great. Credit to the vocal minority it was honestly a really fun pod and they handled him extremely well by keeping it warm and fun but still not letting him off the hook on some of the things he's said in the past.

Also, makes me like Bill Manning a lot more. I actually think what he was saying made alot of sense when heard through the lens of understanding his position.

His discussion about the economics of the league are something that still, to me, seem like the giant unanswered question. When Duane says they want the league to be higher than NASL/USL calibre, but they'd be fine with 5K attendances...well... something just doesn't add up. And Manning calls that out a little.

[matty]

17 minutes ago, lazlo_80 said:

.....Also, makes me like Bill Manning a lot more. I actually think what he was saying made alot of sense when heard through the lens of understanding his position....

Solid face turn lol

[BrennanFan]

22 minutes ago, lazlo_80 said:

I thought this was great. Credit to the vocal minority it was honestly a really fun pod and they handled him extremely well by keeping it warm and fun but still not letting him off the hook on some of the things he's said in the past.

Also, makes me like Bill Manning a lot more. I actually think what he was saying made alot of sense when heard through the lens of understanding his position.

His discussion about the economics of the league are something that still, to me, seem like the giant unanswered question. When Duane says they want the league to be higher than NASL/USL calibre, but they'd be fine with 5K attendances...well... something just doesn't add up. And Manning calls that out a little.

I think the being "fine with 5k attendance" is more a reflection of the league business model not being dependent on gate revenue (which is what they've been trying to do all along to make the league viable in the first place) - and has nothing to do with the expected quality of play.

[BradMack]

30 minutes ago, BrennanFan said:

I think the being "fine with 5k attendance" is more a reflection of the league business model not being dependent on gate revenue (which is what they've been trying to do all along to make the league viable in the first place) - and has nothing to do with the expected quality of play.

Yes, this. It has got to be some combination of league sponsorship (as in "The /blank/ Canadian Premier League"), a league wide kit deal, stadium naming rights, and kit sponsorship and all of that has to be given a higher value by securing some sort of TV deal even if it is given away for free. That is the only way I can see them affording the level of players they are talking about with the number of fans they think they'll need. They probably need to create an extra $2 million per club through these deals to make what they want to happen work.

[lazlo_80]

1 hour ago, BrennanFan said:

I think the being "fine with 5k attendance" is more a reflection of the league business model not being dependent on gate revenue (which is what they've been trying to do all along to make the league viable in the first place) - and has nothing to do with the expected quality of play.

all credit to them if they manage to find a revenue model that doesn't depend on gate revenue, but I think it's fair to wonder where that money is coming from. The expected quality of play won't be sustainable if they don't have enough income to cover the salaries required to pay the type of players they hope to attract.

[lazlo_80]

1 hour ago, matty said:

Solid face turn lol

Context is everything. Considering his position at MLSE and with Toronto FC I think he brought up a lot of fair points despite his admitted bias.

[matty]

Main Shirt Sponsor: 500k
Back Shirt Sponsor(s): 100-200k
Short Sponsor(s): 25K
Say 10-15 Field Sponsors for like 10K each over the 10 game season: 100-150k
Random ads over the year: 50-150k
Kit Maker: 500k-1M

TV/streaming deal: 1M/yr

3k season tickets sold at $250: 750K
1k random tickets at $20 over 10 games: 200k

On the low end that's 3.225m. Ticket sales are around 950k. Of all that I'd say a TV deal is key to making this league work. It'll make any sponsorship way more valuable

Just a note only SOME of these numbers are based on known figures from other leagues. NASL shirt sponsors TMK are like 500k a season, the Toronto Wolfpack sold season tickets for $200 for 11 homes games (I think CPL will sell for a bit more than that).

[BrennanFan]

The league is literally banking on developing and selling players to Europe on a yearly basis, and then distributing that money back into the league through its single entity system. 

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

So was FC Edmonton when they started and how many players have they sold on? The idea that a second tier soccer league in Canada can be driven by TV money and sponsorships is optimistic in the extreme. They would probably have to pay to get games broadcast rather than the other way about until they had some solid ratings numbers to point to. The bread and butter for minor pro leagues is gate revenue and whatever share of the concessions can be negotiated with the stadium owner. And before anyone says it is going to be D1, I am talking about the reality that MLS is still going to be there getting most of the mainstream media coverage even in a League of Wales scenario.

[Gordon]

5 hours ago, BrennanFan said:

The league is literally banking on developing and selling players to Europe on a yearly basis, and then distributing that money back into the league through its single entity system. 

If the league is, then it will be a short ride at best. The structure of Canadian soccer and the relatively poor training & coaching younger players in Canada generally get means that "sellable" players are not going to be the norm. I can't recall a single Canadian team incorporating player sales into their business strategy - for example an FC Edmonton article in an Alberta business magazine from a few years ago (Steve Sandor wrote this) makes no mention of it. Faith articulates a goal of 30-40% of revenue from ticket sales, the same from corporate sponsorship and the remainder from other revenue sources such as concession, parking, merchandising. No mention of TV revenue either, which is also realistic for NASL.

[Rheo]

Liked the Manning interview.  Big fan of the pod in general and he came across well from both parts.  Everything he says makes sense from his and the TFC perspective.  It's an agree to disagree thing, just like the arguments here on which is the best way to proceed.

The one interesting thing he dropped was the 20k attendance number, the host said that no one has said that and he replied, depends on who you talk to. (Note-not to bring up previous point, forgot to check previous replies from when I was on last)

Like I've said, there's a lot of different and interesting things floating out in the bubble.  Can't wait for the real announcement with the actual details to see what the real plan is.

[Macksam]

8 hours ago, lazlo_80 said:

Context is everything. Considering his position at MLSE and with Toronto FC I think he brought up a lot of fair points despite his admitted bias.

He brought up a few, but he contradicted himself way more than anything else. Also, when they finally called him out and said "So it's mainly about protecting your monopoly?" and then he went "No, it's player availability" which was a cop out at best. However, before that he was going on about how NYC fans are not Cosmos or Red Bull fans and how LA Galaxy fans are not Chivas USA fans so why do people think TFC fans will also be Toronto CPL fans? I'm surprised the interviewers didn't just go and say "Do they have to be?" Clearly it is about protecting the MLSE monopoly. To drive this point further, he said Toronto views itself as a New York or LA rather than a Vancouver or Montreal. Besides the fact there's no real basis for that, but if it is true, and we do view ourselves like that, than it should be no issue to have two teams where the fan bases don't overlap each other.

[matty]

6 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

The idea that a second tier soccer league in Canada can be driven by TV money and sponsorships is optimistic in the extreme. They would probably have to pay to get games broadcast rather than the other way about until they had some solid ratings numbers to point to.

Butch Carter's basketball league got a 20 year one with CHCH without even having a team. Regarding the second point, it's more likely that the CPL has to pay for the production and not the airtime.

The big thing with TV is the exposure. It makes you more attractive to sponsors and gives you the ability to change more. Even if money is not changing hands between you and the network, it still provides you with a great deal more funds.

[Gopherbashi]

1 hour ago, Rheo said:

Liked the Manning interview.  Big fan of the pod in general and he came across well from both parts.  Everything he says makes sense from his and the TFC perspective.  It's an agree to disagree thing, just like the arguments here on which is the best way to proceed.

The one interesting thing he dropped was the 20k attendance number, the host said that no one has said that and he replied, depends on who you talk to. (Note-not to bring up previous point, forgot to check previous replies from when I was on last)

Like I've said, there's a lot of different and interesting things floating out in the bubble.  Can't wait for the real announcement with the actual details to see what the real plan is.

I think we'll end up being very frustrated with the lack of details the league will release - they have no reason to publicize any more than they have to.

[Rheo]

9 minutes ago, Gopherbashi said:

I think we'll end up being very frustrated with the lack of details the league will release - they have no reason to publicize any more than they have to.

I'm sure there's going to be a lot of information that they'll keep quiet, look at how bad MLS has been with certain pieces of information over the years.  I'm just talking more about things like TV rights and stuff that'll be more out in the open.

[GuillermoDelQuarto]

11 hours ago, BrennanFan said:

I think the being "fine with 5k attendance" is more a reflection of the league business model not being dependent on gate revenue (which is what they've been trying to do all along to make the league viable in the first place) - and has nothing to do with the expected quality of play.

also I think 5k is sort of a "for now" figure

with the goal of growing that to 10-15k in 10-20 years.

at least that was more my understanding of it

I do think USL has similar ambitions but as long as you have B squads thats gonna be tough from a marketing perspective.

[Macksam]

1 hour ago, Rheo said:

The one interesting thing he dropped was the 20k attendance number, the host said that no one has said that and he replied, depends on who you talk to. (Note-not to bring up previous point, forgot to check previous replies from when I was on last)

I know Gopherbashi humorously mentioned that Bill's probably been reading the forum on here, lol. However, no one except me has stated that it's a possibility. I've only mentioned that theoretically it could be pulled off if a billionaire builds a 20,000 plus seat stadium somewhere in the GTA or metro Toronto. I believed, and still do, that MLS has absolutely nothing to do with a professional soccer team's ability to draw twenty thousand plus supporters. It's always been about having a professional presentation. people only believe MLS has something to do with it because no other team from another league has tried launching a team with the same professional presence (advertising, SSS, etc.) in their respective markets. It's always been extremely low key, subdued and playing out of outdated, rented stadiums. That recipe is only going to give you minimal support.

[Rheo]

My guess and it's only a guess is that it's the CFL people that think they can draw 20k.  It's just the way he outlined how the CSA sees the league as a developmental tool and the CFL people see it as a business opportunity that gives me that impression.  Plus they have a history (for the most part, no need to search and find all the years that certain teams didn't hit an arbitrary number) with the CFL doing those types of attendance figures.

[to70]

1 hour ago, matty said:

Butch Carter's basketball league got a 20 year one with CHCH without even having a team. Regarding the second point, it's more likely that the CPL has to pay for the production and not the airtime.

The big thing with TV is the exposure. It makes you more attractive to sponsors and gives you the ability to change more. Even if money is not changing hands between you and the network, it still provides you with a great deal more funds.

Butch Carter's basketball league is paying to be on the YES network. Catch it sometime. Pretty drab playing in empty gyms.

[Macksam]

7 minutes ago, Rheo said:

My guess and it's only a guess is that it's the CFL people that think they can draw 20k.  It's just the way he outlined how the CSA sees the league as a developmental tool and the CFL people see it as a business opportunity that gives me that impression.  Plus they have a history (for the most part, no need to search and find all the years that certain teams didn't hit an arbitrary number) with the CFL doing those types of attendance figures.

I would like to think the CSA sees it that way to. The ultimate long-term goal for cities like Hamilton, Calgary, Winnipeg and what have you should be to draw 20,000 plus people.

[Rheo]

Just now, Macksam said:

I would like to think the CSA sees it that way to. The ultimate long-term goal for cities like Hamilton, Calgary, Winnipeg and what have you should be to draw 20,000 plus people.

I'm sure the CSA sees it as a combination of both but their primary focus is building and developing the Canadian system.  To be honest though they won't be able to advance the development at home without business success though.

I agree though, 20k should and is a realistic long term goal and if they do things right it's totally reasonable in my opinion.

[rob.notenboom]

While listening to he Manning interview I had many of the same reactions that people on here had. I thought he represented himself well and was very candid making the interview very interesting to listen to. However, I also kept thinking that in regards to what the vision of CanPL should be and what it's function should be that he simply doesn't get it. Sure he's protecting his territory, and as an employee of MLSE that's exactly what he should be doing. But that's why he shouldn't be trusted to make decisions on what is best for Canadian soccer. That doesn't make him dishonest, deceitful, or a bad person at all. It simply means that he is focused on other interests. 

However, I also think that he displayed that he simply doesn't understand some things and his answers displayed this lack of understanding. He commented that he didn't think that the supporters groups would support CanPL and not TFC, but there are a large number of people in TFC SGs who were Voyageurs first and for whom the advancement of Canadian soccer is front of mind. It might not be an overwhelmingly high percentage of those in TFC's SGs but it's not an insignificant number either. 

He also shows his bias by suggesting that a CanPL team in Toronto would struggle to draw a few thousand while TFC 2 in CanPL could draw 5000+ and that TFC 2 playing other Canadian teams would be an even bigger draw. This is a blatant contradiction. Either Manning is aware of this and is just trying to protect his territory or he's unaware of this and has blinders on ... likely the former, but who knows for sure.

Regardless, major kudos to the VMP folks for getting him on and handling him in such an engaging fashion. It was a great piece of podcasting work on their part.

[lazlo_80]

2 hours ago, Macksam said:

He brought up a few, but he contradicted himself way more than anything else. Also, when they finally called him out and said "So it's mainly about protecting your monopoly?" and then he went "No, it's player availability" which was a cop out at best. However, before that he was going on about how NYC fans are not Cosmos or Red Bull fans and how LA Galaxy fans are not Chivas USA fans so why do people think TFC fans will also be Toronto CPL fans? I'm surprised the interviewers didn't just go and say "Do they have to be?" Clearly it is about protecting the MLSE monopoly. To drive this point further, he said Toronto views itself as a New York or LA rather than a Vancouver or Montreal. Besides the fact there's no real basis for that, but if it is true, and we do view ourselves like that, than it should be no issue to have two teams where the fan bases don't overlap each other.

I actually agree with him on the way Toronto views itself. I grew up in hamilton, lived in Toronto for a long time and spent 2 years in Vancouver. Toronto does think of itself as a big city, places like Vancouver don't view themselves in the same context.

I think his point about the NY and LA soccer community is actually extremely valid. he doesn't predict there would be alot of crossover between TFC fans and another teams fans. I suppose the one point of difference in my mind would be a sense of nationalism. Yes, Toronto FC will still be the better product, but will people support a lower calibre team out of a sense of nationalism (there's a CFL/NFL parallel in there I suppose) that's the riddle another owner would have to solve. This isn't like a second MLS team coming into the market, this is a lower calibre team and there are concerns here that absolutely need to be addressed. The stadium issue is going to be huge.

He came around at the end about protecting his monopoly. No team president would ever say "yes it's about protecting our monopoly" because they know it would be a PR nightmare. But his "800 pound gorilla" comment was essentially a thinly veiled threat that things won't be easy for whoever impedes on their territory.

It would be absurd for him to come out and say "I'd love a rival team in my market", in fact that would actually piss me off worse because it would be such a BS thing to say. I appreciate how frank he was about a lot of subjects. To assume he'd layout the red carpet for a rival team to show up on his doorstep is silly. 

 

[lazlo_80]

10 hours ago, BrennanFan said:

The league is literally banking on developing and selling players to Europe on a yearly basis, and then distributing that money back into the league through its single entity system. 

God, I hope that's not the business model.