The Bundle Bulletin - The Gary Lineker Question, FIFA and NFL, The WNBA's Fall Window Pain
Rough notes from the podcast, prepared by Murray Barnett and Yannick Ramcke
1. More than Messi: The media questions facing the FIFA Club World Cup
Sources:
HT to Imran Yusuf in SportBusiness Media: https://media.sportbusiness.com/2024/10/clock-ticking-as-fifa-lowers-club-world-cup-targets/
https://football-italia.net/serie-a-legal-complaint-fifa-club-world-cup/
Introduction
The competition, which has traditionally brought the champions of each continent together to determine the best of the best, has historically failed to fully engage fans and teams. In adding more competitive teams and matches to its format in 2025, FIFA is hoping to build greater excitement and ultimately generate as much revenue as possible.
Next year’s tournament, which will feature 32 of the world’s best club teams takes place in the United States from June 15 to July 13.
The FIFA Council took the decision to play the 2025 edition in the US in order to “maximise synergies” with the organisation of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, which is taking place in the US, Canada and Mexico.
Media strategy was to look at maximising pay TV revenues and/or streamers
LaLiga president Javier Tebas has asked FIFA president Gianni Infantino to cancel the 2025 FIFA Club World Cup because he says that neither the leagues nor the FIFPRO Players' Union want it.
"If you are going to use FIFA funds to finance the money that is missing from the promise you have made to the clubs, you are taking it away from all those federations or places that FIFA says it is there to help. We are talking about more of €1.5 billion that will have to be drawn from that fund."
Serie A, like almost all other European leagues, has not increased the number of games in the last 20 years,” noted Lega Serie A CEO Luigi De Siervo. “On the other hand, FIFA and UEFA are constantly incrementing the dimensions of their competitions, both for clubs and national teams, and now we have reached a point of saturation for the fixture list. “The problem of overloading players with fixtures is not caused by the domestic competitions, but by FIFA and UEFA. “The difference is that while UEFA had significant consultation with all the parties involved, FIFA imposed its new format without any discussion, consultation or accepting any kind of rapport with the organisers of other competitions.”
Apple is said to have been interested in a $1bn bid for global rights allegedly the deal was never close to being finalised.
FIFA has been forced to drastically reduce its revenue targets for next year’s expanded Club World Cup with just over eight months until the tournament starts, SportBusiness Media understands.
FIFA initially targeted at least $1.5bn (€1.37bn) in commercial revenues from the tournament, though some sources put the figure higher.
FIFA was aiming to earn at least $750m for media rights fees
SportBusiness Media understands that FIFA has now revised its CWC media rights target downward to about $500m.
Several sources say the governing body will struggle to reach this number under current circumstances.
FIFA received no acceptable bids from this summer’s tenders
Target market for most revenue is US; bids from Fox and NBC rejected
Sources say FIFA is seeking around $100m in rights fees for the CWC in the US. Bids from NBC and Fox fell far short of this number.
Why it matters
CWC has suffered because:
Marquee teams did not qualify - no Barcelona, Liverpool or Manchester United. Cristiano Ronaldo’s Al Nassr has not qualified.
Widespread criticism from elite players and managers regarding the addition of more matches to the calendar.
The global players' union, FIFPRO, and the European Leagues, which represents 37 domestic leagues, jointly filed the complaint at the European Commission in Brussels in which they argue global football's governing body FIFA is abusing its right as both tournament organiser and regulator. Unprecedented legal challenge by individual players’ unions over FIFA’s expansion of the international match calendar to include the CWC.
Last week FIFA agreed regulations which stipulated that clubs would have to play their strongest teams at the competition
FIFA believes the Club World Cup will have a minimal impact on the football calendar or on player welfare, given it will be held once every four years, featuring a maximum of seven games.
For the clubs, there is uncertainty around how much revenue they are set to generate from participating in the Club World Cup after early reports suggested prize money between €50 and 100 million ($55.17-100.32 million).
Congested schedule - Wimbledon Championships (tennis), Tour de France (cycling) and NBA Finals (basketball).
FIFA has rejected bids from NBCU and Fox despite believing the US would be the most valuable media territory
Media rights tenders for the 2025 and 2029 editions, covering the Americas, Asia and the Middle East & North Africa, Europe and sub-Saharan Africa was issued, with a deadline of September 24 allegedly, no bids were accepted.
Brazil had been expected to deliver multiples of the $10-12m the broadcasters valuation (3 Brazilian teams qualified + good timezone)
Sky UK a challenge as they have lots of summer sports already and only Man City and Chelsea qualified
Sky DACH/Italy off the pace from a FIFA POV
Asia – v tough as local broadcasters already struggling to match expectations of major European leagues for season-long competitions, let alone FIFA’s prices for a month-long one.
Middle East – Al Hilal only club and BeIN banned in Saudi
A meeting was held at FIFA on 20th Sept with broadcasters, agencies and other stakeholders including Nasser Al-Khelaïfi (chairman of the European Club Association, Paris Saint-Germain, and beIN Media Group). Manchester City chief executive Ferran Soriano was also there to support the project, along with representatives from Borussia Dortmund, Porto, Bayern Munich, Atlético Madrid, and the Red Bull group of clubs.
Sources say the meeting was light on detail, with no financials discussed. Speaking afterwards, one told SportBusiness Media: “We sense desperation.”
Conclusions
Somewhat paradoxical that substantial recent deals for European leagues in US seem to be the basis for some of FIFA’s modelling – That’s one of the reasons broadcasters can’t afford it (along with that fact it’s a ‘short window’ tournament rather than a season long leagues).
Last-minute broadcast deals possible and becoming increasingly common in world football.
Broadcasters stressed to SportBusiness Media that the CWC would, eventually, be a marquee product for them when weighing up how to spend rights budgets. At present, they are not willing or able to match FIFA’s expectations.
the tournament is currently just a concept at present — a concept that is being squeezed into a crowded football calendar amid a general plateauing of rights fees.
One issue is that Fox – FIFA’s longstanding broadcaster in the US – is already committed to showing the 2025 Concacaf Gold Cup, which the US and Canada are hosting from June 14 to July 6. Fox is also showing the Women’s Euro in the US.
Hail Marys
Inter Miami/Lionel Messi have qualified (somewhat spuriously?!) as MLS Regular Season Champions
PIF buying/investing in FIFA+ (seems v unlikely)
Could DAZN be a global bidder? They are rumoured to be courting a PIF investment
The Yannick Pull Quote:
The expanded FIFA Club World Cup has become a welcomed scapegoat for league executives such as Lega Serie A‘s CEO Luigi De Siervo and LaLiga‘s CEO Javier Tebas, blaming the additional match inventory for sucking further budgets out of an already challenged market environment for their respective domestic media rights. At the very minimum, FIFA has successfully reframed the perception of its leading club competition, positioned as a new, enhanced version. However, it remains an unproven property without a guaranteed built-in audience, which normally is an inherent advantage for sports in a competitive content marketplace. It remains more a concept of a plan at this stage, which may provide the required flexibility to spin the ultimate outcome positively (e.g. Inter Miami‘s addition on short notice). The challenge is that FIFA has boxed itself into a corner with financial guarantees made to club participants to secure their buy-in, imposing unrealistic revenue targets and forcing them to reject bids from both global and local market participants.
A face-saving outcome for FIFA, without putting a below-expectation market valuation on the reimagined property, might indeed be a combination of PIF underwriting revenues and reach-first distribution via FIFA+ — to go back to market with more of an audience track record for the 2029 edition.
Players are another wild-card amidst an ever-expanding football calendar: They are the one stakeholder group which has not suffered yet from flatlining revenues in global football, and a lack of direct relationship between revenues and player compensation — in contrast to revenue-based salary caps in many US sports — doesn’t make their buy-in straightforward either. Hence, the individual players’ unions FIFPRO voicing their displeasure should have been as expected as the European Leagues.“
2. How Roger Goodell is about to make a billion in new revenue
Sources:
Introduction
As the NFL expands its international schedule, it’s interested in building a rights package around those early games.
This would likely add more than $1 billion in yearly rights revenue while extending the Sunday schedule.
One source familiar with the league’s expansion strategy confirmed that selling a separate package of international games is a definite possibility. NFL has not made a decision—or kicked off the process.
Also the NFL is expected to opt out of its current media deals (with the exception of Disney - 2029) after the 2028 season, per CNBC.
Why it matters
There’s no league better at conjuring new, lucrative media rights out of thin air than the NFL.
NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has speculated his league will eventually expand its International Series to 16 games in foreign cities—up from five this year and eight next season.
If Goodell gets his wish for an 18-game regular season, he will have more inventory of the most valuable property in entertainment: live NFL games.
Goodell’s also not ruling out playing an international Super Bowl overseas in London. That could be the potential cherry on top of a lucrative international game package.
Patrick Crakes, respected media consultant - “I think they’ll move fast. Maybe in a year or so? … Think they’d ask for at least $1 billion to $1.5 billion for 11 to 13 international games.”
The additional revenue could also help Goodell reach his stated target of $25 billion in annual revenue by 2027
John Kosner, the former ESPN & NBA executive, also predicted the league would create a Sunday morning package of international games. Creating a4th Sunday window.
It would be the league’s sixth overall TV/streaming package, counting Monday Night Football and Thursday Night Football.
“By creating a weekly international package of games, 9:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. ET, the NFL would create a brand-new, sixth regular-season games package—ideal for a global streamer like … Netflix (or Amazon/Apple).
Considering the NFL’s huge media deals for $77 billion over 11 years, the NFL is expected to opt out of its current media deals (with the exception of Disney - 2029) after the 2028 season, per CNBC.
That means that after the 2029-30 Super Bowl, the NFL has the right to completely rearrange the media landscape, if it so chooses. – It could be that streaming is so dominant by this point they are happy to move away from linear.
Conclusions
Network still very important for both NFL and the networks as they deliver huge visibility/ratings
With the announcement that NFL Teams can seek minority PE investment, a potential new package is also designed to show (even) more value upside for potential investors
NFL have been super smart to hedge their bets over the years by adding Netflix, YouTube and Amazon to their broadcast roster
By contrast – NBA, with a much higher number of games has only wanted to have 3 (national) media packages to avoid subscription fatigue and viewer confusion – although easier to argues they are also less ratings important than NFL.
The Yannick Pull Quote
Actions are driven by the incentive structure that decision-makers are navigating: Roger Goodell put out the league’s revenue target of $25BN by 2027 many years ago, standing at $20.3BN as of the 2023 season. Expect him to keep coming up with more media (or sponsorship and hospitality) inventory to sell over the next couple of seasons, and media rights will need be the golden goose getting them there. The inevitable 16-game international package, currently warehoused within the NFL Network until it reaches a critically-sized game schedule, might be the single-biggest remaining lever now that its primary media rights agreement ($77BN over 11 years) has taken effect last season. Besides that, there are more nuclear options such as opening up the media rights agreement with CBS-parent-company Paramount Global in wake of the CBS parent company‘s change of ownership — the market considers any of the CBS, NBC, FOX, or even ESPN (paying a premium for limited reach via pay-TV exploitation) already as undervalued a mere couple of years after signature. In contrast to European football, the existence of a salary cap, securing about half of football-related income for NFL players, is obviously conducive to such game inventory (and more importantly exclusive broadcasting window) expansion.
3. Fall Window Pain - WNBA seeks space in NFL season
Sources:
Introduction
The Minnesota Lynx and Connecticut Sun faced off in the Conference Final earlier in October with a trip to the WNBA Finals on the line. Their reward for securing a spot in the finals? A 48-hour turnaround.
Lynx played – 30th/2nd/5th/6th/9th with Finals starting 11th
The WNBA is trying to navigate the crowded broadcast windows it has to compete with during football season, the MLB playoffs, and the start of NBA and NHL seasons.
ESPN, which has exclusive WNBA playoff TV rights, broadcasts a full Saturday slate of college football games; earlier in the playoffs, it was airing MLB’s wild-card games.
Only window left was against NFL – A very tough slot.
Could change in 2026 when ESPN shares WNBA playoffs with NBCUniversal and Amazon
Why it matters
Whether its WNBA or something else it points to how hard it is to find sports windows in the US.
Despite the problems, WNBA had a very successful finals ratings.
Conclusion
The congested environment will stifle any significant gains by new sports
Could make FIFA World Club Cup or Rugby World Cup (USA in ’29 and ’31) very difficult to get any cut through.
May be not super important for FIFA but hugely so for Rugby World Cup who identify the USA as the potential growth engine for rugby
The Yannick Pull Quote:
Once properties have crossed over into the consumer mainstream, and the WNBA might be at the verge of doing so, sports might be the most resilient (and valuable) programming in today‘s content marketplace. The emergence of the WNBA is representative for the momentum in women‘s sports, both in the consumer and equity capital market. It will be critical though, that the WNBA, WSL, or NWSL do not get ahead of themselves (and its revenues): whether that is related to team valuations, player salaries, or demanding prime-time broadcasting slots all of a sudden. These are emerging, but still somewhat unproven media properties. WNBA players opting out of the collective bargaining agreement, and demanding a significant bigger share of revenues, could actually diminish the competitive advantage of the WNBA or any women’s sports: a lower cost base compared to many men‘s sports, which allows for much more flexibility and innovation in the short term.
4. Does on air talent matter in sports broadcasting?
Source:
Introduction
ESPN has been shedding some of its most well know on-air talent and journalists – EG Adrian Wojnarowski, Doc Rivers, JJ Redick, and Zach Lowe. This has largely been wrapped up as a cost saving measure (although there are certain unique circumstances for each one).
Generally speaking, the intelligent and respected talent have left/been forced out
Counter – intuitive when considering the cost of sports rights (and therefore the need to leverage them to the maximum) – ESPN has just signed NBA for $2.6billion/year.
Its data rather than editorial led decision making.
Why it matters
ESPN’s remaining resources are almost exclusively focused on creating content that drives viewership which puts us in an age of ‘star talent’ - Not necessarily good but ones that create clickbait and headlines. See Steven A Smith.
Joe Pompliano – “For example, earlier this year, ESPN posted a video of Stephen A. Smith doing a tunnel walk before a Knicks playoff game in New York. It was a silly video that added no editorial value to the playoff game, but it generated millions of views online and probably had a 10x higher engagement rate than any of Lowe’s intelligent analyses”
Does having Gary Lineker front Match of the Day have any impact on the ratings?
ESPN makes every decision based on data, from the talent it hires and fires to where editorial content is placed on its website. That’s why ESPN spent a week talking about the Los Angeles Lakers drafting Bronny James 55th overall in the NBA draft while most fans argued that they didn’t care.
The data tells ESPN that fans value rage-bait-style content more than thoughtful analysis, despite what they say online. Or, in other words, ESPN’s show First Take talks about the Dallas Cowboys every morning, no matter how poorly they are playing, because data tells them viewers are more engaged when they do that.
Broadcasters need talent stardust to sell wrap around programming EG pre/post-match coverage to advertisers/sponsors.
Conclusion
It seems there is a trend (especially in US) to have ‘noisy’ talent that is not always the best in giving insightful analysis.
The trend for short clips also plays into ‘personality’ rather than talent.
With huge costs for major rights, spending big money on talent helps to ‘sweat’ the asset (and is relatively small cost compared to the rights).
The Yannick Pull Quote:
Scrutinizing single-digit-million cost items might be counterintuitive when spending multiple billions in sports rights each year. However, margin pressure (and investments in an OTT-first future) has made market leaders such as ESPN and Sky Sports rather break-even than money-printing businesses. Whatever doesn’t move the needle, and if any savings trickle right down to the bottom line, will be rationalized, from tier-two rights to on-air talent. Due to valid employee contracts, laying off well-known talents such as Zach Lowe (ESPN) is actually a cash-neutral action, but accounting for this in the form of a below-the-line one-off impairment charges increases reported net income — the target audience is the analyst community, not the end consumer. The on-air talent market will bifurcate just like the sports rights market, between haves and have nots.
All substance around important topics. Great podcast this week.