FIFA reportedly likely to bundle English, Spanish, World Cup rights together

The FIFA World Cup 2026 logo pictured alongside the Fox Sports logo. Courtesy: Derek Futterman, Sports Media Watch

FIFA appears poised to bundle English and Spanish-language World Cup rights in the next set of negotiations.

Ahead of negotiations that are expected to begin in the coming weeks, FIFA has informed interested bidders that it is “likely” to sell English and Spanish-language rights to the 2030 and 2034 World Cup as a single, combined package, according to Alex Sherman of CNBC. Currently, Fox Sports owns English-language rights and NBCUniversal-owned Telemundo owns the Spanish-language package. Previously, those rights were held by Disney and Univision, respectively.

FIFA already bundled English and Spanish-language rights to the Women’s World Cup, which next year and in 2031 will air exclusively on Netflix in the United States.

According to Sherman, interested parties for the 2030 and 2034 men’s tournaments include Netflix, Disney and Google-owned YouTube, with Amazon and Apple mentioned as potential bidders.

Selling a combined package would presumably drive up the cost of the rights to the men’s tournament, which last hit the open market in 2011. Fox and Telemundo won the bidding then, acquiring the 2018 and 2022 men’s tournaments (and the 2015 and 2019 women’s editions). The incumbents were then awarded this year’s World Cup (and the 2023 women’s tournament) without those rights hitting the market, resulting in rights fees that are reportedly well below market rates. The New York Times reported this year that Fox was paying $485 million for this year’s tournament, and CNBC’s report Tuesday put the price tag for Telemundo’s rights at $600 million.

Per Sherman, multiple companies are setting a budget of $1.5-2.0 billion for the rights, a figure that is reportedly expected to price out NBCUniversal. Telemundo EVP/Sports Joaquin Duro previously told Austin Karp of Sports Business Journal that the company was “beyond exploring” the prospect of adding English-language rights to its existing Spanish-language package.

A combined English and Spanish-language package would also prevent the current circumstance of the U.S. rightsholders having to compete against each other for viewers. While it stands to reason that most viewers will choose the broadcast that corresponds with their primary language, no other event the magnitude of the World Cup offers two separate broadcasts offered by competing media companies. The result is that even for their largest World Cup audiences, both Fox and Telemundo are missing out on several million viewers.

USMNT ends World Cup run with one more viewership record on FOX

Jon Lewis

Jon Lewis has been covering the sports media industry on a daily basis since 2006 as the founder and main writer of Sports Media Watch. You can contact him here or on the social media websites X (Twitter) or Bluesky.

3F2NE53 A general view during the FIFA World Cup 2026 final at the New York-New Jersey Stadium. Picture date: Sunday July 19, 2026.

2026 World Cup is most-watched on English, Spanish-language television

by Jon Lewis

1 month ago

The first North American World Cup in 32 years was the biggest viewership hit in the history of soccer...

Spain's Ferran Torres (7) celebrates scoring their first goal during the World Cup final soccer match between Spain and Argentina in East Rutherford, N.J., near New York, Sunday, July 19, 2026. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez)

World Cup Final combines for more than 66 million across Fox, Telemundo

by Jon Lewis

1 month ago

The World Cup ended with another historic audience.

Host Andrés Cantor speaks during the match schedule reveal for the 2026 soccer World Cup in Washington, Saturday, Dec. 6, 2025. (AP Photo/Chris Carlson)

On the Air: How Andrés Cantor’s style suits different expectations

by Armand Broady

1 month ago

Examining the unique style of Telemundo's Andres Cantor and why his lack of impartiality fits the different expectations of...

Argentina and Spain stand for the national anthems before the World Cup final soccer match between Spain and Argentina in East Rutherford, N.J., near New York, Sunday, July 19, 2026. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)

Will the World Cup Final be the most-watched soccer match on record?

by Jon Lewis

1 month ago

Viewership records were shattered throughout the FIFA World Cup. Will Sunday's final be an exception?

Comments 29

Rick James Bible Owner says:

2 months ago

Let me beseech you for one moment: I am not a brand loyalist, nor a nostalgist. Whomever gets the WC (and probably CWC, as Richard has theorized to prop up that turkey) will do a decent enough job. I’ll say this: I’ve lost many ‘Crusades’ recently: no one cares if Fox does FS1 baseball games remotely, I’m starting to get Polo Grounds ‘power alleys’ (better than the Steve McClaren ‘hair island,’ keeping with the WC theme), and the one voice per team ‘Baseball Network’ method will take hold for all nationally-televised MLB games in the future will be my biggest defeat, but for all that is Holy, and there’s a ‘why not’ going around about it, but if Gus Johnson does World Cup matches in the next cycle, this Keyboard Warrior might have to fall on his sword. Much in the same way Ian Darke was never going to do Bama-Tennessee after 2014’s successful World Cup; he did a great ESPN commercial, though (‘Fletch’ has the chops doing London Series baseball games to do baseball or American Football, but shouldn’t, either), but sticking GuJo next to Ian Wright or Warren Barton (again) on soccer and the snarky comments and/or parentheses would have to cease *Yay!* Shut up….

Reply
- Rick James Bible Owner says:
  
  2 months ago
  
  *I’m being facetious, obviously, and if you have 3 minutes to spare, look up ‘Ian Darke Calls a Date’ on YouTube.
  
  Reply
ESL says:

2 months ago

Jon, do you think this combined package will eliminate a lot of the non-streamers from bidding? Seems like FIFA purposely did this to push for a streamer? Do you agree?

Reply
- dx says:
  
  2 months ago
  
  Can’t speak for Jon, but that’s not necessarily the case. NBCU, Disney, and FOX all have the ability to acquire and distribute games in both languages. Doesn’t mean they will ultimately win over Netflix or Amazon, but this wouldn’t be an obstacle for them, unlike with CBS/Paramount which will presumably need to partner with Univision or launch its own Spanish-language sports channel on Paramount Plus.
  
  What it does do is (noted in the SBJ article) is avoid the current situation where two media companies are competing for viewers and advertisers (FOX in English, NBCU in Spanish). At a much higher rights fee going-forward, this would definitely be counter-productive to the rightsholders, as opposed to being able to aggregate/sell the entire World Cup audience to advertisers. So if CBS hypothetically won, they might need to figure out some formula for joint ad sales and revenue sharing with the Spanish-language broadcaster so that there isn’t a competition.
  
  Reply
  - ds says:
    
    2 months ago
    
    Solid analysis about competition for viewers and advertisers. If I were FIFA, I would be happy to accept joint bids provided they satisfy me that I will not get stuck refereeing any of their squabbles. Your hypothetical of CBS/Turner + Spanish tbd seems plausible if so
    
    Reply
    - Richard says:
      
      2 months ago
      
      FIFA would get higher bids for both languages together, though.
- Jon Lewis says:
  
  2 months ago
  
  Depends — it certainly means that a company like Univision, which has no English-language outlet, would not have much of a shot. But I don’t see it ruling out non-streamers as a general rule.
  
  Reply
Richard says:

2 months ago

This is what I’m expecting. In current dollars, $2B for all language rights in the US to WC 2034, $1.5B for all language rights in the US for WC 2038 (because it is in the less favorable winter season going up against the NFL/gridiron). It would be $3B in current dollars for the 2038 WC (all language rights) if it is (mostly) back in the US.

Reply
Richard W says:

2 months ago

I think the Spanish rights will remain with Telemundo as they have done a solid job with this year’s tournament with the expanded format but time for a new voice for the English language rights and the wildcard here could be CBS/Turner especially once they finish with their merger between Paramount and WBD as they can divvy up the games between CBS and TNT and TBS, with CBS getting the bulk of them, but it all depends on when that merger happens. But again, if FOX is going to pay enormous coin for these rights, then FOX will attain them as I cannot see NBC getting them, due to all the current rights they have with other sports and all the monies tied into those deals. Disney would just allocate most games to ESPN and ESPN2 with ABC getting only a handful of games, so they’re out. The CW simply cannot afford these rights, as I think they primarily focus on the MLB rights come 2028 and other mini ventures to fill out their weekend lineups.

Reply
- Richard says:
  
  2 months ago
  
  The pure streamers very much do exist. In fact, one of them likely will win the bidding.
  
  Reply
ds says:

2 months ago

Thank you for the news and link to the CNBC article. I will be interested to see how this plays out since it could be limiting if a single company – not allowed to partner or sublicense? – is required to produce and distribute both Spanish and English. Initial thoughts:

* NF or YT should be fine with either or both languages – plenty of Hispanic and non-Hispanic subscribers and viewership already

* Prime – I do not know their penetration of the US Hispanic market though I suppose since a high percentage of US households have Prime it is probably pretty good

* FOX and ESPN – limited relevance in Spanish, particularly FOX. Back when Liga MX viewer data was easy to find, games on FOXD and ESPND were ~25% of similar-caliber matches on TUDN

* TUDN and CBS/Turner – essentially nonexistent in English and Spanish respectively

* NBCU – by far the most capable traditional broadcaster for carrying soccer in both English and Spanish (ironic given their alleged intent not to bid)

Reply
- Richard says:
  
  2 months ago
  
  A high percentage of US households have Prime. And Latino households being underrepresented would make Amazon even more interested in getting the WC.
  
  Reply
  - Hello Larry says:
    
    1 month ago
    
    It’s very limited in maximum reach, though
    
    Reply
    - Richard says:
      
      1 month ago
      
      ??? Compared to what? Definitely not compared to cable. And are there a large portion of the population without access to the Internet or smartphones? Because with that, you can add any streamer.
Bram Weiser says:

2 months ago

Not quite… Super Bowls have, in recent years, had a Spanish tele ast in the US that wasn’t necessarily on a partner of the English-language network… ESPN Deportes had rights sometimes, as I remember, likely when CBS or Fox had English rights.

Also, defaulting to a bundle necessarily excludes Univision, who aired many past World Cups in Spanish in the US, from bidding, so why would FIFA immediately limit their options in this way?

Reply
- Rick James Bible Owner says:
  
  2 months ago
  
  why would FIFA immediately limit their options in this way? The last two World Cups have limited the options for a true media auction for Mr. Eyebrows (2022 in Late Fall, 2026 no-bid to Fox) and has left $$$ on the table doing so. So much so, NBCU went from ‘Interested’ to ‘Out’ in a few weeks time. I also get why they don’t want competing English & Spanish telecasts. After I got successfully deprogrammed from 15+ years of ChastaDonnaHammStain ‘takes,’ I watched the Spanish version of the 2010 World Cup, and actually missed out on a well-produced, insightful English language World Cup ESPN put together (aside from Rudd Gulit, sleepy Martin Tyler (unless England scored) and Flinthard Glomgold (Ally McCoist))
  
  Reply
  - Rick James Bible Owner says:
    
    2 months ago
    
    *Ruud Gullit. Gullit has always rubbed people the wrong way from player-manager at Chelsea to part-time know-it-all pundit on ESPN’s 2010 coverage, and is still a better Ruud than van Nistlerooy for me (who was smooth and understated on the ‘World Cup Tonight’ show in 2014, but spent his last stop as manager drilling holes in a ship he was supposed to keep from sinking into relegation)
    
    Reply
- ds says:
  
  2 months ago
  
  NFL generally, and Super Bowl specifically, is consumed overwhelmingly in English. The Spanish-language component of Super Bowl is well under 5% of US viewership. By contrast, about half of soccer in the US is consumed in Spanish and a significant percentage of soccer fans are bilingual. It is picking at nits to claim any equivalence of any relevance in these dynamics
  
  Univision is a good example of a potential flaw in FIFA’s approach. I suspect there will be some sharpening of pencils – by FIFA and interested parties – before bids are submitted and selected
  
  Reply
  - Richard says:
    
    2 months ago
    
    This approach really only excludes Univision (unless it becomes part of a larger umbrella with an English outlet) as a bidder, though. All other parties can carry in both English and Spanish.
    
    Reply
JEAN H PIERRE says:

2 months ago

Dr Lewis I can see a scenario where YouTube will get the rights and until the Mundo will get the Spanish language rights. What do you think

Reply
- Richard says:
  
  2 months ago
  
  Not Jon, but I find that very unlikely. You’d still have the same issue as this (and all previous) WC in the US where a company doesn’t have exclusivity because (many) viewers can choose between 2 options.
  
  Reply