YouTube, Netflix, and Amazon have set aside their usual rivalry to form a new alliance. The trio have joined forces as founding members of the Streaming Access and Choice Alliance (SACA), along with TechNet, a national network of tech company leaders that backs American innovation. Their mission: convince Congress that streaming services deserve the power to strike exclusive deals with major sports leagues.
The group says its aim is “promoting high-quality and high-value entertainment experiences for consumers.” That translates to talking to Capitol Hill about why streaming services should be allowed to lock up sports rights the way they have been doing. The companies have already signed some big deals:
- YouTube locked up NFL Sunday Ticket for seven years
- Netflix paid $5 billion for 10 years of WWE Raw
- Amazon signed an 11-year NBA deal
Each streamer has also taken smaller exclusive deals for individual matches or small groups of games. They are all chasing the World Cup 2030 and 2034 rights as well.
The Push Against Exclusive Deals
These deals have drawn closer attention from U.S. regulators. In April, Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) proposed a bill aimed at stopping leagues from blacking out games and forcing fans to pay for multiple streaming services. Her bill would require leagues to give local fans free access to all their teams’ games in one place, on streaming or traditional TV.
Baldwin pointed to her Wisconsin constituents, who she said would need to spend over $1,500 across several channels and services to watch all Packers, Brewers, and Bucks games in a single season. She also noted that the Packers’ playoff game against the Bears was only available on Amazon Prime in five of Wisconsin’s seven media markets. More than 400,000 Green Bay Packers fans in 13 Wisconsin counties were assigned to an out-of-state local TV market, meaning they could get Minnesota Vikings or Detroit Lions games instead of Packers games when those teams played at the same time.
Two months later, the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee began looking into the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961, which lets sports leagues avoid antitrust rules when selling media rights. The committee’s report said the current state of sports rights is “a special-interest antitrust exemption gone awry.”
What SACA Says
Mike Ward, TechNet’s Senior VP of Federal Policy and Government Relations, pushed back directly. He said Americans want more content choices and flexibility in how and where they watch sports and other live events.
“Streaming and digital entertainment companies offer audiences better features and value for their money,” he added. “The industry and its customers deserve a dedicated voice in Washington, D.C., advocating for policies that enable innovation and address the needs of today’s consumers.”
The broader picture is that streaming services are now more expensive than cable overall. Rights to movies and TV shows keep changing hands, and titles disappear fast — log on to Netflix, Peacock, Paramount+, Disney+, or HBO Max, and you will likely find a “Leaving soon” label on at least one title. Consumers are holding more subscriptions than ever.
For live sports, that pattern is particularly painful. Fans are famously loyal, and that loyalty now costs money with streamers securing more exclusive deals. Baldwin’s point stands: the more leagues sell rights to one service, the less choice fans have.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.