From MLS Confidential:
"GOOD NUMBERS: TV ratings for MLS games show a significant jump since the U.S. began its World Cup run.
In eight telecasts since the U.S. win over Portugal -- beginning with a June 8 meeting of Los Angeles and Chicago -- an average of 165,394 households have tuned into MLS games, which represents an increase of more than 13 percent over telecasts prior to the World Cup.
In 10 telecasts on ESPN2 prior to the America win, the league drew an average of 146,043 households.
The jump may be attributable to the larger markets of the teams playing in those last eight games. Seven of the telecasts were MetroStars games, and the Galaxy, Fire and Revs were each involved twice.
A Fire-Metros game played July 27 drew the second-highest rating of the season, a 0.24, and 203,615 households.
The highest rating of 0.25 and 215,242 households was registered for a MetroStars-Fire game June 22, the day after the U.S. lost to Germany, 1-0, in the quarterfinals.
Still, the large-market and post-World Cup theories are countered by a rating of 0.23 (192,010 households) for San Jose-Columbus May 4."
That's encouraging. Maybe people tuned in, found they liked Jack and Ty and decided to come back? ;)
Originally posted by kenntomasch
From MLS Confidential:
That's encouraging. Maybe people tuned in, found they liked Jack and Ty and decided to come back? ;)
Maybe? Try definitely.
Originally posted by kwikstah
Dude, these numbers are still pathetic.
Granted they're not too hot, but they're not that much worse than ratings I've seen for some of ESPN2's other programming.
Ice hockey on ESPN2 had an average rating of 0.3 a few years ago, women's basketball 0.2, etc.
This echoes what Garber said a few days ago in his State of the League address. Hopefully this can be sustained the rest of the season. The next big test is going to be growing these ratings over the next 4 years.
Soccer news, live scores, and results - ESPN Soccernet::
Press Pass: Now on ESPN Classic USA Mondays and Friday at 7pm ET, All the FA up 3rd round pics as Forest sink Man City and Southend hold Chelsea. [+]
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/HOME |
As for being pathetic - maybe, but considering ESPN is putting pennies into MLS for each dollar it spends (literally, as well as time on Sportscenter) on hockey for similar ratings, this is pretty good.
I am guessing, but I would say MLS has to get close to 0.5 or double what they have now to get any money out of a TV contract. That could happen in 4 years, with help from the Nats, but again, it is going to be tough to grow these ratings without a WC.
Originally posted by kasai
Now that I discovered Veronica, I will be tuning into more MLS games..... Does she do sideline reporting for weekly games as well?
yes... she didn't during the world cup, but that was because she was in j/k with jack, ty and everyone's favorite... lisa salters (a real reporter)
Any rise in the ratings is an improvement. Last time I checked, improvement was important, no matter how much or how little. Rome wasn't built in a day....and neither was MLS. It took like 3 years for attendance to begin to rise (fell after the 1st and 2nd years I think....)
Originally posted by Northside Rovers
This echoes what Garber said a few days ago in his State of the League address. Hopefully this can be sustained the rest of the season. The next big test is going to be growing these ratings over the next 4 years.
As for being pathetic - maybe, but considering ESPN is putting pennies into MLS for each dollar it spends (literally, as well as time on Sportscenter) on hockey for similar ratings, this is pretty good.
I am guessing, but I would say MLS has to get close to 0.5 or double what they have now to get any money out of a TV contract. That could happen in 4 years, with help from the Nats, but again, it is going to be tough to grow these ratings without a WC.
good point about investment. When you consider that the NHL got a 600 million dollar tv contract from abc/espn yet they get similar ratings to mls. I would say mls is probably a pretty good deal for them.
This story is just a bit ridiculous given the Nielsen methodology. All of the discrepancies listed are well within Nielsen's margin for error.
Originally posted by kwikstah
Dude, these numbers are still pathetic.
actually, they really aren't that bad... they aren't great, but they aren't bad
You know, with the advent of SUM, getting $$ for TV rights might not be part of the plan. If ratings go up, SUM can leverage ad sales and sponsorships in a way ESPN2 never could. And SUM ought to be able to sell ads for soccer broadcasts more efficiently than ESPN2 (since they'd already have the relationships.)
What I'm trying to say is, for the foreseeable future, it's probably win-win for ESPN2 to continue to get the guaranteed, low hassle income from a timebuy, and for SUM to reap the benefits of higher ratings.
That won't be the case if ratings go way, way up, but so long as ratings are slowly but surely going up, SUM and ESPN/2 may both benefit from the timebuy.
Originally posted by falcon6
good point about investment. When you consider that the NHL got a 600 million dollar tv contract from abc/espn yet they get similar ratings to mls. I would say mls is probably a pretty good deal for them.
i would imagine that would be something that they wouldn't necessarily like to admit too... am i wrong on that or??
Very, very good news indeed.
Originally posted by photar74
What sort of average rating would be needed for a TV contract where ESPN pays for rights to MLS?
i don't think it is going to be any set tv rating
it's just going to take time and encroachment into the american sports scene
Now that I discovered Veronica, I will be tuning into more MLS games..... Does she do sideline reporting for weekly games as well?
The link below gives the Top 10 rated programs on ESPN and ESPN2 for each quarter in 2001. Interestingly, several soccer broadcasts made the list.
http://www.timewarnersd.com/espn2001.htm
Originally posted by kwikstah
Dude, these numbers are still pathetic.
For espn2, they're actually not bad at all. ESPN2 is probably the perfect type exposure for MLS right now.
Dude, these numbers are still pathetic.
good news...
That is a positive step. Lets hope a good chunk of that continues to watch all the way to the MLS championship.
What sort of average rating would be needed for a TV contract where ESPN pays for rights to MLS?
0.3? 0.4? 0.5? 0.8? 1.2?
Any thoughts?
 Where's The Advantage In Windows Genuine Advantage?
 Stocks Bounce After S&P Joins Bear Market
|
HOME
PRINT
Add to favorites