2004/2005 FSW Soccer coverage

Now that FOX Sports World is a mature business with long-term carriage deals with every MSO other than Comcast (the one company that has shown repeatedly that it wants to screw NewsCorp at every possible opportunity. Not even Disney/ESPN is as vicious as Comcast in its dealings with NewsCorp/FOX.), FOX Sports World is run for one primary purpose: maximum cash generation.

That means every soccer product other than English Premier League is filler for FOX Sports World.

FOX Sports Int'l (FSI) has bid for BOTH EPL international TV packages. If FSI wins both packages (not guaranteed since a competitor known in the US for pay-per-view/closed-circuit TV
has bid for one of the two packages), then FSI would have access to 10 EPL games each week, which may be more than enough to fill FOX Sports World and to satisfy FSI's sublicensing agreements with its Canadian affiliates Global TV (owner of FOX Sports World Canada) and Rogers Sportsnet.

FSI will buy filler products under these condition (based on my historical observations):

1. If FSI doesn't have enough games to sublicense to its Canadian affiliates Global TV (owner of FOX Sports World Canada) and Rogers Sportsnet, then FSI will need to acquire filler products. The licensing fee FSI collects from Canadian affiliates covers a substantial portion of the rights fees to the filler products due to the mark-up FSI charges its Canadian affiliates.

2. If the filler products are available at a cheap price, i.e. mid-to-high five figures each year for a package with 1 game each week and a highlights show (examples would include the current Dutch and French League contracts), then FSI would usually wait until the last possible moment to do a deal with the agencies representing the leagues. That means we won't know until July or August each season to find out which filler products will be available on FOX Sports World.

3. If the product serves a strategic purpose. FSI's agreements with TyC for Futbol Argentino and Globo for Futebol Brasileiro are such examples. FSI uses both TyC and Globo for production services in Argentina and Brazil respectively.

FSI will NOT overpay for a filler product that can't sell ads or subscriptions. Serie A is one such example (with asking price for US and Canadian TV rights exceeding over $1 million each year, for a product that is worth at most in the low six figures no matter how you tweak the financial models.)

As for the Bundesliga: the ball is in the Bundesliga's court. If the Bundesliga pulls a "Serie A" and asks for too much money (i.e. mid six figures or low seven figures each year), then FSI will not sign a new deal.

 

Here is my prediction, being a little cautious with regards to EPL.

EPL- 5 or so matches a week, depending on how the two packages are structured (I don't know what each package covers). Up to 2 of them live, with two PPV games and 1 Saturday match on short delay. Of course, if FSW outbids Setanta for the second package, the schedule will be filled with same-day broadcasts of Saturday EPL games.

Either Dutch OR French League- 1 match featuring a top club, live if it's a midweek game, delayed if it's on the weekend, plus a highlights show. I'd imagine the French League rights are cheaper as it doesn't have "big-name" teams like Ajax.

Brazil and Argentina- same as in the past, except select games may air live.

Bundesliga- Maybe.

 

English FA Premier League Limited (FAPL) is set to wrap up most international TV deals by the end of March.

FAPL rejected the first round of bids at the end of February as "inadequate" (translation: the teams want much more money than what was being offered.)

FAPL is putting the pressure on the bidders after the 2nd round of bids allegedly wasn't good enough (the teams still want more money.)

The deals for Scandinavia is done, with the incumbent Canal Plus Nordic winning both packages.

The deals for Japan is also done. The incumbent there is NewsCorp's Japan Sky Sports (JSkySports), which is distributed via the SkyPerfectTV satellite TV platform.

The deals for the rest of Asia (excluding Japan) is set to be announced on March 12. The incumbent in Asia is NewsCorp-managed ESPN STAR Sports Limited operating out of Singapore. (Disney's ESPN, Inc. has a 50% economic interest in ESPN STAR Sports but is NOT involved in day-to-day management of the business. ) The deals for the rest of Asia should be worth somewhere around $12 million to $15 million a year

We'll have to see what happens with the US and Canada.

---

The EPL int'l TV packages:

Package A: 306 to 314 games a season, including all Saturday matches kicking off at 3pm (except one match per week which will be made available in package B); all of the 24 to 30 matches shown at 12.45 on Saturdays, all Saturday matches kicking off at 5.15pm (equating to between 12 and 18 games a season), and all matches kicking off on Sundays at 4pm (24 to 30 games). The package also includes the majority of mid-week games, except Monday evening matches.


Package B: 66 to 74 matches a season, including the top weekly match kicking off on a Saturday at 3pm (29 to 32 matches a season), 18 to 24 matches on Sundays kicking off at 2pm, and 12 to 18 games kicking off on Mondays at 8pm.

 

FOX Sports International (FSI) did acquire US and Canadian TV rights to the English FA Cup from the 3rd round through the final for 2005 and 2006.

This appears to me as a defensive manuever by FSI to maintain both FOX Sports World and the programming contracts with FSI's Canadian affiliates (Global TV/FSW Canada, Rogers Sportsnet), just in case FSI loses the bidding for both EPL packages.

The FA Cup as a product has higher "risk", or "variance", compared to the EPL. The one team that drives viewership is Manchester United (sorry Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, Newcastle, etc., which get at most 1/3 the viewers compared to Man U.) If Man U is knocked out of the FA Cup, then viewership drops off dramatically.

==

The EPL deals for the US and Canada should be done very soon. FSI is obviously the big favorite to retain the rights.

 

Would you expect FSI to win the A package and that the B package is what they are against Setanta for?

If Setanta would get the A Package they would most certainly have to sublicense at least half of those matches. They couldn't possibly make all of those matches PPV unless they offered a Season Pass. And how much would that cost?

Was also curious if FSI had a preference on the "filler" leagues other than just price. Does one league draw better than any of the others or they all draw about equal?

Thanks,

 

This thread is very interesting reading. If I didn't know better, I'd swear da_cfo really was the CFO of FSW.

I hope the Bundesliga doesn't go away, I enjoy waking up early to watch the live games when they're on, and as I mentioned in another thread, I like Allen Hopkins' announcing style.

Serie A, I could give a rat's ass about, Ligue 1, same diff, though I do enjoy Jour De Foot, the highlight show. Actually I could live without the weekly Bundesliga game as long as I got my fix of Toby Charles and the Bundelsiga highlight show.

In case FSW's soccer lineup sucks in 2005, are there any european countries looking for a footballing web designer?

 

Does this mean we'll see the big teams live on FSW each round? Or will FSW simply sublicence all the good games to Setanta and/or PPV like they do with much of the EPL?

 

I'd guess they'd do it similar to EPL. A certain number of matches will be offered to the various PPV carriers while FSW will have games in other time slots and rebroadcasts of the PPV games in midweek. I'd imagine FSW would try to offer at least 1-2 live games a round (through the quarterfinals), with both semis and the final on PPV.

 

Just heard this via a source.

As expected, NewsCorp's FOX Sports International (FSI) has retained EXCLUSIVE US and Canadian TV rights to the English Premier League through the 2006-2007 season (3-year deal).

The total amount of the winning bids for both packages "A" and "B", averaging in the very, very high 7-figures annually, is about 4 times the price of the previous contract.

NewsCorp appeared to have to pay much more than it wanted to in order to defend FSI's businesses: FOX Sports World in the US, and the programming licensing agreements with Canadian affiliates Global TV (FOX Sports World Canada) and Rogers Sportsnet.

 

Yeeehaaaa!!!!! Is this not great news or what!! I knew FSI wouldn't let us down.

Now I wonder if there will be ANY filler leagues. They may have to rename FSW to The EPL Channnel.

Great news. Thanks, Oliver

 

Wow... that's cool, I wonder if there's ANY chance of maybe just the various highlight shows appearing regardless? I doubt it, but I can dream, can't I?

 

Does this mean that FSW will charge an extra fee (to carriers or the public)?

 

They cannot raise rates to present carriers because they've got a contract with them. Now that would not stop them from asking for a higher price from them once their contracts expire. However, FSW presently doesn't have the viewership large enough to make such demands.

I was wondering if FSI would consider making FSW the exclusive channel for EPL (dropping PPV entirely). It would be a great marketing ploy for them to secure new cable outlets that aren't carrying FSW (namely Comcast) or possible for those that only include it in the highest tier packages or carry it parttime (like my old cable provider). If the EPL was THAT popular they could just say, "If you want the EPL than you've gotta get FSW. Call your local cable or satellite provider today to get FSW."

 

Just curious,

If EPL is all FSW cares about, why not fold FSW and offer EPL through a PPV deal like NFL Sunday ticket, where you get all games of the season? Would they still not make lots of money from this? I would think this would be popular with die hard fans?!

I hope they continue to show the so-called 'filler leagues', because without them I personally have no interest in FSW and this filler stuff can help cut down on the 4-5 replays we see of each match every week (I hope they do something about this, and about all the infomercials which make up half of the schedule- that's pathetic!).

Aside from the EPL what other leagues are people interested in that FSW can show?

Spanish Primera and Italian Serie A are on Gol TV, I think they along with EPL are the most popular leagues. Anyone know how long the deals for these two on Gol TV are? I would hope long term for their sakes.

Aside from those I think the ones FSW currently show are the popular ones (German, Brazilian, Argentinian. Anyone have other thoughts about this?

I hope they keep what they have now, they should broadcast 1 or 2 games a week of the French, German, Dutch leagues (pick the best match of the schedule for each day), at least one game live if it doesn't conflict with EPL , if not live then at least same day tape delay.

Portuguese league may be interesting, anyone here who follows it know anything about it.

One final thought, comparing the schedules for FSW and FSWC I noticed that FSWC shows more 'live' EPL games than FSW USA, why is that? If its so popular then why not show as many games live as possible?

 

First, NFL Sunday ticket is only available on DirecTV and not on cable. Therefore, one broadcaster (DirecTV) took a gamble and don't need a middle man to split the profits with. FSI would have to split the profits with whoever carried EPL Ticket. Therefore, it would take more sales for FSI to get their money back.

The other problem is making available that much bandwidth (read channels) by the broadcaster whether cable or satellite to carry all of those games at once. I don't think many systems would open up that many channels. It works for MLS only because they only have five matches on at once (usually less than that due to ESPN2).

NFL Sunday Ticket's games are on, well, Sunday afternoons when people are at home. EPL matches start way too early for west coast viewers to want to get up that early all of the time.

Finally, buying a subscription to tape-delayed matches has no value to any consumer. Why pay for something when you already know the outcome (this happens sometimes with the Sunday PPV matches)?

 

What matters is NOT what "die hard fans" are interested in.

What really matters is what "sells".

EPL "sells" to the restaurants and pubs. Bundesliga, Ligue 1, and Eredivisie do not.

EPL "sells" to the Canadian TV networks, but Bundesliga, Ligue 1, and Eredivisie do not.

EPL "sells" to sponsors such as lager and airlines, but Bundesliga, Ligue 1, and Eredivisie do not.

The only reason FSI currently airs Bundesliga, Ligue 1, and Eredivisie is because FSI doesn't have enough EPL games to license to Canadian TV networks.

With the new EPL deal, FSI will have access to 10 EPL games each week instead of 5 or 6.

I would be very surprised if FSI renews either Bundesliga, Ligue 1, or Eredivisie next season. FSI doesn't need any of these 3 products if they cost anything substantial.

FSI's inventory for 2004-2005:

EPL: 10 games each week, including the Saturday 7:30am ET/4:30am PT match live on FOX Sports World (usually the best match of the 10). 2 or 3 of the 10 will air live on pay-per-view.

English FA Cup from 3rd round to the final: up to 4 games each round, with 2 or 3 airing live on pay-per-view.

Brazil: 2 games each week (deal should be renewed)

Argentina: 1 game each week (deal should be renewed, though at a much lower cost than the previous 10-year deal)

Mexican Interliga (filler material in January)

Man U tour of the US (to take place every summer now that Man U has an appetite for big money in the US market)

MLS (Saturday nights from April through October)

Additional filler material for FOX Sports World is available in Copa Libertadores and Copa Sudamericana (both intended for FOX Sports en Espanol).

 

A question(s) for Oliver, or to anyone else who might know the answer ...

... why does FSW dub the pre-, post- and in-game for many of the telecasts? Are there separate audio and video rights?

The reason I ask is that I find the pre- and post-game dubbing made by FSW unbearable that I find myself switching to mute. Is providing employment to horrible announcers such as Nick Webster, Alan Hopkins, Max Bretos, etc. really necessary? Or are FSW hoping that by having these folks learn on the job, they'll be doing bigger and better things in the future for the network???

 

As expected, NewsCorp-managed ESPN STAR Sports Limited, headquartered in Singapore, has retained the exclusive TV rights to English Premier League in most of Asia (excluding Japan) for the next 3 seasons.

Asia is one of the key territories for both EPL and NewsCorp/ESPN STAR.

(North America is small potatoes compared to Asia, especially with the rapid buildout of cable TV in China. The TV networks run by ESPN STAR pass over 150 million households. EPL is the number 1 rated sports TV product on the ESPN STAR Sports networks in most of East and Southeast Asia, i.e. almost every country east of Singapore.)

NewsCorp has exclusive control of TV rights to EPL and English FA Cup in these key overseas territories: Asia except Japan (Singapore-based ESPN STAR Sports), Japan (Japan Sky Sports on the SkyPerfect TV direct broadcast satellite TV platform) Australia (FOX Sports Australia), and North America (Los Angelest-based FOX Sports International).

 

It's growing exponentially in India too (covered by ESPN/Star). While nowhere as popular as cricket, and not reaching the level of popularity in China/Singapore/Hong Kong, I have noticed the popularity for EPL in India grow tremendously in the last 5 years. It can take over Formula-1 very soon at this rate. Capturing 2 key growth markets: China and India should be considered a major coup for News Corp.

Interesting to note that ESPN/Star is owned by News Corp and not run day-to-day by Disney (despite the ESPN brand name). I wonder if News Corp were to snatch the coveted ESPN from Disney in North America, it could do wonders for soccer coverage in the US. An ESPN-less Disney would keep stave off sharks like Comcast as well.

While I have strong problems with the political agendas of News Corp channles/newspapers, I very much applaud the innovation they've brought to sports broadcasting to pretty much all corners of the world. I can't say the same thing about Disney/ESPN.

 

ESPN absolutely has innovated sports broadcasting with some of the things they do with SportsCenter, NFL, NBA, NHL, Tennis, and MLB.

Disney wouldn't sell ESPN at any price. Guaranteed. If they did, the government would block NewsCorp due to the obvious competition issue. NewsCorp would have to sell virtually ALL of their Regional Sports Networks. MLS and EPL would not benefit as Fox-owned ESPN would still have its flagship American sports products which would draw higher ratings. IMO, NewsCorp really only uses FSW and buys EPL rights so that they, NOT Setanta Sport, can collect the considerable amounts of money that can be reaped from PPV, especially from commercial establishments.

 

To be fair, it is nowhere compared to Fox/Sky in originality. Everyone else has seemed to be following in News Corp's footsteps in this arena for the last 10 years. The clockticker which first appeared in EPL broadcasts on Sky and used on Fox Sports NFL broadcasts in the US is everyone's favorite example. All others jumped on this later (in the US as well as Channel 9 in Australia for AFL/Rugby for example). Also taking advantage of the Sky digital technology, a number of firsts can be mentioned: Player Cam concentrating on a specific player on the football pitch, interactive participation in surveys using Sky digital remote controls, and so on. I wonder if Fox in the US will be able to take advantage of DirectTV digital technology similarly.

News Corp has been trying to push the limits and think outside of the box in this arena, and change the whole concept of sports broadcasting to be a rich/interactive entertainment experience. This has kept all the competitors on toes trying to either emulate or innovate on their own. And using their worldwide reach, they've had the luxury of porting the technology used for one sport for some another sport in another corner of the world. You have to give credit to News Corp where it is due for their cleverness and ability to forsee this 10+ years ago.

Anyhow, I suppose this is getting pretty off-topic from the original thread; but a very fascinating topic to discuss in its own right.