Movistar Plus+: Deconstructing the 43% Piracy Figure Data, Costs, and the Crisis of the Broadcast Model
In Spain, the passion for football faces an unprecedented threat to its legitimate broadcast ecosystem. The startling claim is that 43% of Spanish football fans are engaging in illegal streaming, a figure put forth by Movistar Plus+, the nation’s premier football rights holder.
This figure immediately raises the critical question that underpins the entire piracy debate: How exactly did Movistar Plus+ arrive at this 43% number? Did they spy on their customers’ internet connections, do they believe the government has cameras installed in every home, or is this simply a guess driven by the fact their revenues didn’t hit their goals?
The Origin of the Data: Surveying the Extent of Piracy
The 43% statistic was publicly cited by Movistar Plus+ CEO Daniel Domenjó, who used the number to sound the alarm on the scale of sports piracy in the country. The data is not derived from invasive surveillance of private connections, nor is it based on government security apparatus. We all know how easily such surveys are manipulated, or how they’re simply commissioned until the desired result is achieved.
Instead, this figure comes from market intelligence, likely commissioned surveys, where Spanish football fans were asked to self-report their viewing habits. By quantifying the percentage of the audience who admit to consuming matches illicitly, Movistar is able to:
Lobby the Government: Provide quantifiable evidence of the economic harm to pressure policymakers for stricter anti-piracy legislation.
Justify Pricing: Demonstrate to shareholders that subscription losses are due to external illegal activity, not entirely to a flawed product or excessive cost.
Drive Product Innovation: Use the scale of the problem (43%) to justify further investment in a “superior product” and enhanced user experience as the long-term solution.
In essence, the 43% is a crucial, measured statistic used by the broadcaster to define the parameters of the fight against the “free” alternative.
The Structural Problem: Is the Paywall Model Outdated?
The high piracy rate inevitably leads to deeper questions about the broadcast system itself. Given the easy availability of free streams, is the current high-cost subscription model fundamentally outdated?
- Outdated Systems vs. Modern Technology
While Movistar Plus+ originated as a traditional pay-TV service, it is far from an “old broadcast system.” The platform underwent a significant relaunch to modernize, operating primarily as a sophisticated Over-The-Top (OTT) streaming service available across multiple devices. The CEO himself argues the solution lies in technological disruption to create an experience piracy cannot match. Therefore, the technology is modern, but the business model is under immense pressure.
- The YouTube/AVoD Proposal: Could Advertising Replace Subscriptions?
The suggestion that Movistar Plus+ could save money by simply streaming the matches on a platform like YouTube or making its service free and relying on advertisers (AVoD) is a direct challenge to the pay-TV revenue structure:
Cost Savings (Proprietary vs. Third-Party): While shifting streaming infrastructure (Content Delivery Network or CDN) to a major platform might save some operational costs, this saving is negligible compared to the billions paid for exclusive broadcast rights. Telefónica pays a premium for the rights precisely so it can charge a high subscription fee, which YouTube or any AVoD model can replicate on the same scale.
The Advertising Ceiling: The AVoD model relies on ad revenue, which has been successful in many markets (like parts of the NFL in the US), but typically cannot cover the massive, multi-billion-euro price tags associated with premium, exclusive European football rights. The high price of La Liga rights is paid for the guaranteed, predictable subscription revenue that can only be locked behind a paywall. To switch to pure advertising would require La Liga to accept a drastic reduction in the value of its rights.
- The Impact on Player Salaries
The relationship between the current broadcast model and player salaries is direct and undeniable:
Player Salaries∝Club Revenue∝Value of Broadcast Rights
If Movistar Plus+ and other pay-TV rivals shift to a free, ad-supported model that generates significantly less revenue than the current subscription model, the financial foundation of Spanish football would collapse. The “super high salaries” of players like those at Real Madrid and Barcelona are directly sustained by the billions flowing in from these high-cost rights deals. A successful move to a pure AVoD model would necessitate a massive, proportional drop in the price of rights, which would, in turn, mean a substantial drop in club revenue and, consequently, player salaries.
The debate, therefore, is whether the Movistar Plus+ model is technically outdated, but whether the Spanish football ecosystem built upon escalating broadcast rights can survive a world where consumers demand ‘free’ content. The 43% piracy figure is the stark metric revealing that the current economic structure and consumer expectation are fundamentally incompatible.
Opinion
I would argue that the 43% piracy claim is completely exaggerated. Perhaps Movistar Plus+ should reconsider the price. Is the subscription cost simply excessive?
Ultimately, if no major broadcaster is willing to pay billions for the exclusive rights, the price of those rights will automatically drop. The league would surely prefer a lower, sustainable revenue say, a few hundred million over zero. If the price becomes more reasonable, customers will be more willing to pay for the service.
On the other hand, one could argue that it’s completely crazy that clubs are sometimes forced to pay money just to have their games broadcast! Instead of receiving revenue from the network, they may have to pay millions.
Ref: CEO Movistar Plus: "El 43 % de la gente que ve fútbol lo piratea"