This is a fairly mind-blowing figure revealed this Thursday, November 28, by Benjamin Morel, general manager of LFP Media, the commercial subsidiary of the Professional Football League. Citing a study carried out by the Ipsos institute, the latter indicated that, since the start of the Ligue 1 season, 37% of people who followed the championship did so illegally.
IPTVs continue to thrive
It’s even worse for the last classico which opposed OM to PSG. For this prestigious meeting, no less than 55% of spectators resorted to indirect means. The latter spoke as part of the presentation of Arcom’s 2024 Report on the fight against piracy.
The web policeman, through his deputy general director, Pauline Combredet-Blassel, has rightly indicated that the shortfall for the sports sector linked to illegal retransmission of events is 290 million euros per year. The administrative authority welcomes a drop in pirate live streaming, which was made possible by the blocking of 7,000 illegal domain names in 2022 (and which has continued regularly since).
However, and this is a recurring observation, Arcom is concerned about the rise in power of IPTV. “We have blocked more than 1,600 since the start of 2024, but the question is whether this will be enough”asks the manager.
For his part, Benjamin Morel refutes the argument according to which the excessively high cost of the legal offer, and in particular of DAZN, is responsible for piracy: “Prices cannot in any way justify piracy, which is theft”.
Working on the legal offer to reduce piracy?
Looking the Arcom report However, on closer inspection, we note some significant room for improvement on this point. The shortfall linked to the consumption of audiovisual and sporting content through protocols amounts to a total of 1.5 billion euros, or 12% of the market.
But, “37% of respondents, having previously declared that they would not subscribe to one of the existing offers, indicate that they would be interested in a more attractive offer”. In detail, 21% would be attracted by a subscription service at a lower price or allowing them to cancel at any time.
Likewise, 16% would like a “pay-per-play” service which would allow them to watch a single match at a reduced price. Proof, if any were needed, that there is still a lot of work to be done on the legal offer to attract new customers. For your part, do you think that a drop in prices could attract more spectators to official broadcasters? Tell us in the comments.
