An interview with Dave Gordon, BBC Head of Major Events for Sport in SportsPro which is quite defeatest IMO about the future of Olympic broadcasting, saying the IOC need to decide how the games are broadcast in the future due to the fragmentation of channels rather than adopting the long held BBC stance that only they can deliver the games the way they deserve to be broadcast.
Sadly I really do think they're eyeing up a tie in with Sky for 2016 - which will be fine if the BBC can still offer multiple streams and have no restrictions on coverage, but will be a disaster if the BBC are pegged to just their coverage on linear channels, fulfiling the minimum requirement of both the IOC (200 hours) and the crown jewels list.
http://www.sportspromedia.com/notes_and_insights/bbc_chief_ioc_faces_big_decisions_over_future_oiympics/
P.S. Rumours the Premier League rights will be announced today following the closure of the LSE. The Premier League had their annual meeting yesterday and the PL rights are usually announced outside of trading to avoid anyone trying to make a quick buck on Sky.
I think there are a number of issues here at play that are causing this delay in awarding the rights to 2016.
Firstly I think basic IOC greed is a major issue here. They somehow managed to get NBC to pay through the roof for the rights between 2014 to 2020, despite there being a cultural change afoot in the US television market and viewer appetite for pre-recorded highlights disappearing fast. Had the US negotiations went on for longer and been more drawn out it would have been a good indicator to them that the days of ever increasing rights fees were over.
Secondly the next Olympics, particularly the Summer games, are likely to be the least attractive games ever for the BBC. They will have just been able to broadcast the Olympics in their home country whilst paying the EBU a nominal fee in reality. The 2012 will never be bettered in the eyes of the BBC so there maybe an attitude at the BBC that they hold out for a better deal
Thirdly the BBC can rightly believe that they are the only players in the market. Whilst SKY may want a piece of the Olympic action I readily agree with previous posters that the attractiveness of the Olympics in pushing up subscription figures for SKY is limited. At the same time certain Olympic coverage remains covered as ‘crown jewels’ so they would need to partner with a terristerial broadcaster and the BBC are really the only show in town. I would say that a deal similar to what we have in London with SKY showing the 24 streams is an option they would much rather have.
Fourthly the IOC bundle the rights to 2014 and 2016 together and this a problem in the UK. The Winter games are not an attractive option to broadcasters in the UK. The BBC buy the rights basically as an add-on to the Summer games. If they were sold on their own I could see Channel Four being interested in the Winter games but not as part of a package with the Summer games. Again the BBC are the only player in town.
Ultimately I think the BBC will end up broadcasting both but viewers (and the IOC) need to realize that the level of committment that they are showing to the London games is simply a one-off.