Hollywood Reporter News broke Tuesday that NBCUniversal and The Reelz Channel have struck a deal that will see its linear live stream and on-demand program join the Peacock Streaming service on March 1. Wrestling recently made a deal with Reelz and launched their new flagship weekly show, MLW Underground Wrestling, Again on February 7th. Unfortunately , THR’It’s also indicated that MLW will not be making the jump to Peacock due to the streaming service’s ongoing agreement with WWE.
“While it will include the channel’s live broadcasts, it will not air on Tuesdays at 10 p.m., as Reelz airs Major League Wrestling at that hour. Peacock has a live broadcast deal with WWE, which has exclusivity in Peacock’s category,” the report is reading. This news comes just two weeks after an antitrust lawsuit against WWE was dismissed by a judge.
Reelz’s live line broadcast is coming to Peacock starting March 1, but it will not air MLW’s 10pm timeslot on Tuesdays, because WWE “has exclusivity in Peacock’s class.”https://t.co/LCPL8RnHAX
– Brandon Thurston February 28, 2023
The Court found that MLW did not include sufficient facts to reasonably claim a market for relevant antitrust products. With respect to the proposed market, the complaint only alleges that there are four competitors in the “United States professional wrestling market”; and that “the business of promoting professional wrestling as sports entertainment is in The basis is a media industry, with revenue and business valuation[s] largely driven by fees earned from broadcast rights deals; and that companies such as NBCUniversal and Fox Sports buy the rights to broadcast in [proposed market] to their various distribution channels such as broadcast networks, cable and satellite services, broadcast networks and film production companies,” court documents relating to the dismissal read.
These facts, as promised, are not sufficient to provide an understanding of relevant market characteristics, including the presence or absence of alternatives. For example, there are no allegations addressing why other “sports entertainment” or “informational” content has broadcast rights that May be sold to distribution channels that are not suitable substitutes.MLW It is true that a single sport may constitute a relevant market…but there are no facts alleged in the Complaint to support this legal conclusion.In addition, the Complaint uses several constructs to describe the proposed market, adding to the complexity The question of the limits of the market and the reasonably interchangeable products it contains.”
[ad_2]
