Warner, Fox, Disney to Launch Streaming Sports Joint Venture

[osu1991]

FuboTV Wins Bid to Block Disney-Fox-Warner Sports Streaming Platform Over Antitrust Concerns

The lawsuit alleged that the media giants aim to consolidate control over sports television in a single streaming platform. If allowed to proceed, Fubo said consumers will eventually be forced to pay higher prices.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

 

[PioneerDJ]

View: https://x.com/ourand_puck/status/1824535078590116162?s=46

 

[savarese04]

I love how Venu is considered anticompetitive but it was never considered anticompetitive for Comcast or Charter to have a monopoly on internet services or cable services in an area.

 

[Bruce]

This part-

“Today’s ruling is a victory not only for Fubo but also for consumers. This decision will help ensure that consumers have access to a more competitive marketplace with multiple sports streaming options,” said Fubo CEO David Gandler in a press release after the court decision.

Good for Fubo maybe, not good for consumers, Judge stopped a service that is about 50%, at least, less expensive then Fubo.

 

[Bruce]

While I believe this is unfair for consumers, since they are being deprived of a service that would be a lot less expensive.

On a personal level, I am not unhappy about it.

How Venu started, was because Disney wanted Fox to wholesale them Fox Sports content for the new ESPN streaming service.

Fox did not wish to do that, talks continued, Venu was created because of those negotiations ( Warner came on later).

Now, as advertising revenue has totally crashed for Fox Sports ( both Network and Cable Channels), talks have continued, to maybe add Fox Sports content to the new ESPN streaming service as a add on.

With Venu maybe gone, that makes the odds of that possibility happening a lot higher.

Fox cannot do it on their own as a streaming service, not enough content to make it viable, since they sold their catalog to Disney.

But if I can get Fox Sports with the ESPN streaming service, I am fine with that, do not need the Warner sports content, never watch, but if I did, it is on MAX.

 

[savarese04]

But if I can get Fox Sports with the ESPN streaming service, I am fine with that, do not need the Warner sports content, never watch, but if I did, it is on MAX.

But will live sports be on MAX? WBD's streaming strategy is all over the place and they are currently "giving us" BR Sports add-on for free. That could change in a heartbeat and for no strategic reason. When will that shoe drop?

 

[Bruce]

But will live sports be on MAX?

It is on now.

WBD's streaming strategy is all over the place

Yes it is, I call it the throw things at the wall to see what will stick strategy.

All I know is, they have taken a brand, HBO, that has been around since the 70s and destroyed it.

and they are currently "giving us" BR Sports add-on for free. That could change in a heartbeat and for no strategic reason. When will that shoe drop?

I doubt it will change, stupid to even charge extra for it now, since they will lose the NBA after this season.

If they do wish to charge extra, just attach it to the 4K Plan.

But if they want to charge $9.99 extra, doubt it will get that many to subscribe.

 

[Mike0616]

With the court decision, I will be among the lucky people who get to pay an extra $35 a month, the cost difference in subscribing to YouTube TV and venu. I guess companies like YouTube are loving the decision. Makes no sense to me.

 

[ncted]

With the court decision, I will be among the lucky people who get to pay an extra $35 a month, the cost difference in subscribing to YouTube TV and venu. I guess companies like YouTube are loving the decision. Makes no sense to me.

Antitrust law is specifically designed to prevent companies from using their position as an upstream provider of goods and services from competing unfairly with their customers, the companies that resell, redistribute, or repackage those goods and services. This has been largely ignored by the US government for years, but the laws exist, and this is the basis of some of the claims against Google where they were recently found to be a monopoly. Having dealt with Google's advertising business in the past, I can definitely say it felt like dealing with a monopoly.

Not sure how or if this applies in a civil lawsuit.

 

[prushing]

Antitrust law is specifically designed to prevent companies from using their position as an upstream provider of goods and services from competing unfairly with their customers, the companies that resell, redistribute, or repackage those goods and services. This has been largely ignored by the US government for years, but the laws exist, and this is the basis of some of the claims against Google where they were recently found to be a monopoly. Having dealt with Google's advertising business in the past, I can definitely say it felt like dealing with a monopoly.

Not sure how or if this applies in a civil lawsuit.

Yeah this is what doesn't make sense though. The laws are ignored, there are rulings that have allowed exclusive deals to be made, etc. Any exclusive deal for streaming, channel cable/sat channels only on 1 provider (Comcast), etc should be banned.

This doesn't help the consumer because the costs will remain higher. The price Venu was offering wasn't going to be the long term price. So if they all say fine, we will offer this package to anyone who wants it but the price will now be $X because there isn't a startup price discount.

Disney and Warner already have their own streaming platforms, legally these are fine (so far). This may just push them to just offer it there and only there. If the price is similar, consumers won't care and may save some money if they don't care about all sports. FOX loses as they don't have a streaming platform yet but they should be able to get something up and running quickly since they already stream with TV login.

This will just push each provider to do it on their own. The issue then comes to TV/Satellite now having a different price and not being able to just offer that service plus some additional channels. So will they sue to be able to only offer Disney, ESPN for the same price? Maybe this finally moves to a la carte pricing?

 

[Bruce]

FOX loses as they don't have a streaming platform yet but they should be able to get something up and running quickly since they already stream with TV login.

Fox does not have enough content for a paid streaming service to be viable.

Most of the scripted shows on there are owned by others( like The Simpsons, 911 Lonestar, etc), the Fox catalog is now owned by Disney.

When Fox and Disney were talking, Disney wanted Fox to wholesale them the Fox Sports content, Fox said no, from those talks continuing , Venu was created.

Now, if Venu is forever shut down before it started, look for Fox Sports content to be added to ESPN steaming service, as a add on.

With per sub fees lost use to cord cutting, plus advertising revenue in the dumps, along with way too high contracts ( the MLB deal is terrible for Fox), they need to figure out how to get more revenue.

 

[prushing]

Fox does not have enough content for a paid streaming service to be viable.

Sports are the only thing that matters. They have that plus their local channels. If they offer something like NBC, CBS for ~$5-10 a month, there will be plenty of people who subscribe during football and if they offer a yearly deal cheap enough like NBC, people will just do that.

It really comes down to do they think they will make more money this way or relying on a 3rd party to offer it to consumers. It's a big change from close to guaranteed money with TV/satellite contracts to having to meet the consumers tastes or you lose subscribers.

While Fubo may think this deal is good for them immediately, I don't think this helps them survive.

 

[Bruce]

Sports are the only thing that matters. They have that plus their local channels. If they offer something like NBC, CBS for ~$5-10 a month, there will be plenty of people who subscribe during football and if they offer a yearly deal cheap enough like NBC, people will just do that.

Except for Football, special events like March Madness, Olympics, sports gets awful ratings, for example, last year’s World Series, averaged 4 Million Households, that is out of 131 Million Households here in the States.

They need people to sign up year round, not just during Football Season, like I do.

It really comes down to do they think they will make more money this way or relying on a 3rd party to offer it to consumers. It's a big change from close to guaranteed money with TV/satellite contracts to having to meet the consumers tastes or you lose subscribers.

Yes it is a big change, that is why it is better to add your sports content to a existing service, then go it on your own.

While Fubo may think this deal is good for them immediately, I don't think this helps them survive.

No they will not survive, they have been doing this in their current form for 7 years, cannot seem to crack over 1.5 Million subscribers for any extended period.

 

[Teehar]

I'm glad VENU was put on hold to be honest.It is anti competitive for fubo and other providers.

 

[ncted]

Yeah this is what doesn't make sense though. The laws are ignored, there are rulings that have allowed exclusive deals to be made, etc. Any exclusive deal for streaming, channel cable/sat channels only on 1 provider (Comcast), etc should be banned.

This doesn't help the consumer because the costs will remain higher. The price Venu was offering wasn't going to be the long term price. So if they all say fine, we will offer this package to anyone who wants it but the price will now be $X because there isn't a startup price discount.

Not sure I can see a path to winning for Fubo unles they can prove that Disney, et. al. have intentionally undercut Fubo to drive them out of business. It will be interesting to see what they find in discovery, if the public is ever allowed to know. As for the pricing, it does feel like they are starting out at a loss, but that isn't anything new in business.

This does feel a little like self dealing on Disney's part, like literally making a deal with themselves, but I am no lawyer. Heck, I didn't even sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

 

[Bruce]

How Venu started, was because Disney wanted Fox to wholesale them Fox Sports content for the new ESPN streaming service.

Fox did not wish to do that, talks continued, Venu was created because of those negotiations ( Warner came on later).

For those who doubt my insider news, from the Court Hearing-

Venu Sports, which seeks to bundle 15 of its parent companies' linear sports channels, gestated when Disney approached Fox about licensing its sports programming for its upcoming direct-to-consumer launch of ESPN, codename "Flagship." Fox counter-proposed the idea of a JV.

ESPN Price Per Subscriber Still $9.42

Fubo's antitrust suit against Venu Sports also details how the JV came together

www.nexttv.com

I do wonder what will happen next with Fox Sports rights, hmmmm.

If the appeal ruling is for Fubo, it will be over, but by the time the trial would happen, as I wrote before, Fubo will be out of $$$ and ESPN streaming service will be up and running.

 

[DS0816]

All I know is, they have taken a brand, HBO, that has been around since the 70s and destroyed it.

This is true.

“Max,” as rebrand of HBO, caused confusion in some people. “Max” had people thinking of the acronym for Cinemax.

This was so unnecessary.

This was so stupid.

Warner Bros. Discovery—the very people responsible—delivered with this a good example of how it is possible to have more money than brains.

 

[prushing]

I do wonder what will happen next with Fox Sports rights, hmmmm.

1 of 2 things happen

1. They joint venture is broken up and each company goes directly to the consumer.
2. The joint venture is reworked where Fubo is offered the same services for the same price as directly with Venu.

It depends on what the courts really have a problem with.

If it's Venu as the 3rd party, then they can just offer the service as add-ons to Fubo. Fubo gains nothing but some small amount of money for each subscriber they bring to them. Fubo still can't offer just an ESPN/FOX sports package and has to pay per subscriber costs for what they have. Fubo could then decide to break the ESPN contract to lower the cost per subscriber but then telling each subscriber that wanted ESPN they now have to pay $40-50 more for it will not fly.

If it's just the bundling of the different companies, they can just offer the same service individually using Venu. FOX just needs someone to handle billing, sign-up, etc and ESPN/Disney already has everything covered. Then offer the same add-on services to every streaming service and pay them a small fee if they bring a subscriber.

 

[Bruce]

First, I already know what is being planned if Venu is shut down, have already hinted at it in this thread.

1 of 2 things happen

1. They joint venture is broken up and each company goes directly to the consumer.

ESPN Streaming is planned for next year, Warner already has MAX.

Fox cannot afford the 6 years of losses ( compared to other services) with a new streaming service, one they will not have enough content anyways.

Their revenue has dropped so much, because of the over reliance on per sub fees and advertising revenue, last quarter showed another 10% drop.

This is why having a catalog is important, to lease out your content to others for cash, or enough content to start your own service.

They are also losing so much money on the MLB contract.

Fox and FS1 will have 93 Regular Season Games on in 2024.

Then Fox will have up to 7 Games for the League Championship ( either AL or NL, it alternates every year with TBS) .

Plus up to 7 Games for the World Series.

So to keep it simple, will say 107 Games total.

Fox pays MLB $787 Million a year.

That is over $7 Million a Game plus production costs.

That is for about 934,000 Households for the regular season( and less when only on FS1), about 4 Million Households for the World Series.

Ad Revenue is rumored to be under a million for a regular season game, less on FS1.

1. The joint venture is reworked where Fubo is offered the same services for the same price as directly with Venu.

It depends on what the courts really have a problem with.

My guess is, if the appeal does not go their way, shut down Venu before it starts, that way, no trial, also, they could be worried if a another provider(s) sues or joins in.

Then, just launch ESPN streaming, with Fox Sports either leasing the content to Disney or as an add on ( most likely).

 

[savarese04]

The joint venture is reworked where Fubo is offered the same services for the same price as directly with Venu.

i'd love to see this happen if only so Fubo can explain to its customers why their bills went up so quickly. There's no way Fubo is paying more than $43 for the Venu content, so if they want to pay the higher price for the sake of competitive parity, have at it.