CPL General

[harrycoyster]

20 minutes ago, matty said:

There's no way a project of the CPL' size can survive without it.

There are plenty of soccer leagues that self-sustain without significant TV money. MLS until 2007, the USL, the lower leagues in most soccer countries in the world.  Many minor league baseball and hockey teams actually make money. Sure, the CPL will never be an MLS competitor without a good TV deal, but I don't think that's really even the goal.

For now, we focus on building infrastructure, building fanbases, building the brand, and building a Canadian development system. If we have a CFL-level TV deal in 20 years great...but none of the stuff I mentioned is reliant on that short-term.

[matty]

Just now, harrycoyster said:

There are plenty of soccer leagues that self-sustain without significant TV money. MLS until 2007, the USL, the lower leagues in most soccer countries in the world.  Many minor league baseball and hockey teams actually make money. Sure, the CPL will never be an MLS competitor without a good TV deal, but I don't think that's really even the goal.

For now, we focus on building infrastructure, building fanbases, building the brand, and building a Canadian development system. If we have a CFL-level TV deal in 20 years great...but none of the stuff I mentioned is reliant on that short-term.

You really missed what I'm saying. It's not about signing a $40m TV deal, it's about being able to charge advertisers because it's on TV (caused that's where say 20-40% of teams revenue will come from, advertisers). If you're selling 4k tickets at $25 buck each over 15 games you've got $1.5m in revenue which isn't great when you have a cap around $1m and still have to pay staff and have spent millions on a stadium. Now when you remember the NASL, Iirc, were making around $500k off jersey sponsors stuff starts to look up and when you remember exposure makes what you can charge go up then that's another $1-300k maybe and the best way to guarantee exposure? TV

You can survive without TV but you're not building $20m stadiums (since you mention infrastructure) or paying a living wage. You have to be semi-pro basically. The CPL project makes ZERO economic sense without TV in the very near future.

You talk about building a fanbase and brand, how do you do that on a national scale when most watch sports on TV and hate watching sports on other media including streams. You really can't.

The hockey and baseball you listed either pay very little or are subsidised or owned by bigger teams, same goes for most USL and MLS is the exception to needing TV to make money because it charges insane fees to buy a team and bets that soccer will someday be big.

[harrycoyster]

6 minutes ago, matty said:

You really missed what I'm saying. It's not about signing a $40m TV deal, it's about being able to charge advertisers because it's on TV (caused that's where say 20-40% of teams revenue will come from, advertisers). If you're selling 4k tickets at $25 buck each over 15 games you've got $1.5m in revenue which isn't great when you have a cap around $1m and still have to pay staff and have spent millions on a stadium. Now when you remember the NASL, Iirc, were making around $500k off jersey sponsors stuff starts to look up and when you remember exposure makes what you can charge go up then that's another $1-300k maybe and the best way to guarantee exposure? TV

You can survive without TV but you're not building $20m stadiums (since you mention infrastructure) or paying a living wage. You have to be semi-pro basically. The CPL project makes ZERO economic sense without TV in the very near future.

You talk about building a fanbase and brand, how do you do that on a national scale when most watch sports on TV and hate watching sports on other media including streams. You really can't.

The hockey and baseball you listed either pay very little or are subsidised or owned by bigger teams, same goes for most USL and MLS is the exception to needing TV to make money because it charges insane fees to buy a team and bets that soccer will someday be big.

I'd hope that the CPL is attracting investors willing to spend on infrastructure without having the profit to do so first, as almost every MLS franchise has done. Other than that I think that we have very different expectations for the CPL. I don't foresee player spending being well above the break even threshold for a league whose teams are relying on local advertising, gate, and merch for revenue.

Honestly, if we are talking about a league that's going to be mostly Canadian, there is no reason to pay more than $50k in median salary. Outside of the top 5-10 players, who aren't coming to CPL, our players simply aren't worth that much. A $1-1.25 million salary budget seems like plenty and is sustainable. FC Cincinnati is in that range and covered payroll in the first 5 home games of their season. Granted we can only wish CPL teams will find their fanbase as FCC has, but it shows that payroll is sustainable with a fourth of the success.

[matty]

15 minutes ago, harrycoyster said:

I'd hope that the CPL is attracting investors willing to spend on infrastructure without having the profit to do so first, as almost every MLS franchise has done. Other than that I think that we have very different expectations for the CPL. I don't foresee player spending being well above the break even threshold for a league whose teams are relying on local advertising, gate, and merch for revenue.

Honestly, if we are talking about a league that's going to be mostly Canadian, there is no reason to pay more than $50k in median salary. Outside of the top 5-10 players, who aren't coming to CPL, our players simply aren't worth that much. A $1-1.25 million salary budget seems like plenty and is sustainable. FC Cincinnati is in that range and covered payroll in the first 5 home games of their season. Granted we can only wish CPL teams will find their fanbase as FCC has, but it shows that payroll is sustainable with a fourth of the success.

I agree cause even with TV they're gonna lose money at first and maybe for an extended period but TV could be the difference between losing $300k and $1m a season.

You mention no reason to pay over 50k for talent. Say I'm paying everyone $30k and I have 25 guys on my roster I'm still paying $750k a year in player salaries and that's before I factor in travel, staff, equipment ect. You can't depend on gate for this league (averaging 5k when much bigger markets stateside can't seems fairly unrealistic, especially when you the best promotional tool there is), it has to be advertisers and local ones are not going to cover everything even with gate.

Edited September 19, 2017 by matty

[harrycoyster]

9 minutes ago, matty said:

You mention no reason to pay over 50k for talent. Say I'm paying everyone $30k and I have 25 guys on my roster I'm still paying $750k a year in player salaries and that's before I factor in travel, staff, equipment ect. You can't depend on gate for this league, it has to be advertisers and local ones are not going to cover everything even with gate.

Right, but we have many examples of North American soccer teams thriving without national TV money. Sacramento Republic, FC Cincinnati, Louisville and Indy Eleven are stable teams with estimated salaries in 7 figures. FC Cincinnati has a local TV contract that is netting them a decent amount of money, and Minnesota United was profitable before joining MLS. 

It isn't like maintaining a decent league with little to no TV money is without precedent. 

Edited September 19, 2017 by harrycoyster

[matty]

6 minutes ago, harrycoyster said:

Right, but we have many examples of North American soccer teams thriving without TV money. Sacramento Republic, FC Cincinnati, Louisville and Indy Eleven are stable teams with estimated salaries in 7 figures. FC Cincinnati has a local TV contract that is netting them a decent amount of money, and Minnesota United was profitable before joining MLS. 

It isn't like maintaining a decent league with little to no TV money is without precedent. 

Note: Those are teams not leagues, none built $20m stadiums, all are in cities of around 500k and local TV counts as TV even if it is a small deal (I would feel better if CPL had a series of local deals). Also Cincinnati is a freak, everyone agrees on that.

Indy Eleven as was mentioned earlier is having a hard time with rental costs BTW

Edited September 19, 2017 by matty

[harrycoyster]

20 minutes ago, matty said:

Note: Those are teams not leagues, none built $20m stadiums, all are in cities of around 500k and local TV counts as TV even if it is a small deal (I would feel better if CPL had a series of local deals). Also Cincinnati is a freak, everyone agrees on that.

Indy Eleven as was mentioned earlier is having a hard time with rental costs BTW.

Well who is going to build a $20 million dollar stadium for USL? The US has the most advanced sporting infrastructure in the world...the need isn't there. Yet, all of those teams have plans to build $200 million+ stadiums if they get chosen for MLS. It's up to Bernie to sell the CPL like Garber sells MLS to all these American soccer investors. 

I get that Cincinnati is a freak, but as I said, you only need to have a fraction of their success to survive. FCC didn't get their local deal until their second season, worrying about not having local TV deals is premature. Indy Eleven is likely posturing for a new stadium seal, I don't think they are in any serious trouble while drawing 8,000+ fans a game.

Honestly, my only concern is the limited success non-MLS soccer has had in Canada recently. Edmonton has averaged 2,700 in their last two seasons, the Fury fell out of the USL top 10 in attendance this year, the Impact shut down their USL team, and TFCII/VWCII get basically no support...even by MLS2 team standards. VWCII games are like funerals.

Edited September 19, 2017 by harrycoyster

[matty]

4 minutes ago, harrycoyster said:

Well who is going to build a $20 million dollar stadium for USL? The US has the most advanced sporting infrastructure in the world...the need isn't there. Yet, all of those teams have plans to build $200 million+ stadiums if they get chosen for MLS. It's up to Bernie to sell the CPL like Garber sells MLS to all these American soccer investors. 

I get that Cincinnati is a freak, but as I said, you only need to have a fraction of their success to survive. FCC didn't get their local deal until their second season, worrying about not having local TV deals is premature. Indy Eleven is likely posturing for a new stadium seal, I don't think they are in any serious trouble while drawing 8,000+ fans a game.

Honestly, my only concern is the limited success non-MLS soccer has had in Canada since . Edmonton has averaged 2,700 in their last two seasons, the Fury fell out of the USL top 10 in attendance this year, the Impact shut down their USL team, and TFCII/VWCII get basically no support...even by MLS2 team standards. VWCII games are like funerals.

I agree Bernie needs to sell the league like Garber. One of the things Garber has to sell MLS is the potential future of soccer as a legit mega money maker partly thanks to the fact they're accessible in at least 100 million homes in North America weekly. When Bernie says TV is not in the business model I simply don't fully believe him, I think he and everyone else is looking for one and that the plan isn't to go without it long term. Short term is fine but the longer it goes on the more concerning it becomes.

I also agree that current non-MLS trends aren't great but think having domestic derbies will help improve numbers.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

2 hours ago, harrycoyster said:

...I get that Cincinnati is a freak, but as I said, you only need to have a fraction of their success to survive...

Cincinnati is very much an MLS sized city and has a metro area of over 2 million, so in per capita terms many of the markets that are expected to be in CanPL are looking to draw every bit as well as they do, if they want to hit what appears to be the anticipated break even of 5000 to 6000. Hopefully those stated numbers have been more of an aspiration that an expectation.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

8 hours ago, Pat Carrasco said:

...and even Anthony Totera mentioned not too long ago that the CPL has every intent to put both cities in the province of Saskatchewan in the league...

Think it's more noteworthy that Paul Beirne has outlined a vision in which any city with a metro population of over 200,000 can eventually be expected to have a team. Halifax looking highly likely to be in the first 6 (hopefully the issue with the amendments has been addressed satisfactorily) and Saskatoon being #7 suggests he was serious about that.

[Gordon]

9 hours ago, matty said:

While the metro Saskatoon is larger, it isn't the capital and has a much higher unemployment rate and lower median income than Regina (which also has Moose Jaw not far away). There are decent arguments that could be made of either city. I do think this is the right one. But still would have liked Mosaic....

The business plan includes using Winnipeg and Hamilton's CFL stadiums (add Ottawa's as well) so I don't see how Mosaic doesn't fit in or wrong for CPL. It would also be the only CPL stadium trying to get World Cup games (assuming Fury aren't in).

We know Mosaic wants soccer already (and not just World Cup) and the Joe Belan likes it a lot. It's lack of inclusion could turn out to be one of the biggest CPL mistakes in terms of money spent and if it gets World Cup games.

Fair point re the stadiums in Winnipeg and Hamilton. But I would note that those cities are 2-3 times larger than Regina and Ottawa bigger still. But when that is the example for 1/3 to 1/2 of the initial teams involved, it is fair to say that It is an overstatement to say the model is otherwise. Empty football stadiums were a drag for MLS however, and I don't think either Regina or Saskatoon will get anywhere near enough attendance to fill a stadium the size of Mosaic. 

As for economic/demographic data it is fair to say that Saskatoon surpassed Regina 20-30 years ago as the economic 'engine' of Saskatchewan. The difference in household income is negligible, and both cities were well over $90,000 per household the last time I saw the data reported. Regina is more insulated from recession than Saskatoon due to the high number of civil service jobs in the city so the unemployment rate is a blip in time. Saskatoon is a younger city - youngest larger city in Canada - although, like the household income, that difference is negligible and has significantly higher GDP and economic diversity: A large part of the reason that the population growth has been higher and presenting better opportunity for sponsorship and corporate partners.

There is certainly a case for Regina however, and there is no reason it couldn't be first to happen in Saskatchewan if things play out that way. 

Edited September 19, 2017 by Gordon
Correcting a neither/nor to either/or

[Rheo]

Just my opinion but way, way too much concern about the lack of TV announced so far given that

1-they have two named teams

2-they don't have a start date

3-they may have TV but haven't announced it because they don't have a league to announce.

All Beirne has said is that the business model of the league is to succeed without TV money being a factor, which is smart given how the sports media landscape keeps evolving every day.  Your uneasiness @matty with the lack of TV news indicates you doubt their business plan (what little bits we know from Berine's podcast appearances).  Fair enough but enough people believe in it (at least 12 according to Totera) to make a go of it.

All this being said, I don't think these guys are stupid.  TV will be a factor, just not the be all and end all.

Edited September 19, 2017 by Rheo

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

24 minutes ago, Rheo said:

...Fair enough but enough people believe in it (at least 12 according to Totera) to make a go of it...

See it as sensible enough to be worth showing up for a meeting to hear what is on offer is as far as I would go on that particular description right now and that's no small achievment. Bear in mind Edmonton probably do still want the NASL to survive at D2 level under the USSF and probably see this as more of a plan B scenario. There will probably be others that are intersted but not fully sold yet and therefore not too far along on the spectrum of readiness. Getting six to commit for a season launch with two more solidly in the pipeline is the key.

Edited September 19, 2017 by BringBackTheBlizzard

[Rheo]

Agreed BBTB, I was a little too assuming in my statement.  Haven't had my coffee yet lol.

Also Brian Straus from SI tweeted last night about the NASL's meeting Friday "No news on NASL front, for those asking. Friday meeting in NY did take place. Reached out to NASL-they wouldn't comment"

Edited September 19, 2017 by Rheo

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

On 2017/09/14 at 3:24 AM, Kent said:

I think Rollins view is very plausible in terms of this being a test run for Canada SUM...

Something I totally forgot about when I responded to this was that there was a poster on here who said he heard Don Garber state that MLS were actively looking into a Canadian version of SUM:

 

[matty]

@Rheo the sports media landscape is evolving and it's shown that no one (other than esports) can figure it out.

Also that's not belief that's interest and it's very different. VERY DIFFERENT. And again I'm sure the version of the plan they've seen is what we've been told.

Also I love how everyone is acting like I'm the bad guy when I'm saying they're looking cause that's common sense.

We've been told something that makes no sense and we here ignore it. People here make crazy lists about players and we posts tweets about any rumour city we hear about but one the one thing that and we forget about the one thing that can make economic sense of all this.

TV should be the thing people start chipping away at yet they're not.

BTW we've seen start up leagues in Canada announce TV when they had nothing, so the whole two teams thing doesn't work.

[matty]

4 hours ago, Gordon said:

Fair point re the stadiums in Winnipeg and Hamilton. But I would note that those cities are 2-3 times larger than Regina and Ottawa bigger still. But when that is the example for 1/3 to 1/2 of the initial teams involved, it is fair to say that It is an overstatement to say the model is otherwise. Empty football stadiums were a drag for MLS however, and I don't think either Regina or Saskatoon will get anywhere near enough attendance to fill a stadium the size of Mosaic. 

As for economic/demographic data it is fair to say that Saskatoon surpassed Regina 20-30 years ago as the economic 'engine' of Saskatchewan. The difference in household income is negligible, and both cities were well over $90,000 per household the last time I saw the data reported. Regina is more insulated from recession than Saskatoon due to the high number of civil service jobs in the city so the unemployment rate is a blip in time. Saskatoon is a younger city - youngest larger city in Canada - although, like the household income, that difference is negligible and has significantly higher GDP and economic diversity: A large part of the reason that the population growth has been higher and presenting better opportunity for sponsorship and corporate partners.

There is certainly a case for Regina however, and there is no reason it couldn't be first to happen in Saskatchewan if things play out that way. 

It's not negligible, it's over 5% which is fairly large, and you can't just dismiss unemployment which is high.

Also as we've seen football stadiums can work for soccer (now).

I do largely agree with you

[Rheo]

@mattyI'm not saying your Razor Ramon  

Just disagreeing with how strongly you feel about TVs importance at this point of time.  They control the information flow and when they think the time is right we'll hear what they have planned.  

I get that it worries you and it's valid.  I just personally don't think there's a need to worry about what we don't know about TV when in reality there's a hell of a lot we don't know in general that could be of equal or even more importance.

I'm dying for more info like most of us in here but  I'm patient.  Right now they have my trust from the bits they've let out and I can wait until they're ready to drop the motherlode of news on us.

[matty]

1 hour ago, Rheo said:

@mattyI'm not saying your Razor Ramon  

Good, Razor Ramon is largely overrated. One great match with the king of great matches and one hot angle with two of the most charismatic guy ever and he's a HALL of famer.

EDIT: Of all the Cliq members (Ramon, X-Pac, Nash, Michaels, Triple H) he was likely the 2nd worst charismatic wise and worst in ring. Yes Nash was lazy but when Nash wanted to or needed to go he could go.

And of course he was the defacto worst NWO founding member

Edited September 19, 2017 by matty

[Kent]

5 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Something I totally forgot about when I responded to this was that there was a poster on here who said he heard Don Garber state that MLS were actively looking into a Canadian version of SUM:

 

Wow, mad respect for being able to find something in that thread! Well done!

I didn't remember that at all. Good to know. I know MLS still isn't the most transparent league in the world (but I would say they have improved lately) but I wonder why they haven't announced anything about it (unless I've missed that too).

[matty]

Random wrestling thought of the day: Why do we talk so much shit about WCW here? Yes WCW became bloated and annoying but from 1996-98, WCW was GOLD.

The cruiserweight division was the best wrestling on the planet from 1996-99 (Mysterio, Jericho, Eddie, Juventud, Malenko, Psychosis). Yes it was basically all talent taken from ECW but it also threw in greats like Jushin Liger and solid workers like Chavo, Kidman and X-Pac and gimmick gold Disco Inferno and Alex Wright. It was great!

You also had the hottest angle ever maybe with the NWO, early Crow Sting, the build of Goldberg, Benoit-Booker T best of 7, the rise of DDP (who had the most exciting move of the era) and maybe the greatest non-wrestler ever in Eric Bischoff. Yes WCW fucked up both NWO and Goldberg and at the end only had Scott Steiner truly making it watchable but for a good 3 years it was the most entertaining product out there (yes I'm counting ECW which fell out of its glory days by 1996 and WWF which reached its highs in 1999).

Edited September 19, 2017 by matty

[Ansem]

you're bored?

[matty]

1 minute ago, Ansem said:

you're bored?

yepperz and watching ROH. BTW is Fight Network worth ordering?

Edited September 19, 2017 by matty

[Gopherbashi]

I had a dream last night that Paul Beirne died in a plane crash and these entire forums were losing their shit.

Clearly I need to stop checking this place as much.

[Rheo]

And NASL declares war