Media and distribution (beyond default YouTube)
Visibility is a first-order risk: “free streaming only” correlates with NISA/MLL failure modes; MLS shows distribution choices move reach. Pick a deliberate ladder from MVP to partner-led.
The Options
YouTube-first + sponsor-funded production
Professional multi-camera league-wide baseline paid for by sponsors and league budget; no paywall.
Pros
- +Matches decided “free YouTube” pillar
- +Best ROI on credibility per research notes
- +Fans find games in one known place
Trade-offs
- −National ad revenue modest at small audiences
- −Sponsor diligence still wants verified reach
YouTube + one structured partner
Add a single strategic partner (regional linear, production house, or platform co-marketing) while keeping matches free-to-view.
Pros
- +Bridges gap between “invisible” and full national rights deal
- +Can improve production values and verified reach
Trade-offs
- −Contract and revenue-share complexity
- −Partner fit matters — avoid scatter-shot RSN deals
Media / distribution deal before broad scale
PLL-style: secure meaningful distribution (or equity-style partner) before fixing full national footprint.
Pros
- +Addresses #1 lesson from PLL precedent
- +Can force production and scheduling discipline
Trade-offs
- −Hard without existing audience proof
- −More natural for showcase than for 8 local owners Day 1
MVP stream Year 1, upgrade triggers tied to metrics
Define minimum viable broadcast and explicit thresholds (subs, CCV, watch time, ticket) that unlock spend or partners.
Pros
- +Capital-efficient
- +Forces honest kill / pivot conversation
Trade-offs
- −Risk of looking amateur if MVP is too thin
- −May disappoint early sponsors
General Discussion
0 comments
No comments yet — start the thread.