CPL TV Contract

[dyslexic nam]

10 minutes ago, Gopherbashi said:

The issue would be finding a time that works, and whether whatever they're currently broadcasting in that timeslot would draw more viewers than the CPL.

If a Regina-Halifax CPL match draws 50,000 viewers, while an episode of Murdoch Mysteries at the same time draws 250,000, you can bet that the only soccer you'll be seeing on CBC will be Brackenreid's Olympic team.  ^{(Please let some of you be Murdoch fans)}

I just checked the TV listing for CBC, both tonight, and Saturday through the day.  It sure seems like there are filler slots ("Bondi Vet") that could be better allocated for Canadian content.

And if broadcasting was done on a regional/local basis to match games with viewer markets, it isn't the viewers for Regine v. Halifax that would have to outdraw Murdoch, it would be all the CPL games in that concurrent time slot.  I also point out that Murdoch (somehow, bafflingly) is one of CBC's most popular programs, so not entirely a fair comparison. 

Plus CBC has to worry about the long game.  Murdoch and Coronation Street may be popular, but their viewership is probably not on the younger end of the bell curve.  Thus, the CPL crowd might be just the youth injection needed to keep CBC relevant in years to come.

3 hours ago, matty said:

CBC get dismissed because they have the fewest links to the story, the fact Rollins went out of his way to say CPL wasn't linked to Soccer Night in Canada hurt that a lot. There's also a strong possibly that the CPL isn't big enough for CBC with the MLS in the picture.

TSN and TLN have recent links to the CSA, beIN has been willing to take chances on new sports league in Canada before and GameTV appears to have given the Wolfack actual airtime (unlike CBC). CBC don't have any strong links to this story nor have they shown much willingness to take risks on sports startups.

I don't really take these points as strong arguments.  CBC news isn't known for its sports coverage, so it isn't a good place to find anything that isn't HNIC related - possibly because they are trying to keep interest strong in the sports where they do have an active broadcasting presence.  Thus the lack of CPL coverage on CBC isn't telling one way or another IMO.  Alterantively, if you look at HNIC itself, or CBC's Olympic coverage, it is clear that they still very much have an interest in quality sports programming.  Its just that they have been outbid for the rights to most of the top leagues, so the games are now on the specialty channels.  Hard to chalk that up to CBC's lack of interest.  But there is likely not going to be similar competition for CPL, so it could be something to help them maintain that part of their identity.   I also think the sample size of "sports startups" is probably too small to make any kind of general statements

 

 

[matty]

19 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

I don't really take these points as strong arguments.  CBC news isn't known for its sports coverage, so it isn't a good place to find anything that isn't HNIC related - possibly because they are trying to keep interest strong in the sports where they do have an active broadcasting presence.  Thus the lack of CPL coverage on CBC isn't telling one way or another IMO.

I'm not saying there's a lack of coverage from them (there's been a good amount) but there are not the links TSN or TLN have to the CSA.

19 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

Alterantively, if you look at HNIC itself, or CBC's Olympic coverage, it is clear that they still very much have an interest in quality sports programming.  Its just that they have been outbid for the rights to most of the top leagues, so the games are now on the specialty channels.  Hard to chalk that up to CBC's lack of interest.  But there is likely not going to be similar competition for CPL, so it could be something to help them maintain that part of their identity.   I also think the sample size of "sports startups" is probably too small to make any kind of general statements

If the CBC was seeking more sports than why not go after the NLL? It's a pretty popular established league, half the teams are Canadian, most players are and it's our national sport. When compared to other groups (GameTV, beIN, even Yes) there is no real evidence they want to commit to a league.

I'm not trying to be critical I just don't see CBC coming it

Edited July 5, 2017 by matty

[dyslexic nam]

Maybe I am underestimating the popularity of lacrosse, but I would think that a domestic soccer league would have a much higher viewing cieling than the NLL.  

[matty]

59 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

Maybe I am underestimating the popularity of lacrosse, but I would think that a domestic soccer league would have a much higher viewing cieling than the NLL.  

I think it has the potential but currently I don't think it would. The CPL is seeking 4-7k average and the NLL is doing over 9k a game (outside of Vancouver all the Canadian teams bested the average). I don't think either is gonna bring in big numbers but NLL does have the edge for now. It's not countered by anyone (MLS is going to cast a shadow on this league), it's established and it's well known in Toronto.

In the future it might be big enough but right now it's a struggle to see it attracting them.

Edited July 5, 2017 by matty

[matty]

Just curious what types of ratings do you guys realistically except during the first 5 seasons? Like what do you expect for the average game? 10k? 20k? 35k? 50k?

Edited July 6, 2017 by matty

[dyslexic nam]

10 hours ago, matty said:

Just curious what types of ratings do you guys realistically except during the first 5 seasons? Like what do you expect for the average game? 10k? 20k? 35k? 50k?

I think this number will depend on the platform, as well as other factors. 

In terms of platform, beIN has a pretty limited subscriber base, and isn't even available to some Canadian TV subscribers (from what I have read), so saturation is pretty limited - and those that do have it already have ample footy offerings so the uptake among subscribers is hard to predict.  Mind you, the proposed summer season would help with the saturation issue since it competes with far less coming from Europe.  TSN/Sportsnet subscribers are far more numerous (probably a significant majority of Canada's 11 million cable TV consumers) and have less (though still lots of) footy to watch - thus uptake would probably be higher here (and beIN subscribers would also have these channels, so the viewership would likely include 100% of the people who would have watched CPL  on beIN).  CBC is accessible by 100% of people, and they would have less access to other footy than others who have sports channels.  Those CBC viewers who don't have the other sports channels would be less inclined to watch since they have a demonstrably lower interest in sports (ie. they don't subscribe to sports channels) but all other groups (beIN subscribers, TSN/SN subscribers) would still be able to access games on CBC and would likely watch just as much as if they were on the sports channels.  In a nutshell, that is one of the reasons why i would love to see CBC compete for broadcasting rights - it maximizes the potential reach to Canadians by being accessible to everyone across the spectrum from casual viewer to hardcore fan.   

No matter the platform, viewership will also be impacted by the broadcasting model.  If there is a single "game of the week" broadcast involving (only) 2 set teams for the whole country, it would likely generate less interest than a coordinated broadcast that showed regional concurrent games in local markets.  Broadcasting costs would obviously be higher for multiple games, but that would have to be balanced against the need to drive viewership up over time.  And for non-concurrent games, would only one selected game be shown (GotW format) or would each game be shown in sequence - like last night when the Caps game came on after TFC? 

So many unknowns I think it is difficult to predict #'s.

[matty]

On 2017-7-6 at 8:48 AM, dyslexic nam said:

I think this number will depend on the platform, as well as other factors. 

In terms of platform, beIN has a pretty limited subscriber base, and isn't even available to some Canadian TV subscribers (from what I have read), so saturation is pretty limited - and those that do have it already have ample footy offerings so the uptake among subscribers is hard to predict.  Mind you, the proposed summer season would help with the saturation issue since it competes with far less coming from Europe.  TSN/Sportsnet subscribers are far more numerous (probably a significant majority of Canada's 11 million cable TV consumers) and have less (though still lots of) footy to watch - thus uptake would probably be higher here (and beIN subscribers would also have these channels, so the viewership would likely include 100% of the people who would have watched CPL  on beIN).  CBC is accessible by 100% of people, and they would have less access to other footy than others who have sports channels.  Those CBC viewers who don't have the other sports channels would be less inclined to watch since they have a demonstrably lower interest in sports (ie. they don't subscribe to sports channels) but all other groups (beIN subscribers, TSN/SN subscribers) would still be able to access games on CBC and would likely watch just as much as if they were on the sports channels.  In a nutshell, that is one of the reasons why i would love to see CBC compete for broadcasting rights - it maximizes the potential reach to Canadians by being accessible to everyone across the spectrum from casual viewer to hardcore fan.   

No matter the platform, viewership will also be impacted by the broadcasting model.  If there is a single "game of the week" broadcast involving (only) 2 set teams for the whole country, it would likely generate less interest than a coordinated broadcast that showed regional concurrent games in local markets.  Broadcasting costs would obviously be higher for multiple games, but that would have to be balanced against the need to drive viewership up over time.  And for non-concurrent games, would only one selected game be shown (GotW format) or would each game be shown in sequence - like last night when the Caps game came on after TFC? 

So many unknowns I think it is difficult to predict #'s.

I fully agree with you both carrier and the model matter.

I'm open with the fact I don't think this is going to TSN or CBC but I do think using a "B" channel could work if done right.

Should the CPL end up on TLN (the B channel I hope they take cause 6,000,000 homes), I'm hopeful they try to get everything on TV. Maybe you do your $60k game of the week broadcast midweek but also spend $20k on each of your other two games and show them mid-day on weekends. Have a side stream on the Global app (since both are owned by Corus) or talk CBC into letting you use their site for streams.

Schedule everything so you so you don't have concurrent games and so you not competing with MLS at the start.

Edited July 7, 2017 by matty

[matty]

Sorry to re-bump a seemingly dead thread but figure this might be worth mentioning. Twitter has come up before but the CPL concept has always felt kind of too small for it but I recently read this article.

Twitter struck a deal with the NLL to broadcast games on the platform despite the NLL's small following (currently 41.5k). The reason Twitter seems to have embraced the NLL because its fanbase is loyal and could boost active user counts while NLL gets to counter its lack of a national TV deal with a very popular service handling their streaming.

CPL will likely be small for a while but it's hard to argue those at are following its creation aren't casual fans and that once all the teams are in place the more hardcore regional soccer fans will follow their teams (even if not Canadian soccer fans). A fanbase of this nature could easily appeal to Twitter especially if the CPL isn't able to secure a national TV deal for year one.

As part of the NLL deal, Twitter also handled the sale of advertising which is a plus.

And of course Lee Genier, who is involved in the Saskatchewan CPL group, has strong NLL links.

Edited July 11, 2017 by matty

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

In this podcast from about 45:50 onwards:

http://vocalminority.ca/episode-195-170717-bennyballswasmycollegenickname-theonewiththecplprez-sickbeirnebro/

Paul Beirne says that their business plan assumes no national TV deal in the early years although they would be happy to have one. Streaming seems to be on the agenda.

[CDNFootballer]

17 hours ago, matty said:

Sorry to re-bump a seemingly dead thread but figure this might be worth mentioning. Twitter has come up before but the CPL concept has always felt kind of too small for it but I recently read this article.

Twitter struck a deal with the NLL to broadcast games on the platform despite the NLL's small following (currently 41.5k). The reason Twitter seems to have embraced the NLL because its fanbase is loyal and could boost active user counts while NLL gets to counter its lack of a national TV deal with a very popular service handling their streaming.

CPL will likely be small for a while but it's hard to argue those at are following its creation aren't casual fans and that once all the teams are in place the more hardcore regional soccer fans will follow their teams (even if not Canadian soccer fans). A fanbase of this nature could easily appeal to Twitter especially if the CPL isn't able to secure a national TV deal for year one.

As part of the NLL deal, Twitter also handled the sale of advertising which is a plus.

And of course Lee Genier, who is involved in the Saskatchewan CPL group, has strong NLL links.

NASL's San Francisco Deltas use twitter for their games and its ok from the matches I've viewed.Would be a good streaming option for CPL to go along with a TV deal.

 

As for TV, Bein Sports does a great job with its NASL game of the week and the other option realistically would probably be TLN. Don't see CBC, Sportsnet, or TSN getting onboard at launch.

[matty]

2 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

In this podcast from about 45:50 onwards:

http://vocalminority.ca/episode-195-170717-bennyballswasmycollegenickname-theonewiththecplprez-sickbeirnebro/

Paul Beirne says that their business plan assumes no national TV deal in the early years although they would be happy to have one. Streaming seems to be on the agenda.

Avoided saying if they're in talks for one or not which is expected. Curious if they're looking at local TV instead of national.

Nice to hear Twitter mentioned.

Edited July 11, 2017 by matty

[Complete Homer]

1 hour ago, matty said:

Avoided saying if they're in talks for one or not which is expected. Curious if they're looking at local TV instead of national.

Nice to hear Twitter mentioned.

To me it came off as less of a "can't comment on that" than a "we don't have anything lined up yet, aren't ready to start looking, but don't panic about it" type of statement 

Seems like streaming is plan A in the short term at least. Not necessarily a bad thing. IIRC, the under 35 crowd preferred a streaming option vs TV in the survey (and yes I know I said it would be published already, sorry if you're waiting for it) 

[matty]

9 hours ago, Complete Homer said:

To me it came off as less of a "can't comment on that" than a "we don't have anything lined up yet, aren't ready to start looking, but don't panic about it" type of statement 

Seems like streaming is plan A in the short term at least. Not necessarily a bad thing. IIRC, the under 35 crowd preferred a streaming option vs TV in the survey (and yes I know I said it would be published already, sorry if you're waiting for it) 

My "Avoided saying if they're in talks for one" was less me thinking him saying "no comment" and more him saying "ehhhh don't wanna get into it really atm". Paul's pretty cautious with his words so I wouldn't put this past him.

I do think streaming is in a plan A but listening to it he sounds like they're still toying with making a full-scale pitch but they have some confidence they can find something on broadcast. The streaming isn't bad at all (to get the games out there) but it's somewhat more risky for a start-up that's got heavy competition in place already on national TV. Also the u35 demo is totally sellable, that demo has been losing it's power with advertisers for a while now as the older demos have far more spendable cash and are easier to reach with ads.

I have faith in these owners that they can get eyes on the product. I really like that they want to get every game (it seems) out there for everyone to see be it streaming or a hybrid model.

Edited July 12, 2017 by matty

[Pierce Lang]

Streaming over twitter would bring in money from cell phone/ cable providers. Telus has to be looked at for this plus they would be a great partner for a team playing out of Swangard (pipe dreaming) since their building across the street dominates the mountain vista seen from the pitch. 

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

Maybe I missed the meaning of some of what he was saying but I also picked up the impression that they see the entire future of sports broadcasting as uncertain. You only need to look at what is happening with ESPN and TSN to see that times are changing in that regard.

[dyslexic nam]

3 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Maybe I missed the meaning of some of what he was saying but I also picked up the impression that they see the entire future of sports broadcasting as uncertain. You only need to look at what is happening with ESPN and TSN to see that times are changing in that regard.

 

Yeah, sports and live news are basically keeping traditional cable on life support, but with the ever increasing number of cord cutters and a seeming inability to stop the whack-a-mole pop up of streaming sites, it isn't clear what the future of TV holds.  It may not materialize in the next few years, but I think even the cable companies see the paradigm shift writing on the wall.  Insofar as that is true, CPL would be well advised to get ahead of the curve.  

Not saying TV still wouldn't be a great option in the short term, but the long play might be different.  And in the interim...

             ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )

[matty]

8 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Maybe I missed the meaning of some of what he was saying but I also picked up the impression that they see the entire future of sports broadcasting as uncertain. You only need to look at what is happening with ESPN and TSN to see that times are changing in that regard.

I got that vibe too. Like you look at TV and it's still #1 in terms of reach and ad rev but at the same time streaming is becoming bigger and better and even a service like YouTube is proving a better highlight reel than TSN. The only thing streamings lack is bars and older people (aka the people with the money advertisers want).

5 hours ago, dyslexic nam said:

Yeah, sports and live news are basically keeping traditional cable on life support...

What? Networks are making bank off they're non-news/sports programming, because they're now attracting higher income viewers, which they then sell to Netflix, Hulu or whatever or put on YouTube and Facebook and make more on top of that. Like I don't get where this TV is dead idea comes from when millions of people still watch it and they're the people that actually buys cars and houses and general high ticket items.

[dyslexic nam]

Just now, matty said:

What? Networks are making bank off they're non-news/sports programming, because they're now attracting higher income viewers, which they then sell to Netflix, Hulu or whatever or put on YouTube and Facebook and make more on top of that. Like I don't get where this TV is dead idea comes from when millions of people still watch it and they're the people that actually buys cars and houses and general high ticket items.

I am going off constant reports that cable cutting is gaining momentum every year, coupled with the fact that young people are increasingly going directly to streaming without ever having a traditional cable subscription.  Maybe I am misreading the tea leaves, but if your current cohort of clients is dwindling, and you are not successfully recruiting new clients from younger demographics, it seems like your business model is on its way out.

[matty]

10 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

I am going off constant reports that cable cutting is gaining momentum every year, coupled with the fact that young people are increasingly going directly to streaming without ever having a traditional cable subscription.  Maybe I am misreading the tea leaves, but if your current cohort of clients is dwindling, and you are not successfully recruiting new clients from younger demographics, it seems like your business model is on its way out.

I will agree with that. The younger demo isn't watching on TV but that older demo is and as a result you're likely looking at another 20-30 years where TV will be a massive player in communication. Like since 2012, advertisers have put more money into appealing to the 65+ demo than ever before because they're living longer, they watch TV and they have money to spend.

Edited July 12, 2017 by matty

[Ruffian]

1 hour ago, matty said:

I will agree with that. The younger demo isn't watching on TV but that older demo is and as a result you're likely looking at another 20-30 years where TV will be a massive player in communication. Like since 2012, advertisers have put more money into appealing to the 65+ demo than ever before because they're living longer, they watch TV and they have money to spend.

Every year with reduced revenues from cable subscribers will eventually push a publicly shared company to make a change even if they can milk a smaller and smaller amount of money out of locked in customers for 20-30 years.

[Kent]

1 hour ago, matty said:

Like since 2012, advertisers have put more money into appealing to the 65+ demo than ever before because they're living longer, they watch TV and they have money to spend.

I'm no expert, but I imagine if they are putting more money towards drawing the 65+ demo, it could be because that's the baby boomers. Meaning, it's a lot of people. I've heard it said before that the so called coveted 20-45 demographic, or whatever it is, started out as being so coveted because that's how old the large baby boomer generation were at the time. Eventually the boomers aged out of that demographic and a misconception set in that there is something magical about that age group.

[matty]

11 minutes ago, Kent said:

I'm no expert, but I imagine if they are putting more money towards drawing the 65+ demo, it could be because that's the baby boomers. Meaning, it's a lot of people. I've heard it said before that the so called coveted 20-45 demographic, or whatever it is, started out as being so coveted because that's how old the large baby boomer generation were at the time. Eventually the boomers aged out of that demographic and a misconception set in that there is something magical about that age group.

I think 65+ is like 15% of the US in 2012 so that number has likely ballooned with the boomers. That said they're a smaller demo still than millennials yet are buying way more expensive shit than millennials.

Edited July 12, 2017 by matty

[dyslexic nam]

1 hour ago, Kent said:

I'm no expert, but I imagine if they are putting more money towards drawing the 65+ demo, it could be because that's the baby boomers. Meaning, it's a lot of people. I've heard it said before that the so called coveted 20-45 demographic, or whatever it is, started out as being so coveted because that's how old the large baby boomer generation were at the time. Eventually the boomers aged out of that demographic and a misconception set in that there is something magical about that age group.

I don't think the 25-40 demographic is somehow magical - its just that it is the pool from which you need to draw the bulk of your future consumers.  If you aren't targeting that demographic with recruitment efforts, you are pretty much on a dead-end street.

[Initial B]

On 7/11/2017 at 2:08 PM, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Paul Beirne says that their business plan assumes no national TV deal in the early years although they would be happy to have one. Streaming seems to be on the agenda.

Then the league is doomed to bleed money for the first several years of the league, and that will keep the Ottawa Fury from joining in the near future.

I'd also like to point out that last year the CBC trademarked "Soccer Night in Canada" and nobody could figure out why, considering TSN and Sportsnet had all the existing soccer rights. Perhaps the CPL plans to give the rights to them for free to build buzz for the product, and allow for negotiations later on? 

 

[Rheo]

9 minutes ago, Initial B said:

Then the league is doomed to bleed money for the first several years of the league, and that will keep the Ottawa Fury from joining in the near future.

I'd also like to point out that last year the CBC trademarked "Soccer Night in Canada" and nobody could figure out why, considering TSN and Sportsnet had all the existing soccer rights. Perhaps the CPL plans to give the rights to them for free to build buzz for the product, and allow for negotiations later on? 

 

If you'd of listened to the original interview, he said the league's business plan at launch does not include TV but once they have everything set up they will approach TV groups to see what the interest level is.  No offence to whatever your business acumen is but I'm sure their planning is geared to doom it "to bleed money" lol