Tag: MultiChoice

Major Pay-TV service provider, MultiChoice, is in a situation that needs careful understanding and sorting without emotional recriminations. The fortunes are plummeting and that is not a good testimony for a business that was for a time a valued corporate ambassador for the nation’s business ecosystem.

Fortunately, it is not all gloom. As they say, the light at the end of the tunnel may shine even brighter.

Before the annual report last week, there have been talks about Canal+ acquiring the organisation, which is a good story, because current owners may make some good money and it also means that the new owners may inject some new investment to transform its operations. These are conjectures that may prove positive in the long run.

With $1.96bn on the table by December last year for every MultiChoice share it doesn’t currently own, Canal+, the Vivendi owned company, based in France, is a few regulatory steps away from taking full control of the South African broadcaster. Merger and acquisition always smell very good if it’s a win-win for all parties.

But last week wasn’t about a win-win situation. It was a reality check for the organisation trying to prevent panic in the pay-TV market. According to the annual report, revenue by MultiChoice Nigeria, went down by 44 percent to $197.74m in the financial year ending March 2025, from $355.93m recorded the previous year due to rising inflation and worsening economic climate, which also triggered a mass exit of subscribers.

The economic pressure is on everybody apart from politicians who are in the best business ever. Inflation stood at 23.71 percent in April 2025, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS).

Across the African market, MultiChoice lost 1.8m subscribers with Nigeria accounting for 77 percent, which translates to 1.4m subscribers, since its financial year which ended in March 2023. Just within a space of two years.

In the subscription market, this is a very bad story in all ramifications. The dim summary is that MultiChoice is haemorrhaging and we don’t need to gloat over it. I have read a few things of people saying this is well deserved by the organisation which they accuse of fleecing subscribers. Quite a few in bad faith also hint at the subtle rivalry between Nigeria and South Africa, adding with a little smirk that MultiChoice can now see the importance of the Nigerian market.

My elders would always say, it is cruel when you continue to hit a man that is already on the ground, helpless. Thankfully, MultiChoice isn’t totally helpless yet. The financial figures are in the public space because it is a quoted organisation. There are many organisations in Nigeria at various stages of atrophy but are silent in death pangs carrying their secrets with them.

In clear irony, the Multichoice story is a true reflection of the Nigerian economy, which has very little to do with people dumping Multichoice in protest, although that could be a marginal factor. The economy isn’t kind to anybody. Those who felt safe before are suddenly finding themselves in want.

There are several conversations going on at various levels – in homes, between couples, between parents and children, and between friends, about television entertainment and the urgency to attend to the overriding needs of life, including: feeding, school fees, healthcare and just anything to hold on to life. While there is total insecurity in some places, others don’t have electricity for months.

People are not thinking of Multichoice; they are thinking of survival, just to hold on till grandiose ideas conceived by politicians can begin to distill into individual benefits. The present situation in Nigeria is wrapped into the phrase, “rising inflation and worsening economic climate.” The phrase also captures the reality of people living in the margins.

Calvo Mawela, Chief Executive Officer, MultiChoice Group, also looked at the brighter side of business when he informed during the presentation that DSTV Internet revenue rose by 85 percent, KingMakers grew by 76 percent, DSTV Stream increased by 48 percent, while Showmax saw 44 percent year-on-year rise in active paying customers.

“Our strategy is shaped by developments in our industry, such as changes in technology which are driving shifts in customer behaviour, as well as the impact of a rise in piracy, streaming services, and social media,” he informed.

Hitting the nail on the head is cliche but that is what Mawela has done. Modern TV entertainment is not in competition with other operators but more with new technologies, including over-the-top (OTT) operations and internet streaming services, behavioural changes across age demographics, and infinite capacity for service regeneration.

He was therefore on the right track when he announced that MultiChoice is considering floating a sports only package in order to boost subscription uptake.

“As part of our product offering, we have always had this project that we ran every year where we look at our packaging structures, similar to what Sky did some years back where they had a basic package, they had a sports package on the side (and) they had a general entertainment package on the side,” Mawela said as he tried to find a path to the future by looking at the past.

That is what service regeneration is all about. Modern technologies allow organisations to monitor consumer behaviour and patterns real time and be able to target them with product design and even individual specific adverts. There is no doubt that a sports only package will be a major hit if there is good pricing creativity.

Irdeto – global company specialising in digital platform security, particularly for video entertainment, video games, and connected industries – suggests that any pay-TV which wants to win back its audience from other entertainment platforms or grow them should consider the following measures: Adopt a hybrid model; Secure your access to offer premium content; Keep your audience’s attention with personalised content; Offer choice with attractive payment model; and Extend the reach of your features.

There is no doubt that Multichoice already knows the above and has more information on how to grow its business, but where it has failed inexorably in the past is the payment model which has angered quite a number of its subscribers in Nigeria. They believe that Multichoice is taking advantage of, or simply just fleecing them. There is the need to assuage this thought pattern.

There is another matter. There is an insufferable arrogance around Multichoice which is not only irritating but, one can argue, blinds the organisation from taking some basic decisions that can stir it away from trouble.

For instance, MultiChoice has a case with the EFCC concerning the amount paid as annual operating levy to the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC),  21/2 percent on income – whether it’s on gross or after tax. Some little details that can be sorted without anybody getting hurt. But on this matter, former directors of the Commission are being invited to explain their roles in taking a decision they thought they were empowered by the NBC Act to take as a regulatory agency.

Would it matter here to state that for years, MultiChoice was the only organisation in the broadcast industry making the payment and joined momentarily by Startimes? There are ways to get around regulatory hurdles without infusing the kind of language that hurts or without being contemptible.

MultiChoice has to deal with the rising tide of new technologies to enjoy a business renaissance. It has to send the right communications to stem the anger welling up in the people. The organisation must also manage its corporate pride. It is not only irritating but also attracts unnecessary attention to its operations.

A simmering broadcast news recently has been the story of Multichoice Nigeria jacking up subscription rates on its DStv and GOtv packages in order to remain in business in Nigeria. Coming on the heels of other similar developments like the 50 percent hike in telecoms tariff, and the stratospheric increase in electricity tariffs last year, Nigerians were outraged, understandably.

Their cries got to the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) which immediately asked Multichoice to stay action while proper investigations were being carried out. I would probably have said while a determination was being made?

March 1, 2025, as per the notice sent to subscribers, and like words cast in stone, Multichoice carried out increases between 20 percent and 25 percent. No diplomacy at all to try and sweet-talk FCCPC into a position where nobody would feel humiliated.

I have always wondered why the tangle wasn’t between Multichoice and the regulator of the broadcast industry, the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC). It would probably have been a straight fight. There may be a reason for this. I have been looking at the broadcast books, like the NBC Act CAP N11, 2004, and the Nigeria Broadcast Code and can’t remember any area where a price determination was ever suggested, except the Code which forbids broadcast operators from engaging in anti-competitive behaviour.

Could it have been superfluous if the NBC inserted in the Act the opportunity to have a say in the determination of prices and tariffs of products and services in the industry it superintends? Perhaps  this may yet be done through some amendments that could be introduced to the  Act and Code in future.

Don’t get me wrong at all. I stand for the dictates of the free market where the business owner can fix prices, especially in a challenging economy that is humbling everybody. That is the reason I put my head on the chopping board to advocate for telecoms tariff hike. This should also indicate where I stand on the Multichoice matter. However, things should be done reasonably and in order with respect to the various laws of the land and even constituted authorities. But the case is going through court motions and we should all shut up like the unlearned people we are!

Once Multichoice initiated the increases, the FCCPC immediately went to the courts to file proceedings against the pay TV service provider and its Chief Executive, John Ugbe, over alleged violations of regulatory directives and obstruction of ongoing inquiry.

Nobody would blame FCCPC which carries the expectations of the people on its shoulders and should be seen to be taking actions to alleviate their burden at this time. One would pray here that, at some point, the organisation should create some time to look at the atrocities of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) which, in a most shameful way albeit rodomontade on its part, has been trying to share a meagre 6003 megawatts of electricity among over 220 million Nigerians. Afterall, Nigerians feel even more pained by the near absence of electricity supply.

Following an ex parte motion filed by its lawyers, Multichoice, March 3, 2025, had its prayers answered as it secured an interim injunction restraining FCCPC and its officers from carrying out the threatened prosecution of the organisation pending the hearing and determination of the motion of an interlocutory injunction.

Oh! Things getting more interesting and getting more muddled up? This is not a review of the court proceedings, as I am the least competent to do so, being unlearned. I also do not want to speculate about the outcome of this case which is as sure as tomorrow happening or as sure as the painful reality that there will be no electricity supply to about three quarters of the population of Nigeria today or even a larger percentage not having food on the table. However, quite a number of things have come up on the side, so loud that they drown reason and common sense.

One. There is a strong demand that the NBC should be involved in the fixing of subscription prices. This is understandable in the sense that only in 2023, Multichoice raised subscription twice, one in April and the other in November. And then this increase, March 2025. But as it is now, such demand is not possible. The market is deregulated and the operators have a right to operate without threatening inhibitions from the regulator.

Two. It has been sugggested that the regulator should break the monopoly of Multichoice. It will stop the operator’s arbitrariness concerning subscription. This is more of wishful thinking. Did the NBC deliberately create a monopoly in Multichoice? I don’t think so. Monopoly can grow from market distortions created by an unpredictable economy, including cost of money, unwarranted feeling of entitlement mentality by some licencees,  presumptive feeling of market understanding even when a proper feasibility has not been done, and especially for pay TV, the lack of patience or capacity to build attractive and marketable channels.

The regulator will have to do something extraordinary and, in fact, go beyond regulation to achieve a different result and meet the yearnings and prayers of pay TV subscribers. That will not happen immediately, not by waving a magic wand, even if this obvious truth can prove painful to some people.

To be honest, I believe the pay TV sector needs a reset, a recreation of the entire ecosystem in order to deracinate some latent booby traps that will continue to abort efforts invested in the sector. All efforts to create competition in the sector have failed not because there is a monopoly that swallows up competitions but because of some obtuse realities not sensed at the early stages of licensing. Time has come for the regulator to interrogate the process and take some urgent decisions.

There is something else that has to be done. There is a failing that cannot be swept under the carpet, if you accommodate this cliche. The regulator must quickly revisit the Digital Switchover (DSO) process, ensure thorough re-examination and reactivation of the process and do everything possible to bring it to conclusion. Concluding the process can do a lot of good for the entire broadcast industry. So much monies will change hands, jobs will be created and technology will be upscaled just as there will be more channels to be filled with new contents.

Competition in the pay TV cannot be legislated, no matter how you may feel about some developments. But it is not too early or late to address a problem that may well last into the future. The onus rests on the NCC to act.