NFL hit with $4.7 billion verdict in 'Sunday Ticket' antitrust trial
Adds details and statement from plaintiffs in paragraphs 6-7
Jury finds NFL conspired to inflate 'Sunday Ticket' prices
NFL plans to contest the decision, calling claims baseless
Plaintiffs pleased with verdict, representing 2.4 million residential and 48,000 commercial subscribers
By Mike Scarcella
June 27 (Reuters) -The National Football League must pay more than $4.7 billion in class-action damages for overcharging subscribers of its “Sunday Ticket” telecasts, a California federal jury said on Thursday.
Jurors in Los Angeles agreed with the plaintiffs that the NFL conspired with member teams to artificially inflate the price of "Sunday Ticket" for millions of residential and commercial subscribers.
The jury awarded $4.6 billion to a residential class, and $96 million to commercial subscribers such as bars and restaurants, according to an attorney for the plaintiffs.
A judge could award triple damages under U.S. antitrust law, bringing the total judgment to more than $14 billion.
The NFL in a statement said it was disappointed by the jury's verdict. "We will certainly contest this decision as we believe that the class action claims in this case are baseless and without merit," it said.
The NFL earlier this week asked the court to rule for the league and its teams as a matter of law, which could nullify the verdict.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs in a statement on Thursday said: "We are pleased with today’s result on behalf of the classes we represent."
The trial, which began on June 5, capped more than a decade of litigation over the "Sunday Ticket" telecasts.
The subscribers accused the NFL of using agreements with broadcast partners to keep a stranglehold over distribution, allowing DirecTV to charge artificially higher prices as the former sole distributor of "Sunday Ticket."
A residential subscription to "Sunday Ticket," which is the only broadcast option for fans to watch out-of-market games, now costs as much as $449 through its current distributor, Google's YouTube. DirecTV and Google were not defendants in the trial.
DirecTV is owned by AT&T T.N and Google is owned by Alphabet GOOGL.O.
The plaintiffs claimed that "Sunday Ticket" prices were inflated to limit subscriptions and protect distribution rights fees that CBS PARA.O and Fox FOXA.O paid to air games in local markets.
The NFL denied any wrongdoing and argued that "Sunday Ticket" is a "premium" product that expands viewers' access to games, which are already broadcast for free on local networks.
The plaintiffs are DirecTV subscribers who bought "NFL Sunday Ticket" between June 2011 and February 2023. The case includes at least 2.4 million residential customers and 48,000 commercial subscribers like bars and restaurants, according to court records.
Reporting by Mike Scarcella in Washington
Editing by David Bario and Matthew Lewis
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
