“Turn esports into a competitive cultural ‘show’”, South Korea’s ecosystem needs more than just sponsors

On 30 December 2025, the “2025 Esports Forum Talk Concert” was held in Seoul, bringing together experts, team representatives, and officials to dissect the structural weaknesses of South Korea’s esports industry. While the sector has grown externally – helped by international competitive success at events such as the League of Legends World Championship and by an expanding fanbase – it continues to struggle with chronic deficits and an overreliance on sponsorship and marketing-driven revenue.

In her opening remarks, Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism Choi Hwi-young described esports as “a key driving force in the global expansion of 'K-content' and a competitive field in the global market,” while sounding the alarm: “Despite its achievements and the level of interest it generates, the revenue structure remains unstable, threatening the long-term sustainability of the industry. These discussions must serve as a starting point for strengthening the fundamentals.” Korea Creative Content Agency president Yoo Hyun-seok pledged support to position esports as “a high value-added industry that creates jobs for young people” and as a pillar of Korea’s broader cultural economy.

Panel moderator Kim Ki-han, a professor at the University of Seoul, highlighted an underlying structural issue: “The game industry generates direct revenue through its IP, but esports, much like traditional sports, depends on sponsors and content derivatives, without stable, institutionalized revenue streams to underpin them.”

| Also Read: South Korea’s President congratulates T1 on their Worlds win

T1 head of business development Park Hyeong-jun laid out the realities for teams: “Only a small number of clubs are currently profitable on their own, but sustainable growth is not impossible. However, high player salaries and mounting production costs lock the scene into a high-expense structure that creates constant pressure for short-term results. In the long run, teams must reduce their dependence on sponsors by building their own B2C model.” T1 is actively pushing in that direction, with an expanding merchandise line, the upcoming launch of new internet cafés across Asia, and a paid mobile app that gives fans direct access to conversations and interactions with the organization’s star players.

On the production side, SOOP (ex-Afreeca) content director Wi Yeong-gwang, whose company has acquired domestic LCK broadcast rights, pointed to the declining effectiveness of traditional esports sponsorship: “As media channels diversify, the perceived marketing impact for sponsors is decreasing. Production and operational costs remain high, yet the appeal of investment keeps shrinking. The industry must develop more sophisticated sponsorship models and turn esports into a competitive cultural ‘show’, on par with other major entertainment events.” Lim Dong-hwan, from the Korea Professional Football League, drew a comparison with legacy sports: “Traditional sports benefit from constant exposure in physical stadiums; esports is constrained by its current formats and needs far more direct touchpoints connecting fans and sponsors.”

| Also Read: “The LCK had its best year in 2025,” says the league’s secretary general

Osan University professor Kim Yong-bin pushed the argument further, underlining the limits of one-off events: “Standalone events lack continuity; what is needed are permanent seasons and platforms that can support steady, local consumption and ongoing engagement.” According to him, building such long-term, regional ecosystems – rather than relying solely on global tentpole tournaments – will be crucial if Korean esports is to secure stable revenue streams, deepen its fan relationships, and ultimately establish itself as a sustainable, locally rooted industry.

He highlighted one of the most sensitive structural issues in global esports: the imbalance created by publisher control over game IP. He argued that, because tournaments and leagues must operate under strict regulations from the game companies, organizers face significant difficulties in freely using game IP, which in turn produces a lopsided relationship “similar to that between a franchise headquarters and its franchisees.” In his view, "If the government can ease regulations and make use of IP-related incentives", it would help lay the groundwork for tournaments to operate more autonomously and build sustainable business models, rather than remaining dependent on rules set unilaterally by the publishers.