stephen wisking, partner, [email protected] 20 may 2014 pay tv under the competition...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Stephen Wisking, Partner, [email protected]
20 MAY 2014
PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS’ SCRUTINY
THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES
45420667
![Page 2: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
• Pay TV Supply Chain
• History of Regulatory Scrutiny
• BSkyB/ITV
• Pay TV Movies
OVERVIEW
![Page 3: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
PAY-TV SUPPLY CHAIN
Content rights holders
Content aggregators (including channel providers)
Pay-TV retailers
TVOD SVOD ‘Basic’ pay channels
‘Premium’ pay channels
Consumers
Pay-TV platforms
DTHCableDTT/IPTVDTTIPTVOpen Internet
Advertisers
![Page 4: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
HISTORY OF REGULATORY SCRUTINY
• 1995 Sky cable price Undertakings to the DGFT (reviewed every two years)
• 1999 Restrictive Practices Court (Premium League, Sky, BBC)
• 2000-2002 OFT Competition Act Investigation of Sky
• 2006-2009 review of Sky acquisition of 17.9% of ITV
• 2007-2010 Ofcom Pay TV review
• 2008-2009 CC review of BBC/ITV/Ch4 VoD JV
• 2010 - ? Pay TV review appeals
• 2010- 2012 CC Pay TV Movies review
• 2014 Further Ofcom Pay TV Review
![Page 5: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
SKY/ITV
• Sky acquired 17.9% in ITV plc a FTA broadcaster
• Public interest referral to the CC (plurality)
• Ability to materially influence:
• Ability to block special resolutions
• Potential to limit strategic options
• Weight would be given to Sky’s views
• All TV market analytical framework – FTA is a constraint on Pay TV – includes VoD
![Page 6: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
SKY/ITV
• SLC because Sky could influence:
• Content production/commissioning
• Investment in HD on DTT
• Influence acquisitions by or of ITV
•No SLC in relation to:
• TV advertising
• Pay TV
• News provision
• No plurality concern
![Page 7: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
SKY/ITV APPEALS
• JR grounds only
• Challenge on the basis that the CC failed to meet the standard of proof for material influence/SLC rejected by the CAT/CoA
• Virgin successfully challenged in the CAT the plurality test applied by the CC but reversed in the CoA
![Page 8: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
PAY TV REVIEW
• 2007 complaints by BT, Setanta, TopUpTV and Virgin Media to Ofcom seeking a market reference to the CC
• 2010 Ofcom decision:
• Wholesale must offer remedy in respect of SS1 and SS2
• Consultation on a reference to the CC in relation to movies
• At the same time conditional approval of Sky’s 2007 application to offer a pay DTT service
![Page 9: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
CC PAY TV MOVIES
• Referred the supply/acquisition of Pay TV movie rights for linear broadcast/SVoD services in the first pay window (FSPTW) and wholesale supply of packages including Sky movie channels
• Ofcom concern that Sky’s position in relation to SVoD rights could impede competition – CA98 and sectoral powers limited
• Theory of harm – vicious circle – without access to rights difficult to compete for retail subs and without retail subs harder to compete for rights
• CC provisionally finds an AEC in 2011 but not in the final report in 2012 – market developments and the reappraisal of evidence critical
![Page 10: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
MARKET DEFINITION
• Context specific – wider than Ofcom/OFT but narrower than ITV
• Pay TV retail market including movies, sports and basic channels and SVoD but left open whether incl. TVoD and PPV
• FTA, telephony and broadband out of market constraints
• Did not define the market at the wholesale level
• At the content level all movie content in the FSPTW (not limited to Hollywood majors)
![Page 11: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
CC ANALYSIS
• Sky is found to have market power in the retail market
• Difficulties of switching
• Costs of large scale entry and expansion
• Increased competition from Lovefilm and Netflix not enough
• But market power had not prevented development of SVoD services
• Sky Movies content was only significant to a small minority of Pay TV subscribers in choosing a Pay TV service
• Other attributes more valued than recency (e.g. cost, contract periods and range of content)
• OTT services are substitutable
• Change from PFs
![Page 12: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
CC ANALYSIS
• Barriers to acquisition of rights were limited:
• Lower barriers for OTT retailers and expected to erode further
• Change from PFs
• It follows no strategic incentive to limit supply of Sky Movie channels to other retailers:
• Evidence inconclusive as to whether terms of supply placed other retailers at a disadvantage
• Change from PFs
![Page 13: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
![Page 14: Stephen Wisking, Partner, stephen.wisking@hsf.com 20 MAY 2014 PAY TV UNDER THE COMPETITION REGULATORS SCRUTINY THE FRENCH AND UK PERSPECTIVES 45420667](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062712/56649c4c5503460f948f1a2f/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)