By Kathryn Bird
A basketball fan sits down to watch a game, turns on the television, and discovers that it is not available on the same service that carried the team three nights earlier.
Monday’s game might be on Peacock. Wednesday’s could appear on ESPN. Thursday’s matchup may be available through Amazon Prime Video, while another game requires a local broadcaster or NBA League Pass.
Modern technology was supposed to make sports easier to access. Instead, many fans now need a schedule simply to determine where the game is streaming.
The confusion is not accidental. It is the result of an increasingly valuable market for live sports media rights.
Why Leagues Divide Their Games
The NBA began a new set of 11-year media agreements during the 2025–26 season. Under the agreements, Disney, NBCUniversal, and Amazon received different packages of games through the 2035–36 season. National matchups are now distributed among ABC and ESPN, NBC and Peacock, and Amazon Prime Video. (NBA.com)
During the first season of the agreements, ABC and ESPN carried 80 regular-season games, NBC and Peacock carried 100, and Prime Video carried 66. NBA League Pass continued to offer games that were not nationally broadcast or restricted within a viewer’s local market. (NBA.com)
From the NBA’s perspective, splitting games among several companies creates competition for media rights. Rather than relying on one broadcaster, the league can sell different packages to companies that each want exclusive content.
Exclusivity creates scarcity. A platform with games unavailable elsewhere gives basketball fans a reason to subscribe, remain subscribed, and regularly return to the service.
For streaming companies, live sports can also be more valuable than ordinary entertainment. A viewer can watch a television series weeks after its release, but the value of a basketball game is highest while it is happening. Fans want to see the result before scores, clips, and reactions appear online.
That urgency gives leagues bargaining power.
The Economics of Unbundling
Traditional cable television operated as a bundle. Consumers paid one company for a large group of channels, even when they only watched a few of them.
Streaming appeared to offer an alternative. Viewers could select individual services instead of paying for one enormous television package. Economically, this process is called unbundling.
But sports streaming is beginning to resemble the system it replaced.
A fan who wants access to every nationally televised NBA game may need several subscriptions. Local games and out-of-market games can require additional services. Instead of paying for one cable bundle, consumers are assembling personalized collections of streaming platforms.
The market is slowly moving toward rebundling—multiple services being combined, sold together, or accessed through a central interface.
The NBA introduced “Tap to Watch” to direct fans from the league’s digital platforms to the correct broadcaster carrying each game. The tool covers national games and nearly all local broadcasts, reducing the amount of searching required from viewers. (NBA.com)
That feature is convenient, but its existence also reveals a problem: finding the game has become an economic cost of its own.
The Hidden Cost of Confusion
Economists call the time and effort required to locate a product a search cost.
For a committed fan, spending several minutes finding a game may feel like a minor inconvenience. For a casual viewer, it could be enough to prevent the purchase entirely.
This difference relates to price elasticity of demand, or how strongly demand changes when the cost of a product rises.
Dedicated fans may have relatively inelastic demand. Even when subscriptions become more expensive or inconvenient, they continue paying because watching the team matters greatly to them.
Casual fans have more elastic demand. When watching requires too many subscriptions or steps, they may choose another form of entertainment.
This creates a risky trade-off for leagues. Selling exclusive rights can raise enormous amounts of revenue in the present, but making games difficult to find could weaken the next generation of fans.
A child who rarely encounters games may never develop the loyalty that turns into future ticket, merchandise, and subscription purchases.
Did the New System Increase Viewership?
Despite concerns about fragmentation, the NBA reported significant audience growth during the first season of its new agreements.
According to the league, 170 million people in the United States watched games across ABC and ESPN, Amazon Prime Video, NBC and Peacock, and NBA TV during the 2025–26 regular season. The NBA described that as its largest reach in 24 years and an 86 percent increase from the previous season. It also reported more than 1.3 billion hours of live game coverage consumed globally across measured television and streaming platforms, excluding League Pass. (NBA.com)
The NBA also reported that Tap to Watch directed users to nearly 20 million live streams during the season. (NBA.com)
These numbers do not prove that fragmentation is always good for consumers. They do, however, suggest that distributing games across broadcast television and major streaming platforms can expose the league to a large audience.
The new agreements also placed approximately 75 regular-season games on broadcast television each year, compared with a minimum of 15 under the previous agreement. Broadcast games can be watched without a separate streaming subscription in many households, partially balancing the exclusive games offered by paid platforms. (NBA.com)
Who Benefits Most?
The NBA benefits from having several major companies competing to carry its product. Media companies gain live programming that can attract subscribers and advertisers. Some fans benefit from having games available on platforms they already use.
Other consumers face more subscriptions, more passwords, and more uncertainty.
This does not necessarily mean the streaming model has failed. It means the industry has not fully solved the problem of convenience.
The most successful future system may combine the financial advantages of multiple media partners with a simpler way for fans to purchase and watch games. A single interface could direct viewers to every matchup, while flexible packages could allow people to follow one team without subscribing to several unrelated services.
Until that happens, the battle for sports audiences will not only be fought between leagues and streaming companies. It will also be fought against consumer frustration.
The NBA may have created more ways to watch basketball than ever before. The next challenge is making sure fans can actually find them.
Works Cited
Martin, Brian. “How to Watch NBA Games in 2025–26: Everything You Need to Know.” NBA.com, 11 Mar. 2026, https://www.nba.com/news/how-to-watch-games-2025-26-season.
NBA Communications. “NBA Signs New 11-Year Media Agreements with The Walt Disney Company, NBCUniversal and Amazon Prime Video through 2035–36 Season.” NBA Communications, 24 July 2024, https://pr.nba.com/nba-walt-disney-company-nbcuniversal-amazon-prime-video-media-agreements/.
NBA.com Staff. “NBA Sets Multiple Viewership Highs during 2025–26 Regular Season.” NBA.com, 16 Apr. 2026, https://www.nba.com/news/nba-viewership-highs-2025-26-season.
