Operators that want to reinvent their TV offers should learn from peers in the USA

US operators, including Frontier, Google Fiber and WOW!, have replaced their in-house traditional pay-TV businesses with partnerships with live-TV streaming service providers (often referred to as virtual multi-channel video programming distributors (vMVPDs)). This approach has enabled these operators to enjoy the benefits of bundling pay TV with broadband, such as improved retention and ASPU, while reducing costs and improving customer satisfaction. Operators in other regions can adopt similar strategies, but success will depend on integration, flexibility and the availability of local partners, as explored below.

US operators are replacing in‑house TV with streaming partnerships

Analysys Mason’s Reinventing pay TV: lessons from US platform partnerships explores examples of US operators that have stopped selling their own pay-TV services and instead bundle services from vMVPDs. Frontier, for example, ceased selling its traditional Vantage TV service in 2021, and now partners with YouTube TV and DirecTV Stream. After introducing bill integration in 2023, more than half of its fibre net subscriber additions added a streaming bundle to their plan, which led to an increase in ASPU. Similarly, WOW! has relied on YouTube TV for its pay-TV service since 2023, and has integrated the service into its billing and support systems.

Partnerships with YouTube TV, Philo and others are becoming commonplace across the USA because operators are reprioritising broadband access in their business models. The examples in our report show that operators can reduce the cost and complexity of running a pay-TV service while preserving the value of a bundled offer. This is enhanced when they deliver a seamless experience by integrating billing and support.

The US model offers lessons for operators worldwide

The US pay-TV market faces stronger headwinds than those in many other countries because content costs are higher and streaming providers have more latitude to undercut the high prices of traditional pay-TV services. However, rising content costs, slim or declining margins and changing consumer wants and needs are also common in many other countries.

Changes in the business case for TV services present an opportunity for operators to rejuvenate pay TV as a service that strengthens broadband propositions and that offers a user experience to rival that of standalone streaming services.

Many countries now have strong vMVPDs that can replicate the traditional pay-TV experience. Operators worldwide can form partnerships with these players to maintain bundle appeal and reproduce some of the benefits seen by their US peers. Figure 1 shows some potential partners.

Figure 1: Examples of potential vMVPD partners, by region

Source: Analysys Mason

Operator partnership options are likely to diversify further. Netflix’s agreement to carry TF1’s live channels in France from 2026 is the first example of a major streaming service integrating a national broadcaster’s linear content. Similar initiatives, such as Discovery+ incorporating Eurosport and TNT Sports in the UK, suggest that some streaming platform providers may also evolve into full-service aggregators. This trend could simplify the challenge of replicating a pay-TV experience.

The replicability of the US model depends on how operators approach integration and execution

The opportunity to exit in‑house pay-TV services and pivot to partnerships is promising, but it is not the right strategy for every operator. The benefits of this approach are:

• lower opex and reduced exposure to content rights price inflation
• the ability to offer greater choice and flexibility via multiple partnerships
• positive brand impact (some vMVPDs such as YouTube TV have very high Net Promoter Scores)
• a stronger broadband proposition and potential ARPU uplift when TV is bundled.

Nonetheless, there are drawbacks to this approach. These include:

• a dependence on third‑party partners for pricing and channel line‑up
• the complexity of integrating billing and support, which is important for a seamless experience and allows operators to differentiate a bundle from the component parts on an element other than price.

Operators that can secure the right partnerships and deliver a cohesive customer experience have an opportunity to turn pay TV from a cost burden into a differentiator. Those that cannot may need to retain a slimmed‑down in‑house offer or focus on other ways to add value.

More operators are narrowing their focus to connectivity; they are divesting non-core assets to streamline operations and reduce costs as part of broader delayering initiatives.¹ In that context, the transition to delivering pay-TV services via partnerships enables operators to concentrate on broadband revenue growth and customer experience rather than content ownership.

For more on this topic, see Analysys Mason’s Reinventing pay TV: lessons from US platform partnerships, Optimising the operator TV opportunity: case studies and analysis (volume II) and our recorded presentation, What is the problem with operators’ pay-TV services (and how do we fix it)?. Subscribers can also contact their account manager if they would like to arrange a discussion with Martin on this topic, or a presentation version of this research.

¹ See Analysys Mason’s TV services remain essential for many operators, even if media asset sales mark a change in ambition and Demystifying the delayering of telecoms operator businesses: outcomes and prospects.