The inquiry into sports broadcasting rights successfully places South African sport in the global media arena. The place occupied by South Africa within an international sporting industry is made apparent with the various ramifications resulting from such activity clearly highlighted. The most striking observation that is made is the presence of other countries, international companies and sporting bodies participating within the industry. These
137 participants look to benefit from televised sports in the same manner as their South African counterparts. In this sense, South Africa does not function in a unique manner. All parties and stakeholders involved in the realm of international sports media wish to maximise their profits and sustain themselves through the sale and acquisitioning of sports broadcasting rights.
After the release of the ICASA Discussion Paper (2002) a number of South African stakeholders (including SARU and Octagon CSI who both have a direct interest in South African rugby) warned against the regulation of sporting events held outside of South Africa in their submissions made to ICASA. The relevant stakeholders submitted that:
the listing of sporting events played outside of South Africa would result in adverse consequences in that reduced competition and reduced income to foreign federations would result in such federations not selling their rights to a South African broadcaster at all (ICASA Position Paper, 2003: 15).
This could result in events involving South Africa not being broadcast locally at all; a far cry from the initial intentions of listing such events (ICASA Position Paper, 2003). These sentiments indicate that the sale and acquisition of sports broadcasting rights is a delicate process that needs to take into account the needs of overseas federations and broadcasters as well as the interests of local stakeholders and authorities. A number of negative consequences which could result from the regulation of sporting events played outside of South Africa were further discussed by Octagon CSI in their submission to ICASA on behalf the United Cricket Board of South Africa and SARU. Octagon CSI submitted in their response to the ICASA Discussion Paper (2002) that the regulation of international sporting events preventing subscription broadcasters (M-Net and SuperSport) from acquiring exclusive rights in all likelihood would mean that only two South African broadcasters would bid for international rights. These broadcasters would be the SABC and eTV. Both free-to-air broadcasters have a limited budget and availability of airtime in comparison to the capabilities of M-Net and the various SuperSport channels. The primary area of concern for the overseas based sporting bodies would be the lower prices received for the broadcast rights (Octagon CSI Submission to ICASA Sport Broadcasting Rights Inquiry, 2002). South African touring teams would then come across as less attractive to host bodies as their (host’s) ability to fund the tours would diminish. The available budget used to host an international sports tour usually takes anticipated revenue from selling the broadcast rights into account. If our local broadcasters do
138 not deliver fair market prices for the acquisition of the television rights, host countries may choose to invite other international teams to tour instead of South Africa’s. These countries would represent a more economically viable proposition (Octagon CSI Submission to ICASA Sport Broadcasting Rights Inquiry, 2002).
The inability to acquire prices that are deemed fair and market related may prompt overseas sports bodies not to sell rights to South African broadcasters. This would have a negative effect on local sporting content, as previously accessible footage would become scarce. Sports bodies and sporting events would gain limited exposure on television; resulting in less interest from advertisers and potential sponsors (Octagon CSI Submission to ICASA Sport Broadcasting Rights Inquiry, 2002). International tours hosted by South Africa could be negatively affected in the long run. Overseas broadcasters may return the action and not want to pay market related prices for the right to broadcast events. This would result in poor broadcast sales and revenue generated by local sporting bodies placing their sustainability and related activities at jeopardy (Octagon CSI Submission to ICASA Sports Broadcasting Rights Inquiry, 2002). An examination of the sale and acquisition of sports broadcasting rights places the industry in the global spotlight. South Africa cannot function according to its own mandate as other international broadcasters and sporting bodies are involved. There is a need for commercial broadcasters to sustain local access to international events on a basis of exclusivity as they are in the best position to pay international market related prices and fees.
The global nature of televised sports can be further examined when scrutinising the sale of the South African, New Zealand and Australian Rugby (SANZAR30) broadcasting rights to News Corporation in 1995. News Corporation purchased the broadcast rights for rugby events falling under the control of the SANZAR territories for a contract value of 555 million US dollars for ten years; ending in 2005 with News Corporation retaining the option for a five-year renewal. As a result, News Corporation own all the broadcasting rights for professional and under-21 rugby played in South Africa (SARFU Submission to ICASA Sport Broadcasting Rights Inquiry, 2002). This deal places South African rugby firmly in the global media arena. Even domestic matches played in South Africa (Currie Cup) are controlled by an international media company. The current contract between SANZAR and
30 SANZAR is a regulatory body that controls annual rugby competitions between South Africa, New Zealand and Australia. Competitions under SANZAR control include: The Vodacom Super 14 and the Vodacom Tri- nations. Vodacom are the current title sponsors of the two competitions in South Africa.
139 News Corporation comes to an end in 2010. Regulating rugby matches and restricting the sale of rights to free-to-air broadcasters in South Africa will have an effect on the revenue of the Australian and New Zealand rugby organising bodies as well (SARFU Submission to ICASA Sport Broadcasting Rights Inquiry, 2002). The international media are significant players in the sports broadcasting industry and have a large reach in terms of their global influence. These large corporations are attracted to sporting events as they attract new subscribers to commercial television networks and open the door for appealing advertising contracts.
The power relations that exist within the tussle for sports broadcasting rights and who should be in line to acquire them has a profound effect on television schedules around the world. Large scale international media companies attempt to dominate sports media as they are afforded the opportunity to generate vast quantities of wealth for themselves. The theory discussed in Chapter Three of the dissertation emphasises this importance. A large international media company like News Corporation is at an advantage over other companies as a result of the SANZAR deal. Through the SANZAR deal, News Corporation control the broadcast rights for the major annual rugby competitions held in the southern hemisphere. A South African broadcaster, such as SuperSport, will bid for the rights for Super14 matches as will New Zealand and Australian broadcasters. If a network wishes to broadcast any of the tournaments and matches falling under the control of SANZAR they have to purchase them from News Corporation. Many networks located in countries other than those involved in the actual tournaments (Super14 and Tri-Nations) may wish to broadcast matches in order to supplement their own rugby content. These networks will again have to buy the rights from News Corporation. This makes the deal lucrative for both the SANZAR unions and News Corporation. SANZAR are guaranteed a fixed amount from the deal, whilst News Corporation is in a position to sell the rights to many interested parties; generating its own money in the process. This type of situation is made evident by the inclusion of Heineken Cup matches and many other international rugby fixtures on SuperSport channels.
SuperSport caters for the needs of their subscribers by acquiring the rights to broadcast Heineken Cup matches to South African audiences. The broadcast rights to the Heineken Cup31 are held by the European Rugby Cup (ERC) organisation. This body sells
31 The Heineken Cup is an annual European rugby competition similar to the Super14.
140 their rights directly to broadcasters around the world who wish to include the content in their television schedules. There is no ‘middle man’ in the arrangement so to speak, as is the case with the SANZAR and News Corporation relationship32. SuperSport would have to acquire broadcasting rights directly from the ERC organisation in order to broadcast the Heineken Cup to South African viewers. Other than a few South African players plying their trade for European clubs there is no direct link between South Africa and the Heineken Cup. However, the holder of the rights to the Heineken Cup will have made an additional sale by allowing SuperSport to screen their matches. The holder increases its wealth whilst highlighting the global nature of sports media in the process.