Infantino as moral guardian, discuss; Dark threats and the reach v money question; Does unbundling work?; Sports Podge goes back to Langans; Top 10 Sports Movies; Is Air any good?; Gen Z cliches

Overthinking the sports business, for money

May 04, 2023

Find out more about UP

Infantino: moral guardian, champion of women

The broadcast rights market has disappointed the FIFA president.

There are threats of a Women’s World Cup blackout.

But is everything all that it seems?

What happened?

European broadcasters have offered world football's governing body $1m-$10m (£800,000-£8m) for the rights to this summer’s Women’s World Cup in Australia and New Zealand.

These have been deemed a "slap in the face" of the players and "all women worldwide". (Quite the jump).

He added it was Fifa's "moral and legal obligation not to undersell" the event.

"Should the offers continue not to be fair, we will be forced not to broadcast the Fifa Women's World Cup into the 'big five' European countries," Infantino said at a World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva.

"I call, therefore, on all players, fans, football officials, presidents, prime ministers, politicians and journalists all over the world to join us and support this call for a fair remuneration of women's football. Women deserve it, as simple as that."

Yeah but…

Our podcast with Moya Dodd has been referenced (and/or stolen without attribution) by several big news orgs this week.

Dodd served on the FIFA Exco and brings that insight to bear on the current snafu.

The central challenge to Infantino’s name and shame strat is that FIFA has only recently seen value in its own product of women’s football.

Moya Dodd: I think they do know that it's ripe for commercialization and I think putting in place a women's football commercial program that's dedicated to women's football is a good idea and to unbundle the rights is a good idea to test those markets as well. But I have to say, I think it's a bit rich to be scolding the broadcasters for underpaying because when you look at the history, FIFA itself never put any value on the women's rights.
It sold them as part of a bundle and then attributed all of that value to the men's World Cup. So actually it has for decades trained those commercial partners and broadcast rights buyers to overvalue men's football and undervalue women's football. Part of the reason is because FIFA has never valued it, and actually whatever value it generated was taken and attributed to men's football.

Sometimes it’s just best to throw it over to the invite-only UP WhatsApp Group, the best backchannel in the sports business.

Here’s a taste of the conversation:

Moya Dodd added a further point:

4. Womens football gets attributed no money cos the platform will be free…

FIFA+ as competitive threat

Dave Roberts ex-FIFA+: He referenced this at Congress in Kigali so is continuing the push. WWC23 is the first women's tournament not to be bundled with the men's. Without doubt they'll be looking at repeating the Brazil WC22 test tactic of live streaming the competition on FIFA+ into those territories from where they've received "undervalued" bids with potential for strategic digital partnerships along the way.

‘FIFA doesn’t have a revenue problem, it has a revenue distribution problem’

Ricardo Fort, ex-Coca Cola, Visa: Many of us have been asking FIFA to unbundle Men's and Women's World Cups for quite some time assuming the market will pay a lot more for the Women's event.
These offers are proving we were wrong.
I hope broadcaster review their bids, but the reality (as of today) is that selling Men's and Women's separately isn't working. I am a believer that for the next decade, selling all competitions as a package could be very beneficial for the women's game. FIFA doesn't have a "media revenue problem", they have a "media revenue distribution problem". If they were splitting all competition's media income 50-50, women's football would be in a much better shape.

What does FIFA want for the women’s game? Money or reach?

Aarti Dabas, Formula E, ex-ICC: Sounds exactly like the ICC. Cricket is a cash-rich sport and the ICC is a ‘not-for-profit’ governing body (and promoter for world cups etc) - this issue IS member distribution. Members always want more and more.
On bundling (or not), as with any set of media rights, particularly for fast growing and purpose led sport (which women’s sports are given that they play such a huge role in changing perceptions and society), you need to work the market to create the competition. Federations need to work harder on selling (people selling need to believe in the product), create market competition, and know exactly what they want for the sport/product in each market - revenue or reach. Going too early for revenue without investment may deliver short term results, so the balance is important. But it’s equally important to know the value of what you are selling and how to sell. Not easy. But can be done.
Hopefully FIFA have the growth of the women’s game (fans and commercial) at the heart of these negotiations.

Would women’s football benefit from de-listing?

Steve Nuttall, MD America’s Cup, ex-Sky, Google YouTube: This is turning into a handy case study for any lecturers in sports rights negotiation.
I agree that FIFA is looking to get the best price and is using the spectre of distribution via FIFA+ as a way to create competitive tension.
Meanwhile, politicians reiterate recent sporting success and express the hope that the matches will be made available to everyone. Within current licence fee funds, clearly, and two days before the election. On the other side of the field, broadcasters play hard ball. The natural tension between buyer and seller plays out in public. Broadcasters can take comfort from the listed event status of the tournament. In many ways, it's a good thing that women's football is listed in the same way as men's football. But I wonder if women's football would be better served, at this time, by not being listed. The buyers would probably still be the same, but the revenue would be greater.

Beware the expectation of ever increasing rights fees

Glen Killane, Executive Director, Eurovision Sport: There are a number of things at play here and not really a straightforward case of more money. You cannot compare the UK to Italy or Spain in terms of audience appeal. Unbundling men’s and women’s world cups in terms of sales has exposed various elements, most of all the ability of Free to Air/Public Service Media to offer more and more every time rights cycles come around.
I say that as a rights holding organisation for the FIFA Women’s World Cup for 29 European markets. What is missing here is genuine dialogue between FIFA and the FTA broadcasters on the future direction of the women’s game. Exposure is central to that. I have huge sympathy for FIFA’s position and promoting and supporting the women’s game is central to our mission as PSM but this requires a more strategic and joined up approach I believe.

Professor Simon Chadwick added some academic schizzle.