CPL General

[Watchmen]

7 hours ago, Aird25 said:

I’m surprised there are eve that many given how many probably migrated to Fubo or other methods of watching. They’ve really reduced the value of their stream recently with some of the deals they’ve made. In regards to attendance, doesn’t it typically account for about 10% of revenue in other leagues? Do we know the percentage for CPL?

No, most leagues globally are gate driven.  I know the NFL is lower, but I don't think it's 10% low.  I'm sure the EPL isn't either.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

 

 

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

 

[Unnamed Trialist]

6 hours ago, Watchmen said:

No, most leagues globally are gate driven.  I know the NFL is lower, but I don't think it's 10% low.  I'm sure the EPL isn't either.

This. 

Historically gate was the major factor in soccer, up to the end of the 20th century it would represent over 80% for all clubs.

This began to change with 1-improved tv deals, 2-control over marketing and merchandising, 3-naming rights, and then 4-other forms of licensing, where a powerful brand of any nature--singer, actor, football club--could sell the rights to put their name on a perfume or cologne, for example. All driven by internet and social media opening up access to being able to see teams, see players, get to know details of both.

Then a fifth factor, clubs being owned by wealthy investors--or States, like PSG-- with deep pockets able to stuff them with money at will and find ways to get around any attempt at creating structures for financial fair play (no major soccer league in the world having a salary cap apart from MLS, financial fair play is a sort of equivalent).

But this benefitted and has benefitted especially the bigger clubs that win trophies, have international presence and are able to work their brands internationally. The rich do get richer, as all these factors snowball in their favour, the "weaker" clubs do what they can. 

It was estimated at Barça that although Messi made 104 million euros before taxes in salary (half that after), his presence at the club generated somewhere between 350-400 million a year. But only if you have the skills, technology and context to harness that potential, and historically that wasn't the case: Santos never benefitted from having Pele, except for being invited to a few more friendly tournaments.

I know this from being a club member at Barça, when I first took out membership over 20 years ago we were considered the single most important factor in financial stability (that, along with owning our own stadium and having other fully owned fixed assets, a second stadium, training centre...). Now memberships, and season tickets, might represent close to 10% of our income. The chance for members to sell tickets back to the club for high-end resale adds to that, so taht is gate as well, but still: we are not talking about more than 15-20% of total budget. 

While in the late 90s it was clearly over 80%.

Little of this dynamic is as positive for more modest teams, even successfully more modest teams. Sure, a low end Liga club may be making 30-40% on gate, because they simply have no strong brand identity, merchandising, shirt sales, beyond their immediate city or region. And hardly anything international. 

Speaking of modest: the fact that Atlético lost those two Champions Leagues to Real Madrid, in 2014 and 2016. A win would have leveraged a massive rise in international prestige, merchandising, branding prestige. So with all their relative success, and league wins, Europa League, they have to do things like buy a team in CPL, the one in Mexico. They sort of nickle and dime their way into a international position, establishing the brand in a secondary market, and will continue to do so until they can turn the corner. 

I personally don't think that followers of Atléti have increased signficantly in Canada, or marketing value, but I could be wrong. Maybe going from nothing to a bit is significant.

Oddly, similar case somewhat, would be Manchester City. They too are missing the CL, but they have deeper pockets, the EPL wins are more valuable than Liga wins, they have competed at the same level as the rest of European clubs buying players (and the coach). And benefitted from United slipping. But another factor: they can pump money in at will because they have an entire state behind them and a conglomerate of teams around the world in City Group.

So they are transitioning more readily beyond reliance on gate, which for them was never near the top of EPL or the UEFA teams with bigger stadiums. 

The real crisis, we could argue is with the clearly lower tier of teams. Gate means much more, they have no tv or it is negligible, their sponsorship deals, shirt deals, all minor. They are even more sharply affected by the local guy sitting at home watching his big 4 league or international club he's fallen in love with, who never goes to see his local team. Like maybe his dad or granddad once did. So the lower tier and weaker teams, like in CPL, who could really see a difference with 6000 in the stands instead of 4200, are doubly punished by the same system that sees the powerhouses rely less and less on gate.

[Kingston]

On 9/18/2022 at 5:05 AM, Unnamed Trialist said:

No DPs, terrible idea in all respects.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd be curious to hear your reasoning for such a strong response.

[Aird25]

10 hours ago, Watchmen said:

No, most leagues globally are gate driven.  I know the NFL is lower, but I don't think it's 10% low.  I'm sure the EPL isn't either.

I think I got that idea from this report, which was pre-pandemic. I perhaps incorrectly assumed that percentage went down during the pandemic.

https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/OfficialDocument/uefaorg/Clublicensing/02/58/98/12/2589812_DOWNLOAD.pdf

"For most clubs, the matchday fans remain the heartbeat of the club, but the percentage of overall club revenue that is accounted for by ticketing has continued to decline, falling from 22% in 2008 to 14% in 2017."

I wish we had access to even a small fraction of this info about our leagues so we could actually assess financial stability and the chosen approach. Instead we're left to bicker about how many seats appear to be empty, and whether that means the league is doomed.

We've got half the crowd arguing that the league is siphoning money from the National Teams, and another crowd arguing that the league isn't sustainable. Pacific made something like 50% of it's player salaries in transfer fees alone, but every game we seem to argue about a few hundred fans at matches. We just don't have the information

Edited September 19, 2022 by Aird25

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

If that is aimed at me it conveniently ignores all the posts where I have highlighted what is going right in Halifax on attendance and speculated on how the league could try to emulate that in other mid-sized markets elsewhere.

If you want to do something concrete with that PDF, you could, for example, see how the league's known salary cap stacks up against club average wage budgets on p73. CanPL equates to the top leagues in the Republic of Ireland and Macedonia on that basis if it only involves the players. Maybe Finland if all salaries are factored in. Not leagues that have vast broadcasting and sponsorship revenues in other words that help to minimize the importance of gameday revenue streams.

Edited September 19, 2022 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[CanadaFan123]

Who are the front runners for the MVP and U21 awards? 
 

U21 would seem to be between De Rosario, Rea and Pacius. MVP honestly I have no clue. 

[Kent]

A random thing, but somehow last night I accidentally ended up on CTV Ottawa, and on the news they showed Ollie Bassett's goal against Valour. I didn't get the sense that they routinely show Atletico Ottawa highlights, just that he had a particularly remarkable goal (an Olimpico). It was nice to see though!

[gwsmith63]

25 minutes ago, Kent said:

A random thing, but somehow last night I accidentally ended up on CTV Ottawa, and on the news they showed Ollie Bassett's goal against Valour. I didn't get the sense that they routinely show Atletico Ottawa highlights, just that he had a particularly remarkable goal (an Olimpico). It was nice to see though!

I don’t believe they do it regularly.

Probably because of the nature of the goal?

[Watchmen]

4 hours ago, Aird25 said:

I think I got that idea from this report, which was pre-pandemic. I perhaps incorrectly assumed that percentage went down during the pandemic.

https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/OfficialDocument/uefaorg/Clublicensing/02/58/98/12/2589812_DOWNLOAD.pdf

"For most clubs, the matchday fans remain the heartbeat of the club, but the percentage of overall club revenue that is accounted for by ticketing has continued to decline, falling from 22% in 2008 to 14% in 2017."

I wish we had access to even a small fraction of this info about our leagues so we could actually assess financial stability and the chosen approach. Instead we're left to bicker about how many seats appear to be empty, and whether that means the league is doomed.

We've got half the crowd arguing that the league is siphoning money from the National Teams, and another crowd arguing that the league isn't sustainable. Pacific made something like 50% of it's player salaries in transfer fees alone, but every game we seem to argue about a few hundred fans at matches. We just don't have the information

I mean, the percentage absolutely did fall during the pandemic but that's also why so many clubs were in deep financial trouble. There's also a difference between the biggest leagues/clubs in the world and the majority of clubs in the world. The gate really matters, not just for leagues like the CPL but for the CFL and NHL too.

[Kent]

17 minutes ago, gwsmith63 said:

I don’t believe they do it regularly.

Probably because of the nature of the goal?

Yeah, they were more reporting on the goal than the game. They did mention the game ended in a draw and that Ottawa is in first place as an aside.

[Aird25]

28 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

I mean, the percentage absolutely did fall during the pandemic but that's also why so many clubs were in deep financial trouble. There's also a difference between the biggest leagues/clubs in the world and the majority of clubs in the world. The gate really matters, not just for leagues like the CPL but for the CFL and NHL too.

I completely understand that (6% in Russia, 10% in Italy, and Scotland the highest in Europe at 40%), which is why I was asking if we knew the percentage for CPL. I believe that figure was for the top 700 clubs in Europe though. As far as I know next to nothing is made public about CPL revenue streams though, so we focus on the one that is most obvious to us (attendance)

[Watchmen]

15 minutes ago, Aird25 said:

I completely understand that (6% in Russia, 10% in Italy, and Scotland the highest in Europe at 40%), which is why I was asking if we knew the percentage for CPL. I believe that figure was for the top 700 clubs in Europe though. As far as I know next to nothing is made public about CPL revenue streams though, so we focus on the one that is most obvious to us (attendance)

Absolutely. It's also why the CPL bragging about the OneSoccer deal and then disclosing no numbers was frustrating.  Which should not be confused with me saying it's a bad deal - just tell me the numbers and let us decide.

[Unnamed Trialist]

8 hours ago, Kingston said:

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd be curious to hear your reasoning for such a strong response.

I don't think any of the supposed logic is sound, at all. 

One thing I hate: the guys runs their butts off, put in a leg, spill their guts out on the pitch. One makes 3 million, the others between 80 and 160 thousand, and they are teammates. One guy makes 25 time more than half his teammates. I find the notion repulsive. 

Apart from the fact that there is no evidence it improves the team. 

I don't understand why folks are citing the Beckham effect on gate and interest, when 96% of all other DP cases had a negligible effect. That is not attributable to Beckham then, the logic is totally wrong. People went to see a specific player (honest guy, a serious footballer, a good teammate I believe from having seen and watched him in La Liga, but vastly overrated). 

You know the single factor that most consistently can boost gate in MLS: cheap beer deals. Half price on pints is more effective than DPs for attendance.

[Aird25]

12 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

You know the single factor that most consistently can boost gate in MLS: cheap beer deals. Half price on pints

I could get on board with this

[red card]

9 hours ago, Aird25 said:

I think I got that idea from this report, which was pre-pandemic. I perhaps incorrectly assumed that percentage went down during the pandemic.

https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/OfficialDocument/uefaorg/Clublicensing/02/58/98/12/2589812_DOWNLOAD.pdf

"For most clubs, the matchday fans remain the heartbeat of the club, but the percentage of overall club revenue that is accounted for by ticketing has continued to decline, falling from 22% in 2008 to 14% in 2017."

I wish we had access to even a small fraction of this info about our leagues so we could actually assess financial stability and the chosen approach. Instead we're left to bicker about how many seats appear to be empty, and whether that means the league is doomed.

We've got half the crowd arguing that the league is siphoning money from the National Teams, and another crowd arguing that the league isn't sustainable. Pacific made something like 50% of it's player salaries in transfer fees alone, but every game we seem to argue about a few hundred fans at matches. We just don't have the information

Deloitte's latest football finance report says the Prem's matchday revenue accounted for 13-23% from 2011-21 ex covid year and is projected to be 13-14% for last and this season.

 

 

[narduch]

I get what people are saying about gate receipts but that doesn't really explain how a team like Sogndal in Norway's 2nd tier can afford an alleged $200k transfer fee playing in a 5,600 seat stadium

Edited September 20, 2022 by narduch

[K Edgar]

22 minutes ago, narduch said:

I get what people are saying about gate receipts but that doesn't really explain how a team like Sogndal in Norway's 2nd tier can afford an alleged $200k transfer fee playing in a 5,600 seat stadium

Transfermarkt does not list any dollar amounts (only question marks) but one could assume they are reinvesting transfer fees received?

Edited September 20, 2022 by K Edgar

[narduch]

1 minute ago, K Edgar said:

Transfermarkt does not list any dollar amounts (only question marks) but one could assume they are reinvesting transfer fees received?

Good point

[JamboAl]

38 minutes ago, narduch said:

I get what people are saying about gate receipts but that doesn't really explain how a team like Sogndal in Norway's 2nd tier can afford an alleged $200k transfer fee playing in a 5,600 seat stadium

Add to the fact that Sogndal rarely draws over 1,500 a match.  I do follow Norwegian football a little and wonder the same thing.  The smaller teams are lucky to draw 500 a game and the travel can be brutal as the country is very long north to south.  I really don’t know how they survive, let alone pay a transfer fee.  

[maccaliam]

14 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

Add to the fact that Sogndal rarely draws over 1,500 a match.  I do follow Norwegian football a little and wonder the same thing.  The smaller teams are lucky to draw 500 a game and the travel can be brutal as the country is very long north to south.  I really don’t know how they survive, let alone pay a transfer fee.  

Norwegian Soccer Business funnels money from the national team bonuses to pay for transfer fees, wages, and half-time aquavit for the players?

[phil03]

1 hour ago, narduch said:

I get what people are saying about gate receipts but that doesn't really explain how a team like Sogndal in Norway's 2nd tier can afford an alleged $200k transfer fee playing in a 5,600 seat stadium

For all we know maybe they don't and instead they simply have the good luck of an owner being willing to spend good money on his hobby.

[jonovision]

I suspect that most Norwegian teams having longstanding and deep roots in their communities allows them to leverage more lucrative local sponsorships.

[JamboAl]

I notice that the shirt sponsors are often cooperative banks or building societies that fund housing in the country.  Wouldn’t be surprised if some of those huge royalties the country has from the oil revenues makes its way to the grassroots of football.