MediaTalk | Season 4 | Ep. 36 - Streaming, Sports and 5G: The Deals Reshaping Global Media

View Full Transcript

Mike Reynolds: Hi, I'm Mike Reynolds, a senior reporter covering the media industry with the S&P Global Market Intelligence Technology, Media and Telecom News team. Welcome to "MediaTalk," a podcast hosted by S&P Global Market Intelligence, where the news and research staff explore issues in the ever-evolving media landscape.

With this installment, "MediaTalk" is taking a virtual trip across the Atlantic to the company's London offices, which on September 16 will be the site of a breakfast briefing.

The event will cover a number of topics, providing an overview of the changing media landscape in 2026 and an outlook for what's ahead in 2027. The conversation will take us into the worlds of telecom, mobile, advertising, pay TV, streaming, content production, sports rights and, of course, some of the money behind all of these business facets.

Joining me today are Kagan Research Director Mohammed Hamza, Research Analyst Georgia Jordan, Research Analyst Michail Chandakas and Media Analyst Richard Berndes.

We're also going to hear from Kagan Research Head Justin Nielson, who is making the trek from California to London. And since September is a big conference month, we're also going to preview a major event: IBC.

All right, a bit of a preamble. After COVID-19, a lot of changes were needed in the media landscape over the past five years. There has been significant rebuilding across the technology, media and telecom industries, which have experienced massive market adjustments and competitive restructuring. This has resulted in significant changes across the various areas I mentioned above. Telcos are also facing significant market pressures.

Funding and monetizing fiber and 5G networks remain key areas, with M&A becoming the vehicle to cut costs and free up cash. Mo, I hope I got that right.

Mohammed Hamza: Thanks, Mike. I think you got most of that right. There's a lot to pick apart, as you can imagine, and there are a lot of different sectors within the TMT space that we're going to cover. But there are also many linked themes.

In terms of how telcos are refocusing and reprioritizing infrastructure and technology, they are simultaneously divesting pay-TV assets and trying to bundle more over-the-top, or OTT, services.

You can also see how many of the media assets being let go by telcos are being picked up by media organizations, including traditional broadcasters and traditional media formats such as newspapers.

Reynolds: Okay. Justin, how about bringing us more of a U.S. perspective?

Justin Nielson: Yes, and more of a global perspective. We've covered some major global sporting events so far this year, including the Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics and the World Cup in the United States, Mexico and Canada.

From my perspective, there are a few diverging trends happening in the United States. You have deregulation on the broadcast side, some consolidation involving Warner Bros. and Paramount, and spinoffs of linear assets, such as Comcast's spinoff of NBCUniversal's cable networks into Versant.

I think that's going to be a continuing trend, with more consolidation around studio assets and streaming, as well as additional spinoffs of slower-growth media assets.

Reynolds: Okay. Mo, can you give us an overview of the pay-TV landscape in the United Kingdom, with cable, satellite and telco distributors facing subscriber erosion amid the rise of streaming?

Hamza: Yes, there's a lot going on. Starting with the pay-TV universe, we've generally seen declines across satellite, cable and digital terrestrial television, which is the free-to-air segment. There has been no recovery; it has been a consistent decline over the years.

However, we have seen IPTV gain traction and become the dominant platform in the region. Overall, pay TV is stagnant in Europe, I would say. It picks up, then declines, and then picks up again. Much of that is driven by new bundling strategies from operators, which are incorporating OTT services into their pay-TV offerings.

Moving to the pay-TV landscape in terms of content and platform owners, there have been a number of sell-offs, and Canal+ in France has been one of the major beneficiaries. Canal+ bought Orange's OCS Studios in France and acquired a stake in Viaplay in the Nordics. It also bought MultiChoice, a pay-TV provider operating across South Africa and the rest of Africa.

We've also seen Sky Deutschland sell its assets to RTL, one of the largest commercial broadcasters in Europe.

There isn't much left in terms of telcos that actually own their own content. You're now left with Sky in the United Kingdom and Italy. Bouygues Telecom in France has TF1, a commercial television network group. There is Telenet in Belgium, NOS in Portugal and Telefónica in Spain.

So, to be honest, there isn't much left in the traditional pay-TV landscape. These operators are now combining many of the OTT assets that are available, such as Netflix and Disney+, into their packages. The more, the merrier — that's what we've been seeing.

Reynolds: Justin, back here in the United States, the traditional pay-TV landscape — the cable, satellite and telco providers — has been declining for years. It may be holding its own a little more now, but the distribution landscape has changed because all the major programmers have direct-to-consumer operations and content production. So they're distributors, per se, right?

Nielson: Yes, and that's been the major evolution since COVID-19: a more streaming-first mentality among media operations and distributors.

You also see that from the perspective of live sports. We've covered it extensively with the NFL and college football seasons kicking off, particularly in terms of how the distribution model has changed dramatically over the past few years.

Linear television has taken a step back, with streaming becoming the primary model for many of these services. ESPN's flagship service is going direct to consumer. You also have Peacock, Amazon and Netflix carrying NFL games and other live events.

So it has been a significant transitional shift from linear television to streaming in most instances.

Reynolds: Richard, what's the situation in Europe relative to sports? Is something similar happening there?

Richard Berndes: Yes, live sports are tremendously important across the world, not just in Europe. They are extremely important to media partners, viewers, leagues and federations.

Media rights form the backbone of revenue going into sports. For example, 63% of NFL revenue in 2026 came from media rights. For the Premier League, the figure was approximately 56%.

You have to ask why sports are important. It's because they are one of the few things that attract huge audiences in vast numbers, and that's what advertisers want.

You can't stack a series of NFL games in the same way you can stack a series on Netflix. Live sports bring in massive audiences that are commercially attractive to advertisers. That's the appeal of live sports, and it can't be replaced elsewhere.

Reynolds: As you look at the landscape, are there any major deals brewing? Are there significant properties coming up for negotiation? We just completed the 2026 World Cup, so I think people will be scrambling to get their hands on the rights for 2030 and 2034.

Berndes: Looking at the Olympics, I think the rights are still part of ongoing, extended deals for companies such as NBCUniversal.

What is interesting is how media companies are exploiting their digital assets. More recently, a good example is the German Bundesliga. The league has completed a new deal in the United States with two different companies, selling its English- and Spanish-language rights separately.

In the United Kingdom, the Bundesliga is also using some of its rights to develop content for YouTube, bringing in younger audiences.

Going back to the Olympics, social-media figures from the most recent Paris Olympics showed 16.7 billion engagements, more than double the number recorded for the Tokyo Olympic Games.

I think the interesting question for rights holders and leagues is how they can monetize not only their media rights but also their digital rights and ancillary platform content. That could potentially be a major area of growth.

Reynolds: Yes, that makes a lot of sense. Younger people engage with media that way. Old folks like myself still put television first and foremost. For many younger viewers, television is a second thought.

There are definitely going to be many opportunities with alternative platforms, and they're already emerging.

I'm going to go back to the World Cup for a moment, from a European perspective. There were water breaks, or hydration breaks, during both halves, lasting two or three minutes. FOX, the U.S. English-language rights holder, ran commercials. Telemundo Deportes did not.

I'm not sure what the situation was in Europe, but Richard, as a Tottenham Hotspur season-ticket holder for generations, were you aghast that we had a water break? And do you know whether commercials ran in Europe during those breaks?

Berndes: The traditionalist in me, Mike, was screaming, “This is not soccer.” That was before we talked about a 25-minute halftime break for the final.

However, in terms of player welfare, if you're playing in extremely hot environments such as Mexico, you do need to take these measures.

It's not a new discussion. During my former career at ITV, this was discussed 15 years ago. People were asking whether these types of hydration breaks could be used in sports such as rugby, where there is a natural pause in play.

In the United Kingdom this year, we did not take breaks or run commercials during the hydration breaks. The broadcast returned to the commentators.

That probably has more to do with the strict rules and regulations in Europe governing the amount of commercial airtime that can be used. Broadcasters may have considered the money involved and decided that inserting a break into active play would not sit well with viewers. An advertisement would probably have been even less well received, so they kept the commercials in the traditional breaks, where the rules are stricter.

I think it was more of a commercial decision based on how well those advertisements would have been accepted by viewers and the return on investment they might have generated.

Reynolds: I understand. Mo, Georgia, do you have any thoughts on this? Hydration breaks are not what soccer viewers expect.

Hamza: I think it makes sense from a U.S. perspective because you're used to much more frequent commercial breaks, aren't you?

We often experience these things when watching television in hotels. But in Europe, we're not big fans of long breaks. We like to keep them brief and get on with the game.

Reynolds: Georgia, would you agree?

Georgia Jordan: Yes, absolutely. As a Brazilian, I know Brazilian players were not happy with it at all. It definitely interrupts the flow of the game.

It was a different experience, but, as I said, here in the United Kingdom we didn't have the commercials, so it wasn't quite as jarring as watching U.S. television.

Reynolds: All right, let's move away from sports. Justin, can you share a little about the global advertising perspective for this year? We have the Olympics and the U.S. midterm election cycle. What's the outlook for the market overall?

Nielson: It's definitely a rising-tide market in terms of global advertising, particularly in the United States, as you noted, because of the midterm elections.

We're estimating that the midterm elections will generate more than $4 billion for U.S. broadcasters. So the advertising market may be displaced in the second half of the year by the political advertising coming into the United States.

On a global scale, macroeconomic events and developments in the Middle East are dampening some global ad spending, particularly on big-ticket items such as automobiles and housing.

From that perspective, we may be seeing more of an event-driven advertising market rather than a market characterized by broad-based core advertising growth.

Reynolds: Okay. Let's switch over to mobile. Georgia, what are some of the overarching developments as you look at the market in the United Kingdom and Europe?

Jordan:  A lot of what we've discussed so far relates to how telcos are trying to streamline their operations and divest noncore businesses, such as content.

They're doing something similar with their networks. They've been divesting fiber networks and mobile towers or, at a minimum, spinning them off so they can attract investment partners to help fund the very high investments needed to develop and expand these networks, especially with 5G.

5G is a more expensive network, so operators have to replace much of the back-end equipment.

As we mentioned earlier, operators are also trying to reduce costs through bundling. We've seen a lot of fixed-mobile convergence, with fixed-line operators buying mobile operators so they can find synergies, share subscribers and sell bundles.

Over the past several years, we've seen Altibox buy ICE in Norway, Orange Belgium buy VOO, Norlys buy Telia Denmark, DIGI buy Nowo in Portugal and Fastweb buy Vodafone Italy. So there has been a lot of fixed-mobile convergence.

On the other side, we've also seen new fiber internet service providers enter mobile by buying 5G spectrum. They're launching their own networks, which allows them to offer fiber and mobile services together in a bundle.

One major development we hadn't seen previously, largely because of regulatory restrictions, has been consolidation among mobile operators. Many major markets in recent years have seen the number of mobile operators decline from four to three.

Examples include the MasOrange merger in Spain and the Vodafone-Three merger in the United Kingdom. This year, it was announced that SFR in France would be broken up and divided among the remaining three operators.

So this is a very interesting development.

Reynolds: From an outsider's perspective, it's convergence and consolidation — more of the same. The regulatory environment has been fairly open to these moves, right?

Jordan:  Exactly, and this is very different from what we've seen in the past. O2 tried to acquire Three in the United Kingdom 10 years ago, and that transaction was blocked by both European Union and U.K. regulators.

Yet last year, the merger between Vodafone and Three went through. This is very new. Regulators are becoming aware of the investment needed to expand these networks. Operators need to cut costs, and increasingly, around the world — not just in Europe — we're seeing regulators become more open to consolidation because of those investment requirements.

Reynolds: Last question for you, Georgia. Where do things stand with 5G overall?

Jordan:  In Europe, one thing we've noticed is that 5G is definitely slowing down in terms of new launches. Europe was one of the leading markets, and most operators have launched 5G services.

What we're seeing now is a slowdown in adoption rates. We wrote a comparison a few months ago between 4G and 5G adoption. During the first three or four years after 4G launched, adoption rates were very rapid. With 5G, adoption has generally been much slower across markets.

Some markets are faster than others, and consumers aren't replacing their smartphones as frequently.

Investment is another factor. Telcos are trying to find new ways to monetize their networks. Europe is a highly competitive market, especially with the large number of MVNOs, so prices are much lower than what you're accustomed to in the United States.

Operators are looking for new ways to monetize, especially if they are going to invest in standalone 5G networks, which are considerably more expensive. They're looking for private-network opportunities and more business applications rather than relying solely on the consumer market.

Reynolds: Okay. Mo, let's talk about telecom. How about the transition from copper to fiber? Can you bring us up to speed?

Hamza: Certainly. There has been a major push in Europe to expand fiber, and it's really a region of three parts.

You have the countries with high penetration rates — 80% to 90% — such as France and Spain. Then you have countries that are trying to catch up, such as the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, which have ramped up deployment over the past two or three years.

Finally, you have the countries that are lagging behind, including Austria and Greece. Germany also has relatively low fiber penetration, at around 20%.

Berndes: Really?

Hamza: Yes. There are significant differences in how quickly telcos have expanded their fiber networks.

One factor is the presence of cable. Markets such as Germany have extensive cable coverage, meaning a significant portion of the country already has access to gigabit speeds. That, combined with a focus 10 years ago on rolling out VDSL, or fiber-to-the-curb networks, rather than full fiber, has slowed those markets.

Those networks offered average speeds of approximately 70 to 100 megabits per second. Operators marketed them as fiber, so that confusion, combined with the presence of cable, has slowed the development of full-fiber networks in these markets.

The interesting question is how much money operators can make by decommissioning copper. BT in the United Kingdom recently announced that it could make up to £2 billion simply by selling the copper it has in the ground.

When you look at the cost of delivering fiber, there is not much electricity involved. Many street cabinets and other pieces of equipment are also being removed, creating significant cost savings.

The challenge is getting people onto the fiber networks. But operators also stand to benefit from lower operating costs.

Reynolds: As Georgia mentioned, there are a lot of deals taking place in this space. Mo, you wrote that there had been 86 announced deals over the past four years. Is that possible?

Hamza: Yes. It's mainly because, as Georgia mentioned, Europe is highly competitive. Many of the networks are open networks, including cable networks in some countries.

You can piggyback on those networks and build your own infrastructure into them. You can essentially manage the line, handle billing, offer services and so on without deploying your own fiber lines.

The same was true with copper, and that wholesale access also extends to mobile, as Georgia mentioned with MVNOs. There are thousands of MVNOs and thousands of ISPs offering broadband connectivity through the networks of other telecom operators.

That's why there is so much fiber activity. Consolidation is an opportunity because there is so much competition, while the cost of rolling out networks has increased because of the macroeconomic environment. Energy, labor, construction and borrowing costs have all risen.

As a result, many of these networks have had to sell out, to the benefit of larger players.

Reynolds: That's a bit of a flavor of what will be happening in London on September 16. There will be a lot of interesting discussions and a lot of slides to see.

Anyway, let's go from London to Amsterdam. We're going from the Kagan event to IBC. Michail, you're making the trek. How many times have you been to IBC, or will this be your first visit to the conference?

Michail Chandakas: I believe this will be my eighth time in the last 10 years with Kagan.

Reynolds: Okay. Have you attended recently? As we mentioned at the top, the world slowed down a little during COVID-19.

Chandakas: Attendance has recovered since 2022, but I think it's still down 20% to 30% from the pre-COVID peak.

Reynolds: Justin, do you see the same thing in the United States? You go to the NAB Show in Las Vegas and New York, and you attended the Streaming Media Show in Denver.

Nielson: Yes, it's interesting. This will be my first IBC in Amsterdam, but I've been an NAB veteran for almost 20 years.

I would say the conference peaked in 2018 or 2019 in terms of attendance. We're probably, as Michail said, about 60% to 70% back to where we were. I still think that's the reality going forward.

From the streaming side, the Streaming Media Show has been growing substantially. We had a presence there in Denver in June, so I think there has been a shift in focus.

Reynolds: Michail, you're on the streaming beat. What are some of the things you're interested in seeing or hearing about at IBC?

Chandakas: A couple of things come to mind. AI will, of course, be a major theme, but this time the focus is more likely to be on actual use cases. We're already seeing media groups embed AI into their daily workflows to improve efficiency, cut costs and enhance user experiences. I'm also curious to hear the latest on how technology vendors are adapting their offerings to accommodate changes in how content is discovered, monetized and consumed, especially with the rise of vertical formats, microdramas and the broader creator economy.

Reynolds: So there are challenges and opportunities within that shift?

Chandakas: Streamers' priority these days is maximizing profitability, and subscriber growth has slowed. That's why many of them have stopped reporting certain subscriber figures.

With that being said, subscription revenue still accounts for the bulk of streaming-video revenue, and the cost of those subscriptions is also increasing almost every year.

The opportunity we see is in advertising, which is the fastest-growing of the two revenue streams.

Reynolds: All right. Justin, back in the United States, people can't subscribe to every streaming service. Do we have a sense of how many services consumers prefer to have — two, three or four?

Nielson: We conduct a consumer-insights survey every year on that topic. The number of streaming services people purchase has been growing, although there has been some recent plateauing. Four to six services is usually the average.

A lot of that has been driven by sports because consumers need multiple services to watch all the sports they want.

There has also been a shift toward advertising, as Michail mentioned. Many packages now include a lower-priced advertising-supported option, along with bundles of multiple services. Through pay-TV operators, consumers can also get broadband and some of these streaming services together in a bundle.

Reynolds: Michail, one last question. Are consumers limiting the number of streaming services they have, or are they maintaining roughly the same number while switching to ad-supported plans?

Chandakas: Yes, exactly. Consumers are definitely not prepared to spend more when so much free content is available, perhaps with the exception of premium sports.

Those who do pay are increasingly opting for lower-priced, ad-supported plans, often through telco bundles. Those plans are driving most of the subscriber growth that we're still observing.

Reynolds: That concludes this episode of "MediaTalk."

I want to thank all of the Kagan analysts — Mo, Justin, Georgia, Richard and Michail — for spending time in "MediaTalk's" virtual house and sharing their expertise on the ever-changing media landscape.

This is Mike Reynolds. Thanks to all of you for listening. We'll catch up soon on the next installment of "MediaTalk."