Fair Competition Office to probe Melita and Go over TV football

Go and Melita's refusal to share football TV rights could be breaching the Competition Act and the Parliamentary Social Affairs Committee has called on the Office of Fair Competition to investigate.

Committee chairman Edwin Vassallo said he would write to the Copyright Board requesting an investigation into whether any copyright laws would be breached if Go and Melita shared the exclusive rights to broadcast football matches.

Mr Vassallo was speaking at the end of a five-hour sitting, which, once again, yielded no conclusive results. No agreement was reached even though the committee was suspended for about an hour, allowing 30-minute meetings between the Office of Fair Competition and the individual providers.

What was discussed or proposed, however, remained under wraps.

Most of the marathon sitting was taken up by objections from Go and Melita on Mr Vassallo's "allegation" that the two were acting like a "cartel" because of their dominant position on the market. They stressed he should either withdraw his "serious allegation" or substantiate his claims with evidence that there was price-fixing.

Mr Vassallo said he had made those comments and was assuming full responsibility for them. "From the consumers' point of view, and in a layman's frame of mind, what we have in Malta is a cartel. Even if it's indirect, the end result goes against consumers and that is why we are discussing the issue because we want consumers to be safeguarded," he said.

As things stand today, Melita and Go bid for television sports rights which, eventually, translate into subscription fees for the respective sports channels.

For the coming football season, Go has won the rights to broadcast the Italian Serie A and the British Premier League, the two most followed leagues on this island. However, the broadcasting rights for the Champions League remained in possession of Melita.

So to watch all the matches, viewers must subscribe to both service providers, for a minimum of €52 a month.

Nationalist MP David Agius, who brought the issue before the committee, explained that consumers had no alternative except to choose whether they wanted to follow their favourite team playing in the domestic league or the ones in Europe.

He stressed he did not want the football service for free but was after regulations that ensured consumers did not have to subscribe to both providers to follow their favourite team's matches.

If the two service providers valued their customers, they would sit at a table and discuss a solution. Otherwise, he said, Parliament would have to amend laws to ensure customers got a fair deal.

Eugene Buttigieg, an associate professor at the University's Department of European and Comparative Law, was commissioned by the committee to act as a consultant. He explained in detail the decision by the UK communications' regulator, Ofcom, to oblige the UK winners of football transmission rights to sell them to other service providers. He said the decision was, however, being challenged in court.

A director at the Office of Fair Competition, Antoine Grima said there were no grounds to investigate the matter because there was nothing wrong with using market rules on buying exclusive rights from the holder.

This assertion brought about a harsh reaction from the committee chair who told Dr Grima to decide whether he was protecting the consumers or the providers.

"If need be, we will rock the market," Mr Vassallo said.

Another OFC director, Mireille Vella, stood in to defend her colleague, saying it took Ofcom more than three-and-a-half years to reach a decision.

Mr Vassallo is hoping the Office of Fair Competition would reach its conclusion before the start of the next football season.

In the absence of this, Mr Vassallo ordered the two investigations and adjourned the sitting until they are concluded.