According to a CNBC report, Netflix, YouTube, and Amazon are reportedly preparing bids to secure the U.S. broadcasting rights for the 2030 and 2034 FIFA World Cups. The move could, for the first time, seriously threaten the position of traditional broadcasters, with Fox remaining the leading reference point in the U.S. market.

The figures being discussed help illustrate the scale of the opportunity. Bids could range between $1.5 billion and $2 billion per tournament, levels that would take World Cup rights to an entirely new tier in the U.S. market. Much of this increase appears to be linked to FIFA’s decision to bundle the English and Spanish language rights packages together, a strategy that raises the potential value of each deal while also opening the door for platforms with far greater distribution capabilities to compete for the asset as a whole.

For Netflix, YouTube, and Amazon, paying those amounts only makes sense if the World Cup delivers more than extraordinary audiences during the matches themselves. And this is where the evolution of their business models becomes particularly relevant.

Major sporting events have been one of the few areas that streaming has not yet managed to completely disrupt. Platforms could compete for series, films, and entertainment content, but live sports retained a unique ability to concentrate large audiences at a specific moment and create a shared viewing experience that is difficult to replicate with on-demand content.

The World Cup represents the ultimate expression of that phenomenon. It is not simply a catalog of matches that can be consumed whenever users choose. It is an event capable of mobilizing millions of people simultaneously, generating conversation for weeks, and becoming a cultural touchstone that extends far beyond football fans themselves.

For Netflix, Amazon, or YouTube, that capability has value that goes far beyond the audience they may attract during each match. A major sporting event can become an extraordinary user acquisition tool, particularly in a market where attracting new subscribers is becoming increasingly difficult and expensive. The match can serve as the gateway into a platform that subsequently offers films, series, entertainment, music, commerce, or any other service integrated into that ecosystem.

And this is where a second variable emerges that makes the World Cup particularly attractive at this moment: advertising.

In just a few years, the major streaming platforms have shifted from viewing advertising as a secondary alternative to making it one of the pillars of their strategy. Netflix, Amazon, and YouTube now offer advertising products capable of combining television-scale reach with the targeting, measurement, and optimization capabilities of the digital environment. A World Cup allows that combination to be deployed at an extraordinary scale.

Advertising associated with a highly viewed match has always commanded a premium because it provides access to millions of viewers simultaneously. But when that same inventory exists within a digital platform, its potential value no longer depends exclusively on audience size. It also depends on the available data, targeting capabilities, behavioral measurement, and the ability to connect a campaign with the rest of the company’s advertising ecosystem.

That is why the growth of sports rights and the expansion of ad-supported streaming models are not independent phenomena. The arrival of major live events on these platforms may help justify rights investments that, when viewed solely through the lens of subscriber numbers, would be far more difficult to explain.

Moreover, the value of the World Cup does not end when the match is over.

Recent major tournaments have demonstrated the extent to which a sporting event can become a much broader content platform. Documentaries, analysis shows, interviews, previews, highlights, content built around players and national teams, social formats, and interactive experiences make it possible to extend the relationship with audiences long before and long after the 90 minutes of play.

For a streaming platform, this completely changes the nature of the asset. The objective would no longer be simply to secure the rights to broadcast the matches, but to use the World Cup as the center of gravity of a much broader programming and entertainment strategy. The match generates the massive simultaneous audience; everything built around it makes it possible to capture a larger share of attention and extend its commercial value.

This is where competition with traditional broadcasters could take on a particularly significant dimension. A conventional television network can provide extensive coverage around the matches, but a platform such as Amazon or YouTube can connect that coverage with other services, content, data, advertising, and experiences that are part of a much broader digital ecosystem.

Netflix, meanwhile, would bring a different model. Its potential entry into a competition of this scale would take even further its transformation from a company primarily focused on on-demand video into a platform capable of competing for major live events as well.

In that sense, the World Cup would be a statement of intent.

Because what is at stake is not simply who will broadcast the matches in 2030 or 2034. The real question is who will be able to become the destination for audiences when major events capable of simultaneously drawing millions of viewers to a screen take place.

Sport is one of the few forms of content that still retains that power. And the World Cup is probably the asset that best represents it.

That is why the upcoming rights auction could mark another turning point in the transformation of the U.S. audiovisual market. If the major technology and streaming platforms ultimately succeed in securing the World Cup, it will not simply represent a change in ownership of the rights.

It will represent confirmation that major sporting events are no longer merely a television product, but have become a strategic component within the new ecosystems of entertainment, advertising, and distribution.

And that may be where the true value of those $2 billion lies.