$2 million cost of expanding the A-League Womens

By Janakan Seemampillai / Roar Guru

With fans excited about the prospect of an expanded A-League Women’s (ALW) competition for 2022-23, the financial consequences for clubs remain a major obstacle.

It is understood the cost of bringing in a new women’s club costs the Australian Professional Leagues (APL) an extra $2 million per season, utilising the current 14-round competition length.

This cost blows out when an even number of extra clubs come in, with the cost of an additional ALW game per round adding to broadcasting and travel costs. If the competition was to go beyond 14 rounds, this figure becomes even larger.

All of this eats into APL dividends distributed to each club at the end of each season.

The APL confirmed that ViacomCBS will not pay additional broadcast revenue for an extra ALW game. It is also confirmed that Liberty won’t contribute additional sponsorship dollars.

With the APL underwriting player wages through its annual distribution to clubs, the whopping net cost of $2 million per additional club per season is a major hurdle.

APL CEO Danny Townsend has made it clear that any cost or net loss from expansion is seen as an investment for the future, though this attitude is not necessarily shared by other A-League clubs, most of whom are privately owned.

Canberra United, who only have an ALW team, are the only club which are not privately owned and are run by Capital Football.

It seems unlikely that Central Coast will come in for 2022-23, though this is not definitive. The Mariners’ new ownership may well make a late play for a licence.

Even Western United have not been formally ticked off by Football Australia (FA), with the game’s governing body getting the final say on ALW expansion in terms of clubs and the competition length. The APL confirmed that United were notionally approved last year, but they are still working through the formalities.

With women’s football growing in popularity, especially with the success of the Matildas, there is plenty of enthusiasm about growing our premier women’s competition but, as always, money will be a decisive factor.

(Photo by Thananuwat Srirasant/Getty Images)

The numbers in terms of TV audiences are getting better but seemingly not enough to convince ViacomCBS to pay more. Sadly, crowds are down on prior seasons, with COVID a factor, and a number of games have been moved to odd timeslots.

Channel Ten Bold had average TV audiences of 22,000 for Sunday afternoon – an improvement from 5000 during the Foxtel days. Ratings figures for Paramount are not released, with subscription numbers usually the defining factor in their performance measures.

The subscription numbers for Paramount using unique codes given to A-League club members has not yet been publicly revealed, though it is understood it is well short of the projected mark for 2021-22. The codes don’t separate between mens and womens.

It has been suggested the $32 million annual TV dividend from ViacomCBS can be reduced if targets are not met, though the actual value of any cash loss has been kept in commercial confidence.

TV ratings for Channel Ten for their Saturday night A-League Mens (ALM) games averaged a tick over 80,000, without including finals.

Crowds for the ALW were well down on expectations, with an average of only 1320 for 2021-22, not counting Perth Glory or Wellington Phoenix, who spent the bulk of the season playing in NSW.

The struggles experienced by the ALM this season has been a source of major concern, considering it generates the bulk of APL revenue.

The reality is the men’s competition has helped fund the women’s programs of most clubs since the beginning. With ALM crowds averaging 5595, along with the low TV ratings and low subscription levels for Paramount, there is a concern some clubs may curb spending. Whether this impacts the women’s programs at each club, only time will tell – though most clubs would be loath to take such a backward step.

The silver lining is the $140 million equity investment from SilverLake, a large chunk of which is expected to be invested next season.

The ALW competitions should be demanding their fair share of the investment, particularly leading up to the 2023 World Cup.

With Australia and New Zealand hosting the World Cup, a strong argument should be made to bring in marquee women’s players to build the anticipation. This would require a significant amount of money, with the best players likely to be on decent contracts in Europe or America. To convince them to come to Australia to acclimatise would require big cheques to be written.

Fan engagement is also an important exercise, with a strong argument being made that minimum wages should be increased for ALW players, giving them more time to go out to community clubs and schools.

More advertising is also a no brainer. Though to be fair, Ten did do a decent job through much of last season.

Time will tell how 2022-23 looks, but it will be an exciting season nonetheless, with a World Cup at the end of it.

The Crowd Says:

2022-05-31T11:42:09+00:00

Pedro

Guest


They need to address the toxic culture in women's soccer

AUTHOR

2022-05-28T00:06:29+00:00

Janakan Seemampillai

Roar Guru


Yes as I said it hasn’t been done well. Hopefully they fix next season

2022-05-27T23:58:16+00:00

Brainstrust

Roar Rookie


The websites which werent working at the start of the season? I just went to the Sydney FC website , they have links to clothing ranges, kids clinic on the front page but not to Paramount. I clicked on the watch the A-league ad paramount from 10 play where you had the Socceroos and FFA cup. The difference is they had their ads all prepared before they even had any stuff on Paramount. I subscribed to Paramount and they didnt have anything even Socceroos matches.

AUTHOR

2022-05-27T23:07:14+00:00

Janakan Seemampillai

Roar Guru


Every club advertise a paramount subscription. Some may have said you only get the discount if you become a proper member too. I agree they should have made it clear the tv deal relied on this clause.

2022-05-27T14:03:05+00:00

Brainstrust

Roar Rookie


An option where? The incredibly stupid thing about all this if is they told people they needed to sign up to Paramount in a certain way for some reason the vast majority would have done it. How does one rectify it once they have already signed up, I have done this on many occasions without a discount even, because someone posts a link and says make sure your using this whenever you buy something.

2022-05-27T12:03:36+00:00

Full Time NSD

Guest


Time will tell. Let the winds whisper of the upcoming NSD… :silly:

AUTHOR

2022-05-27T11:33:05+00:00

Janakan Seemampillai

Roar Guru


there was an option to just buy Paramount without being another type of member i think

2022-05-27T10:42:45+00:00

Mark

Guest


Lol. There isn’t the money or interest to make a NSDM sustainable, let alone a NSDW.

2022-05-27T09:29:08+00:00

Brainstrust

Roar Rookie


What percentage though of the A-league fans take out memberships. I think I remember stats something like members only attend 2/3 matches on average. So if you have 10k members for Sydney FC ,15k crowd average , and non members attend 3 games on average then that means about there are about 30k non members. attending matches. Members are usually the wealthier fans and less inclined to use discount codes. We have the situation as well that they didnt work for some people. Then to top it off are there other discount codes for Paramount, I know Kayo seems to have endless discount codes, what happens is another offer gives a bigger discount. It seems quite bizzare to base a major contract on the use of optional discount codes.

2022-05-27T08:40:01+00:00

Football is Life

Roar Rookie


I dont know about you lads, but Australian football needs Women's football. We have a football world cup here next year and it's not for the guys. We really need to embrace women's football and make it every bit as important as the guys if it's not already. Dont tell me the women are not as popular either. We watched the Matildas game down in Canberra on the TV. 13000 turned up on a school night in what was broadcast as a tad on the chilly side. We need to invest in what is a market of huge potential. We have to grow and make football front and centre, and this is a totally validated investment.

AUTHOR

2022-05-27T08:11:23+00:00

Janakan Seemampillai

Roar Guru


Streaming services don’t care for ratings, they don’t advertise, they want subscriptions. The codes were the only way to show how many people signed to paramount due to being A-League fans. This was a measure - as unreliable as it may be - they chose to use as part of their deal. It makes sense. Why would you pay $32 million without expecting a return, if you don’t get that return it makes business sense you’d want some of your money back or not pay as much? Lots of clubs were offering paramount memberships. I got mine for $75 as part of my A-League membership .

2022-05-27T07:52:01+00:00

Brainstrust

Roar Rookie


These codes are discount codes why would they be using them when they can easily tell how many viewers they have on the streaming it makes utterly no sense. I didnt bother with the discount codes at all because it was only 90 for a whole year. Has a single person actually used them and found they actually worked. Paramount subscribers for the US is 30-40 million .

2022-05-27T06:38:47+00:00

Coastyboi

Guest


Yes, yes & yes. Now you’re talking!

2022-05-27T05:21:39+00:00

Garry

Roar Rookie


Man City & Chelseas seem the most logical for their Oz connections..plus Man City owns Melb City

AUTHOR

2022-05-27T04:47:38+00:00

Janakan Seemampillai

Roar Guru


Don’t listen to Sth Melb Mike at all. The info about the codes and that being used to measure subscriptions made by A League fans is correct. Because of the bungle up with the codes many fans just signed up anyway. There was no way to then count them as signing up to watch A-League. I don’t blame Viacom for having a clause like that. But the way to measure it has to be fair. If they stuffed up the codes, they can’t then say you didn’t meet your target. Be keen to know how many subscribers there are for paramount in total. Compared to what was expected?

2022-05-27T04:42:14+00:00

Brainstrust

Roar Rookie


" signed a five-year contract with ViacomCBS worth AUS$200 million (US$155.5 million) in cash and commercial contra, with the deal also including a trigger for a further three-year extension." The targets must be be referring to the three year extension. targets at the end of deal dont make sense otherwise.

2022-05-27T03:21:07+00:00

Waz

Roar Rookie


US$140m

2022-05-27T03:20:15+00:00

Waz

Roar Rookie


The “targets” they are talking about are the back end of the deal, not the start of it. That was in their media release

AUTHOR

2022-05-27T02:42:33+00:00

Janakan Seemampillai

Roar Guru


Yes they would. They have a greater stake than everyone.

AUTHOR

2022-05-27T02:42:03+00:00

Janakan Seemampillai

Roar Guru


Yep the codes were a disaster and I hope the APL use that as leverage to avoid any cash cut from the deal

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar