The contest could include Netflix, YouTube and incumbent broadcaster Fox, creating a very different market from previous World Cup cycles. Reports suggest the next U.S. package could command a price approaching US$2 billion, a figure that would test the appetite of even the biggest media companies.
Netflix has expanded its football presence through the Women’s World Cup, while YouTube’s global reach could offer a new distribution model. Fox, meanwhile, already has the benefit of tournament experience and an established American sports audience.
Pitaro described ESPN as “hipercompetitiva” in sports-rights negotiations and pointed to the World Cup’s importance to the company’s identity. That history matters: ESPN has spent decades presenting football’s biggest tournament to U.S. viewers, with a deep bench of studio talent and international coverage experience.
The commercial case could become even stronger if plans for a larger tournament in 2030 move forward. More teams and more matches would create additional inventory, but also increase production demands and the pressure to deliver a premium viewing experience.
Pitaro was also “muito impressionado” by Fox’s live coverage and studio programming, a notable acknowledgement from a potential rival. His comments suggest ESPN is not assuming it would automatically reclaim the rights.
The decision will come down to more than prestige. As Pitaro put it, “há alguma troca”: any huge investment would require ESPN to balance World Cup ambition against the rest of its sports portfolio.
The next storyline is ’s timetable. Once formal talks begin, the battle between traditional television and streaming platforms could define how American fans watch the 2030 World Cup.