Venu Sports is under scrutiny by US politicians

Three US politicians — Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), as well as Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX) — are calling on law enforcement to investigate Venu Sports, a streaming service created by Disney, Fox, and Warner Bros. The venture is due to launch this fall, and will include popular sports channels such as ESPN and TNT. That risks a monopoly in US sports broadcasting, the politicians say in a letter sent to Justice Department antitrust czar Jonathan Kanter and Federal Communications Commission Chair Jessica Rosenworcel, as reported by The Atheltic.

Venu could be “poised to control more than 80% of nationally broadcast sports and more than half of all national sports content, putting it in a position to exercise monopoly power over televised sports,” the letter reads. It adds that competitors would have to negotiate with Venu’s parent companies “for access to over half of the major sporting licensing rights,” while at the same time “competing against these companies to offer the best product to broadcast or stream these programs.”

Warren, Sanders, and Castro note that in the US, a single company isn’t allowed to own stations that reach more than 39% of households. It’s not certain whether a streaming service would violate this rule. Nevertheless, the politicians warn that Venu could unfairly discriminate against competitors, and potentially inflate the prices of watching sports. The service is already expected to cost $43 per month, which is less than some live TV packages (such as YouTube TV) but steep next to on-demand platforms like Netflix or Max.

Is Venu Sports facing an uphill battle?

Momentum against the Venu partnership has been building for a while. As far back as April, Castro and Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) said they were pursuing antitrust concerns. A month later, companies like Fubo and Dish Networks were urging congressional probes, worried that they might be driven out of business.

On top of that, the Justice Department has become more aggressive about antitrust regulation in general. It’s engaged in a range of cases, most notably the one against Google, which is accused of monopolizing web search. Another prominent example is Apple, charged with exercising unfair control over what apps and connected accessories can do on its platforms. A district court judge has already ruled against Google, which could set a precedent if that decision survives a likely appeal at the Supreme Court.