In the wake of the US Women’s National Team (USWNT) FIFA Women’s World Cup triumph, much has been discussed in terms of equal pay for female players. What seems to be missing from the discussion, however, is how much potential revenue the US women lose because of the co-mingling of broadcast and media rights of US Soccer Federation (USSF) properties with those of Major League Soccer (MLS).
The contract for these rights is not held by some media company or broadcast channel but by Soccer United Marketing (SUM), which is owned by MLS. While transparency has never been a strong suit of the USSF or MLS, this contract — which was apparently awarded in a no-bid process — is even more questionable.
MLS, NWSL and SUM
Currently, the USSF is embroiled in several pieces of high-profile litigation almost all of which question the relationship between the federation, at least ostensibly a neutral governing body, and MLS/SUM. The USSF currently faces questions in legal proceedings about its alleged favoritism toward MLS in terms of men’s pro leagues, its favoring of SUM in terms of match promoters and its favoring of MLS academies over independent ones when it comes to the issues of solidarity payments as well as training compensation.
In the case of the US women, the big concern is that SUM is siphoning off revenue that is generated by the popularity and success of the USWNT and placing it in a men’s professional league. While US Soccer will argue that they subsidize the top women’s professional league in other ways and some MLS clubs have invested in the women’s game as well, the obvious reality is that the federation has gifted the nation’s top men’s league a lucrative revenue source other men’s leagues lack as well as the top women’s league.
NWSL is not part of the eight year TV deal that SUM secured for MLS, USMNT and USWNT in 2014.
With the current television contract that bundles US Soccer properties with MLS set to expire in 2022, it’s imperative that the federation unbundle the rights, allowing the governing body to emerge as impartial to all leagues and clubs while maximizing the revenue the national team programs generate.
Certain Challenges
In early 2018, when running for US Soccer President, Carlos Cordeiro described the problematic relationship between the USSF and SUM. Cordeiro said:
“The unique ownership of SUM creates conflicts that need to be addressed. To avoid any and all conflicts going forward, USSF will need to ensure that any individuals with potential conflicts of interest are recused from any future negotiations with SUM that is why I have proposed a new Board-level commercial committee to be chaired by one of our independent board directors to oversee the entire process.”
However, since becoming President, Cordeiro has done nothing to reign in the favoritism toward SUM and MLS. During his tenure the USSF has found itself the subject of more controversy while the media halo that once protected the establishment figures of the game in this country has fallen away. Questions are being asked more and more about US Soccer’s perceived favoritism toward MLS and SUM on matters as disparate as league governance, player development, international friendlies, TV revenue and sanctioning fees.
Currently SUM pays about $30 million a year to the USSF per the federation’s annual report. This line item is not itemized as media revenue or even as sanctioning fees which it assumed SUM must pay to host friendlies between MLS clubs and international teams as well as the regular Mexican National Team games held on US soil.
Therefore
In this climate, US Soccer has no choice but to split the television packages. They should allow competitive bidding on the package that involves US national teams while SUM should maintain the right to sell MLS games. What should be done as well is SUM be given the rights to bundle NWSL, the nation’s top women’s league and arguably the best league in the world of women’s football with an MLS package. This will also give the women’s club game, at least in theory, the same access to television that has been given to the men’s pro game.
US Soccer must unbundle MLS rights
Unbundling the rights are a critical step forward as at this point in time we have no clear empirical evidence of the value of any subset of the currently bundled package. This means it is speculation albeit educated speculation that the rights for MLS are worth more than the US national teams.
In theory the bundling of rights was done in the past to give MLS an opportunity to get on television without having to buy time. It was originally done in 2006 at a time when antitrust concerns about US Soccer’s governance of the sport had not been yet voiced let alone put into a major lawsuit. It was also a time where MLS with only 12 teams was struggling. However as the runaway success of clubs in Atlanta, Seattle, Orlando and Portland among other locales demonstrates, MLS has developed its own unique culture and expanding fan base in the nation. At this point the continued bundling of rights looks more like a subsidy by the USSF to MLS, allowing the interpretation that the federation is playing favorites, tipping the balance toward MLS against potential competitors. This subsidy, it could argued, would be more useful for lower division leagues, the top women’s league, travel and promotion for the Lamar Hunt US Open Cup or even grassroots soccer.
Potential
US Soccer is sitting on a surplus of $150 million while allowing its own media rights to be devalued by bundling with MLS. For this reason, US Soccer must unbundle MLS rights. Imagine a world with unbundled rights, with the US Men’s and Women’s National Teams value as a media property being fully utilized thus allowing the federation to invest ever more money into player development and grassroots programs for both boys and girls. That is where US Soccer needs to be headed in its thinking. The continued bundling of rights with MLS makes this less possible.
Additionally, if MLS and NWSL rights are bundled together, SUM and MLS could accurately say they are doing a great deal to grow women’s club soccer in the United States. It would be a win-win for everyone.
25+ Channels With Sports & News
- Starting price: $33/mo. for fubo Latino Package
- Watch Premier League, Liga MX, MLS & World Cup
- Includes ESPN, FOX, Univision, TUDN and more
Favorite Leagues At The Best Price
- Starting price: $7.99/mo. for Live TV Package
- Watch Argentine league, Brasileirāo and Copa Libertadores
- Includes beIN SPORTS, GolTV, TyC Sports and more
Many Sports & ESPN Originals
- Price: $6.99/mo. (or get ESPN+, Hulu & Disney+ for $13.99/mo.)
- Features LaLiga, Bundesliga, MLS, Copa del Rey & more
- Also includes daily ESPN FC news & highlights show
Live TV, Soccer & Originals
- Starting price: $4.99/mo.
- Features Champions League, Serie A, Europa League & more
- Includes CBS, Star Trek & CBS Sports HQ
175 Premier League Games & PL TV
- Starting price: $4.99/mo. for Peacock Premium
- Watch 175 exclusive EPL games per season
- Includes Premier League TV channel plus movies, TV shows & more
Get All 3 And Save 30%
- $13.99/mo. for ESPN+, Disney+ & Hulu
- Includes Bundesliga, LaLiga, NHL & the home to UFC
- Features Marvel, Star Wars + shows & movies for your entire family
Outside of World Cup’s (which this doesn’t impact) do the USMNT and USWNT actually draw many viewers for friendlies and qualifying matches (that aren’t vs Mexico)? Honestly I’m not even sure how much value that would have to many media companies. The inventory of MLS matches and the bundling may be helping the national teams TV contracts instead of hurting.
In an environment where NBC is having trouble breaking even on the lucrative Premier League don’t see a bidding war for national team rights.
This exactly USSF knows this thats why they haven’t decoupled their simply isn’t the inventory they aren’t get $200-300 mil yr with out the bulk inventory of MLS games.
Unpopular opinion I agree with you alot Kartik but this has always been a bone of contention, but I’ll be the martyr I know this article will be the red meat that the at all cost anti/MLS all cost fuax Euro base will crave, but I don’t care, I’m fine with the bundling.
I see it like this. MLS owner/operators (I’m probably butchering that. term) lost hundreds of millions of dollars to get a credible 1st division relaunched after NASL died 1968-84 I actually rewatched and showed for the first time “Once in a Lifetime” last night with my 13yr old to teach him part of the history of soccer in the US. Point is I find it so disingenuous the whole argument that SUM/MLS is holding soccer back. People have short memories and some people just don’t flat out know the history.
After NASL died we had nothing in this country it was the dark ages for soccer, Some will reminisce fondly about the days of going to a bar to pay and watch a Serie-A game on tape delay but I’m sure it sucked. There were no prominent Nationally successful soccer leagues before MLS was launched a decade later in 1994 and kicked their first ball in 1996. It was a miracle and took a miracle shot to even get us to qualify for the 90′ WC.
They lost hundreds of millions in investments trying find a way to make soccer work in this country, when no one else was successful or wanted to put their money where there mouth was to do it. Now we fast forward to today where the harvest we we currently have in this country as far as soccer is the direct result of MLS tilling the grounds in the earlier years building a sustainable league and helping grow soccer by partnering up with USSF. SUM is essentially the baby of that relationship.
The big fear is that people who frankly are in it soley for the profiteering are jealous of the money being made and want a cut and this is all a bunch of sour grapes. Before MLS No one was stopping them from becoming this great league that they claimed they can be now .
Instead they want to make money off the hard work blood and tears that MLS paved the way for.
I’m sure the rival leagues of MLB/NBA/NFL all fought the same battle before ultimately losing. Same will happen here. For the people who genuinely love soccer and work in leagues like Kartik thats fine but I believe you should realize the level your in and be happy with that. Too many people trying to live the champagne dream on a shoe string budget.
I think if alot of these lower level pop up leagues grounded themselves to reality and accepted the environment they are in and work to excel instead of crying about big bad MLS they’d be better off you don’t see this with the lower leagues toward NBA/MLB/ or NFL. We shouldn’t here , when given the choice between stable growing league and opening the saloon for a shoot out I’ll pick stability everyday. Paul Mariner the coach of Miami FC had a good quote on Sirius XM when asked about competing with Inter Miami he said they weren’t he looks forward to taking his son to see high quality soccer let’s be real it a different level he gets it and understands the hierarchy more need to. The USWNT is just another straw to clutch for them in their hopes of breaking the established pecking order they didn’t help build but wish to over turn
Sorry for the typos guys i.e your/you’re/their/there* etc. I was at work and ferociously typing this.
The financial success of SUM and breadth of us soccer rights held there is what is MLS owners are investing in NOT the success of their team or the MLS. For their piece of SUM, these owners are willing to put up $200mil for a team that will get a 0.0 TV rating but that doesn’t matter because the piece of SUM that each owner gets will make it a good investment. The SUM/USSF/MLS stranglehold on our game might have worked to attract investment in the beginning but it is holding US soccer back now to protect the investment in MLS that their owners made. With the asinine pay structure, league-owned contracts and sponsorships and exclusive right to the whole US National Team program, the US, renown for our dedication to capitalism, runs the most closed, communist soccer system in the world. Chinese league teams have more latitude to sign players! And let’s not forget that Carlos & gang are just Chuck Blazer underlings running the same racket that Alan Rothenberg set up for them to milk…it’s now just behind the iron curtain of SUM so we can’t see it all. The reason people are watching soccer in the US has more to do with TV networks buying rights than SUM’s dedication to the sport. Hence Premier League kills the MLS at 7am vs. primetime every single week…..
If the USNT tv rights were to separate from the MLS, The MLS would either wither on the vine or become an ESPN+ exclusive. The recent tv deal allowed MLS to expand even beyond comprehensive measures while FOX or ESPN would acquire the ratings that are more likely to come from the USNT matches.
I do agree the USWNT should be separate and maybe even bundle with the NWSL.
@Jasinho there isn’t enough Inventory of USNT games. There are only 15-20 games a year and some years even less than that. They would not get much more probably less than the 30mil they get now. A segment is so hung on on tryna get points for dunking on MLS that they fail to realize this. USNT TV product isn’t enough outside of the WC which is a separate deal to generate hundreds of millions of dollars. As was commented in this thread and has been known. NBC struggles to even break even off the Premier League paying EPL $167M yr and they have over 330+ EPL games of inventory and a streaming service they keep hiking prices on. How in the world do some keep believing the non sense the speak if Networks like NBC can’t make a profit off the Worlds top league that so many worship over here in the US. How do so many believe the nonsense that USNT team rights are worth all these hundreds of millions or hell even extra tens of millions is so nonsensical.
To say that they are only investing in some and not MLS is blatantly untrue the main driver is one of their crown jewel MLS is valuations are skyrocketing teams are being privately valuated 5-6x their initial evaluation of 10yrs ago LAFC is worth $620 mil. These guys no more about they are doing with MLS than keyboard billionaires. Alot of this comes down to sour grapes and a segment just wanting MLS to fail. They’d rather blow everything up if they can’t have things run there way. It’s just a destructive personal trait some people have kin to the if I can’t have her(soccer) no one will mentality.
I even hate when people discuss it because it like politics. One side will retreat to their corner and be unwilling to face reality to because they have bought into a mentality this same group is toxic on US Soccer Twitter and even have turned off those who share common beliefs in their soccer jihad. MLS isn’t perfect the system can be tweaked but whats being suggested are things that would most certainly destroy the system that has done and still can do way more good for the growth of the game in this country.
NBC’s struggle with EPL is they paid a lot and cable/sat subs are plummeting as companies like Comcast and Turner and Disney pay gargantuan sums for sports and expect everyone to pay for it and it reached beyond the breaking point. So Comcast is stuck trying to compete to retain the EPL while dealing with falling subs… just like Disney with ESPN.
Does the MLS matter? Since 2002, the US has had one compelling World Cup appearance. The games don’t get much in the way of ratings. And the MLS”s presence in the CONCACAF Champions League is sporadic at best. The MLS has expanded, but it is not much better than what it was in the late 90’s, in fact, I ponder if an argument could be made the product was better in the 90s.
Not sure what you have been watching but No sane person without a objective can watch MLS then and MLS now and come to the conclusion MLS then was better. The individual skill is better. Players like Kellyn Rowe who would’ve been decent players back then can’t find minutes on teams anymore but I digress I’ve made my point,
The USWNT ratings for friendlies are 33% lower than the USMNT. The NWSL ratings are practically nonexistent. One quick way to destroy any chance of growing the women’s game is to un-bundle their television rights from the men’s.
Hush Rico don’t bring sense into this argument don’t you know the whole purpose of this is to blow up kill off a successful infrastructure MLS/SUM/USSF so the majority greedy people that puppet prop up lower tier soccer like Rocco Commisso and Charlie Stillatano can greedily make lick up the scraps and make money and rest the hierarchy. They want this to be the wild wild west gold rush where everyone can rush in to try and make a quick buck after they blow up the mine. No one can convince me otherwise after seeing there moves thru the years. The woman ARE being paid fairly this is a entertainment business not a basic real world 9-5. In the entertainment business you are paid whatever someone thinks you’re worth and willing to pay you.
The women are no different from men in sports holding out for more money its greed. They have every right to try and position and put out false narratives and mislead the public to achieve that money . But USSF also has every right to just pay them what the market bears. Anyway this is all a argument being pushed MAINLY by the greedy people I mentioned before that just want a cut because they see a quick dollar being made and want a cut even though they weren’t there for the lean years . They could care less and just want to eat because they see SUM/MLS/USSF eating.
This article is more or less a vehicle for the author to promote his agenda on SUM.
If you’re SUM, why would you want NWSL in your package? Its another mouth to feed, and one that draws infinitesimally small ratings and thus little to no revenue. SUM has seen how many attempts at women’s pro soccer, and all have failed. There’s nothing different about this post World Cup – the glow has worn off, the victory tour will come and go, and the NFL, college football and playoff baseball will consume casual fans in the fall as they always do and make everyone forget it even happened.
Clearly this author has no idea about negotiation or media rights and budling in thinking that budling the MLS packages hurts the women’s game. Total false equivalence.
As alluded to by others, this is a business, not some idealistic revenue sharing program to ‘grow’ the women’s game – which might be maxed out as it is right now.