Connect with us

News

NFL pushes to build global audience with more games outside US

Published

on

NFL pushes to build global audience with more games outside US

The National Football League could treble the number of games it stages outside the US as part of ambitious plans to build a global audience for America’s most popular sport.

The NFL, the richest sporting contest in the world, already stages games in the UK, Germany and — for the first time — this year, in Brazil, and will add a Spanish fixture in 2025. But the league’s leadership have raised the prospect of taking the annual total number of international games to 16 in future, up from five this year and as many as nine next year.

“We know our position. We’re not number one in these countries, but we’ve got a fan base who’s hungry for more NFL,” said Peter O’Reilly, who oversees the league’s international strategy. “It’s not as though fans can only be a fan of one sport . . . You’ve got passionate soccer football fans around the world who can walk and chew gum. They love their sport, and they’re drawn to the uniqueness of our sport.”

The NFL’s domestic media rights deals are worth $110bn over the 11 years through 2033. The league is looking beyond its stronghold in North America as sports leagues compete to build global brands and audiences in search of higher media and commercial revenues.

Hunter Henry of New England Patriots and Julian Blackmon of Indianapolis Colts battle for the ball during an NFL match at Deutsche Bank Park © Mario Hommes/DeFodi Images via Getty Images

On Sunday, the New England Patriots will take on the Jacksonville Jaguars at north London’s Tottenham Hotspur Stadium, the final showdown in a trio of high-stakes matches in the UK capital. The NFL has been hosting games in London since 2007.

Advertisement

According to ticket seller Viagogo, UK-based fans accounted for 53 per cent of ticket sales for the three London games, the first time they’ve outnumbered international purchasers. Overall, Viagogo reported a 41 per cent year-on-year increase in international NFL ticket sales on its platform for 2024-25, driven by the overseas games.

The NFL’s international push has helped fuel a race among European football clubs to build new infrastructure to host lucrative fixtures. Next year’s Spanish game will be held at Real Madrid’s Santiago Bernabéu, which recently underwent a €1.2bn renovation. The Carolina Panthers and New York Giants are heading to Germany next month to play at Bayern Munich’s home ground.

“There’s a real curiosity factor in Europe and, frankly, the rest of the world,” Mark Shapiro, president of media, sport and talent group Endeavor, told the FT. “They know what it is, it’s a proven commodity, it’s a winning franchise and winning platform, and they want to get their own taste of it.”

Overseas matches are only one piece of the NFL’s growth plans. Flag football — a non-contact version of the sport — is gaining ground at schools in the UK, aided by the NFL’s charitable arm. This week, Prince William played catch at a flag football event organised by the NFL’s charitable arm in south London.

Prince William played the role of quarterback, hurling the ball to a team-mate
Prince William played the role of quarterback, hurling the ball to a teammate © Kin Cheung/Pool/Getty Images

Flag football was a “priority” for the NFL, O’Reilly said, particularly ahead of its Olympic debut at LA 2028. He saw this version of the sport as the “most accessible way to scale participation around the world” and hoped it could stay on the Olympic programme in Brisbane four years later.

“You look at that beach volleyball venue near the Eiffel Tower and that inspires you to think about, OK, what could a flag football venue look like in LA? How do you create that energy?”

Advertisement

Grassroots initiatives are key to ensuring that the NFL attracts new fans and participants around the world. Initiatives such as the NFL Academy, which has an elite development programme for student athletes at Loughborough University in the English Midlands, are designed to ensure that the NFL builds on the interest that its overseas matches create.

“We’re committed to [the UK market] for the long haul,” O’Reilly said. “The focus is on deepening the connection with fans and building something lasting, rather than just making a splash.”

The NFL’s current UK broadcast deal with Sky Sport — worth some $25mn annually — is set to end this season. ITV, a free-to-air broadcaster, screens the Super Bowl and two London games. Separately, UK fans can also watch via streamer DAZN, through a 10-year international rights deal that started in 2023.

Philadelphia Eagles fans cheer after a 34-29 victory against the Green Bay Packers at Arena Corinthians in Sao Paulo, Brazil
Philadelphia Eagles fans cheer after their team beat Green Bay Packers at Arena Corinthians in São Paulo — the first NFL match played in Brazil © Pedro Vilela/Getty Images

O’Reilly said the league would consider a mix of streamers and traditional broadcasters when it came to renegotiate its UK rights.

“From a marketing standpoint, from a fan engagement standpoint, getting that teenage, early 20s fan to connect with the NFL in the way they may have fallen in love with it on free-to-air TV in the past, we’ve got to strike the right balance there.”

The most recent Super Bowl attracted 3.4mn unique viewers on Sky and ITV, making it the most watched NFL game on record for the two broadcasters.

Advertisement

The NFL’s domestic media rights will generate $110bn in revenue over the 11 years through 2033, and now include games carried on Netflix, Amazon, YouTube and several television networks.

The NFL’s expansion comes at a time when rival sports leagues are competing hard to reach global audiences, as streaming and social media open up new opportunities to attract new fans.

European soccer clubs hold pre-season friendlies and exhibition matches in the US, but they have been more cautious about staging official games abroad because of regulatory obstacles and sensitivities relating to passionate local fans.

News

Brass bands in Beijing make way for sticker shock at home as Trump returns to escalating inflation

Published

on

Brass bands in Beijing make way for sticker shock at home as Trump returns to escalating inflation

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump returned from the spectacle of a Chinese state visit to a less than welcoming U.S. economy — with the military band and garden tour in Beijing giving way to pressure over how to fix America’s escalating inflation rate.

Consumer inflation in the United States increased to 3.8% annually in April, higher than what he inherited as the Iran war and the Republican president’s own tariffs have pushed up prices. Inflation is now outpacing wage gains and effectively making workers poorer. The Cleveland Federal Reserve estimates that annual inflation could reach 4.2% in May as the war has kept oil and gasoline prices high.

Trump’s time with Chinese leader Xi Jinping appears unlikely to help the U.S. economy much, despite Trump’s claims of coming trade deals. The trip occurred as many people are voting in primaries leading into the November general election while having to absorb the rising costs of gasoline, groceries, utility bills, jewelry, women’s clothing, airplane tickets and delivery services. Democrats see the moment as a political opportunity.

“He’s returning to a dumpster fire,” said Lindsay Owens, executive director of Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal think tank focused on economic issues. “The president will not have the faith and confidence of the American people — the economy is their top issue and the president is saying, ‘You’re on your own.’”

The president’s trip to Beijing and his recent comments that indicated a tone-deafness to voters’ concerns about rising prices have suggested his focus is not on the American public and have undermined Republicans who had intended to campaign on last year’s tax cuts as helping families.

Advertisement

Trump described the trip as a victory, saying on social media that Xi “congratulated me on so many tremendous successes,” as the U.S. president has praised their relationship.

Trump told reporters that Boeing would be selling 200 aircraft — and maybe even 750 “if they do a good job” — to the Chinese. He said American farmers would be “very happy” because China would be “buying billions of dollars of soybeans.”

“We had an amazing time,” Trump said as he flew home on Air Force One, and told Fox News’ Bret Baier in an interview that gasoline prices were just some “short-term pain” and would “drop like a rock” once the war ends.

Inflationary pain is not a factor in how Trump handles Iran

Trump departed from the White House for China by saying the negotiations over the Iran war depended on stopping Tehran from developing nuclear weapons. “I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation. I don’t think about anybody. I think about one thing: We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon,” Trump said.

That remark prompted blowback because it suggested to some that Trump cared more about challenging Iran than fighting inflation at home. Trump defended his words, telling Fox News: “That’s a perfect statement. I’d make it again.”

Advertisement

The White House has since stressed that Trump is focused on inflation.

Asked later about the president’s words, Vice President JD Vance said there had been a “misrepresentation” of the remarks. White House spokesman Kush Desai said the “administration remains laser-focused on delivering growth and affordability on the homefront” while indicating actions would be taken on grocery prices.

But as Trump appeared alongside Xi, new reports back home showed inflation rising for businesses and interest rates climbing on U.S. government debt.

His comments that Boeing would sell 200 jets to China caused the company’s stock price to fall because investors had expected a larger number. There was little concrete information offered about any trade agreements reached during the summit, including Chinese purchases of U.S. exports such as liquefied natural gas and beef.

“Foreign policy wins can matter politically, but only if voters feel stability and affordability in their daily lives,” said Brittany Martinez, a former Republican congressional aide who is the executive director of Principles First, a center-right advocacy group focused on democracy issues.

Advertisement

“Midterms are almost always a referendum on cost of living and public frustration, and Republicans are not immune from the same inflation and affordability pressures that hurt Democrats in recent cycles,” she added.

Democrats see Trump as vulnerable

Democratic lawmakers are seizing on Trump’s comments before his trip as proof of his indifference to lowering costs. There is potential staying power of his remarks as Americans head into Memorial Day weekend facing rising prices for the hamburgers and hot dogs to be grilled.

“What Americans do not see is any sympathy, any support, or any plan from Trump and congressional Republicans to lower costs – in fact, they see the opposite,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Thursday.

Vance faulted the Biden administration for the inflation problem even though the inflation rate is now higher than it was when Trump returned to the White House in January 2025 with a specific mandate to fix it.

“The inflation number last month was not great,” Vance said Wednesday, but he then stressed, “We’re not seeing anything like what we saw under the Biden administration.”

Advertisement

Inflation peaked at 9.1% in June 2022 under Biden, a Democrat. By the time Trump took the oath of office, it was a far more modest 3%.

Trump’s inflation challenge could get harder

The data tells a different story as higher inflation is spreading into the cost of servicing the national debt.

Over the past week, the interest rate charged on 10-year U.S. government debt jumped from 4.36% to 4.6%, an increase that implies higher costs for auto loans and mortgages.

“My fear is that the layers of supply shocks that are affecting the U.S. economy will only further feed into inflationary pressures,” said Gregory Daco, chief economist at EY-Parthenon.

Daco noted that last year’s tariff increases were now translating into higher clothing prices. With the Supreme Court ruling against Trump’s ability to impose tariffs by declaring an economic emergency, his administration is preparing a new set of import taxes for this summer.

Advertisement

Daco stressed that there have been a series of supply shocks. First, tariffs cut into the supply of imports. In addition, Trump’s immigration crackdown cut into the supply of foreign-born workers. Now, the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has cut off the vital waterway used to ship 20% of global oil supplies.

“We’re seeing an erosion of growth,” Daco said.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.

Published

on

Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.

Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg, the Food and Drug Administration’s top drug regulator, said she was fired from the agency Friday after she declined to resign.

She said she did not know who had ordered her firing or why, nor whether Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. knew of her fate. The Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The departure reflected the upheaval at the F.D.A., days after the resignation of Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner. Dr. Makary had become a lightning rod for critics of the agency’s decisions to reject applications for rare disease drugs and to delay a report meant to supply damaging evidence about the abortion drug mifepristone. He also spent months before his departure pushing back on the White House’s requests for him to approve more flavored vapes, the reason he ultimately cited for leaving.

Dr. Hoeg’s hiring had startled public health leaders who were familiar with her track record as a vaccine skeptic, and she played a leading role in some of the agency’s most divisive efforts during her tenure. She worked on a report that purportedly linked the deaths of children and young adults to Covid vaccines, a dossier the agency has not released publicly. She was also the co-author of a document describing Mr. Kennedy’s decision to pare the recommendations for 17 childhood vaccines down to 11.

But in an interview on Friday, Dr. Hoeg said she “stuck with the science.”

Advertisement

“I am incredibly proud of the work we were doing,” Dr. Hoeg said, adding, “I’m glad that we didn’t give in to any pressures to approve drugs when it wasn’t appropriate.”

As the director of the agency’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, she was a political appointee in a role that had been previously occupied by career officials. An epidemiologist who was trained in the United States and Denmark, she worked on efforts to analyze drug safety and on a panel to discuss the use of serotonin reuptake inhibitors, the most widely prescribed class of antidepressants, during pregnancy. She also worked on efforts to reduce animal testing and was the agency’s liaison to an influential vaccine committee.

She made sure that her teams approved drugs only when the risk-benefit balance was favorable, she said.

The firing worsens the leadership vacuum at the F.D.A. and other agencies, with temporary leaders filling the role of commissioner, food chief and the head of the biologics center, which oversees vaccines and gene therapies. The roles of surgeon general and director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are also unfilled.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

Published

on

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

The U.S. Supreme Court

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The U.S. Supreme Court refused Friday to allow Virginia to use a new congressional map that favored Democrats in all but one of the state’s U.S. House seats. The map was a key part of Democrats’ effort to counter the Republican redistricting wave set off by President Trump.

The new map was drawn by Democrats and approved by Virginia voters in an April referendum. But on May 8, the Supreme Court of Virginia in a 4-to-3 vote declared the referendum, and by extension the new map, null and void because lawmakers failed to follow the proper procedures to get the issue on the ballot, violating the state constitution.

Virginia Democrats and the state’s attorney general then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to put into effect the map approved by the voters, which yields four more likely Democratic congressional seats. In their emergency application, they argued the Virginia Supreme Court was “deeply mistaken” in its decision on “critical issues of federal law with profound practical importance to the Nation.” Further, they asserted the decision “overrode the will of the people” by ordering Virginia to “conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected.”

Advertisement

Republican legislators countered that it would be improper for the U.S. Supreme Court to wade into a purely state law controversy — especially since the Democrats had not raised any federal claims in the lower court.

Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Republicans without explanation leaving in place the state court ruling that voided the Democratic-friendly maps.

The court’s decision not to intervene was its latest in emergency requests for intervention on redistricting issues. In December, the high court OK’d Texas using a gerrymandered map that could help the GOP win five more seats in the U.S. House. In February, the court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map, adopted to offset Texas’s map. Then in March, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the redrawing of a New York map expected to flip a Republican congressional district Democratic.

And perhaps most importantly, in April, the high court ruled that a Louisiana congressional map was a racial gerrymander and must be redrawn. That decision immediately set off a flurry of redistricting efforts, particularly in the South, where Republican legislators immediately began redrawing congressional maps to eliminate long established majority Black and Hispanic districts.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending