Our take on LaLiga to close LaLiga+ streaming platform & IOC to trim Olympic programme for Brisbane 2032
LaLiga to close LaLiga+ streaming platform
LaLiga’s decision to shut down LaLiga+ might look like the end of a failed streaming experiment. But beneath the surface, it reflects something more interesting about how leagues are rethinking the role of D2C platforms, shared infrastructure and media strategy.
Simão van Zeller and Tom Grindell explore why LaLiga+ should be seen less as a standalone product and more as a strategic tool.
Our Take:
On paper, LaLiga+ closing at the end of June looks like a retreat. A major league built a streaming platform, ran it for nearly a decade, and is now walking away. Easy read: D2C is hard, leagues shouldn't try. We don't read it that way and neither do we at LaSource.
What made LaLiga+ unique: LaLiga+ was distinctive in its category as it was a multi-sport platform. The core football content was supplemented with handball, futsal, basketball, volleyball and gymnastics - competitions that had little broadcast visibility and no real way to build their own streaming infrastructure at the time of launch. The idea was that by sharing the costs and the platform, these sports could get in front of audiences they'd never otherwise reach, whilst also giving the platform incremental content to fill calendar gaps of the core product.
In 2020, that hypothesis made a lot of sense. The reason it's ending in 2026 is that those sports are now able to build their own platforms, their own channels and their own audiences. The cost of content and streaming has dropped significantly, tools that used to require a broadcaster's budget are now accessible to challenger federations. If you interpret the objectives of the platform as shared infrastructure rather than a standalone product, it did what it was supposed to do.
The most important success metric: LaLiga recently secured over €6.1 billion in domestic revenue for the next cycle, a 9% uplift over the previous deal. Having a functioning D2C platform completely changes the dynamics of a rights negotiation, as broadcasters know you have a feasible alternative to distribute your content.
The same logic applies internationally. LaLiga+ was a testing ground in markets where LaLiga had no broadcast deal and no visibility. Running an OTT in those markets builds audience data, and that data matters when you’re trying to convince a broadcaster to take a deal. It's worth asking whether some of those dark markets are now licensed territories partly because LaLiga could show up to the conversation with actual numbers. A good example of that testing bed is what the Premier League is doing in Singapore with their D2C platform.
Two questions that are worth debating:
1. What does the right D2C experiment look like for each league?
A lot of the conversation around league streaming platforms focuses on subscriber numbers and whether they can compete with Netflix or DAZN, which we feel is the wrong frame for most leagues. The more useful question is what role a D2C platform plays in your broader strategy - as a negotiating tool, a data source and a way into markets you don't yet understand. LaLiga's answer was multi-sport shared infrastructure, whereas another league's answer will be completely different.
2. Where does the centralisation logic go from here?
LaLiga+ was built on the idea that one platform could serve multiple sports under one roof which worked given the market forces of the time it was operating in. But now the question shifts: what should still be shared and what should each property own for itself? Things like data infrastructure, tech and monetisation can make sense to pool, but only with the right partners, where incentives are aligned. But the editorial voice and the fan experience usually need to stay with the individual property. We're seeing this play out with a league we're working with who started with centralised back-end infrastructure across their clubs and are now exploring whether that deal could scale to all major sports federations in the country.
What can other leagues take from this?
LaLiga+ helped smaller sports get on screens, gave LaLiga a stronger hand in rights negotiations and opened up markets that had no broadcast footprint. Now the context has changed and LaLiga will evolve again.
What's worth remembering is that this kind of cross-sport collaboration is possible when everyone's clear on what they're getting out of it. LaLiga+ worked because the incentives across the sports were aligned: shared costs, shared platform and shared visibility.
Every league's version of this will look different: different sports, different markets, different starting points. The D2C strategy that makes sense for one league won't look anything like what made sense for LaLiga and that's the bit we find most interesting at LaSource. It's where we spend a lot of our time with the leagues we work with - helping them figure out what their version looks like.
IOC to trim Olympic programme for Brisbane 2032 - The era of efficiency and regaining ownership
The Olympics are entering a new era. After years of expansion with new sports, the IOC is signalling a shift toward efficiency, control and long-term sustainability.
József Tigyi explores why Brisbane 2032 could mark a turning point for the Olympic Movement, and what this could mean for federations competing for their place in the programme.
Our take:
The 2028 Los Angeles Olympics will certainly be the biggest games ever hosted. And it is very likely that it won't be surpassed any time soon. Because the Olympics might stop growing and adding more sports.
This May, the IOC Executive Board Meeting, led by the recently elected president, Kirsty Coventry, pointed toward the structural transformation of the Olympic Movement by wanting to reduce the number of sports in the programme. No official announcements have been made, but at IOC, the first signs often appear in the language:
“Efficiency” - “Cost control” - “Simplification” - “Sustainability”
These are the signs of an adjustment aimed at making the Olympics more compact and less extensive. And these are not minor changes. It is a shift in the model that has been the major direction under Thomas Bach’s presidency at the IOC. For years, the logic was to add more sports to the games, to have more disciplines, and, with that, more athletes. Sports that can speak to the younger generation and others for cultural reasons. From time to time, even e-sports got into the conversation.
At the same time, the IOC kept the traditional sports in the programme, but this came with a cost. In London in 2012, there were 10.500 athletes competing in 26 sports, while for LA28 13.000 participants are expected to compete in 36 sports. With this increase, hosting the games has become increasingly expensive with the need for more facilities with additional complexities for national committees, broadcasters, athletes and the IOC itself.
There are signs that the IOC realised that this growth can not continue forever and signalled a desire to move from openness to optimisation. And this change of direction goes much deeper.
With this decision, the IOC is looking to take back full ownership of its identity, rather than being heavily influenced by host nations on which sports to add. Kirsty Coventry emphasised this when she stated that “the IOC should regain that control and look after it”. This aligns with a broader movement across the sports industry, in which rightsholders are increasingly taking the steering wheel back. For years, platforms, broadcasters and external partners largely shaped how sports were consumed. But now organisations are realising that scale without control creates dependency. And dependency limits long-term strategic flexibility. The IOC’s direction reflects this same logic: simplify the product and regain direct control over what the Olympic Games represent and how they evolve.
Another highly anticipated question, and probably the most important, is which sports can stay in or be removed from the programme. There is no clearly defined criterion, but the commercial value of each sport will definitely play a key role, with one central question: How large an audience can they attract? This might become a significant challenge for many federations, as their media and sporting ecosystems are often not built for today’s sport consumption trends and characteristics. Some of them have historically relied only on the visibility generated by the Olympic Games every four years.
If federations want to meet the IOC's requirements, they must demonstrate they can sustain consistent engagement. Modern pentathlon changed from horse riding to OCR, solving a short-term problem, keeping the sport in the Olympics. But to stay in the longer term, it won’t be enough on its own. The ability to build consistent visibility through reach, digital initiatives, and relevant storytelling will increasingly be part of the equation. Social media performance, direct-to-fan strategies and digital consumption patterns will therefore likely play a much bigger role in how the value of a sport is assessed moving forward.
Another pillar will be the efficiency of facilities and the complexity of their operations. Sports with complex, high-cost operations and limited interest are certainly not in the best position. The Olympic Games are increasingly moving toward a model in which every sport will need to justify not only its symbolic value but also its operational and commercial efficiency. This could open the door and give sports organisations a push to rethink their disciplines to better match these new standards, and possibly lead to a reduction in their number in the Olympic programme.
Any sport that doesn’t fit into this framework is at risk.
The IOC Executive Board is expected to create discipline-level criteria and make a decision about the Brisbane programme later this year. And based on how they approach the digital and commercial verticals can determine the future of many sports. Could it be that we won't see traditional sports like wrestling, shooting, or equestrian and newcomers like climbing or flag football will take their place? The wind of change can certainly give these emerging sports better opportunities to maintain their recently earned place in the Olympic programme, as they can adapt more quickly in the new environment. This is exactly where we are working with IFAF to develop and execute a holistic approach in their digital strategy. Because building the right foundations in time can become a decisive competitive advantage for the future.
LaSource exists to help those shaping the next era of sport. We help sports organisations, technology companies and investors grow their business in sport through strategy, digital transformation and ecosystem partnerships. By combining strategic foresight with hands-on execution, we turn long-term ambition into initiatives that can actually be deployed and scaled.