twitter
email

  • Home
  • Books
    • Soccernomics (UK)
    • Soccernomics 2018 World Cup edition (US)
    • Edge
    • Soccernomics
    • Twelve Yards
    • Money and Soccer
  • The Blog
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Predictions Model
  • About Us
  • Contact Us



MLS and the market for TV soccer in the US

07, 01, 17
by Stefan Szymanski
4 Comments

This article first appeared in three installments at WorldSoccerTalk.

Like many people I have long argued that the real challenge for MLS is to break the TV market. Europe’s big leagues typically generate about half of their revenues from TV, while MLS is probably below 20%.  The current MLS contract will run until 2022 and pays around $90 million a year of which a significant fraction goes to run the national teams. With less than $5 million going to each of the franchises, the size of the broadcast deal limits the willingness of owners to pay the big bucks that will attract the top talent. This is a Catch 22 for the league, since better players means better soccer and a more attractive product for broadcasters to sell. MLS needs to find a way to boost their product on TV by the time the next contract comes along.

The national TV rating data collected by Collin Werner provides an interesting insight into the current position of MLS. He has been collecting national viewing figure for MLS over the last season and for all TV soccer since August. He kindly allowed me to looks at the data and here are some of the highlights that struck me:

1. MLS share of TV soccer is scarily small. Over the period August – December MLS accounted for only 7% of total viewing of soccer in US- while Liga MX accounted for one third.

MLS 7%
La Liga 9%
Other 12%
International 17%
EPL 22%
Liga MX 33%

 

Note that MLS accounted for 6% of all games played, including post-season play which in theory should be the most attractive. MLS plays more games than are actually broadcast nationally. The figures here do not include local broadcast numbers. I have not heard anyone claim that local TV audiences are on average very large, so I don’t think their inclusion would change much.

To have any chance of attracting a large contract MLS would surely need to have a much larger share of its own market. It’s true that there were twice as many EPL and Liga MX games shown, and MLS will indeed expand its supply of games in the next few years with the expansion teams. That should help to increase market share. But…

2. MLS games are lagging behind Liga MX, the EPL and international games in terms of audience per game:

Competition Grand Total
CL 120,608
La Liga 147,270
MLS 287,046
International 305,743
EPL 393,037
Liga MX 584,171

 

Once again the big rival is Liga MX, with double the average audience size. Obviously Liga MX has a large following among those of Mexican origin. But there’s another factor at play too- Liga MX has a time-zone advantage over the EPL…

3. Prime time is the most attractive programming slot, which runs from 8pm to 11pm, and there are never any EPL games played in this slot (since the UK is 5 hours ahead of Eastern Time, they would have to play in the middle of the night). By contrast, 70% of Liga MX games are played in prime time, 48% of international games and, notably, 53% of MLS games (note: I based my prime time definition on the Eastern time zone). Here is something I think should worry MLS. Compare prime and other time audience size:

other time prime time
Liga MX 467211 633011
International 144702 482269
MLS 317333 261086

 

The table shows that while audiences rise for Liga MX and international games played in prime time, they actually fall for MLS (and note the data includes the MLS Cup final which attracted a 2 million audience in the US). Why would the MLS audience fall in prime time? One reason could be that in prime time there’s more competition from other sports. This is the double bind of MLS: the EPL can draw a 50% larger audience going head-to-head in daytime TV while Liga MX can draw an audience that is twice the size in prime time. The problem for MLS is competition…

 

4. MLS does better when the other soccer leagues are not playing. The table below shows the monthly figures for MLS viewing this year since March:

 

March 284,667
April 246,000
May 277,571
June 478,200
July 324,100
August 166,706
September 297,545
October 214,071
November 286,429

 

Cleary the best months are June and July, when only baseball is being played in the US and the other major soccer leagues are between seasons (of course, Euro 2016 ran from June 10 to July 10, so there was still some competition, but none of that was prime time).

MLS is competing in an overcrowded market. Between August and December MLS supplied only 6% of soccer games shown on TV, at the same time as facing competition from the NFL and college football, as well, for at least part of the time, from MLB, NBA and NHL.

 

 

 

 

 

 

About the Author
Social Share
4 Comments
  1. Arnie January 7, 2017 at 9:11 pm Reply

    Just play all the games in June and July. Problem solved!

  2. Matt January 17, 2017 at 7:08 am Reply

    Merge MLS and Liga MX, or at least the most ambitious clubs in each league. Both leagues already share many sponsors and TV partners. Do away with any restrictive roster slotting and salary budget caps. Schedule kickoffs in only certain viewing windows for a more streamlined TV product. And keep a modest limit on regular season matches. A league stretching from Montreal to Mexico City would be a commercial success and in time could grow to be the top league in the Americas.

  3. David Fellerath March 12, 2017 at 1:50 pm Reply

    It’ll be interesting to see what the televised sports landscape is like by the time MLS renews its TV deal in 2022. MLS plans to have a 28-team league by then; the strategy seems to be to increase its viewership numbers by adding teams and new TV markets.

    Thank you for analyzing these numbers, Stefan. A very useful post.

  4. futball_fan August 6, 2017 at 6:07 am Reply

    I can bring myself as a counterexample. I’ve been watching MLS for well over a decade and a half now, and I do think that’s better entertainment for my money than the wast majority of other American professional sports: it’s more dynamic and engrossing, players are healthier, fitter, much more intelligent, resourceful, and inventive than the people functioning on the field in those other sports. I come to games fairly regularly, time permitting, and I’m subscribing to MLS Live because we’ve cut the cord recently (hundreds of cable channels — and absolutely nothing to watch, but this is a different topic; I digress).
    I’ve just finished watching Quakes’ live game with Columbus online, and I saw Billy Beane, the current A’s EVP and the protagonist of “Moneyball”, in attendance; I suppose he thinks that soccer is a good reason to spend his ticket money. Just saying…

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

*
*

captcha *

Soccernomics on Twitter

Tweets by @SoccernomicsLtd

Contact Us

ben@soccernomics-agency.com

From the Blog

  • Abolition of the transfer system
  • Forecasting the final table for the Premier League 19/20 season: Revisited
  • Forecasting the final table for the Premier League 19/20 season
  • Covid-19 and football club insolvency
  • Soccer Analytics update

Soccernomics on Twitter

  • Twitter feed loading

Opinion we like

Anders Red

The Swiss Ramble

Roger Pielke, Jnr

The Sports Economist

John Beech

Zach Slaton

Football Economy

Soccer Analysts

Soccermetrics

A Beautiful Numbers Game

Zonal Marking

The Wages of Wins Journal

Int. Journal of Sport Finance

Rod Fort: Sports Monsters

Data we like

11v11

Football Observatory

RSSSF

European Football Statistics

Football Data

Football Squads

Neil Brown

Soccerbase

MUFPLC

League Managers

Manchester City Analytics

In The Media

Data Analysis at Big Clubs

Becks’ MLS Impact in The Sun

How Liverpool Misread Moneyball

On Racism in Football

NBC’S Premier League Rights Deal

Soccernomics on Baseball Site Honus