Shortly after the ink dried on the NBA’s astonishing $76 billion, decade-plus media rights deals last year, my best sources wondered what fate might befall the next crop of leagues heading out to test the market. Yes, yes, everyone expects the NFL to pursue an out in its current contracts to renegotiate terms in 2029, and use the NBA’s recent success as leverage for what’s sure to be an utterly gobsmacking, market-defying number. But between now and then, many whispered, the industry was likely to face a stagnant market, at best, for less sexy leagues—F1, the Mountain West, the Pac-12, and even a post-ESPN-divorce MLB—and fewer (and more cash-conscious) bidders.

The Peak TV era, the decade-plus when streamers and networks forked over billions to grow and maintain their platforms, is now a relic of the past in the general entertainment industry. And the sports media market appears to be following a similar trajectory. Netflix, Amazon, and YouTube have turned out to be unsurprisingly savvy trade partners—keenly aware of what they need to enhance their LTV metrics and seduce advertisers, which often skews niche or eventized over tonnage, formerly the mother’s milk of the trade. And the cable players, like the newly established Versant and GunnarCo, are less certain participants than ever before.

In fact, multiple sources have described the current sports rights marketplace as the toughest that they’ve ever seen. To be clear, it’s not a market crash or a bursting bubble—there are still plenty of companies coveting sports rights. But the huge fee increases that have been a hallmark of the past two decades are becoming much tougher to negotiate. For instance, several media companies have expressed interest in F1, which has been looking for an increase over the $90 million per year that ESPN currently pays for U.S. rights. The racing series went to market earlier this year, looking to up that deal to $150 million–$180 million. F1 executives took a lot of meetings, but it looks like they’ve had to recalibrate their expectations. F1 will get a U.S. deal done—it’s reengaged with ESPN and has the ear of several streamers. But it doesn’t look like the sport will secure the massive bump it once hoped for.

There is also a looming fear, in particular, that the market will become even tighter during the next three or four years, when some of the biggest rights packages come to market: MLB’s national deals with Fox and TNT Sports are up after the 2028 season; ditto the NHL’s agreements with ESPN and TNT Sports. And then there’s the NFL, the following year, which threatens to suck the oxygen out of the room for everyone else.

Meanwhile, I’m hearing the jury is still out on Major League Baseball’s fortunes. Most believe that the MLB will be fine—the league dominates primetime in October, via the playoffs, and features some of the country’s (world’s) most popular brands in the Dodgers, Yankees, and Cubs.

But there are premonitions that the league could face a brutal negotiation. To wit: The Athletic reported today that MLB is back in discussions with ESPN about the package of games and events—Sunday Night Baseball, the Home Run Derby, and the wild card playoff round—that it relinquished earlier this year. Apple, NBC, and Fox have also shown interest in the package, but none of the talks so far has approached the $550 million per year that ESPN was paying.

In some respects, MLB’s negotiations this summer don’t matter all that much. MLB commissioner Rob Manfred has signaled that he’s working on a larger roll-up of all his national game and local team rights to take to the broader market in 2028. Manfred’s grand plan is strategic and estimable, but potentially unrealistic. Will the commissioner be able to seduce the Yankees and Dodgers, among the league’s top local earners, to follow along and play nice? Will the streamers, who have already signaled their preference for quality over quantity, meet his price? What if they’re licking their lips, at least financially, for a shot at, say, the CBS NFL package the subsequent year?

As I’ve mentioned before, the popularization of American sports has progressed by leveraging the dominant media platforms of each era. Baseball, with its long duration and stops in play, grew to prominence during the dawn of radio nearly a century ago. Football, which fit neatly into a rectangular boob tube, skyrocketed into the culture as Americans brought home color TVs en masse in the postwar years. The NBA blossomed with younger audiences on cable. There’s going to be an inevitable reshuffling as the industry countenances streaming. All we know is that the past won’t necessarily be prologue.

On Amazon’s demos: “Amazon Prime makes more than $44 billion in subscription revenue, probably over 1,000x what they make in NASCAR ad sales. It’s preposterous to suggest there’s a meaningful difference in ARPU between over 55s and under 55s when all the revenue is subscription-based. The aggressively ageist attitude Amazon takes toward the oldest and most loyal fans of NASCAR (and the NFL) is embarrassing.” —A media executive

On NFL collusion: “You wrote that the story doesn’t seem to have legs. Maybe that’s because the reporters who are beholden to the NFL are abdicating their duty to advance it…” —An NFL commentator

On my social calendar: “Since you seem comfortable hanging around The End (a.k.a. Montauk, a.k.a. the Hamptons), can I count on being your plus-one for the White Party, or does Marchand’s severance agreement lock him in, as long as he’s pouring the Sancerre?” —A cable guy

[Ed. note: Thanks for asking. But if Marchand doesn’t join me, who will hold my sun umbrella?]

Speaking of Marchand: “I, for one, would be delighted if you dropped the Marchand jokes. I love the newsletter, but I scan any paragraph for ‘Marchand’ and skip reading it if I see the term within.” —A perceptive Varsity subscriber

[Ed. note: Blame Marchand, he writes them!]

Have a great Fourth. See you next week,
John