Upload
hogne-ulla
View
420
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SPORTS ECONOMICS HE 68 – COPENHAGEN BUSINESS SCHOOL – SPRING 2011
THE FUTURE AND POTENTIAL FOR
SPORTS BROADCASTING
Written by: Hogne Ulla
CPR: 131090-3449
Signature: _______________
Email: [email protected]
Not confidential
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
When Brett Ormerod scored Blackpool‟s winning goal in the playoff match against Cardiff in
English football (soccer) May 2010 he had every reason to celebrate. Not only was Blackpool
ready for the FA Premier League, the promotion was worth a place between 70 and 90 million
pounds sterling.
TV rights around the world are sold at hefty sums and the number of sport pay-TV channels is
growing at a rapid rate. However broadcasters face challenges and with a higher number of
channels the competition and thereby prices increases. This paper will give an analysis and
discussion of how sport broadcasters operate today. Even though the case at hand is from
Scandinavia and based upon European football, much of the discussion may be similar in
other parts of the world and to other sports. Some important and relevant aspects of
broadcasting will be highlighted in this paper.
The paper offers various approaches to TV2‟s challenges. With bigger competition along with
changes in technology TV2 must change and react not to be left on the sideline. Nevertheless,
broadcasting is a game with many players whereas sport enthusiasts, right holders and
distributors are key players.
Any broadcaster must recognize this and offer a service that is both preferred and priced
correctly. The paper points out exclusive rights, social media and marketing as crucial factors.
The conclusion sets out new areas for research and focus in the future.
3
INDEX
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................2
2. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………. 3
2.1.Methodology ………………………………………………………………………3
2.2.Problem statement.....................................................................................................4
3. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION..................................................................................4
3.1. Sport broadcasting in Norway.................................................................................4
3.1.1. An introduction............................................................................................4
3.1.2. The Tippeliga – The Norwegian Premier Division......................................6
3.1.3. FA Premier League.......................................................................................7
3.2. Challenges..............................................................................................................10
3.2.1. Internal challenges......................................................................................11
3.2.2. External challenges ....................................................................................15
4. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................16
5. REFERENCES .............................................................................................................17
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1. Methodology
I will start with some history and explain how football has been broadcasted in Norway. This
includes a comparison of TV2 and state owned NRK. Secondly I will explain how TV2
operate at as a sports broadcaster including various aspects and with a main focus on the
channels TV2 Sport and TV2 Barclays Premier League. Thirdly the challenges will be spelled
out before I move on and discuss these and provide some possible solutions. In the end I will
reach a conclusion answering the question at hand and set out new areas for research. The
paper‟s focus will not be on the welfare economic perspectives of broadcasting. This matter is
already covered in the body of literature on the economics of television sports broadcasting
(Solberg, 2007; Spence et al, 1977; Neale, 1964).
4
2.2. Problem statement
The problem statement is the following:
How does TV2 (Norwegian) operate as a football (soccer) broadcaster and discuss the
challenges they are facing?
In other words, I want to use TV2 as a case and base my analysis and discussion upon their
broadcasting of football. Broadcasting may be defined as “the distribution of audio and video
content to a dispersed audience via radio, television, or other”
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcasting, retrieved 29 May 2011).
3. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
3.1. Sports broadcasting in Norway
3.1.1 An introduction
Throughout history European TV broadcasting have been dominated by public service
broadcasters – so called PSBs (Solberg, 2007). Table 1 shows the three categories of
broadcasting. In Norway only non-commercial and commercial broadcasters are present. Our
case is the latter one. Because of broadcasting‟s high fixed costs and low variable costs it is a
typical “economies of scale” production (Solberg, 2002). Figure 1 illustrates this. We must
also stress that it is a public good in the sense that one person watching a game on the telly
doesn‟t make it more difficult for someone else. Buying a match-day ticket for a football
match may be defined as a private good because it makes it marginally more difficult for
someone else to get hold of a ticket. Broadcasting‟s cost for an extra viewer, hence the
marginal cost, is also very low, if not zero. Olson (1971) explains this as the non-rivalling
criterion characteristic of a public good. However, Gratton et al (2007) explain that the non-
excludability criterion is not satisfied. This due to the fact that even though it is possible to
exclude people, namely the people not paying the fee for watching, other options like pirate
cards and online streaming are available. Just in Italy over 4 million viewers used pirate cards
in 2005 (Loebbecke et al, 2005). Today steaming is a bigger threat mostly because of its
availability (of Premier League games) but also due to the fact that its quality has been
improved just the last few years.
5
Table 1 – Categories of broadcasters
Category Example Funding
1 – Non-commercial NRK License fees or/and public funding
2 – Semi-commercial TV Denmark License fees, public funding or/and advertising
3 – Commercial TV2 (Norway) Advertising
One important difference between NRK and TV2 is that for NRK sports rights acquisitions
represents a cost while TV2 eyes possible income streams through advertising, commercials,
subscribers or pay-per-view fees. This situation has made NRK weaker in the sense that they
have a reduced bargaining power, later this led to NRK giving up rights for a range of
sporting events (http://www.klartale.no/norge/article152.zrm, retrieved 26 May 2011). There
has also been pressure from politicians and the public because NRK prioritized football
instead of other cultural forms.
Since a live sports program is a homogeneous product, some may argue that it is irrelevant if
it is TV2 or NRK displaying the game. There are not significant differences between the two
channels and therefore the consumption value will be the same (Solberg, 2007). Of course,
TV2 has put a lot of effort and money into their sport broadcasting, but in the end the
differences in quality will be marginal. NRK has a tradition of not sending their commentators
overseas, but instead send it from a studio in Oslo. This is of course not ideally for fans who
want to experience how the atmosphere is at the venue. NRK is also known for their
enthusiastic coverage of winter sports with well-planned reports and interviews. But when it
comes to football and especially the Norwegian Tippeliga, NRK‟s coverage has been less
attractive and without the same passion.
Another important characteristic of sports broadcasting is the groups of audience (Merkel,
1994). Table 2 illustrates these from the smallest to the biggest. Make note of the groups‟
characteristics, these differences in segments explain the pricing and why TV2 offer both a
commercial and six premium pay-TV channels. Even though the consumer group is regarded
as the biggest group we must stress that in Norway sports are the most popular TV
programmes (Hammervold et al, 2008).
One of the critics of broadcasting is its effect on match day attendance. In the FA Premier
League the facility fee paid to TV broadcasted teams will outweigh the possible loss in
6
revenue (Forrest el al, 2004). Still the attendance for the broadcasted Monday match in
English and Norwegian football have a tendency to be rather low and especially in Norway
this trend has become clearer the last few years. This has of course something to do with
weekdays versus weekend, but it is no doubt that people sometimes find their armchairs more
comfy than watching the game live in storm and hail.
Table 2 – Groups of audience
Audience group Characteristics
The fan Inelastic vertical demand with respect to
quality and price. Highest willingness to pay.
The supporter More elastic than the fan segment, thus lower
willingness to pay.
The consumer Less interested in football and watches it in
an often ritualistic and occasional way.
Figure 1 – Cost curves for a sports broadcaster
(Gaustad, 2000)
3.1.2 Tippeligaen – The Norwegian Premier Division
Football broadcasting in Norway was in the late 1990s and early 2000s a joint venture
consisting of the state run channel NRK and the commercial TV2. The co-operation with
NRK has not always been a sunshine story. The biggest fiasco was perhaps when both
channels provided the exact same pictures from the World Championship in Skiing in
Price
Units
7
Ramsau, Austria in 1999 (Solvoll, 2009). However in 1997 the French owned distributor
Canal Digital was founded and with the introduction of the channel Canal+ it soon became a
competitor and a threat to TV2 and NRK.
When the rights for the Norwegian Premier Division and the First Division from 2002-2005
was sold TV2 and NRK won the bid. They divided the most attractive matches among
themselves and sold some of the less attractive matches to Canal+. Whether this was a smart
move or not is discussable. It gave Canal+ a chance to capture a slice of the market‟s pizza
and sports fans a possibility to try the channel‟s services.
However, because of growing interest from distributors like Canal Digital and media groups
outside Norway the price escalated and the next four seasons were sold for, at that time,
unbelievable 1 billion NOK. That was more than three and a half times the price for the
period 2002-2005.
The latest rights for 2009-2013 were sold to Lyse, NRK and TV2 for 1.2 billion NOK. Later
Lyse sold their matches to TV2. But because TV2 has been able to broadcast six out of seven
matches they have maintained their status as the Tippeliga channel number one in Norway. In
2007 they introduced five pay-TV channels namely TV2Sport 1 to 5. The channels have been
popular and because of their strong focus on football the commitment from the subscribers is
high. In Britain a survey showed that 50 per cent of BSkyB‟s subscribers would cancel their
subscription if Sky lost the TV rights to football (Solberg, 2002). It is likely that the same
phenomenon would be true for TV2. The broadcasting of the Tippeliga could be partly
explained by the attraction of a large audience, domestic production and that it fits well with
TV2‟s desire to be a part of Norway‟s social fabric (Johnsen et al, 2007).
3.1.3. FA Premier League
In 1995 TV2 bought the rights for the English Premiership (later known as the FA Premier
League). Until then English top football was broadcasted on NRK. However in 1997 Canal+
bought the rights and served as a monopolist being for many years a popular and preferred
broadcaster of English football in Norway.
In February 2010 TV2 bought the Premier League rights for the next three seasons
(2010/2011 – 2012/2013). The sale was highly debated within Norway because many feared
Medge Consulting, which sold the rights, would sell Premier League to several channels
making it a real headache for the football fans. However, even after TV2 secured the
8
exclusive rights, the tension was building up because it for a long time was unknown which
distributors would get hold of TV2‟s new channels. The rights included matches for
television, mobile phones and Internet and since the package included matches in HD TV2
introduced three channels namely TV2 Barclays Premier League HD 1, 2 and 3. Today most
of the distributors, including Canal Digital, RiksTV, Viasat, Get and Altibox, offer either one
or more of TV2‟s Premier League channels. What TV2 paid is yet unknown but, as Figure 2
displays, the price for the Premier League rights both overseas and domestic (within England)
has escalated the last few years.
Average viewing hours
show that the winter is
the best period for
television channels
(Johnsen et al, 2007). In
this period there is
played no domestic
football in Norway, thus
gives TV2 a huge
potential in relation to
the Premier League which is played intensely as this time. Another factor that gives TV2 an
advantage is the flexibility they possess in relation to kick-off time and scheduling. (Johnsen
et al, 2007). This is good news because the Premier League is played at different times and
days during the week which would cause a problem for a PSBs and NRK in our case.
Figure 1.3 shows a possible value chain in Norway. Of course, there are more actors to add,
but the figure helps explain where the product goes - from the right holders and to the
viewers. But where does the money go? Some might guess on a fair split between right
holders, the broadcaster and distributors. A good guess, but reality displays an answer that
might surprise. For every 100 NOK the viewer is charged, 70 of them goes to the distributors,
20 goes to the right holders and only 10 goes to TV2 (Claus Bretton-Meyer / Øivind
Johannessen).
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Pou
nd
s (m
illi
on
s)
Year
Figure 2 - FA Premier League TV Rights
Domestic
Overseas
Source: Deloitte
9
Figure 3 – Value Chain
(Claus Bretton-Meyer, 2010)
TV2 used the time before the FA Premier League kicked-off in August 2010 to advertise their
new channels. For TV2 advertising served two main purposes (Gratton, 2007); firstly it gave
them a chance to inform about the product and its price and terms of sale. Secondly, it was a
tool for persuading and TV2 sought a shift in the demand, making sports broadcasting‟s
already inelastic demand curve even more inelastic allowing them to charge a relatively high
price for their new premium channels. TV2 had maximum luck. They broadcasted the 2010
FIFA World Cup and during the hundreds of hours with matches and live studio TV2
constantly reminded the viewers on what was going to happen the following autumn. Also,
during TV2‟s sports news an ad was run creating awareness and a clear position in the
consumer‟s mind.
Halfway through the season the new channel TV2 Barclays Premier League had 160,000
subscribers, this was rather impressive after just six months service. According to Øivind
Johannessen, TV2‟s finance director, the numbers per May 2011 are relatively stable and
close to the mid-season numbers. This could be explained by the interest trend for English
football. It has a generally high level of interest in the autumn and then a descending trend
until the end of the season.
One way of pricing is through windowing. In this way, using price discrimination, TV2 are
able to meet the different willingness to pay from the various audience groups. In
microeconomic terms this is known as the consumer surplus. Figure 4 illustrates windowing.
A is the price for the consumers with highest willingness to pay, i.e. the fan and supporter
group. At this price XA units are sold. Thus gives a profit equal the area of α. However, if
TV2 can set another price, B, they are able to attract new consumers and thereby offer the
units XB-XA. This gives an additional income of β, resulting in a total income of α+β. The
•FA Premier League
•Norwegian FA
Right holders
•TV2
•NRK
•Canal+
Broadcaster•Riks TV
•Canal Digital
•Viasat
Distributors
•Fotball fans
•You and me
Viewers/users
10
problem is that with no difference in quality both groups will buy at B giving a lower income
than α+β. The solution is then to offer a premium product (e.g. access to more
matches/channels, better quality). This will keep the first group paying price A. Today this is
solved by offering a one (TV2 Sport / TV2 Barclays Premier League) or multiple channels
(TV2 Sport 1-5 / TV2 Barclays Premier League 1-3). The group with highest willingness to
pay buys the latter one.
Figure 4 – Windowing (price discrimination)
To understand why windowing work you may consider A (window 1) as a live coverage and
B (window 2) as a delayed match. The more “windows” you have, the more consumer surplus
will be untapped. One characteristic of sports broadcasting is time sensitivity. A fan‟s
nightmare must be to catch his neighbour singing “We Are the Champions” early in the
afternoon and discover that the delayed match will be of a very low value (Gaustad, 2000).
3.2. Challenges today and tomorrow
As a sports broadcaster TV2 face challenges both inside their business, but also from external
sources. This section ought to discuss these challenges and gives an even further insight into
how TV2 operate as a broadcaster. We will start by discussing the internal matters before
moving on to the factors outside the business. Table 2 displays TV2‟s main challenges.
Price
Units
( Gaustad, 2000)
11
Table 3 - Challenges
INTERNAL EXTERNAL
Viewers/subscribers Competitors
Financial situation Technological development
Distributors World economy
3.2.1 Internal challenges
Viewers/subscribers
First and perhaps most important, the viewers represent a major challenge to TV2. Without its
viewers it is impossible to operate as a broadcaster. To attract new viewers is clearly of
importance, however there are three reasons why existing customers are more profitable than
new ones:
1. The cost of retention of an existing customer is lower than the acquisition cost for a
new one
2. Easier to cross- and up-sell goods and services to existing customers
3. Word of mouth – the recruiting will be done by existing customer. May relate this
point to the phenomenon of dads introducing sons to football.
(Beech & Chadwick, 2004: 400)
Research show that the lag effects are present meaning viewers‟ tendency to stay with the
channel and watch the next programmes (Beech & Chadwick, 2004: 376). This is good news
for any broadcaster and may be explained by commitment and that people in general spend
more time in front of the telly. This trend is also recognized and highly appreciated by
advertisers since many use exposure as a measure for success.
Demand for televised football depends on many factors including quality of the players
involved, the league‟s reputation, placement of cameras, commentators and uncertainty of
outcome (UO) (Gaustad, 2000). The latter is highly debated and several academic papers
challenge Neale (1964)‟s view. Neale used heavyweight boxing as an example and argued
that a high level of UO would result in the highest level of profits. Many articles doubt this
12
argument and findings suggest that in four out of five sports UO is of less importance
(Hammervold & Solberg, 2008). Forrest et al. (2005) find a link and a correlation between
competition and viewing figures; on the other hand, it is unclear whether it is due to sporting
or competitive factors. Another point might be that no-one can guarantee UO, neither the right
holders nor the broadcasters. Football is based on luck and one team might have a bad day at
work, one team may play against the wind, and, since referees still are human beings, they
also do mistakes.
The answer to UO might be two folded. “No”, in the sense that fans will watch the game even
though they might know their team will win – or lose, “yes” because those watching football
for entertainment and some “normal” viewers want an exciting game – if not they‟re only a
keystroke from a different channel. In addition to UO, broadcasters face another paradox: If
you ask two viewers about the quality of same match you are likely to get different answers.
One might see his favourite team play badly while the other one sees his team play one of
their best games in years. This is a major characteristic of sports thus leading to a focus on
giving the overall best impression where placement of cameras, highlights, replays and expert
commentators are all important. But these factors only partly explain demand – viewers habits
and rituals must also be considered leading us over to consumption patterns.
Helland et al. (2011)‟s discussion on changing consumption patterns discuss a very important
point; interactive viewing. This is best explained by giving an example:
Mikkel is watching his favourite team Arsenal’s game against Fulham on TV2 Barclays
Premier League. When the referee blows his whistle for the half time Mikkel opens his laptop.
While doing that his phone is beeping. The half-time scores from the other matches are
ticking in. On his smart phone he also checks the table and the updated top scorer list. On his
laptop he checks his score on an online fantasy football game and picks up his iPad to
continue his post in an online discussion about the offside rule. Before returning to the telly
and the discussion in the studio he checks out the goals on TV2 Sumo – TV2’s online
television service.
As we can see, many platforms are available creating an interactive engagement with the
viewer. A good example of how TV2 uses social media is the following message on Twitter.
Make note of the informal style:
13
“We’ve gotten so many wishes on sending Gary Neville’s testimonial that we’ve bought the
game. Kick-off is set at 20.25 CET on TV2 Barclays Premier League 1 & TV2 Sumo. Enjoy!”
(Editor in Chief for Sports, Vegard Jansen Hagen).
Financial situation
When TV2‟s managing director, Alf Hildrum, presented the annual report for 2010 it was
with a big smile on his face. The operating income of 335 million NOK was the record-
breaking and partly explained by TV2‟s new Premier League channels. However, the income
from advertising is still not at the level before the Credit Crunch. But the prospects for 2011
looks good with increasingly interest from both viewers and advertisers. Figure 5 shows
turnover, operating income and profit (loss), for the TV2 group of companies, the last five
years.
(Source: Annual reports TV2 2005-2010).
TV2 is famous for using their own staff actively in marketing and branding giving them an
emblematic function for the cannel (Solvoll, 2009). This is not only recognized by the
viewers, but also the advertisers. Journalists from TV2 are friendly, personal and display a
somewhat relaxed style. The same is true throughout the organizational from the cameramen
to the front desk personnel. This is implemented in TV2 through the channel‟s values as
„playful‟, „informal‟ and „down to earth‟. Many advertisers find this interesting and something
opposite of NRK‟s more distanced authority. Helland (2003) argues that TV2‟s
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Turnover 2314 2614 2744 2437 2704
Profit/Loss 53 39 38 197 222
Operating income 28 -9 184 150 335
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
1000s
NO
K
Figure 5 - Turnover versus Profit/Loss and Operating Income
14
commentators‟ style focuses more on the appealing side of sports attracting both viewers and
advertisers.
As explained, TV2 is highly dependent on their income from advertising. However, new
technology has been very important in relation to this. Bjørn Taalessen in TV2 puts it this
way: “Technological innovations have not only increased the number of products, but also
enabled the integrated media companies to communicate with consumers simultaneously
through several communication channels. This, as an example, also involves interactive
communication during live programmes” (Helland et al, 2011). To include the companies
early in the process and give them chance to influence the way the communication platforms
are designed is for me considered as a key factor here. In this way advertisers are able to reach
out to their target groups and TV2 will gain through a closer tie with their co-operators.
In an email, finance director of TV2 Øivind Johannessen spelled out the following challenges
in relation to the financial situation: “Maintain our market share, keep control over costs and
keep acquiring attractive sports rights”. The first concern leads us over to the distributors.
Distributors
We define distribution as “the delivery of products from supplier (TV2) to customer (viewer)”
(Beech & Chadwick, 2004: 143). Clearly, without distributors very few, if any, could watch
football on the telly. This section discusses the importance of distributors and how TV2 could
tackle the challenges arising from the cooperation with these actors.
Since the 70s there has been a growth of new distribution technologies including cable and
satellite (Solvoll, 2007). Today the television coverage is terrestrial and 92 per cent of
Norwegian households access the channel TV2. In addition to this the Internet and
development of social media has opened new doors for broadcasters and distributors. But they
are not alone. It has also given newspapers, mobile phone operators, IP television companies,
energy companies and Internet companies a chance to enter the market (Helland, K &
Solberg, H, 2011). I our case TV2 and the telecommunication company Telenor have close
ties and share ownership of the channel TV2 Zebra which owns TV2 Barclays Premier
League and TV2 Sport. The business integration in the media industry has increased both the
competition and transmission capacity – and last but not least the price on television rights
(Helland, K & Solberg, 2011). In addition to this, new products have changed the
consumptions patterns (Mikkel‟s Arsenal match).
15
In the future it is important for TV2 to keep acquiring exclusive and popular sport rights. If
they lose them, they may lose not only their subscribers, but also their distributors. Some may
argue that broadcasters nowadays do not need distributors since the channels can go online
and provide the service directly to their subscribers. This is true, but at the current stage many
broadcasters, TV2 included, are highly dependent on their income from their distributors.
3.2.2 External challenges
Competitors
Both current and possible new entrants are important challenges for TV2. Sharing the same
goals as the rights holders is therefore essential when deals are made. It will also help
maintain the relationship between the broadcaster and the seller (Solberg, 2002). In this way
TV2 may be preferred instead of competitors in the negotiation phase.
Canal+ and NRK have already been discussed. The third big competitor is Viasat. The
distributor also own sports TV channels showing competitions such as the UEFA Champions
League and the Carling Cup. Under the last World Cup, TV2 and Viasat shared the rights.
Viasat‟s coverage of the Champions League on the most popular channel Viasat 4 has
relatively high viewing figures, but except for that not many people are willing to pay for their
sport premium pay-tv channels.
For all broadcasters, TV2 and Viasat included, it is important to realize that there will always
be a threat for new entrants. For the existing channels brand building and consumer
commitment are important keywords. These two channels are also both commercial channels
which means that they will be able to acquire the biggest sports events, if and only if they
keep their subscribers (and bring in new ones) as well as being attractive for advertiser.
Technological development
This matter has already been analyzed and discussed. However it could not be highlighted too
often. Technological development has been, is and will be of great importance for TV2.
Clearly, the collaborations and the mentioned business integration will be helpful here, but it
is TV2‟s own responsibility to follow the market trends and keep developing their services
keeping in mind consumers‟ growing emphasis on service quality (Beech & Chadwick, 2004:
458).
16
World economy
During recessions many businesses‟ first cuts are in the marketing budgets. TV2‟s fall in
incomes from advertising was party explained by the late-2000s financial crisis. The situation
also led to cuts in programme budgets and several employees was either laid off or sacked.
Recently TV2 has sold technology outside Norway
(http://www.tv2.no/omtv2/pressemeldinger/tv-2-satser-internasjonalt-paa-webtvteknologi-
3456319.html, retrieved 27 May 2011). This carries risk, but currency hedging will be a one
way around it. It is important to make note of the economy in Norway, which was less hit by
the crisis than other European countries. 2011 has been a year with positivism and the
following statement from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD) illustrates this: “Norway has fully recovered from the global economic crisis. Growth
is projected to rise through 2012 on the back of increasing private consumption and
investment, despite stagnating oil and gas exports
(http://www.oecd.org/document/56/0,3746,en_2649_37443_45270072_1_1_1_37443,00.html
, retrieved 27 May 2011).
4. CONCLUSION
The managing director of Danish TV2 Sport, Claus Bretton-Meyer, said on 12 May 2011 that
change was the single most important in sport broadcasting. However I only partly agree with
him. Of course broadcasters must follow the technological development not to be left behind,
but without basic marketing theory where the consumer‟s preferences are analyzed and needs
of the consumer are met it is not possible to succeed. There is no reason to offer a service no-
one wants. Broadcasters must bear this in mind as they face the future. Bretton-Meyer also
stated «being liked is one thing, but being preferred is what matters». This statement shows
how important it is to recognize the different types of sport fans and give them what they want
- at a price they can afford. If TV2 succeed in this the viewers will get back again and again,
maybe ending up as a subscriber of all the sports channels.
This paper has helped explain how sports broadcasters operate. The development both in
technology and consumption patterns has changed this market. It is likely that the future will
bring even more of these trends. More and more people are now holders of TVs with 3D,
internet access, a tablet and a smart phone. To succeed in this market a broadcaster must offer
more than the game. Information and feeds such as tables, statistics and news is only a
17
threesome. It is difficult to predict the future, but a user-oriented and a cohesive organization
will be crucial.
Future research should focus on the changed consumption patterns and relate them to the
demand for sports broadcasting. Much research is outdated and has not considered the most
recent consumption trends and the technological developments. Another field worth
mentioning is football‟s competitive balance and uncertainty of outcome. Leagues, such as the
Spanish La Liga, are good examples of situations where many broadcasters fear the
development. Will people still watch the game if there is no or very little competition? New
technology and changes in product design may also affect the distribution of market power
between the businesses involved. When it comes to sports broadcasting these are all important
and should be carefully illustrated by new research.
5. REFERENCES
Scientific Papers, Articles and Reports
Beech, J & Chadwick, S (2004): The Business of Sport Management, Pearson Education
Limited, London
Bretton-Meyer, C (2010): Sports Broadcasting, lecture slides from Sports Economics,
Copenhagen Business School 2011
Forrest, D., Simmons, R. & Szymanski, S (2004): Broadcasting, Attendance and the
Inefficiency of Cartels, Review of Industrial Organization, 24: 243-265
Forrest, D, Simmons, R, & Boraimo, B (2005): Outcome uncertainty and the couch potato
audience, Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 52(4), 641_661.
Gaustad, T (2000): The Economics of Sports Programming, Nordicom Review, Vol. 21, 2000,
101–113
Hammervold, R & Solberg, H (2008): TV Sports Viewers – Who Are They?, Nordicom
Review 29, pp. 95-110
Helland, K & Solberg, H (2011): Sports Broadcasting – An Accelerator of Business
Integration in the Media Industry, Nordicom Review, Vol. 32, 2011, pp. x-x.
18
Johnsen, H & Solvoll, M (2007): The Demand for Televised Football, European Sports
Management Quarterly, Vol. 7, No. 4, 311-335.
Loebbecke, C & Fischer, M (2005): Pay TV Piracy and its Effects on Pay TV Provision,
Journal of Media Business Studies. 2(2), pp.17-34
Merkel, U (1994): Germany and the World Cup: Solid, reliable, often undramatic – but
successful. In J.Sugden, & A. Tomlision, Host and champions: Soccer culture, national
identities and the USA World Cup, pp. 93-118. London: Ashgate Publishing.
Neale, W (1964): The Peculiar Economics of Professional Sports, The Quarterly Journal of
Economics
Olson, Mancur (1971): The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and The Theory of
Groups, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press
Solberg, H (2007): Sports Broadcasting: Is it a Job for Public Service Broadcasters?, Journal
of Media Economics, Vol.20, pp.289-309
Solberg, H (2002): The Economics of Television Sports Rights, Norsk Medietidsskrift, Vol.9,
No.2, pp 57-80
Solvoll, M (2009): Televised Sport, BI School of Management, pp.242- 256
Spence, M & Bruce, M (1977): Television programming, monopolistic competition, and
welfare, Quarterly Journal of Econmics, 91, pp. 103-126.
TV2 Group, Annual reports 2006-2010
Electronic sources
Dagbladet (2011): Viasat rydder fem kanaler til Champions League-finalen
http://www.dagbladet.no/2011/05/26/sport/champions_league/fotball/manchester_united/barc
elona/16678017/ (retrieved 26 May 2011)
Deloitte (2011): Annual Review of Football Finance 2010
http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_GB/uk/industries/sportsbusinessgroup/sports/football/0a4be
867d38f8210VgnVCM200000bb42f00aRCRD.html (retrieved 23 May 2011)
19
Hegnar (2010): Premier League på TV2: http://www.hegnar.no/sport_fritid/article410450.ece
(retrieved 23 May 2011)
Klar Tale (2009): Ikke football-VM på NRK http://www.klartale.no/norge/article152.zrm
(retrieved 26 May 2011)
OECD (2011): Norway - Economic forecast summary
http://www.oecd.org/document/56/0,3746,en_2649_37443_45270072_1_1_1_37443,00.html
(retrieved 27 May 2011)
TV2 (2011): Storsatsing etter rekordresultat i TV2
http://mobil.tv2.no/omtv2/pressemeldinger/storsatsing-etter-rekordresultat-i-tv-2-
3409356.html (retrieved 10 May 2011)
United (2011): Møter Neville med stjernene
http://united.no/united/nyheter/nyheter/moeter_neville_med_stjernene (retrieved 23 May
2011).
Wikipedia (2010): Broadcasting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcasting, retrieved 29 May
2011).