The Impact of Digitalization on Sports Broadcasting: An Analysis of how Streaming Changed the German Sports Broadcasting Market (BestMasters) 365839868X, 9783658398682

Table of contents :
Acknowledgements
Abstract
Contents
Abbreviations
List of Figures
1 Introduction
1.1 Research
1.2 Structure
2 Literature Review
2.1 Sports Television History
2.2 TV
2.2.1 Public TV and Sports
2.2.2 Pay TV and Sports
2.3 Digital Technologies
2.3.1 Social Media
2.3.2 Big Data
2.4 Streaming
2.4.1 Sports Streaming
2.4.2 OTT
2.4.3 DAZN
2.4.4 Niche Streaming
2.4.5 Illegal Streaming
2.5 Broadcasting Rights
2.5.1 Bundesliga Rights
2.5.2 Cooperation
2.5.3 Amazon
2.6 Watching Football in Germany
2.7 Covid-19
3 Methodology
3.1 Research Design
3.1.1 Hypotheses
3.1.2 Data Collection
3.1.3 Participant Acquisition
3.1.4 Data Analysis
3.2 Survey Design
3.2.1 Pretest
3.2.2 Data Protection
3.3 Limitations
3.4 Expected Results
4 Results
4.1 Sample Summary
4.2 Analysis of Data
4.3 Test of Hypotheses
5 Discussion
5.1 Implications
5.2 Limitations
5.3 Further Research
6 Conclusion
References

Citation preview

BestMasters

Martin Hagelgans

The Impact of Digitalization on Sports Broadcasting An Analysis of how Streaming Changed the German Sports Broadcasting Market

BestMasters

Mit „BestMasters“ zeichnet Springer die besten Masterarbeiten aus, die an renommierten Hochschulen in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz entstanden sind. Die mit Höchstnote ausgezeichneten Arbeiten wurden durch Gutachter zur Veröffentlichung empfohlen und behandeln aktuelle Themen aus unterschiedlichen Fachgebieten der Naturwissenschaften, Psychologie, Technik und Wirtschaftswissenschaften. Die Reihe wendet sich an Praktiker und Wissenschaftler gleichermaßen und soll insbesondere auch Nachwuchswissenschaftlern Orientierung geben. Springer awards “BestMasters” to the best master’s theses which have been completed at renowned Universities in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. The studies received highest marks and were recommended for publication by supervisors. They address current issues from various fields of research in natural sciences, psychology, technology, and economics. The series addresses practitioners as well as scientists and, in particular, offers guidance for early stage researchers.

Martin Hagelgans

The Impact of Digitalization on Sports Broadcasting An Analysis of how Streaming Changed the German Sports Broadcasting Market

Martin Hagelgans Heusenstamm, Germany

ISSN 2625-3577 ISSN 2625-3615 (electronic) BestMasters ISBN 978-3-658-39868-2 ISBN 978-3-658-39869-9 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39869-9 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2022 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer Gabler imprint is published by the registered company Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature. The registered company address is: Abraham-Lincoln-Str. 46, 65189 Wiesbaden, Germany

Acknowledgements

Ich möchte diese Gelegenheit gerne nutzen, um einmal allen Menschen zu danken, die mich bisher auf meinem Lebensweg begleitet und unterstützt haben. Vielen Dank für Alles! Ein besonderer Dank geht an die HMKW in Frankfurt am Main, bei der ich ein wunderschönes Studium absolvieren durfte. Auch in Zeiten der OnlineVorlesungen hat mir das Studium stets Freude bereitet und ich schaue sehr gerne auf die Zeit zurück. Des Weiteren möchte ich Herrn Prof. Dr. Sao-Wen Cheng und Herrn Prof. Dr. Stefan Lutz für Ihre Unterstützung und ihre lehrreichen Vorlesungen danken. Mein Interesse für Medien und Statistik wurde durch ihre Vorlesungen maßgeblich gesteigert. Ich wünsche Ihnen für die Zukunft nur das Beste und bleiben Sie beide gesund! Insbesondere möchte ich meinen Eltern danken, die die letzten 27 Jahre immer für mich da gewesen sind, mich immer unterstützt haben und mir immer ihre bedingungslose Liebe entgegengebracht haben. Ich bin jeden einzelnen Tag dankbar für Euch und liebe Euch von ganzem Herzen! Ich möchte meinen Großeltern Bill und Erika danken, die immer für mich da gewesen sind. Ich bin unendlich dankbar, dass ich Euch in meinem Leben haben durfte. Ich denke viel an Euch und werde Euch nie vergessen. Ebenfalls möchte ich meinem Onkel Thomas danken, der mir sehr viel bedeutet und auf den ich immer zählen kann. Ich möchte auch meiner Freundin Chiara danken, die ich über alles liebe. Chiara, du bist so ein unfassbar toller Mensch. Ich liebe Dich!

v

vi

Acknowledgements

Ich danke auch allen meinen Freunden, die mich bisher in meinem Leben begleitet haben und weiterhin begleiten. Ich bin sehr dankbar für Euch und wünsche Euch allen, dass alle Eure Träume in Erfüllung gehen und ihr alle ein langes und gesundes Leben habt. Danke für unzählige lustige, komische, betrunkene und schöne Momente mit Euch!

Abstract

When it comes to “streaming”, most people think of movies or series on Netflix, Amazon Prime or Disney+. This ground breaking technological innovation has not only changed the movie industry, but also the sports broadcasting market and the way people consume live sports events. Sports streaming services offer consumers the ability to watch live sports events on a variety of devices such as a TV, laptop, tablet or smartphone. Compared to movie streaming services (e.g. Netflix), streaming sports events is very different as the time aspect plays a very important role. As soon as the respective live sporting event has taken place and has been broadcast live, the interest in this event drops rapidly. A major advantage of streaming compared to traditional television, namely the possibility to consume at any time, therefore does not really come into play in this area. This Master’s thesis deals with the analysis of digital technologies and streaming technology on sports broadcasting. The focus is on the German sports broadcasting industry. The main objective is to identify and analyse the different parameters that have changed due to the disruptive innovation of streaming and other technological innovations. In particular, quantitative methods in the form of an online survey are used to identify the usage behaviour of consumers. The data collected shows, among other things, that there is a broad interest in many sports and sports streaming services are already used by many consumers. Furthermore, the data show that the use of a sports streaming provider has an impact on consumer behaviour.

vii

Contents

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 3 4

2 Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Sports Television History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 TV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1 Public TV and Sports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2 Pay TV and Sports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Digital Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 Social Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2 Big Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Streaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.1 Sports Streaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.2 OTT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.3 DAZN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.4 Niche Streaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.5 Illegal Streaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 Broadcasting Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5.1 Bundesliga Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5.2 Cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5.3 Amazon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6 Watching Football in Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7 Covid-19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7 7 9 11 12 13 14 17 18 21 23 24 27 28 30 32 34 34 35 36

ix

x

Contents

3 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.1 Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.2 Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.3 Participant Acquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.4 Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Survey Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.1 Pretest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.2 Data Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 Expected Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

39 40 41 44 45 46 48 50 51 52 53

4 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 Sample Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Analysis of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 Test of Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

55 55 60 72

5 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3 Further Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

81 81 85 87

6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

89

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

93

Abbreviations

ARD AVOD BMX CEO CSV DFB DFL DM DSF i.e. IP IPTV MLB MMA n NBA NFL NWDR OTT PDC RTL SVOD TVOD UEFA US

Arbeitsgemeinschaft der öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstalten der Bundesrepublik Deutschland Advertising-Video-on-Demand Bicycle Motocross Chief Executive Officer Comma-separated values Deutscher Fußball-Bund e.V. Deutsche Fußball Liga GmbH Deutsche Mark Deutsches Sportfernsehen id est (that is) Internet Protocol Internet Protocol Television Major League Baseball Mixed Martial Arts Sample size National Basketball Association National Football League Nordwestdeutscher Rundfunk Over the top Professional Darts Corporation Radio Télévision Luxembourg Subscription-Video-on-Demand Transactional-Video-on-Demand Union of European Football Associations United States

xi

xii

USA VOD VPN WNBA ZDF

Abbreviations

United States of America Video-on-Demand Virtual Private Network Women’s National Basketball Association Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen

List of Figures

Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure

2.1 3.1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7

Figure 4.8

Bundesliga Coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Age Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Family Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Highest level of education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Employment Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What are your favourite sports to watch? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What are the most important characteristics of a sports broadcaster? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Which niche sports are you most interested in? . . . . . . . . . . . .

33 49 57 58 59 59 60 63 64 69

xiii

1

Introduction

Digitalisation has permanently changed our everyday lives. These changes are noticeable in many areas, be it in school and academic education, in professional life or even in leisure time. The global Covid-19 pandemic has highlighted how important digitalisation really is. Without digital media, home schooling, online lectures and home offices would not have been possible. But media use in leisure time has also changed significantly due to digitalisation. On the one hand, the supply side as well as the offer has become larger and on the other hand, the consumption of the demand side has increased (Waldfogel, 2018). In contrast to media such as television or radio, which have tended to show a decline in use for years, the average daily use of the internet has been rising sharply for some time (Zenith, 2019). In Germany the use and consumption of the internet is increasing the most of all media (Seven.One Media GmbH, 2021). If one divides the media into the three different segments, audio, video and text, one can see that visual content is consumed by far the most (Media Perspektiven, 2021b). Sport and the media are in a close and interdependent relationship with each other (Schafmeister, 2007). The media stage and broadcast sport content independent of space and time, while sport motivates the media to develop technically and technologically (Thieme, 2014). With a population of just over 83 million, Germany is the largest country in the European Union. However, not only the high number of inhabitants and the associated mass of potential consumers, but also the enthusiasm for sport within society, make Germany an extremely interesting market. The reasons for this lie in the history of the Federal Republic; today there are over 87,000 registered sports clubs (Deutscher Olympischer Sportbund, 2021b). Across Germany, sports clubs have over 23 million members (Deutscher Olympischer Sportbund, 2021a). The most popular sport among Germans is football, which is not only played itself but is also the most popular sport in sports broadcasting (IfD Allensbach, 2021). Already in the 1980s, on Monday mornings, after a sporty weekend © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2022 M. Hagelgans, The Impact of Digitalization on Sports Broadcasting, BestMasters, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39869-9_1

1

2

1

Introduction

with various broadcasts, media sport was the biggest topic of conversation in the workplace (Becker, 1983). According to a study by PwC (2018), 85% of Germans said that they follow sports coverage at least rarely or on major events. Football plays a central role in the German population, which is illustrated by the fact that the share of subscribers to Pay TV channels among football fans is about 14% higher than in the normal population (IfD Allensbach, 2018). The popularity of football is strongly illustrated when looking at the most successful sports broadcasts in Germany in terms of audience market share. Between 2010 and 2019, all of these sporting events were matches of the German national football team in either a European Championship or a World Cup (Media Control, 2020b). It can therefore be concluded that major football events with German participation generate a high level of interest among the population. If we look at the most popular sports broadcasts between 2000 and 2009, a similar picture emerges: all broadcasts showed European and World Cup football matches and, with two exceptions, all were matches of the German national team (Media Control, 2020a). For consumers, the benefit of a sport is higher if they know the sport and the rules, otherwise the respective broadcast can be perceived as boring (Schellhaass & Hafkemeyer, 2002). According to Scheellhass & Hafkemeyer (2002), this is why football is so popular in Germany and why sports such as baseball, whose exact set of rules is rather unknown in Germany, are less popular. The Germans’ enthusiasm for sports, however, goes far beyond football, which is also reflected in the number of viewers of the annual Super Bowl, which is held in the USA. In 2021, the TV audience figures were 2.11 million, an increase of over 70% compared to 2017 (ran, 2021). It should be noted that the Superbowl in Germany is broadcast after midnight and into the early hours of the morning (Robbers, 2021), which is one of the least popular times to watch television (IfD Allensbach, 2019). According to this, there is a certain interest in this event that is so great that consumers even stay awake at night for it (Klein, 2020). According to Lindholm (2019), sports and sports broadcasts attract such a high level of interest among consumers as hardly any other program can do. Evens & Donders (2018) also note that sports are enjoying great popularity among viewers, bringing great value to broadcasters and transforming the global television market as well as the global streaming market. Looking at the content and content categories that are most live-streamed globally, consumption of sporting events was already in second place behind consumption of series in 2018 (IAB (U.S.), 2018). What makes sport so popular on the provider side is, among other things, the fact that sport is relatively inexpensive to produce compared to series or films (Hutchins et al., 2019).

1.1 Research

1.1

3

Research

It should be noted that sports and sports broadcasts are of great interest to German society. There have also been studies in this area for decades that have analysed the conditions and changes. It is already known that the transmission of sports content via streaming is becoming increasingly popular (grabyo, 2021). However, quite recent developments and changes in the market, such as the emergence of sports streaming providers or the inclusion of social media in sports broadcasting, still offer enough space to be explored. Another example of an aspect that has not yet been much discussed is the global Covid-19 pandemic and its impact on the German sports broadcasting market and, in particular, the usage behaviour of consumers. It should also be noted that many studies do not explicitly and exclusively examine the German sports broadcasting market, but rather other or several countries. This research aims to test existing theories and gain new insights in this area by examining current user behaviour in relation to new technological realities and trends. The aim of this research is to provide new insights in the field of sports broadcasting in Germany and to review and possibly confirm existing findings. Since many studies are not limited to Germany as a sports broadcasting market and at the same time few studies examine the connection and interaction between sports broadcasting and technological developments, this study will aim to identify precisely these things. The first aim is to identify the demand for sports broadcasting and how it is consumed by consumers. Secondly, it aims to find out what influence sports streaming has on the consumption of sports broadcasts. Thirdly, it will be examined to what extent social media plays a role in sports broadcasting and user behaviour. Fourthly, it will be investigated how diverse the interest in sports is or whether there is interest in many different types of sports. This study will try to contribute to the knowledge about the usage behaviour of people interested in sports in relation to sports broadcasting. The study will also produce findings that could give sports broadcasters an insight into the usage behaviour and needs of consumers. The results of this study must be seen against the background of some limitations. Quantitative methods were chosen for the study, which allows for the collection and analysis of a wide range of data, but may not be able to capture everything due to the limited selection of questions and limited response options. Furthermore, the limited resources for the acquisition of participants in the study led to the use of convenience sampling and the fact that many participants came from the social environment of the researcher, which could lead to the study not

4

1

Introduction

being generalisable. Another aspect is the limited experience of the researcher, as this Master Thesis is the second academic research project.

1.2

Structure

This thesis is divided into two primary parts, which consist of the literature review, i.e. the theoretical framework, and the own research. The literature review consists of various topics that together will map the German sports broadcasting market and the changes brought about by digital technologies. The own research is divided into three different parts. It starts with the methodology, which describes in more detail how the research was conducted. Then the results of the research are presented and the main findings are discussed with the findings from the literature. In the last part of the thesis, all the findings are summarised and a conclusion is drawn. It begins with a review of the relevant literature in this field, starting with an overview of the emergence and development of the German television sports broadcasting market. This is primarily about the early years of television sports broadcasting as well as the development and changes brought about by the dual broadcasting system, consisting of public television broadcasters and privatecommercial Free TV broadcasters. Furthermore, football and the Bundesliga are considered in particular, as well as the changes in the sports rights market. In the next step, the German television landscape and the different forms of television stations as well as their financing methods will be explained in more detail. In the next part of the literature review, the topic of digital technologies and the resulting changes in the German sports broadcasting market will be presented. First of all, it will deal with the general changes and innovations that have arisen through digital technologies, such as the increase in end devices for consuming sports broadcasts or the increase in providers of sports broadcasts. The next step is to explain and analyse the topic of streaming. First, the definition of streaming and streaming services as well as the characteristics of streaming will be discussed. Then the area of sports streaming will be looked at more closely and it will be explained what makes sports streaming and sports streaming providers different from television providers. It also deals with the possibilities that arise from this and how they are used by consumers of sports broadcasts. In this step, the term OTT will also be explained and how it relates to streaming and in particular the streaming of sports content as well as what differences exist to television broadcasting. Subsequently, the negative aspects of streaming and especially of

1.2 Structure

5

sports streaming will be explained, which lie in particular in the problem of illegal streaming. Then the area of niche sports, which are rarely broadcast in the mass media, will be presented and it will be explained how streaming and OTT influence them and what new marketing opportunities arise for niche sports. To illustrate sports streaming and OTT, the OTT provider DAZN is examined in more detail and it is explained to what extent DAZN differs from other providers and what added value DAZN offers users. The area of social media in connection with sports broadcasting will then be explained, as well as big data and the use of data in the area of the sports broadcasting market. A further topic of the literature review is the topic of broadcasting rights, with a particular focus on the development, as an example of which the Bundesliga broadcasting rights will be examined in more detail. In this context, Amazon will also be considered as an example and the extent to which Amazon plays a role in the German sports broadcasting market and could potentially play a role in the future will be examined in more detail. In the final step of the literature review, the impact of the global Covid-19 pandemic on sports broadcasting will be explained. The section on the own study begins with the methodology, explaining how the own research was conducted. Among other things, the type of research chosen and the questions to be answered or the goals to be achieved are explained. It also explains how the data for the research was collected and how the data was subsequently processed, presented and analysed. Subsequently, the methodological limitations of the study are explained. In the next step, the results of the data collection are presented and explained in order to test the hypotheses. Then, the most important findings from the own research will be discussed with the findings from existing research. In the last step of the thesis, the most important findings will be summarised.

2

Literature Review

2.1

Sports Television History

Up to the present day, sports coverage has changed a lot. Whereas in the past people used to leaf through the newspaper the morning after for reports and results or listen to the sporting events live on the radio, nowadays sporting events are broadcast worldwide at any time and in any form (Bertling et. al, 2018a). The advent of visual broadcasting ushered in a new era in sports broadcasting, from now on people could watch live sporting events without being there themselves. Since the beginning of television, it has constantly evolved and changed, not only in the way it is broadcast (Gleich, 2008), which now makes it possible to broadcast worldwide, but also in the quality of the images and the content (Dayan & Katz, 1992). The first sports broadcast on German television took place before the beginning of the Second World War, namely the 1936 Olympic Games, which took place in Berlin at that time (Fehr, 2021). The transmission of this major event, which took place in black and white at the time, was thus successful. However, there was a central problem on the consumer side, as there were simply no televisions or suitable receivers in private ownership (Fehr, 2021). The audience was therefore correspondingly small, with a total of about 150,000 people in 26 so-called TV parlours able to follow the events live (with a technically induced delay of 30–90 seconds) (Riegler, 2020). With the introduction of the first German television in 1952, sport was also part of the broadcast programme from the beginning (Schwier, 2002). In the same year as Das Erste went on the air, which was then operated under the name NWDR, the first German live sports broadcast was also transmitted. This was an amateur boxing event that took place in Hamburg and could be received on approximately 3000 TV sets nationwide

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2022 M. Hagelgans, The Impact of Digitalization on Sports Broadcasting, BestMasters, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39869-9_2

7

8

2

Literature Review

(WDR, 2017). The first football match was broadcast towards the end of the same year, on Boxing Day 1952. This was a DFB Cup match between the Hamburg club FC St. Pauli and Hamborn 07 from Duisburg, and the rights to this first broadcast were free at the time (WDR, 2017). In the following year, 1953, tariffs were set for the first time that regulated how much money the clubs should receive for the rights to their broadcast (DFB, 2021). At that time, the flat rates ranged between DM 1,000 and DM 2,000, and DM 2,500 was set for the broadcast of a match of the German national team (DFB, 2021). Another year later, in 1954, a historic event in German football and sports history took place and for the first time a major sporting event was broadcast live and internationally on television (Hackforth, 1978). In the final of the 1954 Football World Cup in Bern, the German team beat the big favourites Hungary to become football world champions for the first time (Blecking, 2017). The event, known as the “Miracle of Bern”, could be received on around 28,000 television sets in Germany at the time and was watched live by around 1 million viewers (Köster, 2017). With this event, which was filmed and released in German cinemas in 2003, sport and sports coverage in Germany experienced unprecedented hype (Jordan, 2005). It took four more years until 1 October 1958, when an agreement was reached between ARD and the DFB, ending the coverage of sport that had been mostly free or cheap until then (Hackforth, 1978). However, the potential of televised sports coverage was not only recognised by the DFB, but also by many sports associations and event organisers, so that the foundation stone was laid for the commercialisation of sport and sports reporting (Hackforth, 1978). In 1961, ARD launched the Sportschau, which was all about sport and mostly rehashed and summarised football matches, which was made possible by magnetic tape recording (Mikos, 2009). Two years later, in 1963, the ZDF was founded, which established the competing product to the Sportschau, “das aktuelle Sportstudio” (the current sports studio), which was the first competition on the German sports reporting market (Mikos, 2009). Especially in the 1980s, the German sports television landscape changed a lot, also due to the increase in the leisure time of the population, more television and also more sports were consumed on television (Gilles et al., 2008). One of the biggest changes of all was the introduction of the dual broadcasting system in 1984, i.e. the simultaneous existence of public broadcasters and private-commercial Free TV broadcasters (Messner, 2013). With the introduction of the dual system, audience shares and market shares were at stake for the first time (Hattig, 1994), since the private-commercial Free TV stations in particular generate their income by placing advertisements (Messner, 2013). The first private-commercial Free TV stations were RTL and Sat.1, both of which

2.2 TV

9

went on air in 1984 (NDR, 2019). For the next few years, sport continued to be broadcast exclusively by the public broadcasters, and it was not until 1988 that sport became part of private-commercial Free TV (Pleitgen, 2000). Sat.1 and RTL realised that they could reach a large audience by broadcasting sporting events (Pleitgen, 2000). As football was by far the most popular sport at that time, the broadcasting of football became very interesting for these stations (Pleitgen, 2000). With the founding of Eurosport in 1989 and the founding of DSF in 1993, specific channels were created for the first time that dealt exclusively with the topic of sport (Burk & Digel, 200). Due to the increased competition on the television market, the competition on the sports broadcasting market and thus also on the sports rights market increased (Pleitgen, 2000). While the broadcasting rights to the Bundesliga were DM 10 million for the 1984/1985 season, they were already DM 40 million for the 1988/1989 season (Ostsieker, 2018). Refinancing the acquisition of broadcasting rights was also difficult for the private providers and, according to Pleitgen (2000), it was apparent at this point that private-commercial Pay TV stations were emerging that might buy sports rights and thus jeopardise the freedom of access to major sporting events. In 1991, for example, the private-commercial Pay TV channel Premiere, which was financed by user fees, began television operations (NDR, 2019). In the 1991/1992 season, the costs for broadcasting rights rose again, reaching a peak of DM 80 million (Ostsieker, 2018). Over the next years and decades, the prices for broadcasting rights continued to rise (Ostsieker, 2018) and more and more broadcasts of the Bundesliga and other sporting events were increasingly transmitted by the privatecommercial Free TV and Pay TV providers (Ostsieker, 2018; Pleitgen, 2000). The dual system consisting of public broadcasters and private-commercial Free TV broadcasters (Messner, 2013) had now become a trial system with the addition of private-commercial Pay TV (Hickethier & Hoff, 1998). According to Groebel (2013), the dual broadcasting system, consisting of public and private broadcasters, has now even developed into a system consisting of four players. This has been joined by Pay TV and professional web providers, due to the increased use of digital providers and mobile platforms by the younger generation (Groebel, 2013).

2.2

TV

With a daily usage time of almost four hours, television continues to play a central role in our society today (Seven.One Media GmbH, 2021). If we assume an average sleep duration of eight hours, it can be concluded that Germans spend

10

2

Literature Review

an average of 25% of their day watching television. A study from 2020 shows that watching television remains the most popular leisure activity among Germans (VuMA, 2020). Unlike streaming, where a variety of problems can occur during transmission and consumption (Alexander, 2017), television has built an infrastructure that makes errors that occur, such as interruptions or audio or image errors, very rare (Hutchins et al., 2019). When talking about television, one usually refers to linear television, which means that the respective programmes are transmitted by the providers and are received in real time (Hasebrink, 2009). Consumers can only consume the content that is transmitted by the broadcaster at that particular time (Hasebrink, 2009). In summary, according to Hasebrink (2009), linear television refers to the sequence of programmes in a temporally structured programme. The consumer can thus choose between different channels and thus consume different content, but only the content that the channels transmit at that time (Hasebrink, 2009). Non-linear television, on the other hand, is understood to be the time-shifted consumption of programmes, i.e. consumption that is independent of the current transmission (Hasebrink, 2009). This includes online media libraries but also video-on-demand services and streaming providers that make content available independently of time (Hasebrink, 2009). In Germany, a primary distinction is made between two different TV forms (Held, 2006). On the one hand, there are the public TV channels, which include the ARD broadcasting company with the channel “Das Erste” as well as the ZDF and the third channels such as WDR or NDR (Holtz-Bacha, 2006). On the other hand, there are the private-commercial channels, which can be further divided into Free TV channels and Pay TV channels (Schwotzer, 2011). These include Free TV channels such as RTL, Sat.1 and Sport1 and Pay TV channels such as Sky. The simultaneous existence of these two systems is called a dual broadcasting system (Messner, 2013). The dual broadcasting system was created to trigger competition between the two groups of providers, which should have a positive effect on the formation of public and individual opinion (Held, 2006). The public television broadcasters are not only the first television broadcasters to exist in Germany, they also differentiate themselves from the other providers in terms of financing (von Hahn, 2008). They use a dual financing system, which means that they have two central sources of income to finance themselves (von Hahn, 2008). On the one hand, they are financed by advertising revenue, just like private commercial broadcasters, for example (von Hahn, 2008). On the other hand, the broadcasters finance themselves through the so-called broadcasting contribution, which is a compulsory fee and is paid per flat, regardless of the number of persons (vzhh, n.d.). The broadcasting fee is the primary source of income, which is independent of audience ratings and is intended to ensure

2.2 TV

11

the continued existence of the public broadcasters (von Hahn, 2008). Currently, the licence fee is e18.36 per month (RND, 2021). The amount of this contribution is proposed by a commission that is to determine the financial needs of the broadcasters (Holtz-Bacha, 2006). In 2020, the revenue amounted to more than e8.1 billion, with the broadcaster ZDF receiving the largest share at slightly more than e2 billion (ARD ZDF Deutschlandradio Beitragsservice, 2021). In the same year, ZDF was able to generate e271.4 million through advertising revenues, which represents a percentage share of approximately 12% of total revenues (Media Perspektiven, 2021a). Private-commercial Free tv, which includes channels such as RTL, Sat.1 and ProSieben, accounts for by far the largest share of German TV channels (Schwotzer, 2011). These channels are exclusively privately financed, mainly through advertising revenues (Schwotzer, 2011). In terms of financing, private-commercial Pay TV differs not only from public TV stations, but also from private-commercial Free TV stations. Pay TV is primarily financed by fees that have to be paid by consumers (subscribers) in order to access the broadcaster’s content (Neumann, 2013). Neumann (2013) describes this type of financing as a market-based exchange of services, as consumers can express their preferences in programme selection with their willingness to pay and thus influence the programme offer. As a second major source of income, Pay TV broadcasters usually also use advertising (Neumann, 2013).

2.2.1

Public TV and Sports

In 2017, 74% of Germans interested in football said they preferred to watch football on Free TV, only 22% said they preferred to watch football on Pay TV (Richter, 2017). It is obvious that a large proportion of Germans prefer to watch sport on Free TV, as there are no additional costs for this, in contrast to Pay TV or paid streaming providers. Since 2018, however, no Champions League matches have been shown on public television on ZDF, so anyone who wants to watch the Champions League matches has had to pay money for them since then (rponline, 2018). The main problem here is that the rights are simply too expensive for public television to be able to acquire them (Moebus, 2017). However, the next World Cup in Qatar will be shown by public broadcasters (Spiegel, 2015). The costs for the broadcasting rights amount to e214 million, including the rights to the Women’s World Cup in 2019 (Spiegel, 2015). Not only streaming services such as Netflix, Amazon Prime or DAZN transmit their content via the internet, but also the TV channels in the form of so-called media libraries (ZDF, 2021). In 2021, these media libraries, which are accessible

12

2

Literature Review

free of charge on the internet and mostly offer on-demand content as well as live streams of the current programme, were used more frequently by Germans than streaming providers (ARD & ZDF, 2021c). While 65% of Germans said they used media libraries at least rarely, the figure for video streaming services was 54% (ARD & ZDF, 2021c). This is also reflected in the area of sport, where 48% used Free TV streams on the internet to watch sport in 2018, while 28% said they watched sport on the internet via paid services (Bitkom, 2018b).

2.2.2

Pay TV and Sports

In order to ultimately function as a Pay TV broadcaster on the market and to gain subscribers who demonstrate a willingness to pay, one must differentiate oneself in the offer from the other “free” broadcasters (Kaumanns et al., 2008). According to Kaumanns et al. (2008), Pay TV providers can only function if they broadcast attractive and exclusive content that can only be seen there. As sport has been and still is a big part of the TV landscape, exclusive sports broadcasts are highly relevant for Pay TV, which goes hand in hand with the fact that they have to hold the exclusive broadcasting rights (Messner, 2013). According to Messner (2013), there are several factors that are essential for the success of Pay TV providers: they should have the largest possible market share and the best possible image among the population. Furthermore, they should make their content available on different media and make sure that consumers can watch a lot of their content exclusively with them (Messner, 2013). According to Messner (2013), subscription revenues should be increased through advertising and sponsorship revenues and subscriber retention should be established so that few subscriptions are cancelled and many subscriptions remain long-term. This subscriber loyalty can be achieved, among other things, by individualising the offer (Messner, 2013). However, the extensive range of free-to-air channels reduces the incentive for Germans to take out a Pay TV subscription, which is why Pay TV can only attract users by offering exclusive content (Messner, 2013). A negative aspect that only affects Pay TV broadcasters is piracy or illegal viewing of content (Messner, 2013). The reason why this problem only affects the Pay TV channels is due to the nature of the other channels. The free-commercial channels are free-to-air anyway and thus on the one hand the incentive to consume them illegally is missing and on the other hand also the negative impact. The same applies to the public broadcasters, since they are financed by a compulsory levy anyway (RND, 2021), regardless of whether they are consumed legally or illegally. In 2003, the first German Pay TV broadcaster Premiere announced that

2.3 Digital Technologies

13

around 25% of consumers consumed content illegally via hacked software (Urbe, 2003). According to estimates, the damage caused by illegal viewing amounted to over e100 million per year (Messner, 2013). Looking at the Pay TV programmes in Germany and their different categories consisting of entertainment, sports, documentaries, children and music, we find that only in the area of sports has there been a significant increase in programmes (Vaunet, 2021). Within two years, the number of Pay TV sports programmes has increased by 36% from 22 to 30 (Vaunet, 2021). These channels include Sky, DAZN and Eurosport, as well as smaller channels such as Motorvision.tv, GOLFTV and FC Bayern TV (Vaunet, 2021). The concept of channels is important here, as Sky is represented with a total of five channels (Sky Sport, Sky Sport 1, Sky Sport 2 etc.) which all belong to one provider (Vaunet, 2021). If one adds up the different channels mentioned by Vaunet (2021), one arrives at 14 different channels. The reasons for using Pay TV are the exclusivity of the content, the audio and video quality and the possibility of accessing many different channels (Statista, 2021a). In 2021, there will be around 8 million subscribers to Pay TV providers in Germany (VAUNET, 2021), which is 14.8% of Germans between the ages of 14–65 (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2021).

2.3

Digital Technologies

New digital technologies have triggered a media revolution by changing the needs of media consumers (Rautenberg, 2015), who have become accustomed to consuming content (Moulton, 2019) on many different devices (Bertling et al., 2018), regardless of location and time. However, according to Buschow et al. (2013), it is not necessarily the new technological possibilities that are responsible for the media shift, but rather the consumers. Digital technologies have transformed the entire entertainment market, greatly reducing production costs as well as reproduction costs (Elberse, 2013). According to Elberse (2013), the resulting possibilities also make it very easy and cheap to produce and stream your own content. In addition, many new ways have been created through which users can consume media content (Elberse, 2013). Digital technologies have greatly increased competition in the sports broadcasting market (Bertling, 2018). In order to continue to compete, established television broadcasters have also analysed this development and adapted accordingly by having their own media libraries and making content available to consumers there even before it is broadcast on television (Bertling, 2018). Bertling (2018) concludes from the developments that there is a kind of fusion of television and internet, as on the one hand Smart TVs

14

2

Literature Review

make internet content consumable and on the other hand TV broadcasters also offer their own content on the internet (Bertling, 2018). The internet is crucial for digital development in media; in terms of sports broadcasting, it provides the infrastructure for providers such as DAZN to transmit their content to consumers (Hutchins et al., 2019). However, the internet is also being used significantly for streaming videos in general, with videos expected to account for 82% of global IP traffic by 2022 (Pennington, 2021). According to Pennington (2021), the Covid-19 pandemic has further driven this trend, as consumption of content via streaming services has increased, particularly in 2020. It is interesting to note that even though much content is consumed via the internet, the receiving device “television” is of great popularity (Pennington, 2021). in 2021, at least in the USA, sales figures for particularly large televisions have increased significantly (Pennington, 2021). In 2008, Adam (2008) described that internet use and video consumption on the internet is particularly strong among young users. He said that the younger the user, the greater the consumption (Adam, 2008). If we look at the figures from the year 2021, we see that 94% of the population uses the internet at least rarely; all age groups are represented and there is no difference in the 14–49 age group (ARD & ZDF, 2021a). If we look at media internet use, we find large differences between the age groups. Here, the daily usage time for 14–29 year-olds is more than three times as high as for 50–69 year-olds (ARD & ZDF, 2021b). In 2018, the main medium for watching live sport on the internet was the smartphone, closely followed by Smart TV (Bitkom, 2018a).

2.3.1

Social Media

For years, social media has not only been used for private purposes, but also offers significant added value for a wide range of industries and companies, which can use it, for example, to promote their products and increase their brand awareness (Tritama & Tarigan, 2016). This also applies to the area of sports broadcasting and sports communication, and social media channels such as Facebook and Twitter have played a central role in this for several years (Grimmer & Horky 2018). According to Filo et al. (2015), social media has permanently changed the consumption of sports content. It represents a medium that enables providers to communicate with consumers, share information and promote their products at low cost, while consumers can communicate interactively and give feedback (Karg et al, 1998). All stakeholders in the market, which include clubs, federations, leagues, athletes, broadcasters and viewers/consumers, use social media to

2.3 Digital Technologies

15

protect and represent their interests (Bertling et al., 2018b; Bowman & Cranmer, 2014). Because there is such a high demand for live sports and sports content, the demand for sports content on the internet is also increasing (Eleberse, 2013), and by using social media to share information, providers can reduce their marketing and advertising costs (Waldofgel, 2018). Thus, according to Grimmer (2014), the supply side gains the opportunity to enter into direct contact with their respective reference group in a simple and cost-effective way, without having to rely on conventional media as intermediaries. This enables a direct exchange between producers and consumers (Burk & Grimmer, 2018). In Germany, well over half of the people in all age groups use social media, and the different age groups are relatively close to each other (Faktenkontor, 2021). While the number of users between the ages of 16 and 49 is between 80% and 90%, 76% of those between the ages of 50 and 59 use social media, and 56% of those over 60 (Faktenkontor, 2021). From these figures it can be deduced that the target group that can be reached via social media is very large. Social media such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram are online media that give users the opportunity to interact with other users, share things or even create content (Pennington, 2021; Tritama & Tarigan, 2016). According to Burk and Grimmer (2018), all users have the opportunity to share their opinions and thoughts with the world. This user-generated content, for example, can be created in written form or in the form of images and videos, which, according to Tritama and Tarigan (2016), gives companies a wide range of marketing and advertising opportunities. On the other hand, it gives consumers the opportunity to gain insights and information about any sporting event (Burk & Grimmer, 2018). According to Grimmer and Horky (2018), social media serve as information platforms that can be accessed by all stakeholders. Journalists, for example, use social media as a research tool, while media companies and broadcasters can gain information on user and consumer behaviour, for example, in order to record which sports and formats are particularly discussed (Grimmer & Horky, 2018). Since social media are freely accessible and free of charge, the information shared on the respective platforms is also freely viewable, which on the one hand greatly increases the speed of information (López & Lucas, 2018), but on the other hand makes it more difficult to obtain exclusive information with regard to sports reporting (Nölleke et al., 2018). According to Burk and Grimmer (2018), social media and social live streaming services will play a major role in the future due to the high speed of information and the large reach. Nöcker (2018) also sees great added value in the speed of social media, as they are instant media and consumption, creation and sharing take place in the now.

16

2

Literature Review

In addition to writing and sharing texts, photos, videos and other content, many streaming platforms also offer the possibility to broadcast a live stream. Of course, this also gives broadcasters, associations, leagues and clubs the opportunity to broadcast live sport via social media. One example is the cooperation between the WNBA and Twitter, where Twitter acts as a broadcaster and broadcasts some WNBA games (Pennington, 2021). For this year’s WNBA season, which started on 14.05.2021, a total of 12 live games will be broadcast on Twitter and 20 live games on Facebook (Lyons, 2021). Also the German sports TV channel Sport1 not only offers its livestream on its own website but also streams selected events like the PDC World Darts Championship live and for free on YouTube (SPORT1, 2021a). SPORT1 this year also uses TikTok and streams there as well the broadcast of the PDC World Darts Championship 2021 (SPORT1, 2021b). Since, according to Tritama and Tarigan (2016), the use of social media can increase brand and product awareness within the social media community, the broadcaster SPORT1 can use these livestreams to increase its own awareness on the one hand and also the awareness of the broadcast offered on the other. The broadcast on YouTube and TikTok also differs in the type of communication from the TV broadcast or also the broadcast in its own stream on the website. While television broadcasting or the website stream is a one-way communication, YouTube and TikTok offer a two-way communication through the comment function (Waters & Jones, 2011). As early as 2013, Groebel (2013) spoke of the fact that more and more viewers of television programmes are reporting, commenting and exchanging views on the programme in parallel on social media. Comments and posts from social media are also increasingly being incorporated into broadcasts (Hutchins et al., 2019). Pennington (2021) talks about the fact that the user no longer experiences pure entertainment but can also participate interactively in the broadcast to a certain extent. 65% of global sports fans want to watch more sports broadcasts on social media platforms (grabyo, 2021). Furthermore, there is the opportunity to integrate live statistics and interactive features (Hutchins et al., 2019), such as showing and replying to Twitter comments on the current broadcast (Wöckener, 2020). An example of this is the live broadcast of the PDC Darts World Championship on DAZN, where the commentators include comments, suggestions and posts on Twitter and Instagram during the broadcast and thus make the broadcast interactive (Wöckener, 2020).

2.3 Digital Technologies

2.3.2

17

Big Data

De Mauro et al. (2016) define Big Data in their article as “the information asset characterised by such a High Volume, Velocity and Variety to require specific Technology and Analytical Methods for its transformation into Value” (p. 7). This primarily involves the analysis of data using technology in order to extract information from it that represents added value (De Mauro et al., 2016). Back in 2018, Joe Markowski, who was Senior Vice President of Revenue Management at DAZN in North America at the time, talked about how all of their investment decisions are based on data (The Digital Sport Insider Podcast, 2018). For all investment, strategic and general decisions, they use data as a basis and make decisions according to the data (The Digital Sport Insider Podcast, 2018). The trend towards individualisation that exists in German society makes it difficult for streaming providers to satisfy their users (Seidel et al., 2021). Providers use Big Data and data analytics to analyse the behaviour of users in order to provide them with a better and more personalised offer, including personalised recommendations (Novak, 2017). Personalised suggestions from the provider can lead to long-term switching costs for the user, as the site can make accurate suggestions that suit the user’s tastes, depending on how much and for how long they use it (Smith & Telang, 2016). Smith & Telang (2016) conclude that it is not enough to produce and deliver content to be successful, but that they need to collect and analyse data to identify and serve customer needs. When providers use data to make personalised and relevant content suggestions to users, this can increase user loyalty (Smith & Telang, 2016). Data can also be collected and analysed to know what kind of content users want (Smith & Telang, 2016). Through the use of Big Data in streaming platforms, users gain the power to create their own “TV Programme” (Heredia-Ruiz et al., 2021). However, the collection and use of users’ data also creates the risk that the data will be stolen by criminals and resold or published (Radanliev et al., 2020). Accordingly, careful handling and ensuring the security of data is desirable. OTT providers such as DAZN can measure users’ demographic data, as well as their preferences and usage habits (Babu, 2021).Users’ data is used to predict what they might like, to produce that content and ultimately to present and recommend the content to them on the platform (Heredia-Ruiz et al., 2021). However, sports OTT platforms differ from other OTT providers such as Netflix in terms of personalisation, as users of sports OTT platforms are already interested in sports, whereas OTT providers such as Netflix offer many different genres (Babu, 2021). Sports OTT platforms personalise the user experience by providing statistics that

18

2

Literature Review

are relevant to the user or by allowing users to watch multiple broadcasts at the same time and to fast-forward and rewind them (Babu, 2021). Technological advances have made it possible to collect and analyse data efficiently and easily, which has also had an impact on sports reporting (Horky & Pelka, 2018). This has resulted in data journalism, where journalism happens on the basis of data sets and databases, the data is processed and presented to the user (Horky & Pelka, 2018). If we look at the most popular sport among Germans, football (IfD Allensbach, 2021), a lot of data is generated during a match (Marr, 2015). For example, data on the number of ball contacts, shots on goal and passes by players are recorded, as well as the number of spectators in the stadium and also the respective performance of the referee (Marr, 2015). The processing and provision of this data gives sports enthusiasts the opportunity to understand the matches and match details even more and, for example, to make betting predictions (Krampe, 2012). Through the use of data, sports journalism can be enhanced and thus provide a better experience for the consumer (Horky & Pelka, 2018). However, it is now the case that certain data, such as the quality of passes or the creation of spaces, cannot be easily measured (Horky & Pelka, 2018). Horky and Pelka (2018) cite baseball as a sport where a lot of data can be measured very easily and precisely.

2.4

Streaming

In general, streaming refers to the transmission of audio or video content via the internet (Büscher & Müller, 2009; Kariyawasam & Tsai, 2017). In contrast to a download, streaming does not store any data on the PC or the respective medium (Silberer et al., 2005), as with a stream the audio or video files can be viewed in real time (Borghi, 2011; Brüggemann, 2013). Only some data is buffered and deleted when played back, so no data is stored on the PC (Kariyawasam & Tsai, 2017). Streaming means consuming audio or video content over the internet (Cambridge Dictionary, 2021). According to Seidel et al. (2021), the technical component of streaming is particularly important; for example, the expansion of broadband connections and nationwide high-speed internet access can have a positive influence on the market. Live streaming is similar to traditional television in many ways, as the audio-visual content can be transmitted and used in real time (Beck & Bourquin, 2018). However, live streams often offer more opportunities for interaction between users and the users and producers (Merten et al., 2017). Interestingly, although streaming is becoming more popular and content

2.4 Streaming

19

consumption over the internet has increased a lot, the device used to consume the content remains the same (Pennington, 2021). A streaming service in this case is a provider that transmits streaming content to its users and makes it available for consumption (von Gottberg, 2018). The providers offer users the possibility to choose and consume what they really want, which was previously not possible on traditional television (Lotz, 2017). A central distinction is made between live streaming and on-demand content, which can be further subdivided into different variants (Seidel et al., 2021). While livestreaming content is transmitted in real time (Brüggemann, 2013), with ondemand streaming the user can access the content regardless of time and place and determine the start or end point of his consumption himself (Böhler, 2017). The content of on-demand providers is not transmitted linearly, which means that it can give users value as long as the respective content is available on the platform (Lotz, 2017). A distinction is made between TVOD (payment per single series), AVOD (financing through advertising) and SVOD (financing through subscription), which is the most common (Seidel et al., 2021). In Germany, there are also the so-called media libraries of the public broadcaster, which are financed by the so-called broadcasting contribution (Seidel at al., 2021), which is a compulsory contribution (vzzh, n.d.). According to Lotz (2017), the subscriber model (SVOD) is the best means of getting previous users of television broadcasts to engage with broadcasts on the internet. Providers bundle a large amount of media content and offer it to users on demand for a monthly fee (Lotz, 2017). Globalisation in combination with technological developments has meant that media content can be distributed worldwide via the internet (Lindholm, 2019). According to Lindholm (2019), the television industry has had to adapt greatly to the fact that more and more users consume their entertainment online. While TV viewing figures are decreasing, especially in the 18–40 age group, streaming access figures are increasing (Range & Mataruna-Dos-Santos-Leonardo, 2021). According to Range & Mataruna-Dos-Santos-Leonardo (2021), the decrease in television viewing figures is linked to the increase in streaming viewing figures, so that a change in viewers is taking place. Due to increasing mobility and flexibility in the consumption of content, parallel use or so-called second-screen use (Busemann & Tippelt, 2014), i.e. the consumption of two or more pieces of content at the same time, is also on the rise (Beste & Engel, 2011). The devices on which we use and consume media have increased in recent years, and media consumption is now increasingly taking place on mobile devices such as smartphones or tablets (Heinecke & Meyen, 2018). Hutchins et al. (2019) also note that the mass of available content has grown in recent years and is being consumed more on mobile devices. According

20

2

Literature Review

to Heinecke & Meyen (2018), this not only leads to more content being consumed on mobile devices, for example via apps, but also to sponsors and advertisers investing larger shares of their budgets in the digital area. They are doing this in order to effectively play to their target group, which no longer exclusively consumes their content on television (Heinecke & Meyen, 2018). Evens & Donders (2018) say that the increase in live streaming services and the growing demand for them means that television is becoming more and more “platformised”. This development is confirmed, for example, by the broadcaster ZDF, which operates its own platform, the “ZDF Mediathek”, where, among other things, content can be consumed on demand (ZDF, 2021). Through streaming providers, the media offer is expanding, which can lead to different age groups also using different media (Best & Engel, 2011). Traditional television is consumed particularly heavily by older consumers (AGF, 2021), while the younger age groups use streaming services particularly frequently for consumption (ARD & ZDF, 2020). Around 50% of Germans used video streaming providers in 2021 (Kantar, 2021), and Seidel et al. (2021) predict a positive development for the German streaming market in the future. Based on consumer behaviour, Seidel et al. (2021) state that streaming providers are used in particular by the younger generation, although the older generation is now also prepared to use streaming services due to the increase in digital media and streaming providers. This behaviour is particularly influenced by the family circle (Seidel et al. (2021), which could mean that the younger generation is introducing the parents’ or even grandparents’ generation to streaming content. Along with the great advantage of taking advantage of pre-existing infrastructure, such as using the infrastructure of the internet (Krämer & Wohlfarth, 2015), come disadvantages that do not affect traditional television (Elberse, 2013; Waldfogel, 2018). While streaming providers emphasise their services very positively and advertise them with efficiency or even immediacy, there are complications that involuntarily arise when transmitting and consuming high quality videos (Alexander, 2017). According to Alexander (2017), these errors and complications include in particular buffering, service interruption, programme crashes, overloaded servers and problems that can occur on the end device used. These include bandwidth limitations and the danger of drained batteries, for example when using a smartphone or tablet on the move (Alexander, 2017). Considering that most consumers are keen to watch live broadcasts, buffering is indeed a major problem as it can lead to delayed viewing (Hutchins et al., 2019).

2.4 Streaming

2.4.1

21

Sports Streaming

Sport appeals to a broad audience, which is why many providers are increasingly using sport as a premium product to strengthen their platform and brand (Bertling, 2018). Hutchins et al. (2019) even describe live sport as the most important form of premium content. Nonetheless, Netflix, for example, on the other hand, has already communicated several times that they do not want to acquire broadcasting rights in the field of sports and will therefore not enter the live sports market (Hutchins et al., 2019). According to Schafmeister (2007), digital broadcasting of sports offers great opportunities as neither the location of the venue nor the capacity of the stadium matter. The disruptive revolution of sports streaming (Lindholm, 2019) has greatly lowered the barriers to market entry, thereby greatly increasing competition and giving more power to rights holders (Grafton, 2007). Liveness plays a major role in sports streaming, which is very different from streaming series and films, as it is exclusively on-demand content (Moulton, 2019). While a strong advantage of VoD is that it can be consumed at any time (Moulton, 2019), live streaming is very time-dependent as the event is broadcast and consumed in real time (Li et al., 2015). However, in order to be successful as a provider, it is also essential to offer users the respective content on demand, regardless of location and time (Kunz, 2014). According to Kunz (2014), the possibility of on-demand use is even the most important feature of sports streaming providers for consumers. Therefore, the providers not only offer live content, but also numerous on-demand contents in the form of documentaries, behind the scenes or similar (Hutchins et al. 2019). Furthermore, they offer users the possibility to rewind during the live broadcast or to watch the live broadcasts in full length, for example, the next day, rewinding and fast-forwarding at any time (Hutchins et al., 2019). Even though many sports broadcasts are nowadays multipurposed, for example as summary videos (Dück & Terhorst, 2016), the broadcast of a sports event is most valuable when it is live broadcast (Hutchins et al., 2019). From the consumer side, the live broadcast of the sport is cited as the most important characteristic (PwC, 2018b). The value decreases for the provider after the end of an event or after the result of a match has been determined, as the interest of consumers in delayed consumption is significantly lower (Hutchins & Rowe, 2012). Streaming sports is particularly important to attract young viewers who expect and demand to be able to consume sports on any device at any time (Sun & Zhang, 2021). It is also essential for providers to find out how they can increase user satisfaction in order to retain existing customers and acquire new users (Sun & Zhang, 2021). Sun and Zhang (2021) name a few points that can be

22

2

Literature Review

improved, such as the resolution of the images and the expertise of the commentators and moderators as well as their style of speaking. By adapting the content, for example in the language of the commentary, this leads on the one hand to a more individualised address of the regional markets, but this also increases the fixed costs (Bertling, 2018). Sun and Zhang (2021) conclude that the user experience and the degree of satisfaction strongly influence the willingness to pay for sports streaming services. The more different content a provider can offer in a bundle, the more interesting the offer is for users and the more users will be willing to pay for it (Smith & Telang, 2016). Those who offer a very large offer as a bundle have a lower risk that users will migrate to a competitor (Smith & Telang, 2016). If there are two providers that have the same target group, the provider that offers the larger offer will prevail, as users value this service more (Smith & Telang, 2016). A trend that is also emerging in the area of sports broadcasting or sports streaming is second-screen use, in which several live sports events are consumed simultaneously (Busemann & Tippelt, 2014). This is possible because many providers allow users to connect multiple devices to the respective account, in the case of DAZN, the user can connect up to six devices and consume the content on up to two devices simultaneously (Leber, 2021). There are different revenue models such as the monthly subscription, annual subscription, PPV or freemium content (Huchtins et al., 2019). These different models also develop from the needs and behaviour of the users (Hutchins et al., 2019). The media sports portals, unlike most TV channels, do not operate only in one country, but are usually multinational or globally available. (Hutchins et al, 2019). According to Hutchins et al. (2019), this has implications for the development and strategies of the portals, as they offer their services in a variety of states and thus societies and cultures. In contrast to traditional television, where a broadcaster also offers one programme, streaming services offer several programmes or a large number of content from which the consumer can choose (Hutchins et al., 2019). The possibility of simultaneous consumption of multiple content plays a role here, which can happen in the form of split-screen on one device or on multiple devices, thus changing the consumption experience of sports viewers (Hutchins et al., 2019). Events where many games are happening at the same time, such as the Olympics, tennis Grand Slams or Bundesliga games on Saturdays at 15:30, are particularly suitable for this (Hutchins et al., 2019). Internet broadcasting and the apps provided by broadcasters also increase the number of devices on which people consume and the places where they consume, as portable devices such as smartphones and tablets can work and be used regardless of location (Hutchins et al., 2019). While broadcasters are concerned with scheduling their programming to fill 24 hours of the day (Hutchins, et al., 2019), portals

2.4 Streaming

23

are more concerned with content selection and content customisation (Barker & Wiatrowski, 2017). Content selection is mainly about rights acquisition, while customisation is about improving the user experience, for example through a recommendation system or the possibility to consume on multiple devices (Barker & Wiatrowski, 2017). It offers the possibility to consume several live sports events simultaneously on different devices and to switch between different broadcasts at any time within a few seconds (Hutchins et al., 2019). Lindholm (2019), for example, talks about the “Netflix-ication” of sports broadcasting in his article. According to grabyo’s study, which surveyed 15,000 consumers in 14 countries, 45% of sports fans worldwide already use a paid sports streaming service (grabyo, 2021). 80% of global sports fans would even be willing to switch exclusively to using sports streaming services (grabyo, 2021). This development is expected to cause the global Pay TV market to lose a large number of sports fans in the coming years (grabyo, 2021). More and more older users are starting to try sports streaming services (grabyo, 2021). As fans are constantly looking for new formats and sources of information, providers need to innovate and adapt their content to the platforms and the changing needs of users (grabyo, 2021). Although many Germans are extremely negative about the Champions League and Europa League no longer being broadcast on ZDF, in 2019 most sports fans already had a subscription to Sky or DAZN, with over 20% even using both providers (Lammert et al., 2019).

2.4.2

OTT

Streaming providers such as Netflix, Amazon Prime or DAZN differ in many respects from conventional television channels (Barker & Wiatrowski, 2017; von Gottberg, 2018) and are so-called over-the-top (OTT) providers (Hutchins et al., 2019). A major difference here is the infrastructure used to transmit the respective content (Krämer &Wohlfarth, 2015). Whereas with cable TV, satellite TV or IPTV the providers broadcast via their own infrastructure, OTT providers use the already existing internet infrastructure (Evens & Donders, 2018) without the infrastructure provider having access to the content (Krämer & Wohlfarth, 2015). For example, if you want to receive and consume cable TV, you need the necessary cable access and can then only consume the content that the cable TV is broadcasting at that moment (IONOS, 2019). In comparison, in order to consume the content of an OTT provider, you only need to have an internet connection and an end device such as a laptop, smartphone, tablet or smart TV (Krämer & Wohlfarth, 2015) and in most cases have the provider’s app installed (Adhikari

24

2

Literature Review

et al., 2014). By offering their content without a middleman, OTT providers can also directly measure their revenues, which are mostly based on subscriptions or advertising revenue (Babu, 2021). According to Hutchins et al. (2019), OTT has greatly shaped, changed and simplified the distribution, transmission and consumption of sports broadcasts and sports content, so it is understandable that the number of providers and the market itself are growing. They attribute the growth of the market, or the increasing popularity of OTT providers, on the one hand to the continuing popularity of watching TV among consumers and on the other hand to the growing and everimproving infrastructure for live streaming (Hutchins et al., 2019). More and more leagues and clubs are also launching their own OTT offerings, such as FC Bayern München, which has been operating its own channel FC Bayern.TV since 2017 in order to provide fans and interested users with information and content on a permanent basis (Digel, 2017). OTT platforms ultimately enable consumers to consume more sports content on more different devices, anywhere and at any time (Hutchins & Sanderson, 2017). According to Hutchins et al. (2019), OTT providers are very popular with consumers precisely because of these things; furthermore, users usually have the option to share an account and can usually also cancel their subscription easily at any time. Due to the fact that many sports are broadcast globally via OTT platforms and can be accessed globally, the customer base has become much larger (Bizvibe, 2021). The increasing demand for sports and the multitude of devices that can be used for consumption, as well as the faster internet, are influencing the global sports coverage market (Bizvibe, 2021). OTT platforms are also changing the rights market, as many of them operate globally and can and want to broadcast sports globally (Evens et al., 2013). In the past, it was usually the case that rights were allocated at regional or national level, but global OTT providers make it easier to sell rights for the whole world (Evens et al., 2013).

2.4.3

DAZN

Video on demand is an achievement of the digital transformation, which is not only used by providers such as Netflix, but also by sports streaming providers such as DAZN (Hutchins et al., 2019). However, it is important to note that unlike Netflix, DAZN offers live streaming in particular, which is very different from VoD (Hutchins et al., 2019). DAZN has been active on the German market since 2016 and is the global market leader in sports streaming (DAZN, 2021). The London-based OTT sports streaming service is part of the British DAZN

2.4 Streaming

25

Group, which until 2019 was still operated under the name Perform Group and is a globally active media company (DAZN, 2021). DAZN describes itself as the first live and on-demand streaming service that offers sports content worldwide and exclusively (DAZN, 2019). In doing so, DAZN is credited with ensuring that consumers can consume sports content anywhere and at any time for fair and affordable prices (DAZN, 2019). Furthermore, they describe themselves as a platform that does not tie their customers down with long contracts (DAZN, 2019). DAZN offers a wide range of sports that can be consumed on many devices, in exchange for paying a flat rate (DAZN, 2019). According to the study by Loose et al. (2021), DAZN is the 5th most popular video streaming provider and the 1st in the sports niche. DAZN users are often between 18–29 years old, follow a disproportionate number of people on social media, are interested in technology and like to consume sports content but also play sports themselves (Loose et al., 2021). The study by Kantar (2021) found that most DAZN users are male, younger than 35, have no children and often have sports as their favourite genre. Likewise, users also use the content on the go, at school or at work, which is facilitated by being able to switch seamlessly between up to six devices (Kantar, 2021). DAZN is primarily financed by the subscription contributions of users (Kolkmann, 2021), but since 2019 it has also been partially serving advertising (Gerth, 2019) and therefore differentiates itself in this respect from providers such as Netflix, which do not serve any advertising at all (Lobato, 2019). According to their own statement, they place targeted advertising in order to have more financial opportunities to buy broadcasting rights, invest in innovative technologies and maintain monthly subscription prices (Gerth, 2019). For example, the car manufacturer Renault Germany has been placing advertisements on DAZN since 2021 in order, according to its own statement, to reach target groups that can no longer be reached via linear TV (Pauker, 2021). After entering the German market, DAZN has now increased its prices twice, from the original price of e9.99 per month to e14.99 per month (Kolkmann, 2021). The monthly payment gives access to all DAZN content, there are no other cheaper offers for less or special content (Kolkmann, 2021). DAZN also offers the option of taking out an annual subscription, which is currently e149.99 and therefore represents an annual saving of around 17% compared to a monthly subscription (e179.88 per year). DAZN can be cancelled at any time, the contract then runs for the selected term, i.e. until the end of the month, if you pay monthly (Kolkmann, 2021). Furthermore, DAZN offers the possibility to pause a subscription for up to four months (Kolkmann, 2021). Lotz (2017) notes that flexible subscription terms could lead to a reduction in exclusivity, as many new

26

2

Literature Review

users could first consume the content free of charge, for example in the form of a trial month. DAZN shows a wide range of sports and leagues as well as the Eurosport 1 & 2 channels and the NFL, MLB & NBA networks (Kolkmann, 2021). DAZN broadcasts over 8,000 live events annually and also offers German commentary in the German region (Kolkmann, 2021). DAZN has become increasingly aggressive in the sports rights market in recent years, changing the sports broadcasting market by acquiring coveted and exclusive rights (Hutchins et al., 2019). In doing so, DAZN is adopting a similar strategy to Netflix just a few years ago, making large investments and thus incurring losses in order to attract more and more users so that, over time, it can turn a profit (Sweney, 2018). Hutchins et al. (2019) describe DAZN’s approach to their expansion and rights acquisition as very fast and bold. According to Hutchins et al. (2019), DAZN is also changing the way consumers experience live sport as a result, for example through the variety of devices (TV, computer, tablet, smartphone, etc.) that can be used to consume live sport via DAZN. In 2017, the CEO of DAZN James Rushton spoke out in relation to the German market, saying that DAZN complements the existing market, and that they are aggressive in their approach to rights clearance and are also a disruptive company (Rentz, 2017). Hutchins et al. (2019) also say that DAZN is very aggressive in buying rights and creating a large offering of many sports. James Rushton stated in the interview that his aim with DAZN was to offer sport in a less complicated and cheaper way than before on the market (Rentz, 2017). He also wanted to make sport available everywhere and on all devices (Rentz, 2017). By broadcasting major events such as the boxing match between Saul “Canelo” Alvarez and Billy Joe Saunders, which generate a lot of interest worldwide, DAZN ensures that new users register and also download the DAZN mobile app (Edwards, 2021). DAZN also invests heavily in the production of its own content in the form of shows, interviews, behind-the-scenes etc. to keep users up to date with current sporting events at all times and in all places (DAZN, 2021). Hutchins et al. (2019) say that DAZN achieved economies of scale by operating globally, as the content, data and technology used can be used in different countries. After DAZN acquired the rights to the Friday and Sunday Bundesliga matches in June 2021, the number of new subscribers increased significantly in the following quarter (Kantar, 2021). Very many of DAZN’s users state that their reason for signing up is to watch football, which means that DAZN’s acquisition strategy is in line with user demand (Kantar, 2021). While DAZN continues to grow, Sky Ticket and Amazon Prime Video, for example, are losing subscribers (Kantar, 2021). DAZN has also signed a deal for global rights over the Women’s Champions League in football (Hellier, 2021). DAZN can provide the broadcasts

2.4 Streaming

27

everywhere with its global platform, furthermore there is an agreement between DAZN and YouTube (Hellier, 2021). YouTube also broadcasts the matches on its own site, free of charge, so that an even larger audience can be addressed and top women’s football achieves a large global reach (Hellier, 2021). The rights cost the equivalent of about seven million e per season (Hellier, 2021). According to Hutchins et al. (2019), examples of buffering and live streaming problems include the broadcast of the semi-final between Croatia and England at the 2018 World Cup, where YouTube experienced transmission problems when streaming this event (Hutchins et al., 2019). DAZN, or its users, also had problems watching the games smoothly at the start of the 2018/2019 Serie A season (Hutchins et al., 2019). These events were heavily discussed by users on social media and forums at the time (Hutchins et al., 2019). According to Hutchins et al. (2019), such issues are unavoidable and part of streaming rather than happening infrequently. According to Hutchins et al. (2019), these issues, among others, mean that traditional television viewing remains widespread in sports, even though users now use a variety of devices and services.

2.4.4

Niche Streaming

Digital technologies have made it possible not only for established broadcasters and media companies, but also for many smaller companies and amateurs to produce content and distribute it via the internet or stream it live (Elberse, 2013). Hutchins & Rowe (2012) also describe that digital and mobile media have enabled consumers and fans to consume their favourite leagues, clubs and sporting events, although they do not appeal to mass audiences but rather attract smaller groups. According to Bertling et al. (2018), digital platforms offer marginal sports completely new opportunities for self-promotion, for example by providing self-produced content online. The fact that streaming providers operate multinationally, but are also regionally specialised, offers new opportunities to offer niche sports and amateur sports to a broad and international audience (Vann et al., 2018). This includes streaming amateur leagues or, in the US, college sports (Vann et al., 2018) to enable consumers and fans to consume their favourite leagues, teams and events, which would not be possible without digital media (Hutchins & Rowe, 2012). In particular, the last year or 2020 and 2021 have shown that the technology of live streaming combined with the increasingly cheap means of production such as cameras or PCs (Waldfogel, 2018) ensures that niche sports and even amateur sports can reach a large audience with little effort (Monterroso, 2021).

28

2

Literature Review

According to Monterroso (2021), the technology of streaming ensures that the hurdles of broadcasting live sport disappear and any kind of broadcaster, be it students, sports clubs or leagues, can broadcast their respective content live to an audience regardless of location. Heinecke and Meyen (2018) also see niche sports as clear winners of digital technology. Niche sports, which hardly managed to gain access to the public and generate attention in the age of television, are now finding new and better opportunities to market themselves through the internet (Heinecke & Meyen, 2018). However, online platforms that provide the content of niche sports not only offer new marketing opportunities, but also sponsorship opportunities (Heinecke & Meyen, 2018). In Germany, the platforms that broadcast bundled cycling sports include Sportdeutschland.tv (Heinecke & Meyen, 2018) and the Cologne-based media company Sporttotal, which operates the sporttotal.tv platform (Sporttotal, n.d.). In addition, more and more clubs, leagues and associations are working with media or social media companies to market themselves and distribute their content (Hutchins et al., 2019). Digital technologies make it possible for every association, league and club to produce and distribute their own live broadcasts (Heinecke & Meyen, 2018). Many niche sports see the new opportunities for self-promotion as a chance to reach a wide audience, even though they are not represented in the mass media (Beck & Bourquin, 2018). Also due to the easy access to technology and the simple possibility to carry out and broadcast live streams, more and more clubs and niche sports are making use of this possibility ( Beck & Bourquin, 2018).

2.4.5

Illegal Streaming

The internet and the technological realities that provide the opportunities for streaming also provide the opportunity for illegal streaming (Synamedia, 2020) and thus threaten the protection of intellectual property (Kariyawasam & Tsai, 2017). Illegal streaming allows consumers who do not have enough money or do not want to spend the money to purchase content or subscribe to a streaming provider to still consume the content (Kariyawasam & Tsai, 2017). Digitisation has thus not only greatly facilitated the transmission of media content (Kariyawasm & Tsai, 2017), but also the transmission and distribution of illegal content (Elberse, 2013, Waldfogel, 2018), as there is little to no control over the distribution of data and content online (Smith & Telang, 2016). Because it is so easy to distribute digital files illegally over the internet, this also happens very often and therefore causes a lot of material damage (Waldfogel, 2018). For

2.4 Streaming

29

example, the sports broadcaster BeIN Sports from Qatar decided not to reacquire the broadcasting rights to the Bundesliga for a total of 24 states due to piracy and illegal streaming (Hellier, 2020). In 2018, 52% of illegal streaming of linear TV streams could be attributed to the sports genre, with football accounting for approximately 83% (VAUNET, 2018a). There were particularly many young users among the users of these illegal streams (VAUNET, 2018b). About 32% were between 14 and 23 years old, and about 62% were 33 years old or younger (VAUNET, 2018b). The age group between 54 to 63 accounted for only about 6% of users of illegal TV streams (VAUNET, 2018b). PCs and laptops were particularly popular in use, with 73% of respondents reporting using them to watch illegal TV streams (VAUNET, 2018c). 48% of respondents also used their smartphones to watch, 31% watched these illegal streams on a tablet among other devices (VAUNET, 2018c). Everything that is shown and broadcast on the internet for money is usually available to watch for free on other platforms, usually in lower quality (Babu, 2021). Due to the increasing awareness of sport and sport content, illegal consumption of sport content is also growing, facilitated by the fact that the content is easily accessible and free of charge on the internet (Bertling, 2018). Through the internet and the use of VPNs, many people are able to bypass the exclusivity of sporting events in national markets and consume content from different countries (Bertling, 2018). According to Bertling (2018), combating this is neither easy nor cheap, and the global spread is particularly complicated, as it means that national media law principles are usually of no help. Furthermore, the illegal consumption of an event in real time leaves little time and scope to stop the illegal broadcast (Lobato & Thomas, 2018). Furthermore, Bertling (2018) warns against giving the whole issue too much of a stage, as this could encourage more users to illegally consume sports content themselves or even distribute it themselves. Internet sites such as Reddit play a major role in this, as they bundle a large number of illegal streams and give users the easy opportunity to find and use the streams (Hsiao & Ayers, 2019). It is also problematic that the respective websites that provide illegal streams can themselves advertise and earn from it, and thus have a monetary incentive to spread the illegal streams (Hsiao & Ayers, 2019). To counter illegal streaming, providers can, among other things, increase the quality of their broadcasts and make monthly subscription prices affordable (Babu, 2021). According to Lotz (2017), low monthly prices and flexible cancellation conditions could encourage some users of illegal streams to take out paid subscriptions and reduce or stop their illegal use. In contrast, limited contract flexibility and the associated inflexible cancellation conditions can lead to an increase in the degree of exclusivity of the content on the one hand, but on the other hand

30

2

Literature Review

also to some users switching to illegal stream use (Lotz, 2017). The question is whether sports streaming providers have a similar effect on the market as music streaming providers such as Spotify or Apple music, which have ensured that the illegal distribution and consumption of music has declined (Walker, 2011).

2.5

Broadcasting Rights

The most cost-intensive aspect of sports broadcasting is the acquisition of broadcasting rights; it is irrelevant which channels are used to distribute the sports content (Hutchins et al., 2019). Especially in recent years, sports rights have become more and more important and have increasingly become the central source of revenue (Heinecke & Meyen, 2018). The advantages of acquiring rights lie in the exclusivity that is acquired and the resulting ability to address a large target group, but this is also accompanied by high acquisition costs and a high level of risk, as it is not possible to determine the value of the rights precisely (Bertling, 2018). The exclusive sale of broadcasting rights to sporting events is the largest source of revenue for many leagues, federations and clubs and is therefore essential for financial success (Allison, 2004). Broadcasting rights are not only of significant importance to sports leagues and sports organisations (Mellis, 2007), but also to broadcasters, as holding the rights to popular sports leagues and sporting events, as well as exclusivity of this content, is crucial to a provider’s success (Messner, 2013). Messner (2013) identifies sports rights as the most important resource of sports broadcasters, especially Pay TV providers are extremely dependent on them (Messner, 2013). By acquiring exclusive broadcasting rights, the acquirer gets the opportunity to broadcast the respective content as the sole broadcaster, thus the broadcasting gets a very high value (Kariyawasam & Tsai, 2017). Because exclusivity plays such a major role, media companies try to obtain exclusive rights (Heinecke & Meyen, 2018). If they lose the rights, they are threatened with the migration of their users to another provider who offers this content (Heinecke & Meyen, 2018). Before there was the possibility of broadcasting via the internet, it was simply a matter of acquiring the respective rights in order to broadcast them via television (Bertling, 2018). There was only competition between the different broadcasters to acquire the rights (Bertling, 2018). Now there is also strong competition in the distribution sector, so it is no longer enough to buy the rights and then broadcast them on TV, but providers have to find other distribution platforms and ways to deliver their product to users (Bertling, 2018). As more and more consumers consume content digitally and sponsors and advertisers invest more

2.5 Broadcasting Rights

31

money there, online rights distribution is playing an increasingly important role in sports marketing (Heinecke & Meyen, 2008). The various distribution channels also represent competition to traditional television (Bertling, 2018). Bertling (2018) sees a complete change in the rights market, which is due in particular to the increase in providers and the various transmission channels. In particular, the internet and broadcasting via the internet has led to an increase in competition from more providers who are increasingly trying to offer targeted sport as a premium product in order to position themselves successfully on the market (Bertling, 2018). Due to the interest of digital providers and the increasing competition on the rights acquisition market, the prices of broadcasting rights are rising (Ramcke, 2019). For the provider side, it is becoming increasingly important not only to buy the exclusive rights for TV broadcasting, but to acquire rights that enable them to broadcast in various ways, including via the internet (Bertling, 2018). By acquiring all rights for all distribution channels in this way, one obtains a high degree of exclusivity and can also attract, for example, younger target groups by broadcasting via the internet (Hasebrink & Lampert, 2012). By acquiring rights on an all-encompassing basis, a provider can also draw attention to a specific medium by making the transmissions scarce in the Other Media and playing out a large part via one medium (Bertling, 2018). All-inclusive rights for all distribution channels are usually much more expensive than pure TV sports rights, but there is also a risk of losing some of the users who prefer to consume on platforms or even mobile by acquiring TV sports rights (Bertling, 2018). According to Bertling (2018), the acquisition of broadcasting rights in the field of sports entails certain risks, as it is a speculative acquisition and the real value of the rights cannot be accurately predicted. According to Heinecke & Meyen (2018), in order to preserve the exclusivity of the rights, it is very important to define the exact type of use, for example the right to broadcast live or the right to broadcast highlights after the respective event. However, the federations, leagues and clubs that sell the rights have an interest in being shown on as many different channels as possible, as this allows them to reach a larger audience and also makes them more attractive to sponsors (Heinecke & Meyen, 2018). With sports streaming providers operating and broadcasting sports in multiple countries, the conditions of the sports rights market are changing (Hutchins et al., 2019). Furthermore, exclusive rights for certain territories will be difficult to protect in the future, as the internet is global (Hutchins et al., 2019).

32

2.5.1

2

Literature Review

Bundesliga Rights

German professional football continues to play a special role in the German sports broadcasting market, primarily in the first and second professional leagues (1st Bundesliga & 2nd Bundesliga). A distinction is made between two different rights packages, on the one hand the rights for live broadcasting and on the other hand the rights for second-delayed exploitation, i.e. exploitation after live broadcasting (Kicker, 2020b). The rights are marketed centrally by the DFL, which means that the DFL bundles all 36 clubs in the 1st & 2nd Bundesliga and markets the complete rights for all of them (Polk, 2020). According to Polk (2020), this leaves competitive potentials unused; for his part, individual marketing is proposed, which would allow the individual clubs to market themselves. Overall, the various rights packages include live broadcasting rights for individual matches and conferences as well as audio rights and rights for post-match coverage (Polk, 2020). In addition, certain rights packages are also defined in terms of the transmission channel, which means that the respective content may only be shown on TV or only on the internet (stream), for example (Polk, 2020). The distribution of the rights takes place in an auction process; the last round of awarding the current rights took place in June 2020 (Polk, 2020). Since 2016, no single provider has been allowed to exclusively broadcast all Bundesliga live matches, which has weakened Sky’s monopoly position and exclusivity, as more and more providers have wanted to acquire the rights since then (Welt, 2016). The current rights packages for live broadcasting, which run from the current 2021/2022 season to the 2024/2025 season, i.e. a total of four years and thus four seasons, have created a total volume of e4.4 billion (Kicker, 2020a). This makes revenues of a total of e 1.1 billion per season or per year, which is a slight decrease of about 5% compared to the last auction of the 4-year rights packages (Kicker, 2020c). The last rights auction generated e1.16 billion per season, for a total of e4.64 billion (Kicker, 2020c). Overall, however, the proceeds from the awarding of rights have risen sharply in recent years; in the 2013/2014 season, the proceeds were just over 50% of the current proceeds (dpa & Kicker, 2020). A total of seven different rights packages were sold, which were acquired by four different broadcasters, whereby the Pay TV broadcaster Sky acquired four of the seven rights packages and thus shows the most matches (Kicker, 2020 a). According to Kuserau et al. (2020), the rights cost Sky e595 million per year, while DAZN is said to pay e300 million. The following graph shows all four broadcasters and the number of live matches they each broadcast per season. By acquiring the Bundesliga rights for more than 10 years, Sky has formed itself into the largest Pay TV provider in Germany (Nicola & Hellier, 2020). In 2005,

2.5 Broadcasting Rights

33

when Sky lost the rights to broadcast the Bundesliga, the share price fell by 43% in one day, making it clear how vital the rights are to Sky’s survival and what could happen if, at the next auction in 2024, the rights were to be sold to a third party.

Figure 2.1 Bundesliga Coverage

In this graph (Figure 2.1. Bundesliga Coverage (own representation according to Kicker (2020a))) one can see the market dominance of the Pay TV broadcaster Sky with regard to the 1st and 2nd Bundesliga. The matches broadcast by Sky and DAZN can only be seen against payment, while Sat.1’s matches may only be broadcast on Free TV (Kicker, 2020a). Sport1, by acquiring the rights to the 33 live matches, has the option of showing them either for payment or on Free TV (Kicker, 2020a). However, with the acquisition of the rights to over 100 Bundesliga matches, DAZN has increased the pressure on Sky and shows more Bundesliga matches than ever before; contrary to expectations, Amazon did not acquire any packages in the auction of the rights (Nicola & Hellier, 2020). Amazon does, however, show some Champions League matches exclusively in Prime video (Nicola &Hellier, 2020). Since the interest in Bundesliga matches decreases after the live broadcast, but is still there and thus one can make money with it (Polk, 2020), the rights to the exploitation of the matches after the live broadcast are also sold (Kicker, 2020b).

34

2

Literature Review

These are the so-called “highlights” of the 1st and 2nd Bundesliga matches (Hechler, 2020). In the last rights award round, the DFL also offered seven rights packages, with the public broadcasters acquiring a total of five of the seven rights packages. Overall, in contrast to the live broadcasts of the matches, this content can all be seen for free on TV, with one exception. The public broadcasters are not free of charge, but in a sense it is a compulsory subscription, which is why it is accessible to everyone (RND, 2021). Only the content of the rights package M, which went to Axel Springer Verlag, can only be watched against payment. These are the digital highlights that can be seen against payment on the website www.bild.de in the so-called Bild + subscription. According to Bertling (2018), the first, second and also third exploitation of content offers the possibility of creating a very large value chain.

2.5.2

Cooperation

Sharing rights packages or cooperating with other providers has the advantage of flexibility and lower fixed costs as well as the use of the partner’s specific capabilities, but it also creates a cooperation risk and a certain paradox (Bertling, 2018). Cooperation between DAZN and Sky, the two largest providers in Germany (ARD & ZDF, 2021c), has occurred several times in the past (Nicola & Hellier, 2020). For example, DAZN bought the sub-licence from Sky to be able to broadcast Champions League matches in Germany (Nicola & Hellier, 2020). Since summer 2021, the DAZN app is also bookable via Sky, users who book and use DAZN via Sky can also use the two linear channels DAZN1 and DAZN2, which are not available in the “normal” DAZN app and show live sports (Infosat, 2021). The cooperation makes it easier for existing Sky customers to also use DAZN while DAZN can also address more users (Infosat, 2021).

2.5.3

Amazon

In other countries, Amazon is already very active in the sports rights market and has already broadcast NFL and Premier League games (Lindholm, 2019). As the willingness to pay of users is usually not sufficient to subscribe to all providers, Amazon could benefit greatly, as Amazon’s offer could be more attractive to users, as they sell streaming in a bundle with their Prime membership (Arnold & Schneider, 2019). In Germany, Amazon has been showing the “top match” on Tuesday of each matchday since the 2021/2022 UEFA Champions League season

2.6 Watching Football in Germany

35

for the next three seasons, which will also be matches involving a German team as long as a German team remains in the competition (Amazon, 2021). Lindholm (2019) notes that providers, such as Amazon in particular, do not have the same financial capabilities as traditional broadcasters, but have far more capital to make strong investments in the sports rights market, for example. Amazon is not dependent on offering and broadcasting sports being profitable for them, rather they benefit from the users they gain through this also using their other services, thus strengthening their cross-market position (Lindholm, 2019). Furthermore, Amazon thereby gains data from the users, which the company can use to play the users with relevant offers in the area of sports, for example, and thus use the data for other areas of their business (Lindholm, 2019). Lindholm (2019) concludes that Amazon and other providers could exhaust their financial possibilities to such an extent that it will be difficult for traditional providers and television broadcasters to acquire interesting broadcasting rights in the future.

2.6

Watching Football in Germany

In order to be able to watch the popular football leagues and competitions in Germany in the 2021/2022 season, one has to use several different channels and providers (Platschko, 2021). If you want to be able to watch all matches of the Bundesliga, the DFB Cup, the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Europa League in Germany, you have to pay money for several providers (Hornbogen, 2022). In order to be able to watch all matches of these competitions, you have to subscribe to the following providers: Sky, DAZN, Amazon Prime Video and RTL + (Platschko, 2021). To be able to use all these providers, you have to pay money monthly, only DAZN and Amazon Prime Video can be paid for in an annual subscription, which saves you about 17% of the costs (Hornbogen, 2022). Furthermore, the providers sometimes have different offers, so that, for example, by paying a higher monthly price, more devices can be used at the same time (Hornbogen, 2022). If one now assumes that in the case of DAZN and Amazon Prime Video one chooses the annual subscription and in the case of RTL + and Sky one chooses the cheapest tariffs, then according to Hornbogen (2022) one comes to a monthly amount of e55.74 and e669 per year respectively. The costs are distributed as follows, Sky costs e32.50 per month, DAZN costs e12.50 per month (in an annual subscription), Amazon Prime Video costs e5.75 per month (in an annual subscription) and RTL + costs e4.99 per month (Hornbogen, 2022). If one compares these costs with the costs for the three major streaming providers Amazon Prime Video, Netflix and Disney +, one finds considerable

36

2

Literature Review

differences (RND, 2022). In the cheapest variant, Amazon Prime Video costs e5.75 per month (in an annual subscription), Disney + costs e7.50 per month (in an annual subscription and Netflix costs e7.99 per month (RND, 2022). This results in a monthly cost of e21.24 or e254.87 over the year. The price you have to pay to watch the best German football and the top international competitions is therefore 162% higher than the price you have to pay for Netflix, Disney + and Amazon Prime Video.

2.7

Covid-19

While the global Covid 19 pandemic has negatively impacted many sectors of the economy, streaming services have partially benefited from it, especially in 2020 (Seitz, 2020). Right at the beginning of the pandemic, in the first two quarters of 2020, Netflix, for example, was able to gain significantly more new subscribers than predicted in the forecasts (Seitz, 2020). Streaming providers such as Twitch have also benefited greatly from the pandemic, with consumer usage increasing by over 20% in some cases (Shaw, 2020). In general, video streaming has increased sharply, especially on mobile devices, as streaming is now used not only for pure entertainment but also for work (Pennington, 2021). In general, streaming of media content is becoming more popular (Seidel et al., 2021), but the global Covid-19 pandemic and restrictions such as curfews have accelerated this development (Büschel & Rusche, 2020). A trend has also already emerged in the area of sport, with the closure of pubs and the exclusion of spectators at football matches, leading to more and more football fans taking up sport live streaming (Monterroso, 2021). Another driver of this development could be the decreasing willingness of fans to attend live events on site again (Dabhade, 2021). There are many people who are not comfortable going back to stadiums but still want to watch the events, which is made possible by live streaming (Dabhade, 2021). Even after the pandemic, according to Goldsmith (2021), the desire for live sport and the consumption of sport live streams will continue to increase among many consumers. Since all live sporting events were cancelled in a short period of time and thus the core business of many providers was lost, they tried to react as quickly as possible and offer alternative content (Rust, 2020). As a measure to still provide content and reduce the number of cancellations, providers showed recordings of previous sporting events and documentaries in particular at the beginning of the pandemic (Welt, 2020). As DAZN, for example, gives its users the option to cancel monthly, many users cancelled their subscriptions, especially at the

2.7 Covid-19

37

beginning of the pandemic, when there were few to no sporting events (Nicola & Hellier, 2020). Sky, on the other hand, mostly uses longer-term contracts, so users cannot cancel monthly (Nicola & Hellier, 2020). Due to the financial damage that many leagues and associations have suffered as a result of the global Covid 19 pandemic, they are looking to social media and streaming providers for additional funding (FinancialBuzz, 2021). Skinner and Smith (2021) also note that the pandemic has led to the search for new ways to raise money. According to Pennington (2021), investing in streaming or broadcasting games via streaming is a good solution to compensate for the losses from non-existent ticket sales. According to Sun and Zhang (2021), the Covid-19 pandemic has affected the digital transformation of the sports industry, as many sporting events have been cancelled and rights holders are trying to compensate for the losses through increased revenue from online sports streaming. Liu and Peng (2017) also see digital sports media as a growing source of revenue.

3

Methodology

In the literature review of this thesis, various aspects of sports coverage in Germany were examined. The focus was on all market participants, i.e. the providers of sports broadcasts, the consumers of sports broadcasts and the holders of the broadcasting rights. The following study focuses in particular on the demand side of the German sports coverage market, i.e. the consumers of sports broadcasts and sports content. The main aim is to analyse and understand how the digital and technical changes of the last few years have affected the users and in particular their usage behaviour. The focus here is on finding out what the current usage behaviour of the German population interested in sports looks like and which various technological innovations play a role in this. This involves various parameters that have influenced the sports reporting market in recent years, such as the possibility of broadcasting content via streaming, social media or the use of big data. Finally, by analysing the usage behaviour and preferences of the consumers, it will be identified how the provider side can potentially make changes in order to serve the needs of the consumers. In order to achieve the research objectives, quantitative methods in the form of a survey were used during the research. Qualitative data was also partially analysed, as some of the questions in the survey gave the participants the opportunity to formulate their own answers. The survey was designed and conducted online, which on the one hand greatly simplifies the acquisition of participants through social media, for example, and on the other hand also makes the evaluation of the data easier. Furthermore, the choice of an online survey as a survey method has the great advantage that it can be completed at any time and from any place, especially in times of a pandemic. The following section takes a closer look at the research design and the survey used.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2022 M. Hagelgans, The Impact of Digitalization on Sports Broadcasting, BestMasters, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39869-9_3

39

40

3.1

3

Methodology

Research Design

This part of the thesis deals with the different design choices made in relation to the own study. Positivism was chosen as the basic research philosophy. In contrast to interpretivism, the collected data are evaluated objectively, so that, among other things, the replicability of the study exists (Weber, 2004). Quantitative methods are chosen to conduct research and collect data; data is collected and analysed in the form of numbers (Bortz & Döring, 2006). Quantitative methods are particularly suitable for collecting and evaluating large amounts of data (Bortz & Döring, 2006). The research is primarily deductive, which means that existing theories are tested and, if necessary, confirmed (Chevron et al., 2012). Since there are already some research results and therefore also some theories, this research will test them and try to gain new insights in specific areas where limited research results are available at this point in time. An example of this is the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the consumption of sports broadcasts by people interested in sports. Precisely because this topic has not existed for long, this study attempts to gain insights into this area. In order to conduct the quantitative research and collect the quantitative data, a survey will be created and used. This is an online survey, which ensures that the participants can answer the questions regardless of time and place (Wright, 2005). Another advantage is the recruitment of participants, as various channels such as social media can be used to acquire participants (Burton-Chase et al., 2017). Another aspect is the Covid-19 pandemic and the resulting recommendations and measures on contact restrictions, which do not affect the implementation of an online survey in any way (De Boni, 2020), but could negatively influence other forms of data collection. Another advantage of this method is its great speed, as the data collection process takes comparatively little time (De Boni, 2020). The study was conducted in a fixed period of nine days between 30.12.2021 and 07.01.2022 inclusive, accordingly the cross sectional time horizon was used. Convenience sampling was used as the sampling strategy for conducting the study, which on the one hand is not really recommended for academic research (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2016), but on the other hand has some advantages for the researcher (Saunders et al., 2009). Convenience sampling is a version of non-probability sampling (Etikan et al., 2016) and was chosen as the strategy in this case because this strategy allows for the recruitment of participants due to the fact that they are willing to participate in the survey and can be easily contacted and recruited by the researcher (Dornyei, 2007). With regard to this study, convenience sampling greatly facilitated data collection, as neither a large period of time nor financial resources could be used to recruit participants for

3.1 Research Design

41

the survey. A disadvantage is that not all relevant subgroups of the target group may be represented (Bornstein et al., 2013). After weighing the advantages and disadvantages of convenience sampling and considering the limited possibilities of the researcher to acquire a large number of participants, convenience sampling was chosen.

3.1.1

Hypotheses

In order to find out how consumers of sports broadcasts consume sport and to what extent streaming plays a role in this, a total of eleven different hypotheses were formulated. The aim is also to identify the extent to which social media plays a role in relation to sports broadcasting and how great or diverse the consumers’ interest is. In general, the hypotheses are intended to answer the research questions. The various hypotheses are listed below. Hypothesis1

Consumers prefer to watch sports broadcasts at home in front of the television.

Even though the way in which sports broadcasts are consumed has changed in recent years, especially with regard to streaming, it is assumed that the television itself is still very popular as a medium. This is supported by the trend towards ever larger televisions in German society (Fuhr, 2021). Especially in the area of sports, the size of the screen can influence the user experience. For example, in football, in situations where the camera films the entire pitch, 22 players are visible. In this case, more individual aspects can be perceived if the screen on which the transmission is running is larger. Furthermore, the researcher assumes that one’s own home is a popular place to watch sports broadcasts. In addition, since the Covid 19 pandemic, Germans are spending more time at home, which could lead them to watch more sports at home. Hypothesis2

It is very important for consumers to have the possibility to watch sports broadcasts time-shifted.

Streaming providers such as Netflix or Disney + give consumers the opportunity to watch content such as series or films on demand, which means that they can consume this content anytime and anywhere (Seidel et al., 2021). In the case of sports broadcasts, these are mostly live, which means that the “location” factor may not play a role in watching the broadcasts, but the “time” factor does play a

42

3

Methodology

role. Sports streaming providers offer the possibility of watching sports broadcasts time-delayed; the question here is to what extent the target group makes use of this and how important it is to them. Hypothesis3

Consumers show a broad interest in different sports.

Football is still by far the most popular sport in Germany. If one looks at the costs for broadcasting rights (dpa & Kicker, 2021), one can well imagine how great the demand for football and football broadcasts is. Nevertheless, providers such as DAZN offer a wide range of different sports (Kolkmann, 2021). The fact that a large number of sports and their broadcasts are available, could ensure that interest in different sports increases. Hypothesis4

The Covid-19 pandemic has led to an increase in the consumption of sports broadcasts.

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, many people in Germany have at times spent significantly more time at home than usual. For example, employed people were sent to the home office and children and young people were taught from home via laptops and tablets. It stands to reason that people who suddenly spend more time at home also consume more media such as sports content. However, it is important to note that at least at the beginning of the pandemic, there were no sporting events for several weeks (Skinner & Smith, 2021). Hypothesis5

Consumers are dissatisfied with the sports broadcasts of the public and free television channels.

Nowadays, very little football can be seen on the public and free privatecommercial channels, as, for example, almost all Bundesliga and Champions League matches can only be watched against payment (Hornbogen, 2022; Platschko, 2021). As football is by far the most popular sport and the broadcasts generate a great deal of interest, but are hardly ever shown by public and free channels, dissatisfaction with these channels could arise. This could also result from the fact that until a few years ago ZDF broadcast some Champions League matches free of charge. This dissatisfaction could also be increased by the fact that the monthly cost is e55.74 per month to watch popular football competitions and the Bundesliga (Hornbogen, 2022). Compared to the costs of streaming providers for series and films, these costs are very high (Hornbogen, 2022; RND, 2022).

3.1 Research Design

Hypothesis6

43

The younger consumers are, the more often they use a sports streaming service.

Streaming, and sports streaming in particular, is still a fairly recent technological achievement. According to Kantar (2021), for example, users of the provider DAZN are mostly younger than 35 years old. Furthermore, Sun & Zhang (2021) describe the offering of sports broadcasts via streaming as an important measure to acquire young viewers in particular. Accordingly, one could assume that among the young consumers there are particularly many consumers who already use a sports streaming service. Hypothesis7

Consumers who have subscribed to a paid sports streaming service are less likely to consume illegal sports streams than before.

In the music industry, the emergence of music streaming providers such as Spotify and Apple Music has led to a decrease in illegal streaming of music (Walker, 2012). This leads to the idea that the emergence of sports streaming providers such as DAZN will lead to a similar process. The sometimes large range of different sports and sporting events could also influence this and lead to a decline in illegal streaming of sports broadcasts. Hypothesis8

Most consumers are willing to spend money to watch their favourite sports.

The interest in sports within the German society is very high and many sports events, such as the broadcasts of Bundesliga matches, can only be consumed against payment. This could be one reason why most consumers of sports broadcasts are prepared to pay money for these broadcasts. Likewise, paid streaming services such as Netflix in the area of series and films and Spotify in the area of music are widespread, which means that many people are familiar with these providers and also many people use these paid providers. So if there is a willingness to pay for streaming services in the area of series and films and in the area of music, then there could possibly also be a willingness to pay for sports broadcasts. Hypothesis9

Consumers’ interest in sports increases when they use a sports streaming service.

44

3

Methodology

With the use of sports streaming providers, the choice of sports content and sports broadcasts that can be watched also increases. If a consumer of sports broadcasts now subscribes to such a provider and is suddenly exposed to a wide range of different sports broadcasts, this could well lead to the consumer consuming more sports broadcasts and sports content than before. Hypothesis10

Consumers are also interested in less popular sports such as niche sports, amateur sports or women’s sports.

Through new technological possibilities, such as the possibility of streaming, it is now possible for many people or even organisations to broadcast live streams with little financial effort. This means that less popular sports can also be marketed and shown to an audience via the internet. Providers such as Sportdeutschland.tv or Sporttotal.tv broadcast niche sports or amateur sports. Accordingly, there is an offer, the question now is whether this offer is also increasingly perceived and consumed by consumers. Hypothesis11

Consumers frequently use social media in connection with sports broadcasts.

There are numerous social media platforms that are used by a large part of the population. Among other things, social interaction plays a role. Since a large number of people use social media and are interested in sports and sports broadcasts, the question is to what extent social media plays a role in relation to sports broadcasts. On the part of the researcher, it is assumed that many social media users who are interested in sport also like to talk about sport and discuss it in social media. It could also play a role here that the broadcasters of sports broadcasts and the clubs and associations are usually also represented on social media.

3.1.2

Data Collection

Data collection is a proven method for gathering information on a specific topic and for testing research questions and hypotheses (Kabir, 2016). Data collection must first be divided into the collection of primary data and the collection of secondary data. Secondary data was used to write the literature review. Data already collected and analysed from research articles, books and other publications were studied in order to present them. In order to gain own insights, primary data was

3.1 Research Design

45

collected. Quantitative methods were chosen for the collection of primary data in this study. The data was collected by means of a survey. The survey was designed and conducted online, so that the survey and the course of the survey could be easily managed by the researcher. Furthermore, by choosing the online survey as the primary data collection method, the participants could also be recruited online, which increased the reach. The survey was designed online after the collection of questions, so that the data was also collected and stored online. Sosci Survey was used to design and conduct the survey and to collect and store the data. For non-commercial research, Sosci Survey may be used free of charge (SoSci Survey, n.d.). After the end of the survey period, the data remained stored on SoSi Survey and was downloaded in the form of an.xlsx file and also stored.

3.1.3

Participant Acquisition

In the context of this study it was essential to collect data, in this case the data was collected by means of a quantitative online survey. In order to collect the data, people had to answer the online survey, who first had to be acquired for participation. The larger the sample or the more people who participate in the online survey, the more accurate the final result of the subsequent data analysis will be (Jannsen, 2018). In order to recruit as many people as possible to complete the online survey, convenience sampling was used and various methods were used to recruit participants. The target group was Germans aged 14 and over who are at least mildly interested in sport. One approach to recruiting participants was to search via social media. Nowadays, social media is increasingly used to find participants for online surveys, as the search for participants can prove to be extremely successful (Burton-Chase et al., 2017). Furthermore, finding participants on social media and then sharing and posting a post that references the survey has the potential to spread organically (Stokes et al., 2019). This happens, for example, when social media users who see the respective post about the online survey share this post with other users or forward it to other users (Stokes et al., 2019). In the context of participant recruitment via social media, a total of four different platforms were used in this study. These platforms were Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn and Xing. The researcher prepared a post for Facebook, LinkedIn and Xing with an address to the potential participants and a link to the online survey. For Instagram, a separate text was formulated for the address. The number of contacts the researcher has on the platforms also formed the number of people who could be reached. The contacts on Facebook (661), LinkedIn (156), Xing (57) and Instagram (289)

46

3

Methodology

initially resulted in a maximum reach of 1,163 people. By sharing the post with several people and accounts, the maximum number of people reached increased to around 3,000. A total of 23 people then came forward to confirm that they had taken part in the survey. Another method of acquiring participants was to approach social contacts and family members who were contacted via the messenger service WhatsApp and asked to participate. For this purpose, a message was also formulated, which was then personalised and included the respective name of the person who was addressed personally. In total, the message was sent to 38 individual people, of whom 29 came forward and confirmed via message that they had taken part in the survey. The message was also shared in various WhatsApp groups where another 90 people were reached, of whom a total of 19 contacted the researcher and confirmed their participation in the online survey. As a further measure to attract participants, the platform www.surveycircle.de was used, which allows users to list their online surveys on the site so that other users can answer the survey (Survey Circle, n.d.). A ranking list of all online surveys is created on the platform (Survey Circle, n.d.). Each user of the site now receives points for each answered online survey (Survey Circle, n.d.). With the increasing number of points, the respective user or the online survey of the user also rises in the ranking, which means that other users receive more points for answering the survey (Survey Circle, n.d.). In summary, the more surveys you answer, the more participants you acquire for your own survey (Survey Circle, n.d.). Interestingly, the platform has a built-in mechanism that tracks how long it takes users to complete the survey and sanctions users who are significantly faster than average and therefore may not complete the surveys conscientiously (Survey Circle, n.d.). In the case of the researcher, the researcher himself answered 68 different surveys, while his own survey was answered by 45 people. In summary, all the acquisition measures reached approximately 3,200 people, of whom a total of 116 confirmed that they had taken part in the survey. In the end, a total of 284 people initially started to do the online survey, of which 237 were ultimately part of the target group, so that in total 237 people were surveyed.

3.1.4

Data Analysis

The data collected from the 237 participants in this study was first downloaded from the SoSci Survey platform in Excel format as an.xlsx file. The website www. soscisurvey.de, which was used to create and conduct the survey, offers various options for downloading the data. There is also the option of downloading the

3.1 Research Design

47

data as a CSV file, for example, so that the data can be analysed with the help of SPSS. The programme Microsoft Excel was chosen to store, display and analyse the collected quantitative data. Excel was chosen as the analysis tool because the researcher has already used this programme frequently to analyse data and is familiar with the user interface of the programme. The aim of this study was to gain new insights into German sports broadcasting and user behaviour and to review existing findings. The main focus was on the connection between new technologies and sports broadcasting. Descriptive statistics and inferential statistics were used to evaluate the survey and analyse the data. First, the data was downloaded and opened in Microsoft Excel, so that a table opened with all the quantitative data and the text entries of the participants. The table was then modified, for example by adding filters that could be used to filter for specific answers or to sort the numerical data as desired. The researcher then created a separate table for each of the questions asked in the survey, consisting of the question, the answer options and the answers selected by the participants. The tables showed the number of people who selected the respective answer option as well as the percentage. This provided an initial overview of the results and the researcher could see how the participants had chosen in the form of clear tables. The data from the table was then used to create a diagram for each question, which made it even easier to visualise the participants’ answers. To finally analyse the data, the percentage distributions were measured as well as the frequency of the data and the mean value. A range was also used in relation to the investigation of the willingness to pay, as in this question the participants could enter a number via text input. This made it possible to measure the extent to which the amounts entered differed from each other and what the lowest or highest amount was. Since a Likert scale was also used in part to measure the extent to which the participants agreed with certain statements, the mean value in particular was considered here, as well as the percentage of participants who agreed or disagreed with the statement. After creating a table and chart for each question of the survey that illustrated the data collected, the researcher analysed this data to see how the participants responded. In the course of this, the researcher also looked at whether the results of the analysis of the data fulfilled the researcher’s expectations, in order to ultimately test the hypotheses that had been put forward. In order to do this, the relevant data were examined for each individual hypothesis in order to draw conclusions about whether the hypotheses can be confirmed by the collected data or whether they must be refuted. This process was carried out with all hypotheses. After the analysis of the results of the individual questions and the verification of the hypotheses through the data analysis, the data analysis was completed.

48

3.2

3

Methodology

Survey Design

During the literature research, the researcher began to write the first questions for the later survey, which were all saved in a “question catalogue” in the form of a Word file. In the course of the literature research and the later writing of the literature review, many more potential questions for the own survey arose, which were also all recorded in writing in this file. In the course of this process and with the further research of already published literature and collected data, a total of 74 questions were recorded. In the course of writing the literature review, various research gaps emerged, so that the focus of the survey was formed. As a result, the total of 74 questions were initially reduced to 50 questions. Finally, another 15 questions were deleted from the questionnaire, so that the final survey contained a total of 35 questions plus five questions regarding the socio-demographic data of the participants. In addition, there was a question on consent to participate and three questions that were asked at the beginning of the survey to ensure that only the target group participated. The target group was Germans aged 14 and over who are at least mildly interested in sport. In the course of the design, the survey was divided into different sections and topics. First, general questions were asked about interest in sports, then questions were asked about sports broadcasts on television and about the consumption of sports broadcasts. This was followed by questions about sports streaming and less popular sports. Towards the end of the survey, the focus was on social media and its use in relation to sports broadcasting, before the socio-demographic data was asked. The survey was designed to collect primarily quantitative data, which means that answer options were provided for each question in the survey. This made it possible to store a large part of the data in the form of numbers that could be evaluated in the later analysis of the data. The survey consisted mainly of questions for which the participant could choose between different answer options. Depending on the question, there were between two and 18 different options for the participant to choose from. Some questions also offered participants the option of selecting “Other” and writing their own answer, so that quantitative data was also collected within the framework of the online survey. This mechanism was built in to better identify whether the answer options provided covered all opinions, feelings and behaviours of the participants. Furthermore, it ultimately allowed data to be collected that was not initially apparent to the researcher. On the one hand, the collection of quantitative data makes data analysis and data evaluation more difficult; on the other hand, it allows the participants to express themselves more “freely”. In the case of this survey, an added value was achieved because more sports that the participants find interesting could be identified. In

3.2 Survey Design

49

the questions of the survey, the participants could choose either one answer option or several answer options. The use of multiple choice questions was particularly useful in measuring the preferences of the participants in terms of sports and sports broadcasts. A question was also included in the survey where no answer options were given, but the participants had the opportunity to freely choose an answer in the form of a number. Nominal, ordinal, interval and ratio scales were used as measurement scales during the survey. In the course of the survey, different filters were used for different reasons. The first filter (Figure 3.1. Filters) was used before the start of the survey, when consent to participate in the survey and the data protection regulations had to be agreed to.

Figure 3.1 Filters

The main aim was to ensure that only people who agree to participate and accept the data protection regulations take part in the survey. As can be seen in the illustration, all persons who selected “2”, i.e. who selected “No” in the consent question, were directly forwarded to the end of the survey. This marked the end of the survey for these people. In this case, all 287 people answered “1”, i.e. “Yes”, and thus agreed to participate in the survey. Further filters were used for the next three questions, all of which had the task of identifying those persons who did not belong to the target group of the survey. They were asked whether they were interested in sports and sports broadcasts and how often they watched sports broadcasts. People who stated that they were not interested in sports or sports broadcasts or that they did not watch sports broadcasts were also forwarded to the end of the survey, so that it was then completed for them. Further filters were used in the topic areas “Sports Streaming” and “Social Media” in order to only interview participants who could also answer these questions. In the area of “Sports Streaming”, the questions were directed at all participants who used a sports streaming service. Accordingly, the filter was set up in such a way that all persons who did not use a sports streaming service were directly forwarded to the next topic area, so that these questions were skipped. The same was done in the “social media” section, where all participants who did not use social media were filtered out and forwarded to the next topic block. On the one hand, these filter questions made it possible to ask exactly those participants who belonged to the

50

3

Methodology

specific target group of the topic area; on the other hand, this reduced the sample in these areas. With the question on consent to participate in the survey and the three initial questions, which had the task of only forwarding people to the survey who belonged to the target group, the survey consisted of 44 questions. For example, if participants did not use a sports streaming service, seven questions were skipped, so they also answered seven fewer questions. Participants who did not use a social media skipped another five questions, so that the total number of questions to be answered varied greatly during the survey. This resulted in a processing time on the part of the participants that was between five and nine minutes in most cases.

3.2.1

Pretest

In the preparation of the survey, two pretests were carried out, both of which had different objectives. Pretests usually serve the purpose of identifying problems and errors in the survey before it is published (Gershowitz, 1995). According to McDaniel & Gates (1998), a pretest is useful for any type of survey. Overall, the two pretests had a great influence on the final survey and the questions and wording it contained. The pretest phase lasted a total of three days. The acquisition of participants for the pretest generally took place in the respondent’s own social environment. In this case, various people from the family circle and social contacts were acquired to conduct the two pretests. Care was taken to ensure that these individuals had different demographic characteristics, particularly in terms of age, gender and level of education. The total number of participants was n = 8. The participants ranged in age from 16 to 68 years, three of whom were female and five male. Within the participants were people who were still at school, students, people who had completed their studies and people with a secondary school diploma. Especially in the first pretest, it was very helpful to find participants of different ages and with different educational backgrounds. During the pretest phase, the survey was also tested for validity and reliability, and it was found that all the questions formulated were understood in the same way by different people with different socio-demographic data and that the questions also measured what they were supposed to measure. The first pretest had the core task of finding out whether the final survey in English makes sense or whether this could lead to complications in understanding and answering the survey. The pretest was conducted with the help of “Google Forms”. The basis for the assumption that a survey in English can lead to problems is that English is not the first language in Germany and there are

3.2 Survey Design

51

still some Germans today who speak little or no English. In 2021, about 36% of Germans estimate their English skills to be low or have no English skills at all (IfD Allensbach, 2021b). Platforms were also used in the acquisition for the final survey that could encourage participants who do not live in Germany to take part in the study. This potential problem can be solved by conducting the survey in German. Of course, certain tools can be used to translate a website and thus the survey questions, but the likelihood that people will do so is supposedly low. The first pretest consisted of a total of 13 questions, 12 of which were related to the topic of the thesis. The last question asked whether the participants had any difficulties in understanding or answering the pretest questions. This question, in contrast to the other questions, was also available in German, so that every participant could understand it, whether they had knowledge of English or not. This question was answered yes by five of the eight participants, which means that they had difficulties understanding or answering the questions of the pretest. This led to the decision to design the final survey of the thesis in German, so that the participants would not experience any comprehension problems. The second pretest was already formulated in German and contained all 38 questions that were later used in the final survey. The aim of this pretest was to check, with the help of several people, whether all the questions were formulated in a comprehensible way and to identify potential grammatical errors and spelling mistakes. During this pretest, which was conducted with the help of “Sosci Survey”, some errors were identified. All eight people who participated in this pretest found a total of seven grammatical errors and 23 spelling errors that were not found in advance by the researcher. All eight participants felt that the questions and phrasing were understandable. As a result, all errors were corrected by the researcher so that the survey could be completed and released for answering. Both pretests thus produced important findings that contributed to the finalisation of the survey.

3.2.2

Data Protection

Several issues can arise when collecting data, especially when personal data is stored. In this study, all data was collected anonymously, so the data cannot be assigned to individual persons. Furthermore, no sensitive data such as name, address, e-mail address etc. was collected. Before the survey started, all participants were asked if they agreed to take part in the survey and if they accepted the privacy agreement. A mechanism was built in to direct participants who did not accept these conditions to the end of the survey. This ensures that only people

52

3

Methodology

who explicitly want to participate in the survey and who agree to the anonymous and non-personal data collection can take part. It is important to mention that only the researcher had access to the data during the entire research process and that the collected data was neither used for commercial purposes nor published. The data was collected with the SoSci Survey platform and also stored there. Access to the collected data was only possible through the researcher’s log-in data. Microsoft Excel was used to analyse the data; in this case, the data could only be found on the researcher’s PC, which was also protected by a password. Data protection is ensured because the participants expressly agreed to the collection of data, all data was collected anonymously and not on a personal basis, so the data cannot be traced back to individual participants and only the researcher had access to it.

3.3

Limitations

For the research, quantitative methods were chosen in the form of a survey conducted online. This has some advantages, but also some disadvantages, such as the uncertainty whether the data are really valid or whether the participants answered the survey attentively (Wright, 2005). Since it can be assumed that the main part of the participants belong to the social contacts of the researcher or to the extended circle of acquaintances of the researcher and that some persons have assured the conscientious answering, it is questionable which percentage of the participants have answered the online-survey inattentively and uncertainly. Another limitation was the time factor, the online-survey was accessible online from 30.12.2021 until 07.01.2022. This results in a total period of nine days. If you look at the different days and the respective numbers of participants, you can see that the number of participants already dropped after two days and after four days only very few participants joined. A longer period for the survey could therefore only have generated significant added value if participants had been acquired via other methods and channels. A total of 237 participants took part in the online survey, although the inclusion of some filter questions in the survey reduced the number of participants in certain areas of the survey. For example, in the area where only people who subscribe to a sports streaming service were surveyed, the number of participants decreased to 117. In general, the higher the number of participants, the more accurate and representative the result will be (Jannsen, 2018). Accordingly, the limited number of participants is a limitation, although the researcher used many

3.4 Expected Results

53

channels to conduct participant recruitment. For another survey, where the number of participants should be larger, probably more channels should be used or, for example, material incentives could be offered for participation. Another possible avenue could be to run paid advertisements on social media platforms such as Facebook to reach a larger target audience (Bennett et al., 2019). Another limitation is the demographics of the participants. Due to the fact that especially people from the social environment were recruited as participants and especially social media was used, the average age of the participants is above average young compared to the age distribution and average age of the German population. More than 75% of the respondents were younger than 40 years old. In terms of gender, more males than females also took part in the survey, although this is less significant in this case, as the target group (Germans aged 14 and over who are at least mildly interested in sport) includes more men than women, as women are less interested in sports and sports broadcasts on average (PwC, 2018a). Furthermore, there is an above-average number of people among the participants who are interested in the sport of darts, as the survey was shared in a WhatsApp group consisting of about 50 members of a darts club. Accordingly, an above-average number of participants indicated that they are interested in broadcasts of darts events, which, however, is easy to see and, except for one question of the survey, does not influence the other 34 questions.

3.4

Expected Results

Primarily, the results of the analysis of the collected data are expected to confirm existing research findings and results from other surveys. The main point here is that the target group is expected to show a high level of interest in sports and sports broadcasts. It is expected that a large part of the target group is interested in various sports, such as American football, handball or basketball. Furthermore, it is expected that the target group will also have an interest in the broadcasts of less popular sports in this respect. It is expected that the willingness to pay among the participants of the survey is high, i.e. that the target group is willing to pay money on average to be able to watch sports broadcasts. Furthermore, it is expected that a large proportion of the participants who are willing to pay for sports broadcasts already use a paid sports streaming service. With regard to illegal streaming of sports broadcasts, it is expected that a large proportion of the target group have already made use of this. It is also expected that the Covid-19 pandemic has had an impact on consumption behaviour.

4

Results

In this chapter of the study, the results of the survey will be presented, starting with the socio-demographic data of the sample. This is done to illustrate the socio-demographic characteristics of the participants in the online survey and the extent to which the sample is representative of the target group. Subsequently, the data shape and the composite measures are reviewed. The data will then be analysed and presented in order to test the hypotheses that have been formulated. The chapter will conclude with a summary of the main findings.

4.1

Sample Summary

A total of 237 participants took part in the online survey, who belonged to the exact target group (German persons aged 14 and over who are at least mildly interested in sport). However, due to the fact that not all participants completed the survey and left during the survey, the number of participants differs for some questions. Furthermore, not all participants were willing to provide information about their socio-demographic data. Nevertheless, answers could be collected for each question and a large part of the participants also provided information on socio-demographic data. The question on data protection and consent to participate was answered with “yes” by 287 participants, the first question of the survey was answered by 284 participants, so that three participants left the survey before the first question.

Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39869-9_4.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2022 M. Hagelgans, The Impact of Digitalization on Sports Broadcasting, BestMasters, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39869-9_4

55

56

4

Results

The first three questions of the survey had the primary purpose of identifying the level of interest in sports and sports broadcasts and to filter out those participants who either have no interest in sports or sports broadcasts or do not consume sports broadcasts. This filtered out a total of 40 survey participants who did not belong to the desired target group. After filtering out the participants who were not interested in sports, a total of 237 participants remained, which means that in addition to the 40 participants who were filtered out, another ten participants dropped out of the survey. In the course of the online survey, further filter questions were included, which also had the purpose of excluding participants from questions that did not concern them or excluding participants who did not belong to the specific target group of the respective questions. An example of this are the questions regarding social media use and perception in relation to sports broadcasts and sporting events. People who stated in the filter question “Do you use a social media platform? (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc.)” that they do not use any social media, were excluded from the following questions regarding social media and led directly to the next thematic block. The use of filters is dealt with in more detail in the subchapter “Survey Design”, which can be found in the chapter “Methodology”. The sample consists of a total of 237 participants, all of whom have at least a small interest in sports and sports broadcasts and consume a sports broadcast at least once a month. Thus, they belong to the target group of the study and show at least a small interest in sports. Of the 237 participants, 218–221 people provided information on their socio-demographic characteristics, which represents a share of approx. 92%. The fact that only 8% of the respondents did not give any information about themselves because they did not complete the survey or did not want to answer these questions still gives a representativeness for the sample. A total of five different questions were asked regarding socio-demographic characteristics. The questions asked for age, gender, marital status, highest level of education and current employment status. In order to capture the age of the participants, different age categories were provided for the participants to choose from according to their affiliation (Figure 4.1. Age Distribution). This revealed that six participants (2.7%) are between 14–19 years old, 116 participants (52.5%) are between 20–29 years old, 44 participants (19.9%) are between 30–39 years old, 27 participants (12.2%) are between 40–49 years old, 12 participants (5.4%) are between 50–59 years old and 13 participants (5.9%) are 60 years old or older. Three participants did not want to give their age, thus 218 participants gave their age category. In these results one can see, which is also illustrated in the figure, that the average age of the participants is comparatively young. Especially if you look at the average age

4.1 Sample Summary

57

of the German population, which is 44.6 years (Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder, 15 November, 2021). The reasons for this lie in the strategy of participant acquisition, as participants were recruited in particular from the social environment of the researcher and via social media. The fact that the researcher’s contacts were also approached to a large extent via social media means that a large proportion of the participants (52.5%) are between 20–29 years old. This results from the fact that the researcher’s contacts in the respective social media platforms are of a similar age to the researcher himself, who was 27 years old at the time of data collection. The above-average youth of the participants must be taken into account in relation to the study, as younger people tend to use streaming services more often, for example (ARD & ZDF, 2020).

Figure 4.1 Age Distribution

In terms of gender (Figure 4.2. Gender), 218 people provided information and two people selected that they did not want to provide information regarding their gender. In total, 134 people (60.9%) indicated that they are male. 82 participants (37.3%) indicated that they are female. Two participants (0.9%) have indicated that they are diverse. Accordingly, there are comparatively many males among the participants, considering that males and females are represented in society in roughly equal numbers (bpb, 2020). However, it must also be taken into account that on average more men are interested in sports and especially sports broadcasts and sports content than women (IfD Allensbach, 2020; PwC, 2018a). Accordingly, the imbalance of males and females among the participants was to some extent to be expected.

58

4

Results

Figure 4.2 Gender

A total of 218 participants provided information on their marital status (Figure 4.3. Family status), while two participants selected that they did not want to provide any information on this. 154 persons (70.0%) indicated that they are single, while 61 participants (27.7%) indicated that they are married. Three persons (1.4%) stated that they were divorced. No person (0.0%) indicated that they were widowed. The high proportion of single persons compared to the average in the German population (destatis, 2021) could be related to the above-average age of the sample. The question on the highest level of education (Figure 4.4. Highest level of education) was answered by 218 participants, none of whom chose not to provide any information. 22 respondents (10.1%) indicated that their highest level of education is a secondary school diploma, 77 respondents (35.3%) indicated that their highest level of education is a general university or university of applied sciences diploma. 66 participants (30.3%) indicated that they have a Bachelor’s degree, 47 participants (21.6%) indicated that they have a Master’s degree. Six participants (2.8%) indicated that their highest level of education was obtaining a doctoral degree. Among the participants, there was no person with a professorial title. Regarding the employment status of the participants (Figure 4.5. Employment Status), 218 people provided information, none of the participants chose the option that no information should be provided. Eight persons (3.7%) indicated that they are pupils or go to school. 72 respondents (33.0%) indicated that they are students. 112 respondents (51.4%) indicated that their main job is as

4.1 Sample Summary

Figure 4.3 Family Status

Figure 4.4 Highest level of education

59

60

4

Results

an employee, while 13 respondents (6.0%) indicated that they are self-employed. Five persons (2.3%) indicated that they are currently not employed and eight persons (3.7%) indicated that they are retired. In general, a comparatively high proportion of pupils and students can be identified, which may be influenced by the young age of the sample.

Figure 4.5 Employment Status

In summary, the sample consists of an above-average number of young participants, and there are also more males than females in the sample. Most of the participants are single and have a Bachelor’s degree as their highest level of education or a lower level of education. Furthermore, the majority of the sample is employed or a student. In summary, the sample is particularly striking because of the low age average, which is significantly lower than in German society (Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder, 15 November, 2021).

4.2

Analysis of Data

In the following, the collected data will be analysed by going into the questions of the survey individually and presenting the results. In particular, we will look at how the participants answered. In order to clarify the weighting of the different answers, primarily percentage shares are presented. Quantitative data, i.e. answers in the form of numbers, were collected as part of the data collection. Each answer option was assigned a number. For some questions, there was the option for the participants to answer qualitatively in the form of a text entry. The target group

4.2 Analysis of Data

61

for the survey is: “German persons aged 14 and over who are at least mildly interested in sport”. First, the three questions and their evaluation are presented, which were built into the survey to determine the affiliation of the respondents. In order to measure the extent of the respondents’ interest in sports and sports broadcasting, the respondents could choose between five different answer options to answer the three questions in order to express the extent of their personal interest. An ordinal scale was used. The response options were as follows: “Very interested” (5), “Interested” (4), “Somewhat interested” (3), “Not very interested” (2), “Not interested” (1). Target group affiliation1 “How interested are you in sports?” 284 people answered the question, the task of which was to identify and exclude from the survey all respondents who indicated that they had no interest in sport. The average interest was 3.9, which is very close to the answer option “interest”, which expresses the second highest interest. 43.3% of the respondents indicated that they had a great interest in sport, while 10.2% indicated little interest. Overall, 69.4% of the respondents gave a positive rating and said they were interested or very interested in sports. 14.4% of the respondents gave a negative rating and indicated that they have little or no interest in sports. 4.2% or twelve people who said they had no interest were excluded from the survey because they did not belong to the target group. 4.2% or 12 respondents indicated that they have no interest in sport, so they were excluded from the survey. Target group affiliation2 “How interested are you in sports broadcasting?” 269 respondents answered this question, which was designed to measure people’s interest in sports broadcasting. The average interest was 3.7, which means that on average there is some interest. 59.8% of the respondents gave a positive rating and expressed that they are interested or very interested in sports broadcasts. 20.1% gave a negative rating and expressed that they have little or no interest. 4.5% or twelve people indicated that they had no interest and were therefore excluded from answering the survey. Target group affiliation3 “How often do you watch sports broadcasts?” 256 people answered this question, 59% of whom said they watch sports broadcasts at least once a week. 41.8% said they watch sports broadcasts several times a week or every day. 6.3% or 16 people said that they do not watch sports. Thus, they were also excluded from answering the survey. Of the 284 people who answered the first question, 40 people (14%) were excluded from answering the survey because they did not belong to the target

62

4

Results

group. A further seven people dropped out of the survey in the course of these three questions, so the actual survey starts with 237 participants. Question1 “What devices do you use most often to watch sports broadcasts?” 237 participants answered this question, in which they could choose several answers (maximum three). Participants also had the opportunity to formulate an answer themselves in the form of text. 88.6% of the participants stated that they often use the television to watch sports. 41.8% said that they often use a PC or laptop for this purpose, 40.1% gave “smartphone” as an answer. 23.2% of the participants often watch via a tablet, 4.2% often use a projector. Question2 “Where do you like to watch sports?” The 237 participants in this question could choose multiple answer options (maximum of three). 93.7% said they like to watch at home. 54.9% said they like to watch at a friend’s house. 37.1% chose the answer “in a pub or bar”, 11.4% said they like to watch on the road. 30% of the participants like to watch sport on location. Question3 “What is particularly important to you when watching sports broadcasts? This question was answered by 237 participants who could choose up to five answers. 75.5% think it is important that sports are broadcast live, 64.1% think picture and sound quality is important. 60.8% think free broadcasts are very important, 50.6% think qualified commentators are important. 42.2% said that an advertising-free broadcast is important to them. 26.6% consider the possibility of watching on the move to be important, 23.6% stated that they consider the possibility of watching the next day to be important. 15.2% mentioned the possibility to rewind. Question4 “What are your favourite sports to watch?” 237 participants answered this question and could choose a maximum of five different sports. The participants were given 17 different sports to choose from. All the sports mentioned were chosen by at least 2 people (0.8%). Most people chose the sport football, 188 participants (79.3%) indicated this sport. Furthermore, 39 people chose the option to add other sports that were not mentioned. Of these, 21 participants chose winter sports. To better illustrate the results, here is an overview of the sports and the number of people who chose them (Figure 4.6. What are your favourite sports to watch?). After football, tennis, American football and darts can be identified as the most frequently chosen sports. Tennis and darts were selected by 31.6% (75), American football by 29.5% (70).

4.2 Analysis of Data

63

Figure 4.6 What are your favourite sports to watch?

Question5 “Since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, has your consumption of sports broadcasts changed?” The 237 participants in this question could choose between three different answers. 61.2% of the participants stated that their consumption of sports broadcasts has remained the same. 38.8% indicated that their consumption had changed. Of the participants who indicated that their consumption has changed, 66.3% indicated that their consumption has increased. The other 33.7% indicated that their consumption has decreased. Question6 “What do you consider to be the most important characteristics of a sports broadcaster?” There were 231 respondents to this question, which means that six respondents left the survey compared to the previous question. The participants could choose from ten given answer options and select a total of five of these answers. The participants also had the opportunity to give an answer in the form of a text. The most frequent answer given by the participants was that the sports broadcaster should provide good picture and sound quality; this answer was chosen by 65.8% of the participants. 60.2% said that it is important to them that the sports broadcaster provides a wide range of sports. 52.4% of the respondents consider it important that sports broadcasts are free of charge. An overview is provided here

64

4

Results

for further illustration (Figure 4.7. What are the most important characteristics of a sports broadcaster?).

Figure 4.7 What are the most important characteristics of a sports broadcaster?

Question7 “How satisfied are you with the sports broadcasting of the free and public television channels? (ARD, ZDF, RTL, Eurosport etc.) 231 participants answered this question and could choose between the following options: “Great interest” (5), “Interest” (4), “Some interest” (3), “Little interest” (2), “No interest” (1). From the answers given, a mean value of 3.1 is calculated, according to which the participants are somewhat satisfied on average. 40.3% of the participants gave a positive rating and stated that they are satisfied or very satisfied. 22.1% stated that they are somewhat dissatisfied or dissatisfied, thus a negative rating. 37.7% of the participants stated that they are somewhat satisfied. Question8 “Where do you watch sports most often?” 230 participants answered this question, they could choose between two given answers or add their own answer in the form of text. 46.1% said that they most often use free and public television channels. 46.5% of the participants mostly use paid TV channels and sports streaming providers. 7.4% of the participants stated other channels or providers, including providers such as YouTube and Twitch, which can be used free of charge.

4.2 Analysis of Data

65

Question9 “Where do you inform yourself most often about sports broadcasts and sporting events?” The 230 participants who answered this question could choose between four given answers or write their own answer in text form. There was also the option to indicate when you do not inform yourself about sports broadcasts and sporting events. 46.1% mentioned websites and 37.4% mentioned social media. 4.8% use newspapers as their main source of information, 1.7% teletext and 5.7% do not inform themselves. 10 participants (4.3%) indicated other sources, with apps being the primary source of information. Question10 “Have you ever watched a sports broadcast illegally? (Illegal stream etc.)” This question was answered by 230 participants, of which 44.3% answered “Yes” and 51.7” answered “No”. Nine participants (3.9%) indicated that they did not want to give any information on this. Question11 “Are you willing to pay money to watch your favourite sports broadcasts? This question acted as a filter and excluded those who answered “no” to this question from the subsequent questions, as they did not belong to the specific target group of the subsequent questions. These participants were redirected directly to the questions in the next topic area, in this case the questions in the area of niche sports. This affected 35.7% of the 230 participants in this question, as they chose the answer “No”. 64.3% of the participants chose “Yes”, indicating that they had a willingness to pay. Question12 “Do you use a streaming service for sports broadcasts? (Sky Go, DAZN, etc.)” This question asked all participants who had indicated their willingness to pay in the previous question. This question also functioned as a filter question here and directed all participants to the next topic area who answered this question with “No”. This measure was taken because the directly following questions were exclusively addressed to people who use a sports streaming service. Of the 148 participants in this question, 79.1% answered “Yes”, while 20.9% chose “No”. Thus, 79.1% of respondents who indicated a willingness to pay for sports broadcasting use a sports streaming service. In terms of the total number of participants and across all ages, the percentage of those who use a sports streaming service is 51.4%.

66

4

Results

Question13 “Do you share a subscription to a streaming sports provider for sports? (DAZN, Sky Go, Prime Video etc.)” This question was answered by 117 respondents who indicated in advance that they had a willingness to pay for sports broadcasts and used a sports streaming service themselves. Overall, 68.4% indicated that they share a subscription. 31.6% of participants said they do not. Question14 “How often do you watch two or more sports broadcasts at the same time?” This question was also answered by 117 participants, all of whom had a willingness to pay for sports broadcasts and were themselves using a sports streaming service. They could choose between five options to express how often they watch two or more sports broadcasts at the same time. 4.3% said they do this very often, 9.4% said they do this often. 29.1% said they rarely do this and 25.6% said they never use it. The average rating was 2.4, with 54.7% giving a negative rating and 13.7% a positive rating. 31.6% said they occasionally watch two or more sports programmes at the same time. On average, participants rarely to occasionally use two or more sports programmes at the same time. Question15 “How has illegal watching of sports changed since you started using a streaming provider for sports? (Sky Go, DAZN etc.)” This question was answered by 116 participants, which means that one participant left the survey before answering this question. The participants, all of whom are willing to pay for sports content and use a streaming service for sports themselves, were able to choose between five different answers and also indicate if they did not want to give any information. 6% did not want to give any information and 41.4% of the participants stated that they have never watched a sports broadcast illegally. 6% of the participants stated that their illegal consumption of sports content has remained the same. 46.6% of respondents indicated that their illegal consumption of sports content has changed. Of those participants who indicated that their use had changed, 5.6% indicated that their use had increased. 29.6% indicated that their consumption has decreased and 64.8% of respondents indicated that they no longer watch illegal sports content. Question16 “Have you ever had problems in the past with streaming sports broadcasts?” The 116 participants who answered this question could choose between six different answer options. One option was to give an answer by text input to complement the existing answer options. Participants could choose a maximum of three answers. 69.8% said that they have ever watched a stream that did not

4.2 Analysis of Data

67

run smoothly. 52.6% said that the audio and/or video quality of a stream was not good. 50.9% said they have ever watched a stream that did not load or loaded slowly. 35.3% stated that the internet has not worked when streaming as a problem they have encountered. 9.5% of the participants stated that they have never had problems streaming sports content. Question17 “I watch more sports since I started using streaming provider for sport. (Sky Go, DAZN, Prime Video etc.)” This is a statement made where participants were asked to indicate the extent to which the statement applied to them. A Likert scale with five different answer options was chosen. A total of 115 participants made statements, all of them using a streaming service. After the previous question, one participant stopped the survey, so the number of participants was changed from 116 to 115. On average, participants responded with a 3.85. This means that, on average, this statement tends to apply to participants. 65.2% of participants gave a positive rating, indicating that the statement tends to apply or applies to them. 11.3% of the participants gave a negative rating and stated that the statement does not apply to them or does not apply to them. 23.5% chose the option “Neither agree nor disagree”. Question18 “I am interested in more sports and their broadcasts. since I started using a streaming provider for sports. (Sky Go, DAZN, Prime Video etc.)” Participants were asked to indicate to what extent the statement applied to them. A Likert scale with five different answer options was chosen. A total of 115 participants provided information. All participants use a sports streaming provider. 44.3% of the participants gave a positive rating, while 30.4% gave a negative rating. 25.2% of participants indicated that they neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement. The average rating is 3.2. Question19 “I sometimes stay awake to watch live sports broadcasts I’m interested in.” 115 respondents indicated to what extent they agreed with the statement. A Likert scale with five different response options was used. All participants use a sports streaming service. 53.9% of participants gave a positive rating and tended to agree or agree with the statement. 32.2% of participants gave a negative rating and disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement. 13.9% of the participants stated that the statement neither applies nor does not apply to them. This results in an average rating of 3.4.

68

4

Results

Question20 “How much euros would you be willing to pay per month to watch all sports, sporting events and content (interviews, documentaries, etc.) that interests you?” This question was answered by 115 respondents, all of whom indicated that they use a sports streaming service. There were no options for the participants to choose from for this question; instead, the participants were asked to enter a value in the form of a number via text input. This resulted in an average of 21.02. The participants were thus willing to pay an average of 21.02e per month. The range of the different numbers or values varied between 5 and 100. Question21 “How interested are you in watching sports broadcasts of niche sports? (beach volleyball, table tennis, rowing, gymnastics, sailing etc.)”. This question again includes all participants in the survey, there are 227 of the original 237 participants left at this point. This question asked participants to indicate how interested they were. Participants were again able to choose between five different response options: ‘Very interested’ (5), ‘Interested’ (4), ‘Somewhat interested’ (3), ‘Not very interested’ (2), ‘Not interested’ (1). 12.8% of participants indicated that there was a great deal of interest and 23.3% indicated that there was interest. 25.6% of participants indicated that they had little interest and 17.2% indicated that they had no interest. 21.1% of the participants indicated that they have some interest. The average score is 2.9. 36.1% of participants gave a positive rating and expressed interest, while 42.8% gave a negative rating and expressed little to no interest. Question22 “How interested are you in watching amateur sports and low leagues? (Football Regional League, 2nd Handball Bundesliga, 2nd Basketball Bundesliga etc.)”. This question was answered by 227 participants who were asked to express their interest. As in the previous question, five different answer options were given. 30% of the participants gave a positive rating and indicated that they were interested or very interested. 55.5% of the participants gave a negative rating and indicated that they had little or no interest. 14.5% of the participants indicated that they have some interest. On average, this results in a score of 2.6. Question23 “How interested are you in watching women’s sports broadcasts? (Women’s football, Women’s volleyball, Women’s handball, Women’s basketball etc.)” 227 participants answered this question, choosing between five different response options that expressed different degrees of interest. In this context, 30% of the participants gave a positive rating and indicated that they were interested or very

4.2 Analysis of Data

69

interested. 51.1% of the participants indicated that they had little interest or no interest. 18.9% of the participants indicated that they have some interest. This results in an average of 2.6. Question24 “Which niche sports are you most interested in?” 227 participants answered this question and could choose from eleven different options, one of which was the option to give an answer in the form of a text entry. Participants could choose up to five answers in total. 48% of the participants stated that they were interested in beach volleyball, thus this answer was chosen most often. For better presentation, a pictorial representation is chosen (Figure 4.8. Which niche sports are you most interested in?).

Figure 4.8 Which niche sports are you most interested in?

The diagram shows that besides beach volleyball, table tennis (31.3%), gymnastics (24.2%) and skateboarding (18.5%) were selected. Among the 33 entries under “Other”, especially winter sports, badminton, rugby and hockey were mentioned. Question25 “Which of the following providers of niche sports and amateur sports broadcasts do you know?” In this question, participants were given five response options, three of which were directed at specific providers (Sportdeutschland.tv, Sporttotal.tv and

70

4

Results

Leagues). A total of 227 participants answered this question, with the option to select multiple answers. 18.8% of the respondents stated that they knew the provider Sportdeutschland.tv. 10.6% of the participants knew the provider Sporttotal.tv and 7.8% of the participants knew the provider Leagues. 3.1% of the respondents added other providers; Twitch was mentioned in particular. 59.6% of the respondents stated that they did not know any of the three providers listed. Question26 “Which of the following providers of niche sports and amateur sports broadcasts have you ever used? 227 respondents answered this question with the same options as the previous question (Question 25). 14.7% of the respondents said that they had already used Sportdeutschland.tv. 7.1% stated that they had already used Sporttotal.tv. 5.1% of respondents said that they had already used the provider League. Under “Other”, 7 participants (2.9%) listed other providers that they had already used, with Twitch being mentioned by four participants. 70.2% of respondents stated that they had not yet used any of the providers listed (Sportdeutschland.tv, Sporttotal.tv and Leagues). Question27 “How interested are you in data (shots on goal, number of passes, passing accuracy, etc.), mentioned or discussed during sports broadcasts?” This question was answered by 225 participants, which means that after the previous question (Question26), two participants completed the survey. Here, the interest of the participants was again asked, and again five answer options were offered. 15.1% of the respondents stated that they were very interested, while 34.2% stated that they were interested. 28.4% indicated that they were somewhat interested. 16% of respondents indicated that they had little interest and 6.2% indicated that they had no interest. This results in an average score of 3.8. Question28 “Do you use a social media platform? (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc.)” This question was answered by 225 participants and functioned as a filter question. The aim of this question was to determine which participants use social media and which do not. Since the following questions were explicitly addressed to participants who use social media, this question excluded participants who do not use social media from answering the following questions regarding social media. 87.1% answered “Yes” to this question, while 12.9% answered “No”. Accordingly, 29 participants were excluded from answering the following questions.

4.2 Analysis of Data

71

Question29 Have you ever talked about a sporting event, discussed it or reported on it on a social media platform? (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc.) This question was answered by 194 participants, all of whom use social media. 10.3% answered “Yes, regularly” and 19.1% answered “Yes, once in a while”. 29.4% chose the answer “Yes, but rarely”. 41.2% of the participants answered “No, never”. Question30 “If you want to get information on sporting events or exchange or want to talk about sport, which social media platform do you use most often? The 194 respondents to this question could choose between four different social media platforms, add one social media platform or indicate that they do not use any social media platform in terms of information search. 51% of the respondents mentioned Instagram, 21.6% mentioned Facebook, 6.7% mentioned Twitter, 1% mentioned TikTok. 5 respondents (2.6%) added Reddit and YouTube as platforms. A total of 17% of the social media users surveyed said that they do not use any social media for this purpose. Question31 “Have you ever seen a sports broadcast where pictures, comments or discussions from social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc.) were included?” In this question, participants who use social media could choose between four different answer options to indicate how often or how rarely they have seen such a sports broadcast. 21.1% of participants chose the answer “Yes, regularly” and 31.4% of participants chose the answer “Yes, once in a while”. 23.2% of the participants answered “Yes, but rarely” and 24.2% chose the answer “No, never”. Question32 “Have you ever seen a summary or highlights of a sporting event on a social media platform (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.)?” This question could be answered by the 194 participants of the survey who use social media by selecting two options. 75.8% answered “Yes” and 24.2% of the respondents answered “No”. Question33 “Have you ever watched a sports broadcast on a social media platform (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc.)? As with the previous question (Question32), 194 participants were asked who stated that they use social media. This question also had two possible answers, the participants could choose between “Yes” and “No”. 32.5% of the respondents chose the answer “Yes”, while 67.5% of the respondents chose the answer “No”.

72

4

Results

Question34 “Have you ever watched a sports broadcast with VR (virtual reality) glasses?” This question again included all respondents, with a total of 222 respondents answering the question, meaning that a further three respondents completed the survey early. Participants could answer the question with either “Yes” or “No”. 1.4% answered “Yes” to the question, while 98.6% answered “No”. The three participants (1.4%) who answered “Yes” to this question were excluded from the following question, as this was explicitly addressed to people who selected “No” for this question and have therefore never watched a sports broadcast with VR glasses. Question35 “Would you be interested in watching a sports broadcast with VR glasses if you had the opportunity?” This question represents the last content question of the survey, followed by the questions on the socio-demographic characteristics of the participants. Since the previous question excluded three people from answering this question, 219 participants answered this question. They could choose between five different options to express the level of their interest. 12.8% indicated that they were very interested. 22.8% of respondents indicated that they were interested. 24.2% of respondents indicated that they had some interest. 17.4% of respondents said they had little interest and 22.8% said they had no interest. This results in an average of 2.9.

4.3

Test of Hypotheses

A total of 237 people answered the online survey, which consisted of 35 questions plus 5 questions on socio-demographic characteristics. In order to filter out participants who did not belong to the target group of the study, three additional questions were asked in advance, which identified and sorted out all participants who were not interested in sport. In the following, the hypotheses will be tested by analysing the data. Hypothesis1

Consumers prefer to watch sports broadcasts at home in front of the television.

In the survey, the participants were asked firstly about the devices they most often use to watch sporting events and secondly, the participants were asked where or in which places they like to watch sporting events. In terms of where participants

4.3 Test of Hypotheses

73

like to watch sports, 93.7% of respondents said that they like to watch sports at home. 54.9% of respondents said they like to watch sports at a friend’s house, while 37.1% of respondents said they like to watch sports at a pub or bar. 30% of the participants said that they like to watch sports directly on site, for example in a stadium. This option is the only option where sport is not consumed via a medium, but live and on site. The least chosen option was watching sports broadcasts on the move, with 11.4% of participants indicating this. All but 6.3% of respondents said they liked to watch sports at home, making this the most popular option. Looking at the devices that consumers most often use to watch sports, 88.6% said they most often use the TV. Watching via PC or laptop was chosen by 41.8% participants and watching via smartphone by 40.1%. 23.2% of users said that they often watch sports broadcasts via their tablet, while 4.2% participants often use the projector. The most frequently used device is thus the TV and the most popular place to watch is at home. This indicates that consumers of sports broadcasts prefer to watch them at home in front of the television. The findings therefore support the hypothesis. Hypothesis2

It is very important for consumers to have the possibility to watch sports broadcasts time-shifted.

To test this hypothesis, as with the first hypothesis, the data collected from two different questions in the survey are also analysed. The first question was: “What is particularly important to you when watching sports? Here, 75.5% of the participants stated that it is particularly important to them that the sports broadcast is live. 64.1% said that the picture and sound quality of the broadcast is very important to them. 60.8% of the participants feel that a free broadcast of sports is particularly important, while 42.2% consider an advertising-free broadcast to be particularly important. 50.6% of respondents said that qualified commentators are very important to them. With regard to the possibility of time-shifted consumption, 26.6% of the participants stated that the possibility of watching the broadcasts on the move is very important to them, while 23.6% stated that the possibility of watching the next day is very important to them. 15.2% of the participants stated that they consider the possibility to rewind during the broadcast to be very important. Thus, of all the response options given, the options related to time-shifted consumption were the least selected. Accordingly, other features such as the live broadcast or the quality of the picture and sound are more important to the participants. When asked “What are the most important characteristics of a sports channel for you?”, the participants answered similarly. While 65.8% of the participants consider good picture and sound quality to be important, 18.6%

74

4

Results

of the respondents said that the possibility of on-demand use is very important to them. The option to use on the move was selected by 22.1% of respondents. Likewise, free use was very important to 52.4% of respondents, while advertising-free use was very important to 42.9%. In summary, it can be said that many aspects of sports broadcasting are in part significantly more important to the target group than the possibility of watching sports broadcasts time-delayed. Accordingly, the hypothesis cannot be confirmed at this point, but must rather be refuted. Hypothesis3

Consumers show a broad interest in different sports.

In order to test this hypothesis, firstly it will be considered the question: “What do you consider to be the most important characteristics of a sports channel? Here, “picture and sound quality” was most frequently chosen by the respondents as the most important characteristic of a sports channel. 65.8% of respondents chose this characteristic. The second most frequently chosen characteristic was that a sports channel should broadcast a wide range of sports, with 60.2% of respondents selecting this answer option. According to this, the majority of respondents would like a sports channel to broadcast many different types of sports. 79.3% of respondents said that they particularly like to watch football, making football the most popular choice among all sports. In total, the question “Which sports do you like to watch most?” asked for a choice of 18 different sports, of which all sports were chosen by at least a few participants. Furthermore, 39 participants added further sports by adding a non-listed sport that they like to watch under the item “Other”. In particular, winter sports such as skiing and biathlon were mentioned. Furthermore, certain niche sports such as gymnastics, table tennis or horse riding were mentioned. While 79.3% of the respondents like to watch football, 31.6% chose tennis and darts as the second most popular sports. It should be noted that the supposedly high proportion of participants who like to watch darts is due to the fact that an above-average proportion of people who are members of a darts club took part in this survey. In relation to niche sports, i.e. sports that are very rarely broadcast in mass media, 57.2% of respondents said they were at least somewhat interested in these sports and the broadcast of them. In summary, there are three key aspects that suggest that consumers have a broad interest in different sports, thus confirming the hypothesis. First, 60.2% want a sports channel to broadcast as many different sports as possible. Second, there is some interest in niche sports. Thirdly, the 18 sports available for selection were selected in the question: “Which sports do you most like to watch?” and 16.5% of the respondents added a few more sports.

4.3 Test of Hypotheses

Hypothesis4

75

The Covid-19 pandemic has led to an increase in the consumption of sports broadcasting.

To test this hypothesis, a longitudinal study would have been particularly useful, as it would have measured pre-pandemic and pandemic consumption to compare the results. In the case of this study, the online survey specifically asked about the change in consumption due to the Covid-19 pandemic and asked the participants to give their own estimate. 61.2% of the participants answered that their consumption of sports broadcasts has remained the same since the pandemic. 13.1% of respondents said that they watch less sports than before the pandemic. 25.7% said they watch more sports than before the pandemic. According to this, consumption has not changed for most participants. For those participants whose consumption did change, it increased in most cases, but this data is not sufficient to confirm the hypothesis. However, further research may yield more representative results and possibly confirm that the Covid-19 pandemic has led to an increase in the consumption of sports broadcasts. Hypothesis5

Consumers are dissatisfied with the sports broadcasts of the public and free television channels.

When asked, “Where do you watch sports most often?”, participants were given two or three options to answer. They could choose between the free and public television channels and the paid television channels and sport streaming services. Furthermore, they could add other channels or platforms where they most frequently consume sports broadcasts. It turns out that 46.1% mostly watch sports broadcasts on free and public TV channels like ZDF or Eurosport, while 46.5% mostly use paid TV channels and platforms like Sky or DAZN to watch sports broadcasts. Accordingly, the difference is and about half of the participants primarily use the public and Free TV channels, which suggests that they are at least not dissatisfied with these providers to a high degree. 78% of respondents said they were at least somewhat satisfied with these providers, 40.3% even said they were satisfied or very satisfied. In contrast, 22.1% of respondents said they were somewhat dissatisfied or dissatisfied with the sports coverage of the free and public television channels. On average, respondents are satisfied with the sports coverage of these channels. Likewise, 46.1% used them as their primary source for watching sports. Accordingly, this hypothesis cannot be confirmed, but is refuted in this case.

76

Hypothesis6

4

Results

The younger the consumers are, the more often they use a sports streaming service.

To answer this question, the researcher looked at how many people in the different age groups already use a sports streaming service. The percentage share within the age group was then calculated. A total of 51.4% of the respondents in these age groups stated that they use a sports streaming service. In total, six different age groups were considered. In the 14–19 age group, 16.7% said they use a sports streaming service. Between the ages of 20–29, 53.4% use such a provider. In the 30–39 age group, the figure was 54.5%. In the 40–49 age group, it was 62% and in the 50–59 age group, it was 33% of respondents. 30.7% of the participants who are over 60 years old said they already use a sports streaming service. According to the survey, the highest proportion is between 20–49 years old. Since the proportion is highest among 40–49 year olds and thus higher than among 20–29 year olds and 30–39 year olds, the hypothesis cannot be confirmed in this step. Hypothesis7

Consumers who have subscribed to a paid streaming provider for sports consume fewer illegal sports streams than before.

Here, the participants who use a streaming service for sports were explicitly asked. With regard to illegal streaming, 51.7% of the participants stated that they have never illegally streamed and watched sports content. 44.3% of respondents indicated that they have ever watched an illegal stream of sports content. 3.9% of the respondents said that they did not want to give any information on this. In the next step, only users of paid sports streaming providers were surveyed, of whom 52.6% stated that they had ever illegally streamed a sports broadcast. 41.4% said that they had never illegally streamed a sports broadcast and 6.0% did not want to give any information on this. Of the participants who use a paid streaming provider for sports and have ever illegally streamed and watched a sports broadcast, 11.5% said that their use of illegal sports streams has remained the same. 4.9% said that since they use a paid streaming service for sports, they also consume more illegal streams for sports. 26.2% said that they watch fewer illegal sports streams and 57.4% said that they no longer use illegal sports streams. Thus, 83.6% of participants who use a sports streaming service and have ever streamed a sports broadcast illegally said that they use fewer or no illegal sports streams since they started using a paid sports streaming service. Accordingly, the hypothesis can be confirmed by the findings.

4.3 Test of Hypotheses

Hypothesis8

77

Most consumers are willing to spend money to watch their favourite sports.

In this case, participants were asked directly about their willingness to pay, explicitly asking about the willingness to pay for sports broadcasts in which the participants have a great interest. In this case, 64.3% of the participants were willing to pay money to be able to watch these sports broadcasts that are of particular interest to them. 35.7% of the respondents said that they would not be willing to do so. Accordingly, it can be stated first of all that among the respondents the majority is willing to pay for sports broadcasts. However, 60.8% of the participants also stated that free sports broadcasting is important to them. However, it remains unclear to what extent the phrase “favourite sports broadcast” had an effect on the participants’ decision. Accordingly, the hypothesis cannot be confirmed at this point, but the assumption that the majority of consumers have a certain willingness to pay is confirmed. The participants who already use a paid streaming service for sports are willing to pay an average of e21.02 per month to be able to watch any sports content in the form of sports broadcasts and other sports content that interests them. The figures varied between e5 and e100 per month. Hypothesis9

Consumers’ interest in sports increases when they use a paid sports streaming service.

For this purpose, participants who already use a paid sports streaming service were explicitly asked. A Likert scale was used to measure the extent to which the respective statements apply to the participants. The first statement was: “I watch more sport since I started using a streaming service for sport”. 3.5% of the participants stated that this statement did not apply to them. 7.8% of participants indicated that this statement was somewhat not true for them. 23.5% of the participants stated that this statement neither applies nor does not apply to them. 30.4% of the participants stated that this statement is somewhat true and 34.8% stated that this statement is true. This results in a mean value of 3.9, which means that this statement tends to apply to the participants on average. Overall, 65.2% of respondents tended to agree or strongly agree with this statement, so it can be assumed that more than half of the respondents watch more sports broadcasts since they use a sports streaming provider. In the next step, the participants were asked about their interest in sports. This involved the statement: “I am interested in more sports and their broadcasts since I use a streaming provider for sports”. A Likert scale was also used and participants were asked to select the

78

4

Results

extent to which they agreed with the statement. 13.0% of participants indicated that the statement did not apply to them. 17.4% of participants indicated that the statement tended not to apply to them. 25.2% of the participants stated that the statement neither applies nor does not apply to them. 24.3% of the participants stated that the statement rather applies to them. 20.0% of the participants stated that the statement applies to them. If one adds up the total votes of the participants, one obtains a mean value of about 3.2, which means that a slight tendency is possibly recognisable here, but this is not clear enough. Furthermore, the participants were asked how often they watch several sports broadcasts at the same time. 4.3% of the participants stated that they very often watch two or more sports programmes. 9.4% of the participants stated that they often watch several sports programmes at the same time. 31.6% of the participants said that they occasionally watch several sports programmes at the same time. 29.1% of the participants stated that they rarely do so and 25.6% stated that they never do so. This means that the respondents rarely watch several sports programmes at the same time. There is therefore a tendency for the consumption of sports content to increase on average when consumers start using a sports streaming service. However, it cannot be confirmed that this potentially increased consumption is also reflected in the fact that several different sports are now watched. Furthermore, it was not found that a significant number of people watch multiple sports at the same time; rather, it was found that most participants do so either infrequently or not at all. In summary, this hypothesis cannot be clearly confirmed, even if a certain tendency is recognisable. Hypothesis10

Consumers are also interested in less popular sports such as niche sports, amateur sports or women’s sports.

Participants were asked about less popular sports broadcasts and streaming providers of niche and amateur sports. With regard to niche sports and interest in niche sports broadcasts, 12.8% of respondents said they were very interested in them. 23.3% of respondents said they were interested and 21.1% of respondents said they were somewhat interested. 25.6% of respondents said they had little interest and 17.2% said they had no interest. From this, a mean of 2.9 can be calculated, so on average respondents show little to some interest in broadcasting niche sports. With regard to amateur sports, meaning for example the 4th and 5th leagues in football or also the lower leagues in basketball and handball, 7.5% of the respondents said they were very interested in the broadcasts of these sporting events. 22.5% said they were interested and 14.5% said they were somewhat interested. 32.2% said they have little interest in these sports broadcasts and

4.3 Test of Hypotheses

79

23.3% said they have no interest. The mean score calculated from this is 2.6, so on average respondents show little to some interest. Interest in the broadcasting of amateur sports is thus lower than interest in the broadcasting of niche sports. In relation to the broadcasting of women’s sports, 9.7% of respondents said they were very interested, 46% said they were interested. 18.9% said they had some interest in women’s sports and 26.4% of respondents said they had little interest in women’s sports. 24.7% of the respondents said they have no interest in women’s sports. Thus, the average score is 2.6, which means that the respondents’ interest in it is similar to that of broadcasting amateur sports. It should be mentioned, however, that both in the broadcasting of niche sports and amateur sports and in the broadcasting of women’s sports, 30%-36% of the respondents indicated that they were interested or even very interested. With regard to the individual sports, it was indicated particularly frequently that there was interest in the broadcasts of beach volleyball. 48% of the respondents indicated that they would be interested in the broadcasting of this sport. The participants frequently added the area of winter sports, which was not included in the response options, but was also already mentioned by some participants in relation to interest in “popular” sports. With regard to the providers of niche sports, amateur sports and women’s sports broadcasts, 59.6% of the respondents stated that they were not aware of any of the three providers (Sportdeutschland.tv, Sporttotal.tv, Leagues), 70.2% of the respondents stated that they had not yet used any of these providers. At the same time, 18.8% of respondents stated that they knew Sportdeutschland.tv and 14.7% of respondents stated that they had already used Sportdeutschland.tv. 10.6% said they knew Sporttotal.tv, while 7.1% said they had already used Sportotal.tv. The provider Leagues was known to 7.8% of respondents and 2.9% said they had already used League. Accordingly, the majority of respondents did not know these providers, while 30% of respondents have already used one of the providers or another provider of this kind. It can be concluded that the interest in niche sports, amateur sports and women’s sports is partly present but not too high. The providers of these sporting events have never been used by many participants or are unknown to them. Beach volleyball can be named as the most popular sport among the niche sports. Accordingly, the hypothesis cannot be confirmed at this point, although there is a certain interest. Hypothesis11

Consumers frequently use social media in connection with sports broadcasts.

80

4

Results

In order to test this hypothesis, the survey participants were first asked where they most frequently inform themselves about sports events and sports broadcasts. 46.1% of the participants stated that they inform themselves on the internet and 37.4% stated that they inform themselves via social media. Newspapers as a primary source of information are used by 4.8% of the participants. Another 5% of the participants stated that they inform themselves via special apps, such as the “Flash Score App” or the “Eurosport App”. Thus, social media is the second most common source of information among all respondents. In order to identify the further use of social media in relation to sports broadcasting, the participants were first asked whether they use social media. 87.1% of the respondents stated that they use one or more social media platforms such as Instagram or Facebook. These 87.1% were then asked further questions on this topic. The 12.9% of respondents who do not use social media were excluded from these questions because they do not use social media and therefore do not belong to the specific target group of these questions. 10.3% of social media users stated that they regularly discuss sporting events on social media or exchange views with other users. 19.1% of the social media users stated that they do this from time to time, 29.4% stated that they rarely do it and 41.2% of the social media users stated that they have never exchanged views or discussed sporting events on social media. Accordingly, more than 70% of the respondents who use social media did not use the respective platforms for exchange and discourse about sporting events. With regard to obtaining information about sporting events on social media, 51% of the respondents stated that they primarily use Instagram for this purpose. 21.6% of the participants stated that they primarily use Facebook for this purpose. Twitter and TikTok were the least popular. 17% of the social media users among the respondents do not use any social media platform for information gathering. When asked if respondents had ever watched a summary or highlights of a sporting event in the past, 75.8% answered “Yes”. 32.5% of respondents said that they had already seen a sports broadcast on a social media platform. In summary, it can be said that social media is definitely used as a source of information, with Instagram playing a particularly important role. About 30% of the respondents also exchange information about sports on social media at least from time to time. When asked whether the respondents had ever seen a sports broadcast that included pictures, comments or discussions from social media, 75.7% said that they had seen something like that. 21.1% said they watch something like this regularly. Nevertheless, the data obtained is not sufficient to say that consumers frequently use social media in connection with sports broadcasts.

5

Discussion

The aim of this study was to create new insights in the field of sports broadcasting in Germany. The goal was both to review existing findings from research, studies and surveys and to produce new findings. In particular, the study focused on the connection between sports broadcasting and new technological developments. In particular, the aim was to find out to what extent technologies such as streaming are connected to sports broadcasting. First of all, it was a goal to identify how great the interest in sports broadcasts and sports content is. Another aim was to find out how the target group (Germans aged 14 and over who are at least mildly interested in sports) consumes sports broadcasts and whether technological changes play a role in this. The aim was also to identify how the use of sports streaming providers affects the consumption of sports content. Furthermore, the connection between the consumption of sports broadcasts and social media should be examined more closely, so that insights can be gained into how social media is used by consumers in relation to sports broadcasts. Also it was an aim of the work to find out what the interest of the target group is in relation to less popular sports or amateur sports and women’s sports.

5.1

Implications

The relationship between the global Covid-19 pandemic and sports broadcasting, or the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the consumption of sports broadcasting, was investigated in the study. To do this, a question on this topic was included in the online survey. Participants were asked whether their consumption had changed since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. They were also asked about the nature of the change, namely whether their consumption had increased or decreased. Most respondents indicated that their consumption had remained © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2022 M. Hagelgans, The Impact of Digitalization on Sports Broadcasting, BestMasters, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39869-9_5

81

82

5

Discussion

the same. However, among the respondents who said that their consumption had changed, 66% said that their consumption had increased. Accordingly, a tendency towards increased consumption due to the Covid-19 pandemic can be seen here. Büschel & Rusche (2020) also state that the global Covid-19 pandemic has led to streaming becoming more popular. Shaw (2020) notes that, for example, the usage time of consumers of the free streaming provider Twitch increased by over 20% in some cases during the Covid-19 pandemic. Goldsmith (2021) writes that the increased consumption of live sports streams will continue or rise even after the pandemic. The results of the study could therefore be a further indication that the pandemic has increased the consumption of sports broadcasts. Big data is being used more and more by providers, on the one hand providers such as DAZN use the data to make their business decisions (The Digital Sport Insider Podcast,2018), on the other hand it also personalises the user experience (Novak,2017). However, according to Horky & Pelka (2018), the use of data also enhances the consumer experience by building data into reporting. Through the study, consumers’ interest was measured in relation to the incorporation of data into sports coverage. In this regard, 49.3% indicated that they are interested or even very interested, while 22.2% have little or no interest in this. Thus, the study’s finding that there is some interest on the part of consumers builds on the findings of Horky & Pelka (2018), for example. Streaming technology is often associated with youth or young people. For example, Sun & Zhang (2021) state that the broadcasting of sports via streaming appeals in particular to young viewers and, consequently, one could reach the young target group. Loose et al. (2021) also say that the users of these providers are on average very young; in the case of DAZN, very many users are between 18–29 years old. Which is to be considered a very young target group, especially in relation to the average age of the German population. Kantar (2021) also states that most DAZN users are younger than 35 years old. In the study, the average disproportionately young age of the consumers could only be partially confirmed. Overall, 51.4% of respondents stated that they use a sports streaming service. This is roughly in line with the figures of grabyo (2021), who found in their study that 45% of sports fans worldwide use a paid sports streaming service. Lammert et al. (2019) also found back in 2019 that most sports fans use a sports streaming service. With regard to the different age groups, this study found that most users of sports streaming services are between 20–49 years old. Here the percentage was 55.1%. However, the largest percentage of users was not found in the 20–29 age group, but in the 40–49 age group. Among the 40–49 year old participants in the survey, 62% said that they use a sports streaming service such as DAZN. Among respondents over 50 and 60 years old, the percentage was

5.1 Implications

83

between 30%–35%. Accordingly, it can at least be confirmed that the target group and users tend to be young, as the majority are under 50 years old. However, it cannot be confirmed that the users are mostly under 35 or 30 years old. Within the framework of the evaluation of the study, it was found that most consumers consume sports content via the TV. 88.6% of the respondents stated that they often or most often watch via the TV. This observation is in line with the statements of Pennington (2021), who states that on the one hand, more and more content is consumed via the internet, but the medium via which consumption takes place is still the TV. According to Bertling et al. (2018), consumers have become accustomed to using or consuming on multiple devices. The Kantar (2021) study also found that more and more consumers of sports broadcasts consume content on the go or in locations outside their homes. In doing so, users would switch between different devices and at least use their smartphone for consumption on the go (Kantar, 2021). Furthermore, 91% of Germans used their smartphone for media consumption in 2021 (Seven. One Media GmbH, 2021b). Heinecke & Meyen (2018) and Hutchins et al. (2019) also note that media consumption is increasingly taking place on mobile devices such as smartphones. The study can partially confirm these findings, as 40.1% stated that they frequently use their smartphone to watch sports. Another 41.8% frequently use their PC or laptop, which also makes it possible to watch on the go. Nevertheless, the survey showed that the TV is still by far the most used medium for watching sports. Accordingly, this finding is in line with those of Pennington (2021). In contrast to streaming such as Netflix or even Spotify (Moulton, 2019), which offer their content exclusively on-demand, sporting events are usually broadcast live (Hutchins et al., 2019). The advantage of VoD lies in the fact that it can be consumed at any time (Moulton, 2019); according to Kunz (2014), this possibility of on-demand use is even the most important feature of sport streaming providers for consumers. In the course of the study, however, most respondents stated that it was particularly important to them that a sports broadcast was live. The liveness of the broadcast was particularly important to 75.5%. This result is in line with the results of the study by PwC (2018b), in which consumers also stated that the live broadcast of sporting events was most important to them. Hutchins et al. (2019) also assign the greatest value to the broadcasting of sporting events when they are broadcast live. So, while 75.5% said that it is very important to them that the sports broadcast is live, only 23.6% said that the ability to consume it time-shifted is important to them. In terms of the most important features of a sports channel, only 18.6% said that the possibility of on-demand consumption of sports broadcasts and sports content was particularly important to them. Accordingly, the results do not match the findings of Kunz

84

5

Discussion

(2014) that the possibility of on-demand use is the most important feature. Rather, it has been confirmed, as was already recorded in the study by PwC (2018b), that consumers particularly like to watch sports broadcasts that are broadcast live. The most popular sport within the German population is still football; according to Kantar (2021), a disproportionately high number of DAZN users stated that they had registered with DAZN and subscribed to DAZN because they particularly want to watch broadcasts of football matches. This great interest in football is confirmed by the study, with by far the majority of respondents (79.3%) stating that they very much enjoy watching football. Nevertheless, a broad interest in many different sports was noted, such as tennis, American football, beach volleyball and winter sports. Particularly with regard to interest in winter sports such as ski jumping and biathlon, these results are supported by the study by IfD Allensbach (2021a). Heinecke and Meyen (2018) see niche sports as clear winners of the new technological possibilities, as they can present themselves to a larger audience and gain more attention. The study found that there is at least some interest in niche sports, as well as interest in amateur sports and women’s sports. However, 59.6% stated that they were not familiar with the listed providers of niche and amateur sports broadcasts (Sportdeutschland.tv, Sporttotal.tv, Leagues). 70.2% said they had not yet used any of these providers. So even though new marketing opportunities have opened up, most consumers do not know or use at least the providers listed. Illegal streaming of sports content still takes place and is difficult to control, especially in relation to live broadcasts (Lobato & Thomas, 2018). The study found that 44.3% of consumers have used an illegal stream of a sports broadcast at least once. Already in 2018, 52% of illegal streams of linear TV could be attributed to Gerne Sport (VAUNET, 2018a). According to Babu (2021), the providers of sports broadcasts with moderate monthly subscription fees could cause the illegal streaming of sports broadcasts to decrease. The study identified that, on average, users of paid streaming providers actually use less illegal streaming since they started using the paid providers. Overall, 83.6% of consumers who use such a service and have already illegally streamed a sports broadcast stated that they consume fewer or no illegal streams of sports broadcasts since they started using a sports streaming service. This is also consistent with Walker’s (2011) suggestion that sports streaming providers may have the same effect on the illegal consumption of sports broadcasts as music streaming services have on the illegal streaming of music. Providers such as Spotify and Apple Music have reduced the illegal distribution and consumption of music (Walker, 2011). According to Lotz (2017), another aspect of the decline in the use of illegal sports streams is that many sports streaming providers offer flexible cancellation

5.2 Limitations

85

conditions, which may encourage some users of illegal streams to stop illegal streaming and subscribe to such a paid provider. In the area of social media use in relation to sports broadcasting, the extent to which the target group uses social media was investigated. It was found that most consumers rarely discuss sports broadcasts on social media. 41.2% stated that they had never done this. Thus, these findings do not confirm those of Groebel (2013), that more and more viewers, parallel to consuming content, report on this content on social media, comment on it or exchange views. According to Hutchins et al. (2019), more and more posts and comments from social media are also being incorporated into sports broadcasts. The study found that the majority (75.8%) have watched a sports broadcast where users’ posts were included in the broadcast. 21.1% even stated that they watch such sports broadcasts regularly. This at least gives an idea that social media is increasingly being taken into account in sports broadcasts and that contributions from users and viewers are being addressed.

5.2

Limitations

The study carried out has some limitations in various areas, which ensure that the results collected and analysed cannot fully represent the target group. First of all, the sample of n = 237 is comparatively small; a sample size of n = 500 or n = 1000 would have been better in order to represent the target group and ensure a higher representativeness. The time period of the survey (9 days) was also too short, so the sample size could probably have been increased if the survey period had been a month, for example. In addition, not all participants answered all the questions during the online survey. On the one hand, this was due to the fact that some participants abandoned the survey before completing it. A total of 15 participants left the content part of the survey prematurely. On the other hand, various sub-target groups were defined during the survey, which were addressed, for example, only to participants who use social media or a sports streaming service. Certain questions were answered by 115 participants, so the particular sample size considering these questions was less than 50% of the original sample size. Another central point of criticism is the use of convenience sampling. On the one hand, it was possible to find participants for the survey in a very short time; on the other hand, the sample was changed as a result. This manifested itself especially in the socio-demographic data of the participants, as the participants were on average very young. About 75% of the participants were under 40 years

86

5

Discussion

old, which is not representative of the target group. Convenience sampling also recruited many people for the survey who are students in their main occupation. This was due to the fact that many participants were recruited from the social environment of the researcher. With regard to the interest in different sports, at least the results for the sport “darts” were distorted, as an above-average proportion of participants were interested in darts. This is also due to the convenience sampling, as some people who play in a darts club were asked to participate in the survey. In this case, however, the consequences were not particularly significant as only one of 35 content questions was influenced and it was easy to see how much the result was “distorted”. Another limitation is that it is difficult to assess to what extent the participants in the survey read the respective questions carefully and answered them truthfully. Since many participants came from the social environment of the researcher, the social relationship could have led the participants to answer the survey more conscientiously. However, this is only an assumption that is difficult to prove. The Survey Circle platform was used to further recruit participants, and it cannot be ruled out that some of the survey participants who were recruited via this platform did not read the questions very carefully and answered them truthfully. In retrospect, one or more control questions should have been built into the survey to better ensure that the data of participants who answered the questions inattentively were not taken into account. Another issue is the collection of primary data, where supplementing the collected quantitative data with, for example, expert interviews might have been a suitable solution. Among other things, a very small target group (for example: German people between 20–30 years of age who use several sports streaming providers and watch sports broadcasts at least three times a week) could have been examined more closely in order to gain more specific insights. Furthermore, other aspects could certainly have been considered, such as the use of YouTube or Twitch in relation to sports broadcasting. Also, no e-sports were considered in the study. In summary, the data collected is not representative of the target group, mainly because the respondents were on average very young. Furthermore, it could not be verified to what extent the participants’ answers were given conscientiously and truthfully. Nevertheless, the data is suitable for answering the research questions and can at least show a slight tendency in relation to the behaviour of consumers with regard to sports broadcasts.

5.3 Further Research

5.3

87

Further Research

The sports broadcasting market, or rather the German sports broadcasting market, still offers a lot of scope for gaining new insights that can help to better understand consumers and their usage behaviour. For further research, it is advisable to ensure that the sample better reflects the target group. The sample size should be as large as possible and probability sampling should be chosen as the sampling method. In order to collect as much quantitative data as possible, it is recommended to interview the target group by means of a survey or an online survey. If possible, it should be checked that the questions are all answered conscientiously. Qualitative data could also be collected by means of expert interviews, in which consumers could be interviewed on the one hand and sports broadcasters / sport streaming services on the other. By interviewing the provider side, a further perspective could be depicted. Since many users of providers such as DAZN are mostly male (Kantar, 2021), it would be interesting for further research to investigate how high the interest of women is in different types of sports and sports broadcasts. Further research in this area could possibly result in recommendations for action for providers in order to be able to address more women and thus gain more female users. Furthermore, there should be further research in the area of broadcasts of niche sports, amateur sports and also women’s sports. It could also be interesting to investigate the extent to which pay-per-view models work or can work in the German sports market. In contrast to the USA, where it is not unusual to pay money for individual broadcasts, providers on the German market usually use bundling and offer a large number of broadcasts for a fixed monthly price. In the context of further research, different target groups could also be interviewed in order to better understand the different needs and usage patterns. Examples of different target groups would be: “People who watch sports broadcasts every day”. “People who use DAZN, Amazon Prime Video, RTL+ and Sky”. “People who have a high interest in sports broadcasts but do not use a paid sports broadcaster” “Women who are interested in sports and watch sports broadcasts at least once a week”.

6

Conclusion

This chapter is the final chapter of the study and is intended to summarise the study. It lists the key findings that emerged from the analysis of the quantitative data collected. It then reflects on the genesis of the study and the study itself. In addition, the main contributions of the study will be outlined. Through this research, an attempt was made to create new knowledge in the field of sports broadcasting in Germany. The main focus was on the usage behaviour of the target group: “German people aged 14 and over who are at least mildly interested in sport”, in connection with new technological developments such as streaming. The study also examined where and via which medium consumers watch sports broadcasts and which sports interest them. It also looked at participants’ interest in less popular sports and sporting events, and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on consumption patterns. Another area of the study was the use of social media in connection with sports broadcasts. In order to gain insights into the aforementioned topics, quantitative data was collected from a total of 237 people (n = 237) by means of an online survey, which was available for response from 30 December 2021 to 7 January 2022. These persons could all be assigned to the target group mentioned. The survey also contained some questions that were only addressed to some of the 237 participants. Accordingly, these questions were only presented to the participants who belonged to the specific target group of these questions. For example, the target group was supplemented by the addition: “user of a sports streaming service”. After the survey period, the data was processed, analysed and evaluated by the researcher so that findings could be drawn from it. The results of the data analysis indicate that the target group does make use of sports streaming and a good 50% of them already use a streaming provider for sports broadcasts. Further findings show that the majority of users of these sports streaming services are younger than 50 years old. The results also show © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2022 M. Hagelgans, The Impact of Digitalization on Sports Broadcasting, BestMasters, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39869-9_6

89

90

6

Conclusion

that there is a broad interest in various sports, but that football remains the most popular sport. Among consumers, there is also a certain interest in less popular sports and sporting events, but the providers of these broadcasts are unknown to the majority and have therefore not yet been used by many. The results indicate that the Covid-19 pandemic has had some impact on the consumption of sports broadcasts. The majority of those who noted a change in their consumption behaviour stated that they watch more sports broadcasts since the start of the pandemic than before. In terms of consumption behaviour, the study indicates that the target group still primarily uses the television as a medium to watch sports broadcasts. Even though streaming has made it possible to consume content from anywhere and thus also on the move, more than 90% of the target group likes to watch sports broadcasts at home. With regard to on-demand use, the study also indicates that the target group does not consider this option to be very important, but rather that live broadcasting is considered to be particularly important. Thus, the study indicates that in this aspect there is a considerable difference between streaming services for series and films and streaming services for sports. With regard to illegal streaming of sports content, the study indicates that slightly less than half of the target group has already made use of it. Further findings show that the target group tends to use less illegal sports streams after subscribing to a sports streaming service. The study also indicates that after taking out such a subscription or starting to use such a provider, the total consumption of sports broadcasts increases. With regard to the use of sports streaming services, the study therefore indicates that the consumption of sports broadcasts increases, while the consumption of illegal sports broadcasts decreases. The idea for research in this area resulted from the assumption that sports streaming services have a significant impact on the German sports broadcasting market and that many people interested in sports use these providers. At the beginning of the study, it was assumed that many people interested in sports make use of sports streaming services in order to be able to watch many exclusive sports broadcasts and sports content. This assumption was confirmed in the course of the research. The assumption that the Covid-19 pandemic has had an impact on consumption behaviour was also partly confirmed. On the whole, not only were most of the expectations on the part of the researcher confirmed, but also the findings from the literature review. In order to analyse the usage behaviour of the target group, the target group was interviewed by means of an online survey. This enabled quantitative data to be collected, which was then analysed. During the research, it turned out that the chosen method for obtaining primary data was advantageous. By using an online survey, a lot of data could be collected in a short time. Furthermore, the collection and storage of the data was unproblematic.

6

Conclusion

91

The evaluation and analysis of the data was also facilitated by the fact that the data could be downloaded and inserted into various analysis programmes without any problems. During the research process, new questions arose, especially through the text input of the survey participants. This made it clear, for example, that there is a relatively high interest in winter sports within the target group. With regard to the implications of the study’s findings, there are some implications for the practice and especially the providers of sports broadcasts. The study indicates that many users especially like to watch sports broadcasts on TV, so the sports streaming providers could further improve their respective applications and make them particularly user-friendly for Smart TVs. Likewise, providers of sports broadcasts could potentially gain many users if they offer a wide range of sports. Furthermore, the study shows that good picture and sound quality is very important to users. Accordingly, transmission in HD can be recommended. Providers of sports streaming services should possibly also work on the problemfree transmission of their streams, over 90% of the respondents stated that they have already had problems with the streaming of sports broadcasts. For niche and amateur sports broadcasters, the study suggests that they may be taking steps to increase awareness, as the majority are not aware of them, but there is an interest in niche and amateur sports. This study has addressed specific areas of sports broadcasting, such as broadcasting via streaming. It has produced some findings that have received limited attention, such as the impact of Covid-19 on the consumption of sports broadcasting. The topic of less popular sports and sporting events was also addressed and the study indicates that there is certainly some interest from consumers. In the literature review, various aspects of sports broadcasting were addressed, with a particular focus on the changes that digital technologies have brought to the market. As digital technologies have not been around for very long, there have been a limited number of studies, especially in relation to the German sports broadcasting market. The findings of this study confirm most of the previous assumptions in this area.

References

Adhikari, V. K., Guo, Y., Hao, F., Hilt, V., Zhang, Z. L., Varvello, M., & Steiner, M. (2014). Measurement study of Netflix, Hulu, and a tale of three CDNs. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 23(6), 1984–1997. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNET.2014.2354262 AGF. (2021, January 13). Durchschnittliche tägliche Fernsehdauer in Deutschland nach Altersgruppen in den Jahren 2019 und 2020 (in Minuten) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 24, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/152389/umfrage/ durchschnittliche-fernsehdauer-pro-tag/ Alexander, N. (2017). Rage against the Machine: Buffering, Noise, and Perpetual Anxiety in the Age of Connected Viewing. Cinema Journal, 56(2), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1353/cj. 2017.0000 Allison, L. (2004). The global politics of sport: The role of global institutions in sport. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203005460 Amazon. (2021). Amazon bringt dir jetzt die UEFA Championsleague. Amazon. Retrieved December 28, 2021, from https://www.amazon.de/b?ie=UTF8&node=22974459031 ARD, & ZDF. (2020, October 8). Anteil der Befragten, die mindestens wöchentlich folgende Online-Videoangebote nutzen, nach Altersgruppen in Deutschland im Jahr 2020 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 24, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/ 627556/umfrage/altersstruktur-der-nutzer-von-videostreaming-diensten-in-deutschland/ ARD, & ZDF. (2021a, November 9). Anteil der Internetnutzer nach Altersgruppen in Deutschland in den Jahren 1997 bis 2021 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 22, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/36149/umfrage/anteil-der-intern etnutzer-in-deutschland-nach-altersgruppen-seit-1997/ ARD, & ZDF. (2021b, November 9). Entwicklung der durchschnittlichen täglichen Nutzungsdauer des medialen Internets nach Altersgruppen in Deutschland in den Jahren 2018 bis 2021 (in Minuten) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 22, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1073613/umfrage/taegliche-nutzungsd auer-des-medialen-internets-nach-altersgruppen-in-deutschland/ ARD, & ZDF. (2021c, November 9). Nutzungshäufigkeit von Mediatheken und Streamingdiensten in Deutschland im Jahr 2021 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/627483/umfrage/nutzungshaef igkeit-von-videostream-anbietern-in-deutschland/ © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2022 M. Hagelgans, The Impact of Digitalization on Sports Broadcasting, BestMasters, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39869-9

93

94

References

ARD ZDF Deutschlandradio Beitragsservice. (2021, June 15). Erträge des ARD ZDF Deutschlandradio Beitragsservice nach Rundfunkanstalt im Jahr 2020 (in Millionen Euro) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 14, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/sta tistik/daten/studie/196121/umfrage/gez--einnahmen-nach-rundfunkanstalt/ Arnold, R., & Schneider, A. (2019, October). TV or not TV? Streamingdienste in Deutschland. Kurzstudie Oktober 2019. HS Fresenius. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https:// images.hs-fresenius.de/www.hs-fresenius.de/uploads/WIK_Hochschule_Fresenius_Kur zstudie_Streaming_in_Deutschland_DEU.pdf Babu, D. (2021, January 1). The future of sports broadcasting is OTT: Here’s all you need to know. Best in Australia. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://bestinau.com.au/the-fut ure-of-sports-broadcasting-is-ott-heres-all-you-need-to-know/ Barker, C., & Wiatrowski, M. (Eds.). (2017). The age of Netflix: Critical essays on streaming media, digital delivery and instant access. McFarland. Beck, D., & Bourquin, L. (2018). Livestreams als neue Chance für Randsportarten? Die Nutzung von Livestream-Angeboten der Schweizer Basketball-, Handball-, Volleyballund Unihockey-Ligen. Journal für Sportkommunikation und Mediensport, 3(2), 109–120. https://doi.org/10.25968/JSkMs.2018.2.109-120 Becker, P. (1983). Sport in den Massenmedien. Sportwissenschaft, 13(1), 24–45. A. R. (2019). Using paid and free Facebook methods to recruit Australian parents to an online survey: an evaluation. Journal of medical Internet research, 21(3), e11206. https://doi.org/ 10.2196/11206 Bertling, C. (2018). Strategien von Medienkonzernen für die Digitalisierung der Sportkommunikation. In Horky, T., Stiehler, H. J., & Schierl, T. (Eds.). Die Digitalisierung des Sports in den Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Bertling, C., Bruns, T., & Ludwig, M. (2018a). Sportmediennutzung in Zeiten des digitalen Wandels. In Horky, T., Stiehler, H. J., & Schierl, T. (Eds.). Die Digitalisierung des Sports in den Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Bertling, C., Degen, M., & Lüke, J. (2018b). Die Selbstvermarktung des Fußballs in der digitalen Kommunikation unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Social Media. In Horky, T., Stiehler, H. J., & Schierl, T. (Eds.). Die Digitalisierung des Sports in den Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Best, S., & Engel, B. (2011). Alter und Generation als Einflussfaktoren der Mediennutzung. Media Perspektiven, 11, 525–542. Bitkom. (2018a, June 14). Auf welchen Endgeräten verfolgen Sie Sportereignisse live im Internet? [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statis tik/daten/studie/553686/umfrage/nutzung-von-live-uebertragungen-von-sportevents-iminternet-nach-endgeraeten/ Bitkom. (2018b, June 14). Über welche Kanäle verfolgen Sie Sportereignisse live im Internet? [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/ daten/studie/553698/umfrage/nutzung-von-live-uebertragungen-von-sportevents-im-int ernet-nach-zugangsart/ Bitkom. (2021a, September 22). Für welche Inhalte haben Sie Virtual Reality bereits genutzt? [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 5, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/ studie/1247695/umfrage/umfrage-zu-beliebten-einsatzszenarien-fuer-virtual-reality-indeutschland/

References

95

Bitkom. (2021b, September 22). Können Sie sich vorstellen, künftig eine VR-Brille zu nutzen? [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 5, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/ studie/438899/umfrage/umfrage-zum-interesse-an-virtual-reality-brillen-in-deutschland/ Bizvibe. (2021, July 12). Demand for Sports Streaming to Have Strong Impact on Spectator Sports Businesses | Discover Company Insights on BizVibe. Prnewswire. Retrieved December 30, 2021, from https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/demand-for-spo rts-streaming-to-have-strong-impact-on-spectator-sports-businesses--discover-companyinsights-on-bizvibe-301328478.html Blake, J. (2016). Television and the second screen: Interactive TV in the age of social participation. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315690902 Blecking, D. (2017). Das Wunder von Bern 1954 und Wembley 1973: Ein Spiel schreibt Nationalgeschichte. 20 Deutsch-Polnische Erinnerungsorte (pp. 477–491). Brill Schöningh. https://doi.org/10.30965/9783657787166_023 Böhler, C. (2017). Notwendigkeit einer Rundfunklizenz beim Betrieb von Video-StreamingPortalen. Computer und Recht, 33(8), 541–546. https://doi.org/10.9785/cr-2017-0815 Borghi, M. (2011). Chasing copyright infringement in the streaming landscape. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 42(3). Bornstein, M. H., Jager, J., & Putnick, D. L. (2013). Sampling in developmental science: Situations, shortcomings, solutions, and standards. Developmental Review, 33(4), 357–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2013.08.003 Bortz, J., & Döring, N. (2006). Quantitative Methoden der Datenerhebung. Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation (pp. 137–293). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-540-33306-7_4 Bowman, N. D., & Cranmer, G. A. (2014). SocialMediaSport: The fan as a (mediated) participant in spectator sports. In Routledge Handbook of Sport and New Media (pp. 213–224). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203114711 bpb. (2020, August 10). Bevölkerung nach Altersgruppen und Geschlecht. bpb. Retrieved January 5, 2022, from https://www.bpb.de/nachschlagen/zahlen-und-fakten/sozialesituation-in-deutschland/61538/altersgruppen#:%7E:text=Ende%202018%20waren% 20in%20Deutschland,48%2C3%20Prozent). Breuer, M., & Görlich, D. (2018). Gaming und E-Sport – Markt und Inszenierung des digitalen Sports. In Horky, T., Stiehler, H. J., & Schierl, T. (Eds.). Die Digitalisierung des Sports in den Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Breunig, C. (2007). IPTV und Web-TV im digitalen Fernsehmarkt. Media Perspektiven, 10(2007), 478–491. Brüggemann, S. (2013). Streaming–Moderner Medienkonsum und strafrechtliche Verantwortlichkeit. J § E Jura Studium & Examen (3rd ed., pp. 285–301). Büchel, J., & Rusche, C. (2020). Status quo und Perspektiven von Video-on-Demand in Deutschland: Eine Bestandsaufnahme im Angesicht von Streaming Wars und CoronaKrise (No. 31/2020). IW-Report. Büscher, M., & Müller, J. (2009). Urheberrechtliche Fragestellungen des Audio-VideoStreamings. GRUR (6), 558–560. Burk, V., & Digel, H. (2002). Die Entwicklung des Fernsehsports in Deutschland. In Schwier, J. (Eds.). Mediensport: Ein einführendes Handbuch (pp. 101–124). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag.

96

References

Burk, V., & Grimmer, C. G. (2018). Sportkommunikation bei Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube und Blogs. In Horky, T., Stiehler, H. J., & Schierl, T. (Eds.). (2018). Die Digitalisierung des Sports in den Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Burton-Chase, A. M., Parker, W. M., Hennig, K., Sisson, F., & Bruzzone, L. L. (2017). The use of social media to recruit participants with rare conditions: Lynch syndrome as an example. JMIR research protocols, 6(1), e12. https://doi.org/10.2196/resprot.6066 Buschow, C., Schneider, B., Bauer, A., Carstensen, L., & Drabner, K. (2013). Wer nutzt Social TV? Die Nutzer als Treiber sozialer Inter aktion mit Fernsehinhalten. Medien Wirtschaft, 10(4), 48–57. Busemann, K., & Tippelt, F. (2014). Second screen: Parallelnutzung von fernsehen und internet. Media Perspektiven, 7(8), 408–416. Cambridge Dictionary. (2021, December 29). streaming Bedeutung, Definition streaming: 1. the activity of listening to or watching sound or video directly from the internet: 2. the act. Dictionary Cambridge. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/ de/worterbuch/englisch/streaming Chevron, M. F., Köpl, R., Payrhuber, A., & Reinprecht, C. (2012, May 7). methodologiesowi – deduktiv. Fakultät für Sozialwissenschaften, Universität Wien. Retrieved January 5, 2022, from https://www.univie.ac.at/sowi-online/esowi/cp/methodologiesowi/ methodologiesowi-15.html Dabhade, A. (2021, July 1). Post-lockdown, are people comfortable attending in-person concerts? Yougov. Retrieved December 19, 2021, from https://yougov.co.uk/topics/entertain ment/articles-reports/2021/07/01/post-lockdown-are-people-comfortable-attending-per Dayan, D., & Katz, E. (1992). Media events. harvard university press. DAZN. (2019, July 26). DAZN Media Center. DAZN Media Centre. Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https://media.dazn.com/en-us/welcome-to-the-dazn-media-center-4/ DAZN. (2021, June 3). DAZN AND MATCHROOM STRIKE GAME-CHANGING FIVEYEAR GLOBAL DEAL. DAZNGROUP. Retrieved December 11, 2021, from https://daz ngroup.com/dazn-and-matchroom-strike-game-changing-five-year-global-deal/ De Boni, R. B. (2020). Web surveys in the time of COVID-19. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 36(7), e00155820. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-311X00155820 De Mauro, A., Greco, M., & Grimaldi, M. (2016). A formal definition of Big Data based on its essential features. Library Review. https://doi.org/10.1108/LR-06-2015-0061 destatis. (2021, June 21). Bevölkerung nach Familienstand. destatis. Retrieved January 6, 2022, from https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/ Bevoelkerungsstand/Tabellen/familienstand-jahre-5.html Deutscher Olympischer Sportbund. (2021a, October 1). Gesamtzahl der Mitglieder in Sportvereinen in Deutschland von 1999 bis 2021 (in Millionen) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/215297/ umfrage/bevoelkerungsanteil-mit-einer-mitgliedschaft-im-sportverein-nach-alter/ Deutscher Olympischer Sportbund. (2021b, October 1). Gesamtzahl der Sportvereine in Deutschland von 1999 bis 2021 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/215312/umfrage/gesamtmitgliederzahl-deu tscher-sportvereine/

References

97

DFB. (2021, July 5). VOR 60 JAHREN: DAS ERSTE LIVESPIEL IM DEUTSCHEN FERNSEHEN. DFB – Deutscher Fußball-Bund e.V. Retrieved December 12, 2021, from https:// www.dfb.de/dfb-pokal/news-detail/vor-60-jahren-das-erste-livespiel-im-deutschen-fer nsehen-39115/full/1/?no_cache=1&cHash=5bac9b7c5ea09cd92240e145bcb31c39 die medienanstalten. (2020, October 26). Anteil der Nutzer von VoD-Angeboten nach Plattformen in Deutschland im Jahr 2020 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/814256/umfrage/nutzung-von-vod-ang eboten-in-deutschland/ Digel, H. (2017, November 13). Digitalisierung als Chance – neue Formen der Sportkommunikation. sport-nachgedacht. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://sport-nachgedacht. de/wiss_beitrag/digitalisierung-als-chance-neue-formen-der-sportkommunikation/ Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics Oxford University Press. New York, 748. dpa, & Kicker. (2020, June 22). Jährliche Einnahmen aus dem Verkauf der Fernsehübertragungsrechte für die Fußball-Bundesliga in Deutschland von 2000/2001 bis 2024/2025 (in Millionen Euro) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 28, 2021, from https://de.statista. com/statistik/daten/studie/6750/umfrage/entwicklung-der-tv-einnahmen-der-bundesliga/ Dück, H., & Terhorst, G. (2017). Zentralvermarktung der Fußball-Bundesliga im Lichte neuer kartellrechtlicher Kriterien wie „No-Single-Buyer-Rule“ und alternative Modelle der Rechteverwertung. Zeitschrift für Wettbewerbsrecht, 15(1), 50–71. https://doi.org/10. 15375/zwer-2017-0105 Edwards, J. J. (2021). DAZN Tops Mobile Streaming Sessions With Alvarez-Saunders Fight. Bloomberg.Com, 140. Elberse, A. (2013). Blockbusters: why big hits–and big risks–are the future of the entertainment business. Faber & Faber. Eriksson, P., & Kovalainen, A. (2015). Qualitative methods in business research: A practical guide to social research. Sage. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American journal of theoretical and applied statistics, 5(1), 1–4. Evens, T., & Donders, K. (2018). Platform power and policy in transforming television markets. Springer. Evens, T., Iosifidis, P., & Smith, P. (2013). The political economy of television sports rights. Springer. Faktenkontor. (2021, May 19). Anteil der befragten Internetnutzer, die Social Media nutzen, nach Altersgruppen in Deutschland im Jahr 2020/21 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 21, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/727354/umfrage/ nutzung-von-social-media-in-deutschland-nach-altersgruppen/ Fehr, J. (2021, October 12). Fernsehgeschichte in Deutschland: Meilensteine des fernsehens. Planet Wissen. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://www.planet-wissen.de/kultur/ medien/fernsehgeschichte_in_deutschland/pwiemeilensteinedesfernsehens100.html Fernández-Manzano, E. P., Neira, E., & Clares-Gavilán, J. (2016). Data management in audiovisual business: Netflix as a case study. El profesional de la información (EPI), 25(4), 568-576. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2016.jul.06 Filo, K., Lock, D., & Karg, A. (2015). Sport and social media research: A review. Sport management review, 18(2), 166–181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2014.11.001

98

References

FinancialBuzz. (2021, April 8). Streaming and Social Media Services Begin to Permeate into Sports Broadcasting. Prnewswire. Retrieved January 4, 2022, from https://www.prnews wire.com/news-releases/streaming-and-social-media-services-begin-to-permeate-intosports-broadcasting-301264781.html Fuhr, M. (2021, October 14). 65 Zoll und mehr: Deutsche lieben große Fernseher. teltarif. Retrieved January 8, 2022, from https://www.teltarif.de/fernsehen-tv-markt-gfu/news/ 86021.html Gershowitz, H. (1995). Improving validation: Process vs. product. Marketing Research, 7(1), 48. Gerth, R. (2019, January 18). Fix: DAZN führt erstmals Werbung ein – Streaming-Plattform beruhigt seine Abonnenten. Sportbuzzer. Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https://www. sportbuzzer.de/artikel/dazn-bundesliga-werbung-fans-abo-tv-hammer-sky/ Gilles, D., Hagenah, J., & Meulemann, H. (2008). Freizeit zunehmend durch Fernsehen bestimmt: Freizeit und Fernsehnutzung in Deutschland 1987–2005. Informationsdienst Soziale Indikatoren, (40), 11–14. https://doi.org/10.15464/isi.40.2008.11-14 Gleich, U. (2008). Digitales Fernsehen aus Sicht der Nutzer. Media Perspektiven, 9, 485–490. Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The qualitative report, 8(4), 597–607. Goldsmith, J. (2021, June 4). Consumers Want Diverse Content, A Greater Voice And, Of Course, More Live Sports Post-Pandemic, UTA Study Finds. Deadline. Retrieved January 4, 2022, from https://deadline.com/2021/06/media-streaming-services-live-sports-divers ity-uta-1234769410/ grabyo. (2021, August 26). 79% of global sports fans now want to watch sport exclusively online: Grabyo Sport Video Trends Report 2021. Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https:// about.grabyo.com/de/grabyo-sport-video-trends/ Gratton, C., & Solberg, H. A. (2007). The economics of sports broadcasting. Routledge. Grimmer, C. G. (2014). Kooperation oder Kontrolle?: eine empirische Untersuchung zum Spannungsverhältnis von Pressesprechern in der Fußball-Bundesliga und Journalisten. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Grimmer, C. G., Horky, T. (2018). Sportkommunikation bei Facebook und Twitter. In Horky, T., Stiehler, H. J., & Schierl, T. (Eds.). (2018). Die Digitalisierung des Sports in den Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Groebel, J. (2013). Das neue Fernsehen: Mediennutzung-Typologie-Verhalten. SpringerVerlag. Hackforth, J. (Ed.). (1978). Sport und Massenmedien. Limpert. Hasebrink, U. (2009). Lineares und nicht-lineares Fernsehen aus der Zuschauerperspektive: Spezifika, Abgrenzungen und Übergänge. Hans-Bredow-Insitut für Medienforschung an der Universität Hamburg. Hasebrink, U., & Lampert, C. (2012). Onlinenutzung von Kindern und Jugendlichen im Europäischen Vergleich. Ergebnisse der 25-Länder-Studie „EU Kids Online“. media perspektiven, 12(2012), 635–647. Hattig, F. (1994). Fernseh-Sport. Im Spannungsfeld von Information und Unterhaltung. Butzbach-Griedel: Afra. Havens, T. (2014). Media programming in an era of big data. Media Industries Journal, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.3998/mij.15031809.0001.202

References

99

Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evidencebased nursing, 18(3), 66-67. https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2015-102129 Hebbel-Seeger, A., & Horky, T. (2018). Innovative Medientechnologien im Sport – Videodrohnen, 360-Grad-Video und VR-Brillen. In Horky, T., Stiehler, H. J., & Schierl, T. (Eds.). Die Digitalisierung des Sports in den Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Hechler, D. (2020, June 22). Bundesliga-Rechtevergabe: SAT.1, Sky und DAZN zeigen die Bundesliga ab 2021 LIVE. www.ran.de. Retrieved December 28, 2021, from https:// www.ran.de/fussball/bundesliga/news/bundesliga-rechtevergabe-sat-1-sky-und-dazn-zei gen-die-bundesliga-ab-2021-live-151285 Heinecke, S., & Meyen, M. (2018). Die Mediatisierung des Sports in der digitalen Sportkommunikation. In Horky, T., Stiehler, H. J., & Schierl, T. (Eds.). Die Digitalisierung des Sports in den Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Heinrich, J. (2013). Medienökonomie: Band 2: Hörfunk und Fernsehen. Springer-Verlag. Held, T. (2006). Rundfunksystem. Medien von A bis Z (pp. 301–305). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90261-6_124 Hellier, D. (2020). German Bundesliga Loses Mideast Broadcaster in Piracy Fight. Bloomberg.Com, N.PAG. Heredia-Ruiz, V., Quirós-Ramírez, A. C., & Quiceno-Castañeda, B. E. (2021). Netflix: catálogo de contenido y flujo televisivo en tiempos de big data. Revista De Comunicación, 20(1), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.26441/rc20.1-2021-a7 Hickethier, K., & Hoff, P. (1998). Am Ende einer Epoche —Vom analogen zum digitalen Fernsehen in Deutschland Ende der neunziger Jahre. Geschichte des deutschen Fernsehens (pp. 517–543). JB Metzler, Stuttgart. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-055781_14 Holtz-Bacha, C. (2006). Wer soll das bezahlen? Fußballrechte, Vermarktung und Vermarkter. Fußball-Fernsehen-Politik (pp. 113–142). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90014-8_6 Horky, T., & Pelka, P. (2018). Die Visualisierung von Daten: Chancen und Herausforderungen von Datenjournalismus im Sport. In Horky, T., Stiehler, H. J., & Schierl, T. (Eds.). Die Digitalisierung des Sports in den Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Hornbogen, C. (2022, January 6). Live-Fußball im Pay-TV: Das Kosten DAZN, Sky und Amazon pro Jahr. TV-Angebote. Retrieved January 9, 2022, from https://www.tv-angebote. de/fussball-pay-tv-kosten/#respond Hsiao, L., & Ayers, H. (2019). The price of free illegal live streaming services. arXiv. Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.00579 Hutchins, B., Li, B., & Rowe, D. (2019). Over-the-top sport: live streaming services, changing coverage rights markets and the growth of media sport portals. Media, Culture & Society, 41(7), 975–994. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443719857623 Hutchins, B., & Rowe, D. (2012). Sport beyond television: The internet, digital media and the rise of networked media sport (Vol. 40). Routledge. Hutchins, B., & Sanderson, J. (2017). The primacy of sports television: Olympic media, social networking services, and multi-screen viewing during the Rio 2016 games. Media International Australia, 164(1), 32–43. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1329878X17707065

100

References

IAB (U.S.). (2018, June 13). Welche der folgenden Inhalte sehen Sie sich normalerweise als Live-Stream an? [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista. com/statistik/daten/studie/872878/umfrage/nutzung-von-live-video-streaming-nach-inh alt-weltweit/ IfD Allensbach. (2018, July 11). Fußball-Fans der Bundesliga in Deutschland nach Abonnement eines Pay-TV-Senders im Vergleich mit der Bevölkerung im Jahr 2018 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/729 122/umfrage/fussball-fans-in-deutschland-nach-abonnement-eines-pay-tv-senders/ IfD Allensbach. (2019, July 11). Bevölkerung in Deutschland nach Tageszeiten des Fernsehkonsums, von 2015 bis 2019 (in Millionen) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/170988/umfrage/beliebtetageszeiten-zum-fernsehen-in-den-letzten-4-wochen/ IfD Allensbach. (2020, July 14). Ranking der beliebtesten Fernsehformate und -genres in Deutschland nach Geschlecht im Jahr 2020 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/291182/umfrage/umfrage-in-deu tschland-zu-den-beliebtesten-fernsehformaten-nach-geschlecht/ IfD Allensbach. (2021a, June 28). Beliebteste Sportarten in Deutschland nach Interesse der Bevölkerung an dem Sport in den Jahren 2019 bis 2021 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/171072/umfrage/ sportarten-fuer-die-besonderes-interesse-besteht/ IfD Allensbach. (2021b, June 28). Bevölkerung in Deutschland nach Einschätzung der eigenen Englischkenntnissen von 2017 bis 2021 (in Millionen) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 7, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/170896/umfrage/ein schaetzung-zu-eigenen-englischkenntnissen/ Infosat. (2021, May 26). Sky erweitert die Kooperation mit DAZN. INFOSAT – Alles Aus Der Digitalen Welt. Retrieved January 4, 2022, from https://www.infosat.de/entertainment/ sky-erweitert-die-kooperation-mit-dazn IONOS. (2019, October 9). Was ist OTT? Der nächste Entwicklungsschritt des Fernsehens. IONOS Digitalguide. Retrieved December 16, 2021, from https://www.ionos.de/digitalgu ide/online-marketing/verkaufen-im-internet/ott-over-the-top/ Janssen, O. (2018, October 1). Nachgefragt: Wann ist eine Studie repräsentativ? Maisberger Insights. Retrieved January 5, 2022, from https://maisbergerinsights.maisberger. de/wann_ist_eine_studie_repraesentativ.html Jordan, S. (2005). Der deutsche Sieg bei der Weltmeisterschaft 1954: Mythos und Wunder oder historisches Ereignis?. Historical Social Research, 263–287. https://doi.org/10. 12759/hsr.30.2005.4.263-287 Kabir, S. M. S. (2016). Basic guidelines for research. An Introductory Approach for All Disciplines, 168–180. Kantar. (2021, November 4). DAZN punktet nach Sicherung der Bundesliga-Übertragungsrechte. Retrieved January 4, 2022, from https://www.kan tar.com/de/inspiration/advertising-media/dazn-punktet-in-deutschland-nach-sicherungder-bundesliga-uebertragungsrechte Karg, A., Funk, D., Quick, S., Shilbury, D., & Westerbeek, H. (1998). Strategic sport marketing. (4th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003117483

References

101

Kariyawasam, K., & Tsai, M. (2017). Copyright and live streaming of sports broadcasting. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 31(3), 265–288. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13600869.2017.1299553 Kaumanns, R., Siegenheim, V., & Sjurts, I. (Eds.). (2008). Auslaufmodell Furnsehen?: Perspektiven Des TV in Der Digitalen Medienwelt. Springer-Verlag. Kicker. (2020a, June 22). Rechtepakete für die Liveübertragungen der Spiele der 1. und 2. Fußball-Bundesliga von 2021/22 bis 2024/25 (Anzahl der Live-Spiele je Saison) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 28, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/ 1127579/umfrage/fussball-bundesliga-rechtepakete-fuer-liveuebertragungen/ Kicker. (2020b, June 22). TV-Rechte 2021/22: Alle Pakete für 1. und 2. Bundesliga. Retrieved December 28, 2021, from https://www.kicker.de/tv-rechte-2021-22-alle-pakete-fuer-1und-2-bundesliga-777057/artikel Kicker. (2020c, June 22). Wer zeigt was? Die TV-Pakete ab der Saison 2021/22 im Überblick. Retrieved December 28, 2021, from https://www.kicker.de/wer_zeigt_was_die_tv_pak ete_ab_der_saison_2021_22_im_ueberblick-778029/artikel Klein, G. (2020, January 31). Super Bowl: Die Nacht ist nicht zum Schlafen da. https://www. fr.de. Retrieved December 29, 2021, from https://www.fr.de/sport/sport-mix/super-bowlnacht-nicht-schlafen-13513679.html Köster, T. (2017, February 9). Stichtag – 9. Februar 1952: Erste deutsche SportLiveübertragung im TV. WDR. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://www1.wdr. de/stichtag/stichtag-sport-direktuebertragung-tv-100.html Kolkmann, T. (2021, June 1). DAZN Kosten 2021: Preise für das Sport-Streaming-Abo. GIGA. Retrieved January 4, 2022, from https://www.giga.de/artikel/dazn-kosten-preisesport-streaming-abo-2021/ Krämer, J., & Wohlfarth, M. (2015). Regulating over-the-top service providers in two-sided content markets: Insights from the Economic Literature. Communications & Strategies, Forthcoming. Krampe, A. L. (2012). Voraussetzungen für guten Datenjournalismus-äußere Kriterien. Datenschaetze. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://datenschaetze.wordpress.com/ Kunz, R. (2014). Sportinteresse und Mobile TV: eine empirische Analyse der Einflussfaktoren des Nutzungsverhaltens. Springer-Verlag. Kuserau, P., Riether, A. J., & Schimak, F. (2020, August 4). TV-Hammer um BundesligaRechte! Wilde Diskussion um Verteilung von TV-Geldern -So viel zahlen Sky und DAZN. tz. Retrieved December 28, 2021, from https://www.tz.de/sport/fc-bayern/bundesliga-tvrechte-dazn-sat-1-dfl-sky-uebertragung-sender-zdf-ard-zr-13796488.html Lammert, J., Faix, A., Schröer, J., & Eßer, A. (2019, October). Big-Point Studie zum Pay-TV. FanQ. Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https://fanq-app.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/ 10/fanq-big-point-pay-tv.pdf Leber, B. (2021, September 24). DAZN: Wie viele Geräte gleichzeitig nutzen? Championstream. Retrieved December 22, 2021, from https://championstream.de/dazn-wieviele-geraete-gleichzeitig-nutzen/ Li, Z., Xie, G., Kaafar, M. A., & Salamatian, K. (2015, May). User behavior characterization of a large-scale mobile live streaming system. Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web (pp. 307–313). https://doi.org/10.1145/2740908.2743054 Lindholm, J. (2019). The Netflix-ication of sports broadcasting. The International Sports Law Journal, 18(3), 99–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40318-019-00145-8

102

References

Liu, J., & Peng, S. (2017). Interaction and sports mobilization in online video sports live casting: a case of tencent 2017 “NBA all-star game.”. J. Wuhan Instit. Phys. Educ, 51, 18–22. Was kursiv? Lobato, R. (2019). Netflix Nations. New York University Press. https://doi.org/10.18574/978 1479882281 Lobato, R., & Thomas, J. (2018). The informal media economy. John Wiley & Sons. Loose, N., Spearman, J., & Gewiese, J. (2021, November). Video-on-Demand: DAZN in Deutschland 2021 Brand Report. Statista. Retrieved January 5, 2022, from https://de.sta tista.com/statistik/studie/id/100638/dokument/video-on-demand-dazn-in-deutschlandbrand-report/ López, I., & Lucas, C. (2018). Nutzung von Social Media im Sport. In Horky, T., Stiehler, H. J., & Schierl, T. (Eds.). Die Digitalisierung des Sports in den Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Lotz, A. D. (2017). Portals: A treatise on internet-distributed television. Michigan Publishing, University of Michigan Library. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9699689 Ludwig, M. (2014). Sportmediennutzung im digitalen Zeitalter: Repräsentativstudie zur Sportmediennutzung 2012 in Deutschland. In P. Strahlendorf (Eds.), Jahrbuch Sponsoring 2014 (pp. 58–62). New Business. Luhmann, N. (1995). Die Realität der Massenmedien. Die Realität der Massenmedien (pp. 5– 73). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-66316287-2_1 Lyons, K. (2021, May 4). WNBA to stream games on Twitter, Facebook, and Paramount Plus. The Verge. Retrieved December 14, 2021, from https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/4/224 19249/wnba-stream-games-twitter-facebook-oculus-paramount-plus-google Marr, B. (2015, March 25). How Big Data and Analytics are Changing Soccer. Linkedin. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-big-data-analyt ics-changing-soccer-bernard-marr McDaniel, C. D., & Gates, R. H. (1998). Marketing research essentials. Media Control. (2020a, January 27). Ranking der zehn erfolgreichsten Sportübertragungen in Deutschland nach Zuschauermarktanteilen in den Jahren 2000 bis 2009 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/110 1780/umfrage/rmarktanteile-der-zehn-erfolgreichsten-sportuebertragungen/ Media Control. (2020b, January 27). Ranking der zehn erfolgreichsten Sportübertragungen in Deutschland nach Zuschauermarktanteilen in den Jahren 2010 bis 2019 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/110 1754/umfrage/rmarktanteile-der-zehn-erfolgreichsten-sportuebertragungen/ Media Perspektiven. (2021a, April 1). Bruttowerbeumsätze des ZDF in den Jahren 2006 bis 2020 (in Millionen Euro) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved Dezember 14 , 2021, from https:// de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/172750/umfrage/werbeumsaetze-des-zdf-seit-2003/ Media Perspektiven. (2021b, September 9). Tägliche Mediennutzungsdauer nach Segmenten in Deutschland in den Jahren 2020 und 2021 (in Minuten) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/164504/umfrage/ taegliche-nutzungsdauer-von-medien-in-deutschland/ Mellis, M. J. (2007). Internet piracy of live sports telecasts. Marq. Sports L. Rev., 18, 259.

References

103

Merten, L., Welz, R., Hooffacker, G., Kulisch, U., Datko, J., Thiergen, T., ... & Kretzschmar, S. (2017). Trends im Social und Mobile TV. In Technische InnovationenMedieninnovationen? (pp. 115–190). Springer VS, Wiesbaden. Messner, H. (2013). Pay-TV in Deutschland: ein schwieriges Geschäftsmodell. SpringerVerlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-01443-8_1 Mikos, L. (2009). Fernsehsport zwischen Repräsentation und Inszenierung–Das Beispiel Fußball. In Theatralisierung der Gesellschaft (pp. 137–156). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Moebus, F. (2017, May 17). Ist die Champions League zu teuer für das Free-TV? [digital picture]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/infografik/9439/ ist-die-champions-league-zu-teuer-fuer-das-free-tv/ Monterroso, Y. (2021, December 8). Live Streaming Sports at Every Level. TV Technology. Retrieved December 17, 2021, from https://www.tvtechnology.com/equipment/livestreaming-sports-at-every-level MOULTON, C. (2019). Watch, Go, Now: “TV Everywhere” and the Promotion of Liveness. Why Popular Culture Matters, 17. Müller-Lietzkow, J. (2006). Sport im Jahr 2050: E-Sport! Oder: Ist E-Sport Sport?. Medien + Erziehung, 102–112. NDR. (2019, November 21). Bewegte Bilder: Die Geschichte des Fernsehens. NDR.de. Retrieved December 12, 2021, from https://www.ndr.de/geschichte/Bewegte-Bilder-DieGeschichte-des-Fernsehens,fernsehen240.html Neumann, I. (2013). Pay-TV in Deutschland: Markteintritts-und Wettbewerbsbedingungen für neue Anbieter. Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-08841-7 Nicola, S., & Hellier, D. (2020). DAZN Raises Pressure on Sky With German Soccer Rights Grab. Bloomberg.Com, N.PAG. Nöcker, M. (2018). Social Media Broadcasting – ein Erfahrungsbericht. In Horky, T., Stiehler, H. J., & Schierl, T. (Eds.). Die Digitalisierung des Sports in den Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Nölleke, D., Grimmer, C. G., & Horky, T. (2017). News sources and follow-up communication: Facets of complementarity between sports journalism and social media. Journalism Practice, 11(4), 509–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2015.1125761 Novak, A. N. (2017). Narrowcasting, Millennials, and the personalization of genre in digital media. The Age of Netflix: Critical Essays on Streaming Media, Digital Delivery and Instant Access. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 162–181. Ochi, D., Kameda, A., Takahashi, K., Makiguchi, M., & Takeuchi, K. (2016). VR technologies for rich sports experience. ACM SIGGRAPH 2016 Emerging Technologies (pp. 1–2). https://doi.org/10.1145/2929464.2949030 Ostsieker, P. (2018, August 7). Die Kosten & Inhaber der Bundesliga-Rechte seit 1965. BASIC thinking. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://www.basicthinking.de/blog/ 2017/05/19/bundesliga-rechte/ Pauker, M. (2021, September 22). Renault will neue Zielgruppen auf Dazn erreichen. W&V. Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https://www.wuv.de/medien/renault_will_neue_zielgru ppen_auf_dazn_erreichen Pennington, A. (2021). The State of Live Streaming: From sports to protests, video is delivering what we can’t share in person. Streaming Media, 18(2), 18–26.

104

References

Platschko, N. (2021, August 26). Bundesliga, DFB-Pokal, Champions League im TV & Stream: Wo läuft was? t-Online. Retrieved January 8, 2022, from https://www.t-online. de/sport/fussball/bundesliga/id_90445482/bundesliga-dfb-pokal-champions-league-imtv-stream-wo-laeuft-was-.html Pleitgen, F. F. (2000). Der Sport im Fernsehen (Vol. 127). Inst. für Rundfunkökonomie. Polk, A. (2020). Zur Vergabe Der Medienrechte in Der Fußball-Bundesliga (On the Central Allocation of Media Rights for Professional Soccer in Germany). Available at SSRN 3682557. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3682557 PwC. (2018a, August 24). Verfolgen Sie Sportberichterstattung? [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/901266/umfrage/pop ularitaet-von-sportberichterstattung-in-deutschland/ PwC. (2018b, August 24). Welche Eigenschaften beim Sportfernsehen sind Ihnen besonders wichtig? [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statis tik/daten/studie/901289/umfrage/wichtigste-eigenschaften-vom-sportfernsehen-in-deu tschland/ PwC. (2018c, August 24). Welchen Betrag wären Sie bereit monatlich für Sportfernsehen auszugeben? [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/ daten/studie/909373/umfrage/zahlungsbereitschaft-fuer-sportfernsehen-in-deutschland/ PwC. (2021). PwC’s Sports Survey 2021. PwC. Retrieved January 4, 2022, from https://www. pwc.ch/en/insights/sport/sports-survey-2021.html Radanliev, P., De Roure, D., Walton, R., Van Kleek, M., Montalvo, R. M., Maddox, L. T., ... & Anthi, E. (2020). Artificial intelligence and machine learning in dynamic cyber risk analytics at the edge. SN Applied Sciences, 2(11), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452020-03559-4 Ramcke, Y. (2019, January 11). Streaming of live sports: Triple play of “Live” + “Exclusive” + “Pay-per-View” as challenge for today’s OTT technology. Cleeng. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://blog.cleeng.com/streaming-of-live-sports-triple-play-of-live-exclus ive-pay-per-view-as-challenge-for-todays-ott-technology ran. (2021, February 9). Durchschnittliche Anzahl der Fernsehzuschauer der Übertragungen des Super Bowl in Deutschland in den Jahren 2013 bis 2021 (in Millionen) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/513 756/umfrage/tv-quoten-des-super-bowl-in-deutschland/ Range, D., & Mataruna-Dos-Santos-leonardo, L. J. (2021). The Implications of Streaming and Online Viewing for Sports Advertising and Sponsorship. Rautenberg, K. (2015). Medienwandel durch Crossmedia. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Rentz, I. (2017, October 8). DAZN-CEO James Rushton: “Die Offenheit des deutschen Marktes hat mich umgehauen!”. Horizont. Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https://www. horizont.net/medien/nachrichten/DAZN-CEO-James-Rushton-Die-Offenheit-des-deutsc hen-Marktes-hat-mich-umgehauen-161539 Richter, F. (2017., August 18). Fußball am liebsten im Free-TV [digital picture]. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/infografik/10740/bevorzugte-fussballuebe rtragungswege/ Riegler, T. (2020, January 10). Die geschichte des fernsehens: Olympia 1936 und der krieg (teil 2). DIGITAL FERNSEHEN. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://www.digita lfernsehen.de/ratgeber/digital-tv/die-geschichte-des-fernsehens-olympia-1936-und-derkrieg-teil-2-550218/

References

105

Rijswijk, K., Bulten, W., Klerkx, L. W. A., den Dulk, L. S., Dessein, J., Debruyne, L., & en Nematoden, O. T. E. (2020). Digital Transformation: Ongoing digitisation and digitalisation processes. Desira. Retrieved January 3, 2022 https://desira2020.eu/2020/05/22/art icle-digital-transformation-ongoing-digitisation-and-digitalisation-processes/ RND, Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland. (2021, August 5). Rundfunkbeitrag: Wie hoch sind die Aktuellen Gebühren? RND. Retrieved December 14, 2021, from https://www.rnd.de/ geld-und-finanzen/rundfunkbeitrag-erhoeht-wie-viel-gez-gebuehren-muss-ich-jetzt-zah len-DLP466MGYRCSTL3K33WJPQOENQ.html RND, Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland. (2022, January 3). Disney Plus Kosten aktuell: Was kostet ein Abo und auf wie viel Geräten kann ich gleichzeitig streamen? RND. Retrieved January 9, 2022, from https://www.rnd.de/medien/disney-plus-kosten-aktuellwas-kostet-ein-abo-und-auf-wie-viel-geraeten-kann-ich-gleichzeitig-EVYMPPINPJAW RMD4FDPNOVGTSY.html Robbers, M. (2021, September 8). Super Bowl 2022: Datum, Uhrzeit, Ort, Live-Übertragung und Co. – alle Informationen zum Endspiel in der NFL. DAZN. Retrieved December 29, 2021, from https://www.dazn.com/de-DE/news/american-football/super-bowl-2022datum-uhrzeit-ort-live-uebertragung-alle-informationen-endspiel-nfl/rekfcfb7zlc11t4jgr w9fg1of#:~:text=Der%20Super%20Bowl%202022%20findet,um%200.30%20Uhr% 20deutscher%20Zeit rp-online. (2018, April 20). Champions League 2018 nur noch bei Sky und DAZN. ZDF verliert Rechte. RP ONLINE. Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https://rp-online.de/sport/ fussball/champions-league/champions-league-2018-nur-noch-bei-sky-und-dazn-zdf-ver liert-rechte_aid-17739379 Rust, R. T. (2020). The future of marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 37(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2019.08.002 Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students. Pearson education. Schafmeister, G. (2007). Sport im Fernsehen: eine Analyse der Kundenpräferenzen für mediale Dienstleistungen. Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8350-5439-4 Schellhaass, H. M., & Hafkemeyer, L. (2002). Wie kommt der Sport ins Fernsehen?: Eine wettbewerbspolitische Analyse. Cologne: Sport und Buch Strauß. Schwier, J. (Ed.). (2002). Mediensport: ein einführendes Handbuch. Schneider-Verlag Hohengehren. Schwotzer, B. (2011). Fernsehen in Deutschland 2009/2010. Seidel, J., Zerres, T., & Zerres, C. (2021). Der Markt von Streamingdiensten in Deutschland. Abgrenzungsansatz und Analyse mit einem Fokus auf medienrechtliche Aspekte (No. 53). Arbeitspapiere für Marketing und Management. http://dx.doi.org/10.48584/opus-4990 SEITZ, P. (2020, July 8). Netflix Poised For Another Big Quarter Amid Coronavirus Pandemic. Investors Business Daily, N.PAG. Seven.One Media GmbH (Ein Unternehmen der ProSiebenSat.1 Media SE). (2021a, October 20). Durchschnittliche tägliche Nutzungsdauer ausgewählter Medien in Deutschland in den Jahren 2014 bis 2021a (in Minuten) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 13, 2021a, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/992180/umfrage/taeglichenutzungsdauer-von-medien-in-deutschland/ Seven.One Media GmbH (Ein Unternehmen der ProSiebenSat.1 Media SE). (2021b, October 20). Persönliche Gerätenutzung für den Medienkonsum in Deutschland in den Jahren

106

References

2014 bis 2021 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/ statistik/daten/studie/476467/umfrage/persoenliche-geraetenutzung-fuer-den-medienkon sum-in-deutschland/ Shaw, L. (2020, April 14). How Coronavirus Changed the Way We Watch, Listen and Play. Bloomberg. Retrieved December 22, 2021, from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/art icles/2020-04-14/how-is-coronavirus-changing-the-way-people-use-media Silberer, G., Engelhardt, J. F., & Deiters, J. F. (2005). Wirkung von Streaming MediaWerbung. Marketing: Zeitschrift für Forschung und Praxis, 7–23. https://doi.org/10. 15358/0344-1369-2005-1-7 Skinner, J., & Smith, A. C. (2021). Introduction: sport and COVID-19: impacts and challenges for the future (Volume 1). European Sport Management Quarterly, 1–10. https:// doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2021.1925725 Sky. (n.d.). Übersicht der Beteiligungen am Unternehmen. Sky. Retrieved December 16, 2021, from https://info.sky.de/inhalt/de/unternehmen_beteiligungsstruktur_start.jsp Smith, M. D., & Telang, R. (2016). Streaming, sharing, stealing: Big data and the future of entertainment. Mit Press. Sørensen, I. E. (2016). The revival of live TV: liveness in a multiplatform context. Media, Culture & Society, 38(3), 381–399. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443715608260 SoSci Survey. (n.d.). SoSci Survey  professionelle Onlinebefragung made in Germany. soscisurvey. Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https://www.soscisurvey.de/ Spiegel. (2015, January 23). Für ARD und ZDF anfallende Kosten für die TVÜbertragungsrechte der Fußball-Weltmeisterschaften von 2006 bis 2022 (in Millionen Euro) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/ daten/studie/381252/umfrage/ard-zdf-kosten-uebertragung-fussball-wm/ SPORT1. (2021a, December 15). Darts Live – WM | 1. & 2. Runde, WM 2022 | SPORT1 [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved December 21, 2021, from https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=TgSTCmin2QE SPORT1. (2021b, December 20). Deutscher Showdown bei der #DartsWM ! Jetzt live auf unserem TikTok-Account. [Video]. TikTok. Retrieved December 21, 2021, from https:// www.tiktok.com/@sport1news/video/7043487672697982213 Sporttotal. (n.d.). Über Uns. Sporttotal. Retrieved December 19, 2021, from https://sporttotal. tv/pab14ff7a Spotify. (2021, June 2). Anzahl der verfügbaren Songs auf Spotify in ausgewählten Monaten von August 2014 bis Juni 2021 (in Millionen) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 22, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/378806/umfrage/anzahl-derverfuegbaren-songs-auf-spotify/ Spotify. (n.d.). Spotify Premium. Retrieved December 16, 2021, from https://www.spotify. com/de/premium/ Statista. (2021a, September 29). Warum bezahlen Sie für ein TV-Abo (Kabel/Satellit)? [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/prognosen/999 899/deutschland-gruende-fuer-die-nutzung-von-pay-tv Statista. (2021b, September 29). Welche dieser Video-on-Demand-Anbieter haben Sie in den letzten 12 Monaten kostenpflichtig genutzt? [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/prognosen/999834/deutschland-beliebteste-video-ondemand-anbieter

References

107

Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder. (2021, November 15). Durchschnittsalter der Bevölkerung in Deutschland von 2011 bis 2020 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 10, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1084430/umfrage/durchschn ittsalter-der-bevoelkerung-in-deutschland/ Statistisches Bundesamt. (2021, June 21). Bevölkerung – Zahl der Einwohner in Deutschland nach relevanten Altersgruppen am 31. Dezember 2020 (in Millionen) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 22, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/ 1365/umfrage/bevoelkerung-deutschlands-nach-altersgruppen/ Steinert, H. (2002). Schnellkurs Fussball. DuMont Literatur und Kunst Verlag. Stelzel-Morawietz, P. (2013, September 4). Abseits oder nicht? Augmented Reality in der TV-Sportberichterstattung. PC-WELT. Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https://www. pcwelt.de/ratgeber/Abseits_oder_nicht__Augmented_Reality_in_der_TV-Sportbericht erstattung-Technologie-8092167.html Stokes, Y., Vandyk, A., Squires, J., Jacob, J. D., & Gifford, W. (2019). Using Facebook and LinkedIn to recruit nurses for an online survey. Western journal of nursing research, 41(1), 96–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945917740706 Studlib. (n.d.). Medienordnung. Retrieved December 30, 2021, from https://studlib.de/6085/ medien/medienordnung Sun, Y., & Zhang, H. (2021). What Motivates People to Pay for Online Sports Streaming? An Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.619314 Survey Circle. (n.d.). SurveyCircle – Die größte Community für Online-Forschung. SurveyCircle. Retrieved January 6, 2022, from https://www.surveycircle.com/de/ Sweney, M. (2018, May 14). UK-based sport streaming service adopts Netflix model after $1bn deal. The Guardian. Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/ media/2018/may/14/streaming-service-dazn-netflix-sport-us-boxing-eddie-hearn Synamedia. (2020, Ocotber 26). Knockout blow for sports piracy requires incentives and deterrents, finds new Synamedia report. Retrieved December 14, 2021, from Knockout blow for sports piracy requires incentives and deterrents, finds new Synamedia report – Synamedia The Digital Sport Insider Podcast. (2018, July 19). 101: OTT, boxing & launching in the US with DAZN’s Joe Markowski. Spotify. Retrieved January 1, 2022, from https://open.spo tify.com/episode/0jpBQwMJzWYk0plLlEWk7y Thieme, L. (Ed.). (2014). Spezielle Aspekte des Sportmanagements: Zur Sportartikelindustrie, dem Controlling in Sportclubs und Angebotsaspekten in Sportvereinen (Vol. 2). epubli. Tritama, H. B., & Tarigan, R. E. (2016). The effect of social media to the brand awareness of a product of a company. CommIT (Communication and Information Technology) Journal, 10(1), 9–14. https://doi.org/10.21512/commit.v10i1.1667 Urbe, W. (2003, June 17). Razzia am frühen Morgen. DIE WELT. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from https://www.welt.de/print-welt/article240613/Razzia-am-fruehenMorgen.html Vann, P., Bruns, A., & Harrington, S. (2018). Transmedia social platforms: Livestreaming and transmedia sports. In The Routledge companion to transmedia studies (pp. 107–115). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351054904

108

References

VAUNET. (2018a, August 24). Verteilung von illegalen linearen TV-Streams nach Genres in Deutschland im Jahr 2018 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https:// de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/974027/umfrage/anteil-genutzter-streams-bei-illega len-linearen-tv-streams-nach-genres/ VAUNET. (2018b, August 24). Anzahl der Nutzer illegaler linearer TV-Streams nach Altersklasse in Deutschland im Jahr 2018 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/973767/umfrage/nutzeranzahl-ill egaler-linearer-tv-streams-nach-altersklasse-in-deutschland/ VAUNET. (2018, August 24). Verwendete Endgeräte für das Sehen von illegalen linearen TV-Streams in Deutschland im Jahr 2018 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/973775/umfrage/endgeraetefuer-das-sehen-von-illegalen-linearen-tv-streams-in-deutschland/ VAUNET. (2021, July 27). Anzahl der Pay-TV Programme in Deutschland nach Genre in den Jahren 2015 bis 2021 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/283256/umfrage/anzahl-der-pay-tv-sen der-in-deutschland-nach-genre/ volders. (2020). Volders: Digitaler Kündigungsservice. volders. Retrieved January 4, 2022, from https://www.volders.de/sky-vs-dazn von Gottberg, J. (2018). Jugendschutzvorkehrungen bei Streamingdiensten. JMS Jugend Medien Schutz-Report, 41(4), 7–8. https://doi.org/10.5771/0170-5067-2018-4-7 von Hahn, F. (2008). Hybride Angebote öffentlich-rechtlicher RundfunkanstaltenFinanzierung und Ausgestaltung (Doctoral dissertation, Staats-und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg Carl von Ossietzky). VuMA. (2021, November 17). Welche der folgenden Video-on-Demand Portale nutzen Sie? [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1102950/umfrage/senioren-zur-nut zung-ausgewaehlter-vod-portale/ VuMA (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Verbrauchs- und Medienanalyse). (2020, November 18). Beliebteste Freizeitbeschäftigungen, Aktivitäten und Sportarten (mindestens mehrmals im Monat) in Deutschland in den Jahren 2017 bis 2020 [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 14, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/171601/umfrage/ mehrmals-pro-monat-ausgeuebte-freizeitaktivitaeten/ vzhh, Verbraucherzentrale Hamburg. (n.d.). Rundfunkbeitrag – muss ich zahlen oder nicht? Verbraucherzentrale. Retrieved December 14, 2021, from https://www.vzhh.de/themen/ rundfunkbeitrag/rundfunkbeitrag-muss-ich-zahlen-nicht Waldfogel, J. (2018). Digital renaissance. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10. 1515/9780691185439 Walker, C. S. (2011). A la carte television: A solution to online piracy. CommLaw Conspectus, 20, 471. Waters, R. D., & Jones, P. M. (2011). Using video to build an organization’s identity and brand: A content analysis of nonprofit organizations’ YouTube videos. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 23(3), 248–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142. 2011.594779 WDR. (2017, February 8). Stichtag – 9. Februar 1952: Erste deutsche Sport-Liveübertragung im TV. Retrieved December 14, 2021, from https://www1.wdr.de/stichtag/stichtag-sportdirektuebertragung-tv-100.html

References

109

Weber, R. (2004). Editor’s comments: the rhetoric of positivism versus interpretivism: a personal view. MIS quarterly, iii-xii. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148621 Welt. (2016, April 12). Sky verliert Exklusivrechte an der Fußball-Bundesliga. DIE WELT. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://www.welt.de/sport/fussball/article154225630/ Sky-verliert-Exklusivrechte-an-Fussball-Bundesliga.html Welt. (2020, April 1). Streamingdienst: So reagiert DAZN auf die Corona-Krise. DIE WELT. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from https://www.welt.de/sport/article206948737/Streaming dienst-So-reagiert-DAZN-auf-die-Corona-Krise.html Wirtz, B. W. (2006). Medien-und Internetmanagement. 5th ed. Wiesbaden. Gabler. Wöckener, L. (2020, December 23). „Ich glaube an den Deutschland-Faktor“. Welt. Retrieved December 22, 2021, from https://www.welt.de/sport/article223102930/DartsWM-2021-Elmar-Paulke-Ich-glaube-an-den-Deutschland-Faktor.html Wright, K. B. (2005). Researching Internet-based populations: Advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. Journal of computer-mediated communication, 10(3), JCMC1034. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00259.x ZDF. (2021, August 17). ZDFmediathek – Alles zu deiner Zeit. ZDF. Retrieved December 20, 2021, from https://www.zdf.de/service-und-hilfe/zdf-mediathek Zenith. (2019, Juni 14). Durchschnittliche tägliche Nutzungsdauer ausgewählter Medien weltweit in den Jahren 2011 bis 2018 und eine Prognose bis zum Jahr 2021 (in Minuten) [Graph]. Statista. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://de.statista.com/statistik/ daten/studie/881337/umfrage/durchschnittliche-taegliche-nutzungsdauer-ausgewaehltermedien-weltweit/