The Football Kenya Federation (FKF) is under growing pressure from fans and stakeholders over its continued partnership with the Kenya Broadcasting Corporation (KBC) for airing FKF Premier League (FKFPL) matches.
Concerns have been raised regarding the necessity and effectiveness of the deal, which was originally signed under the previous FKF administration in 2023. The agreement saw KBC secure Free-to-Air (FTA) broadcast rights for FKFPL matches in a seven-year deal. For the first season, KBC committed USD 1.25 million (approximately KES 162.5 million), with an annual increment of USD 100,000 (KES 13 million). In return, KBC was expected to air 68 matches per season two per match week across both television and radio.
However, FKF’s recent confirmation that it will uphold the agreement has sparked frustration among football fans. Many believe KBC’s coverage is inadequate and question why the federation has not explored better alternatives. The issue gained traction after FKF President Hussein Mohammed reiterated the federation’s commitment to KBC, following a meeting with the broadcaster’s leadership to discuss strategies for expanding the visibility of Kenyan football.
In his statement, Mohammed emphasized the importance of national coverage, stating that the partnership aimed to amplify the reach and engagement of the sport across the country. Despite this, many fans and analysts remain skeptical, pointing out shortcomings in KBC’s ability to deliver quality broadcasts.
A key concern is the disparity between the value of the KBC deal and the matches aired. While KBC has exclusive FTA rights, it does not broadcast the most high-profile fixtures. Instead, Tanzanian broadcaster Azam TV, which holds primary FKFPL broadcast rights, airs four matches per week on its pay-TV and digital platforms. The seven-year deal with Azam, signed in August 2023, was valued at USD 1 million (KES 130 million) for the first season, a figure lower than KBC’s, despite Azam securing more significant matches.
This arrangement has led to accusations that the FKF-KBC deal is financially unsound. Critics argue that FKF should consider alternative broadcasters with better capacity to cover local football extensively. Some fans have suggested opening up the rights to other Kenyan TV stations, rather than limiting them to KBC, which has been criticized for inconsistent coverage.
Social media reactions have been particularly strong, with fans questioning the logic behind maintaining the KBC partnership. Some have described the deal as a “rip-off,” arguing that the national broadcaster should have been given priority to air top-tier matches rather than a limited selection. Others have raised concerns about transparency, urging FKF to provide clear justifications for its decision to stick with KBC.
Despite the criticism, FKF maintains that the deal is beneficial for growing the sport. The federation argues that having a national broadcaster as a partner increases visibility and ensures accessibility to fans who may not afford pay-TV subscriptions. However, with mounting pressure from fans and stakeholders, there is a growing demand for FKF to reassess its broadcast strategy to ensure the best possible coverage for Kenyan football.
As the debate continues, questions remain about whether FKF will address the concerns or stand by its controversial agreement. The long-term impact of the deal on the league’s visibility and financial sustainability will be closely watched in the coming seasons.
