MultiChoice, eMedia, SABC get warning from Minister of Sports, Arts, and Culture

What about the consumer protection act? If you have 2 tires replaced for your car, do they tell you that you can only have all 5 tires replaced and not just one or two? DSTV is making misuse of their monopoly.
 
ThinkCentre said:
What about the consumer protection act? If you have 2 tires replaced for your car, do they tell you that you can only have all 5 tires replaced and not just one or two? DSTV is making misuse of their monopoly.
Click to expand...

Which is why the facing head winds, they cannot afford, anymore.

Currently the sports base is shrinking, and DSTV's customer base, is being eroded by the same attrition. The foundation, of their business is cracking up.

Fewer, people, are not going to pay more, to keep DSTV rolling in clover.

The writing is already on the wall, for all to see.
 
Majority of super sport is not national teams though. I do think there needs to be some leverage with a public broadcaster being able to show international games of the country. Rest no, that should be standard licensing but there should be some form of concession or reduced concession with regards to national team games.
 
1) Multichoice is not, in any way shape or form, a monopoly. Them going bankrupt is evidence of that. I thought the whole definition of a monopoly was for a company to entrench itself against market forces. Yet here we are with Multichoice going under in a slow motion disaster. That is market forces acting on them.

2) SARU, Cricket SA and everyone else whose businesses are coupled directly with Multichoice need to seriously consider whether or not signing away all exclusivity to a company that can't even profit on an exclusive licence is good business practice. They probably should also think of the broader business. They want more people to play their sports, but currently only sell their broadcast rights to people who can shell out R800 per month. Good business thinking that. Getting more people into the sport is good for their business.

3) I think the right solution for the matter of sports rights is for SARU, Cricket SA and the SABC to sort out rights with a new product. Namely something like SABC Sports+. This is broken down into two sub products. A low res version that is broadcast to everyone, and a high res one that you need a subscription for. This is just for national teams. Sell annual packages, contracts with lock in, and pay per view matches/seasons to cater to as many people as possible This allows people who have 4k screens to cross-subsidise poorer households for the sport, but still gives them a product that is worth the money. And given how sports is the only unifying form of entertainment in this country, there probably is good reason to have some tax payer money thrown in as well. Better than then endless seasons of Generations.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
How did they do it a few years ago? Through sponsorships. But being accountable to your sponsors is too much effort, easier to take the easy money through broadcasting...
Click to expand...
They got a lot less money back then. DStv have poured a lot of money into the sports that's for sure. For football at least, it doesn't seem to have made much development difference though.
 
konfab said:
1) Multichoice is not, in any way shape or form, a monopoly. Anyone who says they are is retarded. Them going bankrupt is evidence of that. I thought the whole definition of a monopoly was for a company to entrench itself against market forces. Yet here we are with Multichoice going under in a slow motion disaster. That is market forces acting on them.
Click to expand...
They're no longer a monopoly. Their position remains dominant however. They are losing money because people can no longer afford their services and the emergence of streaming providers has helped too. They're still the de facto monopoly sports broadcaster.
 
R13... said:
They got a lot less money back then. DStv have poured a lot of money into the sports that's for sure. For football at least, it doesn't seem to have made much development difference though.
Click to expand...

That is why, they are hitting the skids hard.
 
R13... said:
They're no longer a monopoly. Their position remains dominant however. They are losing money because people can no longer afford their services and the emergence of streaming providers has helped too. They're still the de facto monopoly sports broadcaster.
Click to expand...

The market, has opened up and shifted. DSTV, have chosen to hold the status quo.

You can only sell something in a market, that is prepared to pay your price.

The market, shifts, you better move with it, or get left behind.

The market, supports you product, or, it supports some one elses product.
 
R13... said:
They got a lot less money back then. DStv have poured a lot of money into the sports that's for sure. For football at least, it doesn't seem to have made much development difference though.
Click to expand...
Well yeah, everything was less back then. I also got paid less.

Nobody is saying that sponsors and broadcasters can't co-exist. But when you rely almost exclusively on broadcasters, you remove accountability. And without accountability, the sport suffers all the way from national down to grassroots...
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
Well yeah, everything was less back then. I also got paid less.

Nobody is saying that sponsors and broadcasters can't co-exist. But when you rely almost exclusively on broadcasters, you remove accountability. And without accountability, the sport suffers all the way from national down to grassroots...
Click to expand...

:thumbsup:
 
R13... said:
They're no longer a monopoly. Their position remains dominant however. They are losing money because people can no longer afford their services and the emergence of streaming providers has helped too. They're still the de facto monopoly sports broadcaster.
Click to expand...
Under what definition of monopoly are you using?
 
R13... said:
Definition where they control nearly all sports rights.
Click to expand...
That isn't a monopoly in economic sense we are talking about.

GRRM has a monopoly on all his books. Does that mean there are no other books to read?

You want to get rid of that "monopoly" then you need to get rid of copyright.
 
R13... said:
I said de facto, here's a definition to help you some,
Click to expand...
DSTV then isn't the monopoly. It is SARU and Cricket SA. And even then, they are not monopolies because anyone can go and start their own rugby union and broadcast the rights. If SARU doesn't change its business practices in the near future, Multichoice is going to drag them down.

The monopolies we have in SA are Eskom, SAPO and Transnet, where the government actively stops other players from participating.


And like I said, DSTV isn't displaying behaviour that an actual monopoly does given the fact that they are going bankrupt.
 
Fuzzbox said:
Free market economy.
Sport rights are for sale to the highest bidder.
SABC doesnt have 2c to rub together.
That leaves Multichoice.

Case closed.
Click to expand...
Free market monopoly? That forces consumers to pay a premium fee to see their national team play sport.
Mckensie is making a valid point which I think most would agree.
Sports support decline in South Africa is due to multichoice dominance allowing people who can afford to pay be able to watch sport.
This needs to be re looked into to be honest.
 
He is making the right noises...

You force regulation by putting some sport events (and other events) into a class of national interest. Then no matter what exclusive contract you may have signed with whoever, becomes null and void when those sport events are involved. Being done in most European countries already. In France they call it "major events" for example:

"Major events: Against a monopoly on all-payment services
Considered as "events of major importance", the free broadcasting of certain competitions is protected by French legislation. Law No 86-1067 of 30 September 1986, implemented by Decree No 2004-1392 of 22 December 2004, states that "events of major importance may not be transmitted on an exclusive basis in such a way as to deprive a substantial proportion of the public of the possibility of following them [...] on a free-access television service." There are 21 such events in France, out of which 6 are football matches."

We already have legislative mechanisms to do that, but ICASA with its usual kark has not finalised the list of events yet.
FYI:
To qualify as being of “national interest”, the following criteria must apply:
  • The event must involve the South African senior national team (i.e., the most senior official South African team) or an individual representing the Republic.
  • The event must be in a major sport, taking into consideration the number of South Africans who play it and/or watch it at the venue or on television, or listen to radio coverage.
  • The event must be of major importance to South African society, and not just to those who ordinarily follow the sport.
  • The event is appropriate to list, given its structure and duration.
  • The event takes place in South Africa. The only events which take place outside South Africa which should be eligible for listing are international confederation sporting events such as a World Cup or Olympic event in which a South African team or individual is representing the Republic.
Click to expand...

But sadly Gayton's taking the wrong path by giving them the chance to "work it out". Dstv will simply prevent the hard legislation by negotiating some sub par contracts, then do what they usually do...fcking them over with last minute contracts making it hard to monetize.

Been saying this for years. Sport of national interest by law is the only way forward.
 
supersunbird said:
Who is going to fund the relevant sporting bodies if they do not get the required same amount of money that they did with current exclusive rights way ?
Click to expand...
Cut of sponsorship and cut 9f ad revenue etc etc. Should be lots of ways if one is open minded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter