MultiChoice Faces Allegations of Market Abuse at Competition Tribunal

The South African Competition Tribunal was recently the focal point of a major complaint against MultiChoice, a dominating force in the pay-TV market. This stems from an incident where viewers of OpenView, a free-to-air television service provider, were unable to enjoy the Rugby World Cup 2023 final – an event that unifies many across the nation. The complaint was lodged by Hosken Consolidated Investments' subsidiary eMedia Investment.

The core of eMedia's argument, as presented by counsel Gavin Marriott and Max Du Plessis, revolves around the accusations that MultiChoice has strategically used its positioning in the market to prevent competitors, particularly OpenView, from providing vital sports content to South Africans. They assert that this is not only anti-competitive but also infringes on constitutional rights relating to freedom of expression and information.

The Competition Tribunal heard detailed remarks on how MultiChoice acquired both pay-to-air and free-to-air rights for the Rugby World Cup matches, then arranged a sub-licensing deal with the SABC, that explicitly excluded OpenView from distribution. This suggestion shed light on a broader issue concerning the impending transition from analogue to digital broadcasting expected to take place this year, which would considerably reshape the broadcasting landscape.

According to eMedia, MultiChoice has unjustly stifled the SABC’s ability to conduct business with OpenView, limiting their potential and causing distress to viewers who heavily rely on OpenView's satellite-based platform. Indeed, the upset borne by the viewers was palpable, with several of them expressing their frustrations in letters read during the hearing.

The digital switch is perceived as pivotal, threatening to entrench MultiChoice’s dominance further if they are left unchecked. OpenView fears that without intervention, MultiChoice will continue to muscle out any significant competition in the sector.

MultiChoice, however, denied any wrongdoing and maintained their stance that OpenView is simply seeking a "free ride" on broadcasting rights that they had legitimately acquired at substantial costs. They contested the notion that viewers were left without any alternative means to view the content, despite evidence suggesting that this was not the case for many.

The fallout from these proceedings has brought the issues of market dominance and fair competition in South Africa's broadcasting industry into sharp focus. This case could serve as a critical juncture for regulations and market practices going forward.