As upfront negotiations near, buyers chart path through complex sports market

Earlier this month, the issue prompted the U.S. Justice Department to open an anti-trust investigation into the NFL concerning complaints that watching football has become too pricey for viewers at home. But fragmentation of sports rights matters for advertisers, too.

Strategic pain

The annual television upfronts season, which kicks off in just a few weeks, will confront media buyers and brands with a sports media market of unprecedented complexity. Brands aiming to dominate coverage of the NFL, MLB or NBA will have to plan around a large cast of rights-holders, each with different format and schedule offerings that complicate campaign strategies and measurement efforts.

“The fragmentation of audiences in general is more of a pain for advertisers than if it was centralized among fewer networks,” said eMarketer analyst Ross Benes.

Advertisers also have to keep in mind consumers’ lack of loyalty to streaming services. The sports fan that signs up to watch a specific game or tournament run on Peacock or Amazon, for example, might not stick around for long; 49% of Americans changed their streaming service providers in 2025, according to YouGov.

Related Insights

Member Exclusive

Future of TV Briefing: How Netflix is shaking up the upfront deal model Subscribe To Read Read More

Ashley Silver, group director, integrated investment at CrossMedia, told Digiday that “streaming cyclers” meant brands might have to approach live sports upfront conversations with a more selective strategy, that targeted key tentpole moments but didn’t rely on streamers to guarantee audience retention down the line. “[Audiences] are still tuning in for those high moment events. They won’t be there for the retargeting strategy,” she said.

The issue is most acute regarding the NFL, according to Teddy Montalvo, vp and managing director of sports integrated investment at Horizon. 

“The mass ratings of the NFL are a microcosm of this overall concept,” said Montalvo. “Advertisers with strict flighting, or key industry windows, need to be ready to move early to ensure they secure desired inventory.” 

WIth streaming services working to tempt more non-endemic advertisers to spend on sports, competition to grab enough inventory has increased. That puts pressure on brands hoping to own a given season or sport, he noted.

“Despite fragmentation, advertisers need to land inventory within the upfront. It’s why we see earlier sellout each year,” said Montalvo.  

Pricing gain

While the tangled sports rights market can frustrate marketers and media agencies, it’s also a factor weighing in their favor when it’s time to haggle. “It’s good for pricing, but hard on strategy,” said one holding company media exec, who exchanged anonymity for candor. “On the one hand: the more distribution, the more negotiation, the more [we have] power to leverage on pricing. But at the same time it’s harder to actually find the consumers and engage with them all in one place.”

The increasing number of media companies touting sports inventory has — generally speaking — served to put a lid on CPMs (cost-per-thousand), according to three buyers who spoke to Digiday.

Related Insights

Member Exclusive

Media Buying Briefing: What buyers got out of the NewFronts and expect to happen in the upfronts Subscribe To Read Read More

“The friction that frustrates the fan is the exact thing that actually gives media buyers more leverage and empowers us,” said Shasta Cafarelli, svp of media investment at Tinuiti.

That’s partly a consequence of supply and demand. It’s also due to streamers using sports rights as a lure to build their subscription businesses, rather than as an excuse to hike ad rates.

“[Media] partners are obviously intent on making back the investment that they’ve made, but on the flip side of that, there is such an abundance now of new and differentiated opportunities,” said Cafarelli.

The focus on flexibility sought by many advertisers amid last year’s tariff-inspired caution will likely remain a feature of this year’s upfront market. “Vendors are going to move the whiskey with the wine,” said the holdco exec.

In some cases, the leverage gained from rights fragmentation could work in favor of buyers aiming to secure favorable positions. Another media buyer, who traded anonymity for candor, said they had successfully negotiated opt-out clauses in contracts with TV networks and streamers that allowed them to allocate — or pull — spend based on sporting minutiae that might pull or push audiences away, such as whether certain players were due to appear in games or not.

“We build in triggers to our buys throughout the year to make sure we can be as dynamic as possible to what’s happening in the season itself,” they said.

Montalvo said his team looked to secure “protection clauses” in contracts to grant extra insurance to clients worried about how tumultuous rights negotiations might affect their investment. Major League Baseball’s collective bargaining agreement, which expires this December, was one obstacle he anticipated working around.

“Agencies must protect their clients’ investments against potential lockouts or season delays via strict deal-point language that allows for flexibility in such events,” said Montalvo.

High demand for commerce-adjacent media inventory, such as that offered by Prime Video, would likely be another feature of this year’s market.

“We’re seeing the barrier between brand inspiration on the TV screen and the ability to shop a brand effectively disappear,” said Cafarelli. “As more sports [rights] move to streaming environments… we’re going to see an increased focus on that full funnel activation.”