CPL new teams speculation

[Ansem]

15 minutes ago, Kingston said:

So they aren't going to push this if the reality is that the extra money would amount to peanuts at the cost of destroying the home clubs of half our national team.

I'll challenge this part.

How is the status quo solving their money issue by the 2040s?

Also define "destroyed" - where talking about private ownership who paid between 10 to $40M who would get a return on investment in the hundreds of millions should they decide to sell back to the league

Half our national team are good enough where US-based clubs or abroad would still sign them. USA is included in "abroad" and that should remain the goal. CPL having all the markets to itself does not prevent this one bit.

After MLS (selling high), they can launch a club in CPL (buy low) and do the marketing job to retain their fanbase and grow it. This is where the mutual interest of making this works kicks in for all parties.

Edited November 16, 2022 by Ansem

[Unnamed Trialist]

The CSB does not run the CSA. 

For example, the CSA is an elected body subject to Canadian law and the role of the CSB in it can be delimited. 

It is represented by elected and appointed individuals coming in their majority from the Provincial Associations, in a federated system of representation that even favours, proportionally, smaller provinces and territories. Has the CSB-CPL alliance found away to ensure representation of Québec, or even the French language? The holes are glaring.

Then, if pushed, the CSA could also find ways to circumvent apparent abuse on the part of CSB, if they were to choose to do so. 

They could offer to buy them out, with the idea that they could generate the resources they need by other means.

They could accentuate those revenue sources the CSB does not control. I am not entirely sure here, but gate from home matches, some merchandising, fees from youth players.

They could continue to make the case for the MLS teams, approving them and even bolstering their market positions, to ensure a lasting counter-power in the Canadian club system.

The board of the CSA could also pressure the CSB by raising the fees to be paid to the CSA by the CPL to remain a sanctioned league. They could basically tax or financially pressure them into renegotiating the deal.

They could establish parallel entities or organisations through which to channel sponsorship and other revenue streams outside the agreement with the CSB.

They could take them to court for breach of contract.

Yes, I am talking about at some point taking a more adversarial position if the CSB oversteps. Or at least not lying on your back like a puppy and letting them growl at your throat. I've defended the CSB mostly on this board, not because I think the deal they signed is a good one, but because I'm bothered by dolts like Westhead going at it with no concern for the diversity of the Canadian soccer eco-system (NB, Westhead silent these last few weeks, that is telling, bought out by his own).

But don't push me. It is one thing to have power to exercise in favour of your interests (keeping the CPL afloat and expanding, which I am entirely in favour of), and quite another to be saying you own the CSA, which is big-headed, arrogant, hostile and offensive. This is from Friend, the same guy whose club apparently tried to influence in favour of the incumbent in Langford, which also shows a weak sense of democratic process. Make me lose my patience.

I am all for the CPL succeeding in the terms of the CSB, but not at the expense of all the other things that need to succeed in Canadian soccer, and not at the expense of a proper balance of power to ensure control of abuse and possible corruption.

Edited November 16, 2022 by Unnamed Trialist

[Ansem]

2 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Then, the CSA could also find ways to circumvent the apparent abuse on the part o the CSB, if they were to choose to do so. 

"Abuse"? They could have said "No"

 

3 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

They could offer to buy them out, with the idea that they could generate the resources they need by other means.

Buy them out with what money? They got CSB to generate those revenues because they never could do it themselves competently. It's one sided but it beats writing a cheque to TSN to air games on TV - now that's incompetence.

I'll tell you what I think happened, the CSA never anticipated that they would knock it out of the park the way they are doing currently. They massively underestimated how much money CSB could generate and thought they were doing good business at $3M a year.

CSB definitely outperformed any projections they presented to the CSA (you be the judge if it was on purpose or not) - and they massively outperformed it making them look bad today.

 

5 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

They could accentuate those revenue sources the CSB does not control. I am not entirely sure here, but gate from home matches, some merchandising, fees from youth players.

CSB controls the most lucrative stuff. Sure you have revenue on gates and merch but there's a cost to organized those games. Heck, we're too poor to have youth camps or play friendlies overseas consistently - I disagree with passing the bill to players --> less pay to play, not more

 

7 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

The board of the CSA could also pressure the CSB by raising the fees to be paid to the CSA by the CPL to remain a sanctioned league. 

If you want more money from them, that's a very poor way to go at it

 

8 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

They could establish parallel entities or organisations through which to channel sponsorship and other revenue streams outside the agreement with the CSB.

Outside of government subsidies and whatever remains, there's isn't much left to make a significant difference

 

10 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

But don't push me. It is one thing to have power to exercise in favour of your interests (keeping the CPL afloat and expanding, which I am entirely in favour of), and quite another to be saying you own the CSA, which is big-headed, arrogant, hostile and offensive. This is from Friend, the same guy whose club apparently tried to influence in favour of the incumbent in Langford, which also shows a weak sense of democratic process. 

I understand that Friend's quote was not a good thing to say publicly - I agree with that.

 

12 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

I am all for the CPL succeeding in the terms of the CSB, but not at the expense of all the other things that need to succeed in Canadian soccer, and not at the expense of a proper balance of power to ensure control of abuse and possible corruption.

For a G7 nation to not have a "bare minimum" of a soccer pyramid quite frankly an embarrassment of the CSA's making. Yes, I agree that the deal is one sided (I said so myself) but we can't argue the value they bring on the table in exchange. Monopoly on Canadian soil is a big ask but not unreasonable since they are the one's taking all the financial risks and liabilities in exchange of the marketing revenues.

If the whole affair goes south, CPL owners will lose hundreds of millions while the CSA would just remain the same - it's called "having skin in the game". CSB is taking most if not all the risks and they are getting compensated for it (even if it's one sided). Monopoly significantly decrease the risk of their project to fail so it's obvious that they will pursue that at some point.

On the other hand, I expect them to give far more money to the CSA if their bottom line increases significantly as a result of having no more competitors.

Hope this makes sense

 

[Watchmen]

This subject always ends the same way, and hinges on whether you consider the Fury to be a valid precedent (the USL is not at the same level as MLS), whether the CSA wants to do it, and what you consider to be best for Canadian soccer as a whole. Further, it's a question we won't have a resolution on for years, because we have no idea how long the CSA granted exemption status to the MLS sides for.  

I'll now do my best to keep my mouth shut because I'm tired of this debate and it's already wasted endless pages on this forum. 

[Aird25]

1 hour ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Does Friend think he, as part owner of CSB, is an owner of the CSA?

I think he's just talking about the business side of things, not governance

[Unnamed Trialist]

5 minutes ago, Aird25 said:

I think he's just talking about the business side of things, not governance

Even then he's way out of line. He's going to end up hurting his business endeavours, in BC, in Langley, if he's involved in Kelowna. No public entity, or public official, should take lightly to being called a puppet.

[Aird25]

6 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Even then he's way out of line. He's going to end up hurting his business endeavours, in BC, in Langley, if he's involved in Kelowna. No public entity, or public official, should take lightly to being called a puppet.

I haven't read all the back and forths in this thread, but how has he called anyone a puppet? From what I recall this article is just describing CSBs business strategy (i.e. lumping club and national team commercial and broadcast rights together). Which doesn't seem that out of line to me. 

Edited November 16, 2022 by Aird25

[red card]

1 hour ago, Ansem said:

 

 

CSB controls the most lucrative stuff. Sure you have revenue on gates and merch but there's a cost to organized those games. Heck, we're too poor to have youth camps or play friendlies overseas consistently - I disagree with passing the bill to players --> less pay to play, not more

 

 

 

 

The CSA has way more levers to pull with a couple that should exceed sponsorships & media. But yes, they'll need to execute way better than they have done in the past. 

Looking at other football Feds & also Hockey Canada, match revenues should exceed sponsor monies. But the CSA needs to hold about 10 men/women domestic friendlies per year with healthy crowds paying healthy ticket prices. The women may need to set up a SheBelieves/Arnold Clark type tourney and the men need to get Conmebol nations over to Canada when they play the US or Mexico.

If both the men & women do well at the 2 upcoming World Cups, Olympics in 24 and a couple new stars emerge over the next cycle, kit royalties should add at least $1 million/yr. 

But the biggest lever will be from hosting 2026. CSA made good coin from hosting 2015 where they made about 4 years worth of CSB payments.

 

[SthMelbRed]

4 hours ago, Aird25 said:

I haven't read all the back and forths in this thread, but how has he called anyone a puppet? From what I recall this article is just describing CSBs business strategy (i.e. lumping club and national team commercial and broadcast rights together). Which doesn't seem that out of line to me. 

These things got conflated due to @Ansem's fantasy ramblings about CanPL and CSB destroying MLS in Canada.

[Ansem]

3 hours ago, SthMelbRed said:

These things got conflated due to @Ansem's fantasy ramblings about CanPL and CSB destroying MLS in Canada.

You don't have to agree with my preference of having only CPL in Canada but understanding the business side of CSB and the dynamics of this partnership is important. 

It's a good convo to flesh out what that deal actually is and it's potential impacts medium to long term.

If you're takeaway is that I'm rambling, that's fine - the business behind the sport isn't for you and that's ok too

Edited November 17, 2022 by Ansem

[Bison44]

6 hours ago, Ansem said:

They got CSB to generate those revenues because they never could do it themselves competently. It's one sided but it beats writing a cheque to TSN to air games on TV - now that's incompetence.

Thats very unfair...the fact that no one wanted to boradcast the games and CSA had to pay to get them on TV and blaming it all on CSA is very simplistic. We are all aware of the realities (from previous cycles) and where soccer rated with the networks and what amount of money they wanted to spend on CMNT.  

 

[Unnamed Trialist]

7 hours ago, Aird25 said:

I haven't read all the back and forths in this thread, but how has he called anyone a puppet? From what I recall this article is just describing CSBs business strategy (i.e. lumping club and national team commercial and broadcast rights together). Which doesn't seem that out of line to me. 

Bontis and the board hearing they're owned by Friend or Bob Young. But then Bontis worries about the power of unions, that's what obsesses him.

[Shway]

11 hours ago, SthMelbRed said:

These things got conflated due to @Ansem's fantasy ramblings about CanPL and CSB destroying MLS in Canada.

There’s facts, and then there’s fantasy.
You can’t dismiss them to fit yours, his or my sentiments.

The reality is the CSB has a lot of power, and have important figures and federations on their side.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

...which is why they got left out of the Leagues Cup.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

16 hours ago, red card said:

...But the CSA needs to hold about 10 men/women domestic friendlies per year with healthy crowds paying healthy ticket prices...

That approach certainly got off to a good start on the CMNT side of things with the Iran/Panama fiasco.

[Kingston]

18 hours ago, Ansem said:

How is the status quo solving their money issue by the 2040s?

Also define "destroyed" - where talking about private ownership who paid between 10 to $40M who would get a return on investment in the hundreds of millions should they decide to sell back to the league

I'm not looking as far forward as the 2040s.  Who knows what Canadian soccer will even look like then?  That's like looking at Canadian soccer in 2002 and trying to forecast today's reality.  Anyone who is confident they can do it is wrong.

By destroyed, I'm not thinking of the financial impact on the current ownership groups.  I mean taking well known teams with large fanbases and converting them into unknown, rebranded teams with a zero chopped off their attendance figures.  And why?  So they can be the golden goose for the CPL and the CSB?  Nope, you killed that goose by moving the teams.  So that the new owners can "do the marketing job to retain their fanbase and grow it" in the CPL?  We have that now with the only difference being the acronym of the league they're in.  It makes no sense.

Anyway, I see this as a very low probability event on any meaningful time frame.  I'm tapping out and going back to speculation on new teams in this thread.

[Shway]

2 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

...which is why they got left out of the Leagues Cup.

what is this in reference too? 
They got "left out" of the Leagues Cup to the die hards like you and I who know these things.

But do you if the CPL was asking to be included?

[narduch]

1 minute ago, Shway said:

what is this in reference too? 
They got "left out" of the Leagues Cup to the die hards like you and I who know these things.

But do you if the CPL was asking to be included?

This is just another one of his anti-CPL points.

[SthMelbRed]

21 hours ago, Ansem said:

You don't have to agree with my preference of having only CPL in Canada but understanding the business side of CSB and the dynamics of this partnership is important. 

It's a good convo to flesh out what that deal actually is and it's potential impacts medium to long term.

If you're takeaway is that I'm rambling, that's fine - the business behind the sport isn't for you and that's ok too

The business side of sport isn't for me? FFS, mate. You've definitely created this fantasy where CanPL, CSB, the CSA, and CONCACAF are all conspiring to force the 3 Canadian MLS teams into CanPL. There's no real basis for your fantasy except that you want that to happen. That doesn't make you in any way more attuned to the way that business in sports work than any other person on this board. 

I'm going to excuse myself from this ridiculous charade, but you can feel free to continue being the guy on the other end of the spectrum to the parrot in these interminable discussions.

Edited November 18, 2022 by SthMelbRed

[SthMelbRed]

10 hours ago, Shway said:

There’s facts, and then there’s fantasy.
You can’t dismiss them to fit yours, his or my sentiments.

The reality is the CSB has a lot of power, and have important figures and federations on their side.

Yes. CSB has found themselves in an influential position right now. Is there any evidence, though, for this alleged conspiracy which ends up with the 3 MLS teams being told that they either join CanPL or close their doors? No, there is actually none. 

[SthMelbRed]

mistake

Edited November 18, 2022 by SthMelbRed

[phil03]

Honestly, I am starting to believe the forums should have a thread specifically for the issue. IMO it would bring key advantages:

I. It won't spillover into other conversations (I own my part in making it happen in the past).

II. It would keep all the arguments straight, so to speak, so that they basically won't get repeated ad nauseum (like, I had to basically restrain myself from retyping my previous point on why the Fury don't work as a precedent since you can make the case that the shift from one league to another wouldn't be ''exceptional circumstances'', FIFA's metric, (although it definitely could have been if the CPL requested expansion fees) but that there is just no way that the forcible downsizing or sale of MLS clubs due to neither failures on the pitch nor misdeeds outside of the pitch would definitely meet it  ).

Edited November 18, 2022 by phil03

[Ansem]

1 hour ago, SthMelbRed said:

The business side of sport isn't for me? FFS, mate. You've definitely created this fantasy where CanPL, CSB, the CSA, and CONCACAF are all conspiring to force the 3 Canadian MLS teams into CanPL. There's no real basis for your fantasy except that you want that to happen. That doesn't make you in any way more attuned to the way that business in sports work than any other person on this board. 

I'm going to excuse myself from this ridiculous charade, but you can feel free to continue being the guy on the other end of the spectrum to the parrot in these interminable discussions.

No need to get trigger, we'll go back to speculating about expansions more specifically

I should know better than "speculating" in a thread with the name "speculation"

😉

I definately owe you a drink

 

[Kent]

On 11/16/2022 at 4:28 PM, Ansem said:

Actually it's a 4-way deal between CSA/CONCACAF/USSF/FIFA. If at any point one of the 4 wants to end it or not continue with it, then it would be over.

With the Fury, the CSA was onboard (publicly) but CONCACAF was the one pulling the plug.

You are also correct to say that the CSA could unilaterally end this at any time

Unrelated, but reminding me about the Fury drama and JDG's shade throwing toward the CPL reminded me of something he said on TSN this week. In one of those daily countdown to Qatar shows (maybe on Thursday or Wednesday) he was talking about positive strides in the pro game in Canada over the recent years. I can't remember exactly what lead into it but he was clearly alluding to the CPL but instead of saying "CPL" or "Canadian Premier League" he said "the domestic leagues". Maybe I misinterpreted and he was bundling the MLS expansion into Canada with the CPL founding, but it really sounded like he just didn't want to explicitly mention the CPL as if he has a beef with them.

[Ivan]

11 hours ago, Kent said:

Unrelated, but reminding me about the Fury drama and JDG's shade throwing toward the CPL reminded me of something he said on TSN this week. In one of those daily countdown to Qatar shows (maybe on Thursday or Wednesday) he was talking about positive strides in the pro game in Canada over the recent years. I can't remember exactly what lead into it but he was clearly alluding to the CPL but instead of saying "CPL" or "Canadian Premier League" he said "the domestic leagues". Maybe I misinterpreted and he was bundling the MLS expansion into Canada with the CPL founding, but it really sounded like he just didn't want to explicitly mention the CPL as if he has a beef with them.

But hasn't he publicly said a goal for his Simcoe County Rovers is to get to the CPL one day?