Rogers and Bell Buy Maple Leaf Sports

Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment, owners of some of the best known and most valuable sports brands, is now owned by the two biggest communication companies in Canada.  Rogers and Bell jointly acquired 80% of MLSE, announcing today their $1.3 billion deal. When asked about competition or conflict of interest in their partnership, they replied that Rogers and Bell had previously worked together (covering the Olympics).


The new arrangement is to bring premium content to sports fans through a number of different channels.  Because Bell and Rogers are both already involved in tv (cable & satellite), internet connectivity, cell phones, and – okay, let's just say "everything," – this gives MLSE a lot more channels for distribution.

Nahir Mohamed, President and Chief Executive of Rogers, said that part of Rogers' aim is to offer fans content on demand.

"We're excited to partner with MLSE to create highly interactive and engaging experiences for hockey, basketball and soccer fans, creating the perfect marriage of content and distribution. This investment fits squarely into our strategy of securing premium content and making it accessible to Canadians when, where and how they want it."

Rogers already owns the Toronto Blue Jays.  Acquiring MLSE means they also own the Toronto Maple Leafs, the Toronto Raptors, and the Toronto Marlies (soccer).  At least in this city, sports news can now be covered by all the same people, which can be convenient or it can be limiting.  

A thought: is consolidation of ownership good or bad for fans?

-Tamara Hecht

  • Scott D

    Premium content? The Toronto Maple Leafs? Really?
    Sports tribalism aside, the news is great if one is a Maple Leafs or Blue Jays fan. It’s not when one follows a different team from Ontario (like, oh, the Senators) or a different province altogether (the Canadiens). And, as an Expo fan, I do have to say it will suck. I still remember not having any access to English language Expo games on television or radio after the 1994 season.

  • http://profile.typepad.com/tamara126 Tamara Hecht

    No. There are no sports teams or cities in existence that are not Toronto. Only Toronto.
    That is an interesting point that you raise about the language barrier. When one company sets out to be everything to everyone, it’s got to offer it in multiple languages to truly achieve that.

  • Scott D

    Out side the 416 and 905 area codes, there is whole other country. ;)
    The barrier isn’t just language. When Rogers bought out Skyline Cable here in Ottawa, they revamped the channel lineup. We lost several Montreal channels, to have them replaced with Toronto stations, despite Ottawa being closer to Montreal.
    There’s another issue with the purchase, too. Bell now owns chunks of both the Leafs and the Habs. I’m starting to doubt that games between the two would be available over the air unless the CBC gets it for Hockey Night in Canada.

  • http://profile.typepad.com/tamara126 Tamara Hecht

    Why would Bell not broadcast games that feature both teams? It’s not like they care which one wins. It’s only a matter of how many people tune in, and a Leafs-Habs game will definitely get hockey fans’ attention.

  • Scott D

    There’s broadcast, then there’s pay per view, which I suspect would get them a good chunk of cash from die-hard fans of both teams. (And, yeah, there would be people who would want to see a match up like that.) I’m more worried that the game would become available for those willing to pony up what Bell wants to charge.

  • http://profile.typepad.com/tamara126 Tamara Hecht

    There’s always been a lack of competition though. Both companies are pretty secure in their positions, whether the mutual backscratching is made public or not. I don’t think this REALLY changes much. Bell could still price gouge even without sharing the deal with Rogers, and Rogers would be like “sweet, now I can price gouge too.” The only issue here is that 80% of MLSE was bought by one group. It would be better for fans if it “diversified its portfolio.”
    Also, Go Leafs Go. :p

  • Scott D

    Diversification would be ideal. But, now that the Teacher’s Federation has sold off its ownership, having two controlling 80% is a good step and could see moves into making the Leafs actually competitive. ;)

  • http://profile.typepad.com/tamara126 Tamara Hecht

    Oh, so just because we haven’t won since the first year “Speed Racer” was on the air, it means we’re not competitive? …Oh…I guess it does.
    Well, while I don’t think it’s a good idea for anything to be controlled THAT fully by any one group (or partnership), if it has to be ANY company, it might as well be a communications company. Still, 80% is a heckuva lot.

  • Scott D

    Mind, I still pine for the Expos… :)
    If Bell and Rogers are paying equally, it’s 40% each, which isn’t as bad provided they compete. But Bell-Globe Media and Rogers are Canada’s big two comm companies, controlling a lot. We need diversification in that area more than in sports.

  • http://profile.typepad.com/tamara126 Tamara Hecht

    Not arguing with you there. >.>