Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Disney - FOX deal likely to consummate by "mid-2019"
Author Message
Rabbit_in_Red Offline
Banned

Posts: 1,496
Joined: Sep 2013
I Root For: Louisville, ACC
Location:
Post: #141
RE: Disney - FOX deal likely to consummate by "mid-2019"
But again, Murdoch doesn't WANT cash. He wants stock, and seeing as he's in a position to where they don't NEED to sell, I think Comcast is wasting their time.
05-09-2018 06:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,266
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 613
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #142
RE: Disney - FOX deal likely to consummate by "mid-2019"
(05-09-2018 06:56 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  But again, Murdoch doesn't WANT cash. He wants stock, and seeing as he's in a position to where they don't NEED to sell, I think Comcast is wasting their time.

Yes, some seem to think that "cash" is inherently better than "stock". But not necessarily. E.g., I'd much rather get a million shares of Disney stock at $50 a share than $50 million in cash.
05-09-2018 07:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,704
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 193
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #143
RE: Disney - FOX deal likely to consummate by "mid-2019"
(05-09-2018 12:09 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(05-09-2018 11:56 AM)XLance Wrote:  Murdoch sought out Disney.
He needs to do a stock swap (not a cash sale) to avoid billions in capital gains taxes.

Yeah, it would seem that a stock swap is critical here. That avoids the capital gains tax issue along with making Murdoch one of the top shareholders of Disney. Control and influence is as important as the money at this point for him. Making Murdoch into a top shareholder isn't that big of a deal for Disney - they already have big names like the wife of the late Steve Jobs (via Disney's acquisition of Pixar) and George Lucas (via Disney's acquisition of Lucasfilm) on that list, so there isn't a sense of "OMG Rupert Murdoch is taking over Disney!" with this transaction. The Disney business would pretty much run the same even with Murdoch having a large stake and presumably a board seat.

In contrast, Comcast is structured very much like... Fox. It has a controlling family (the Roberts) that holds a disproportionate number of voting shares, so the company is run like a really large family business (just as Murdoch has run Fox and News Corp.). As a result, Comcast can't really let Murdoch become a top shareholder because that completely changes the dynamic of who controls that company. That's a huge reason why Comcast is so insistent on a cash deal - they don't want the Murdoch family having any real say in the business going forward at all.

Frank, I would imagine the Murdoch will start dumping Disney stock at the first opportunity. His goal wasn't another investment, but converting his interest in FOX/News Corp into cash (without the taxes).
05-09-2018 07:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 16,468
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 909
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #144
RE: Disney - FOX deal likely to consummate by "mid-2019"
(05-09-2018 07:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-09-2018 06:56 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  But again, Murdoch doesn't WANT cash. He wants stock, and seeing as he's in a position to where they don't NEED to sell, I think Comcast is wasting their time.

Yes, some seem to think that "cash" is inherently better than "stock". But not necessarily. E.g., I'd much rather get a million shares of Disney stock at $50 a share than $50 million in cash.

The miracle of deferred tax status! Wait until you have a write off against the capital gains and then sell.
05-09-2018 07:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,000
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 37
I Root For: Not ESEACCPN
Location:
Post: #145
RE: Disney - FOX deal likely to consummate by "mid-2019"
(05-09-2018 07:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-09-2018 06:56 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  But again, Murdoch doesn't WANT cash. He wants stock, and seeing as he's in a position to where they don't NEED to sell, I think Comcast is wasting their time.

Yes, some seem to think that "cash" is inherently better than "stock". But not necessarily. E.g., I'd much rather get a million shares of Disney stock at $50 a share than $50 million in cash.

As long as that "stock" is stable and backed by a huge market cap/robust cash flow with minimizing risk. Still, as we all know, companies come and go. What's solid today may not be in the future. I'm no financial wiz but there's always a trade-off in every decision, especially at the high finance/mega-corp level.

I think the trend of the cable business may be what's making Comcast unappealing for Murdoch. If he wants stock then it's reasonable to think he wants a suitor that has a better upside.
05-10-2018 12:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 16,468
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 909
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #146
RE: Disney - FOX deal likely to consummate by "mid-2019"
(05-10-2018 12:28 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(05-09-2018 07:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-09-2018 06:56 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  But again, Murdoch doesn't WANT cash. He wants stock, and seeing as he's in a position to where they don't NEED to sell, I think Comcast is wasting their time.

Yes, some seem to think that "cash" is inherently better than "stock". But not necessarily. E.g., I'd much rather get a million shares of Disney stock at $50 a share than $50 million in cash.

As long as that "stock" is stable and backed by a huge market cap/robust cash flow with minimizing risk. Still, as we all know, companies come and go. What's solid today may not be in the future. I'm no financial wiz but there's always a trade-off in every decision, especially at the high finance/mega-corp level.

I think the trend of the cable business may be what's making Comcast unappealing for Murdoch. If he wants stock then it's reasonable to think he wants a suitor that has a better upside.

Murdoch operates in a macro picture business world. There have been more than a few super wealthy investors globally who have been seeking safety. Italy's debt crisis is growing (it is a crisis in that their national debt exceeds the GDP of the ECM). Recently one of the Egyptian oil barons converted stock to precious metals. Remember the super wealthy move to cash when things get dicey. And it's not a defensive move but rather an offensive one. They let the average investors take the hit and when prices crash they buy on the cheap. It is not inconceivable that Murdoch realizes that the college sports bubble is nearer to its end than some believe and with the changes coming to cable he's simply looking to cut future losses but do so in a way where he doesn't have to get taxed on capital gains. If this is the case then he will unload FOX Sports, FS1, and FS2 shortly. He'll sit on his cash and blue chip stock and wait until the bubble collapses to get back into whatever business he sees has an upside.

The question that gets overlooked because of the lucrative nature of the Big 10's last rights contract, is who was it that wanted to sign a 6 year deal? Was it the Big 10 or the networks?

I'm thinking it was the networks who had much more data on the trends and changing models of their own industry. It doesn't mean the decline of college football is nigh, but it does mean the days of locker room waterfalls could be. And if it is coming it will be arriving at precisely the wrong time for what many college presidents have been preparing to deal with which is namely a significant drop in enrollment.

The economy right now looks great with unemployment being at an all time low but this wasn't anyone's political victory, but rather the result of retiring Boomers. Retiring Boomers will mean more competition for labor which means that for a while things will boom. Younger people will earn more and while alive in later years Boomer's will spend more. But then as Boomers begin to die out a trend that began with the deaths of the WWII generation will come to completion, namely the loss of the last large individual donors whether that is to philanthropy, education, or athletics. Corporate donors have slowly been taking their place for decades so it won't be the loss of capital per se, but there will be more strings attached to the donations other than good seats. And with the high cost of tuition currently in our schools, and with the post graduation jobs not really paying that well at the entry level, the new generation is weighing the starting pay scale of skilled labor and trade versus the cubicle jobs. It looks now like more are opting for a less expensive path forward in life.

So while school officials like Zenger at Kansas have openly talked about the importance of sports being a lure for incoming students who identify with schools they've seen on TV and want a place that makes them feel good, and that a viable sports program drives admissions, if we should suddenly see the sports rights industry take a decline it will be coming at a very inopportune time for those looking to boost their enrollment via their sports profile.

I think 2023-5 will be far more interesting than just for realignment news. The story that could swamp the importance of any realignment will be just how much these next contracts are going to deliver. I was listening to a representative of Facebook on CNBC yesterday when they specifically asked him about the social media giant entering into sports carriage. He was tepid at best in his response while dissing football outright as a social health problem, criticizing baseball as being way too long, downplaying soccer for having too little action, and zeroing in on basketball as something they might be interested in. And he seemed to believe that would be the case for other Tech style companies.

If FOX is bailing, and the tech companies aren't interested in football, baseball, or soccer, and if we are 6 more years into the retirement years and die off of the Boomers then just how much will ESPN or their competitors want to put into the rights purchases in 2024 and could it be that if the tech companies see an upside in hoops that the ratio of the future sports contracts might be a bit more weighted in that direction? Let's say in 2024 that basketball might be more like 35 to 40% of the revenue package and football might be more like 65% to 60% of it.

What this board has not discussed much is the possibility that the tech companies may be interested in one sport, which in the words of the Facebook rep puts the audience closer to the action and has continual play with something happening every few seconds instead of every few minutes or every half hour.

I'm a big football first guy and an old coot in that I still love baseball, but the SEC put an emphasis on basketball in Slive's last year as commissioner. The last couple of years it's paid off for us in the post season.

So perhaps 6 years was chosen for contract renewal on the Big 10 precisely because it will be a pivotal time for trends and demographic shifts in the marketplace. And because leadership in the conferences are wrestling with changing culture and trying to hedge their bets. ESPN has the ACCN and SECN locked up and the T1 & T2 of the ACC and the T2 of the SEC into the 2030's so they've hedged their bets too but in a different direction. Should the tech companies get into college football the value and cost will go up and ESPN will have pulled of a coup by sewing that product up for that duration. But if the tech companies take a pass on college football then those contracts could be locking them into rates which while not high, are also not flexible.

Realignment therefore is very likely on hold. Why be in a rush to take Oklahoma and pay out huge sums for a short term gain which ends when Boomers have passed? Remember the oldest Boomer's turn 80 in 2026. In 2024 Kansas might have a bigger upside, unless they've gone broke spending 315 million on football renovations. Oh the irony!
(This post was last modified: 05-10-2018 01:22 PM by JRsec.)
05-10-2018 01:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 9,536
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 351
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #147
RE: Disney - FOX deal likely to consummate by "mid-2019"
(05-10-2018 01:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-10-2018 12:28 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(05-09-2018 07:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-09-2018 06:56 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  But again, Murdoch doesn't WANT cash. He wants stock, and seeing as he's in a position to where they don't NEED to sell, I think Comcast is wasting their time.

Yes, some seem to think that "cash" is inherently better than "stock". But not necessarily. E.g., I'd much rather get a million shares of Disney stock at $50 a share than $50 million in cash.

As long as that "stock" is stable and backed by a huge market cap/robust cash flow with minimizing risk. Still, as we all know, companies come and go. What's solid today may not be in the future. I'm no financial wiz but there's always a trade-off in every decision, especially at the high finance/mega-corp level.

I think the trend of the cable business may be what's making Comcast unappealing for Murdoch. If he wants stock then it's reasonable to think he wants a suitor that has a better upside.

Murdoch operates in a macro picture business world. There have been more than a few super wealthy investors globally who have been seeking safety. Italy's debt crisis is growing (it is a crisis in that their national debt exceeds the GDP of the ECM). Recently one of the Egyptian oil barons converted stock to precious metals. Remember the super wealthy move to cash when things get dicey. And it's not a defensive move but rather an offensive one. They let the average investors take the hit and when prices crash they buy on the cheap. It is not inconceivable that Murdoch realizes that the college sports bubble is nearer to its end than some believe and with the changes coming to cable he's simply looking to cut future losses but do so in a way where he doesn't have to get taxed on capital gains. If this is the case then he will unload FOX Sports, FS1, and FS2 shortly. He'll sit on his cash and blue chip stock and wait until the bubble collapses to get back into whatever business he sees has an upside.

The question that gets overlooked because of the lucrative nature of the Big 10's last rights contract, is who was it that wanted to sign a 6 year deal? Was it the Big 10 or the networks?

I'm thinking it was the networks who had much more data on the trends and changing models of their own industry. It doesn't mean the decline of college football is nigh, but it does mean the days of locker room waterfalls could be. And if it is coming it will be arriving at precisely the wrong time for what many college presidents have been preparing to deal with which is namely a significant drop in enrollment.

The economy right now looks great with unemployment being at an all time low but this wasn't anyone's political victory, but rather the result of retiring Boomers. Retiring Boomers will mean more competition for labor which means that for a while things will boom. Younger people will earn more and while alive in later years Boomer's will spend more. But then as Boomers begin to die out a trend that began with the deaths of the WWII generation will come to completion, namely the loss of the last large individual donors whether that is to philanthropy, education, or athletics. Corporate donors have slowly been taking their place for decades so it won't be the loss of capital per se, but there will be more strings attached to the donations other than good seats. And with the high cost of tuition currently in our schools, and with the post graduation jobs not really paying that well at the entry level, the new generation is weighing the starting pay scale of skilled labor and trade versus the cubicle jobs. It looks now like more are opting for a less expensive path forward in life.

So while school officials like Zenger at Kansas have openly talked about the importance of sports being a lure for incoming students who identify with schools they've seen on TV and want a place that makes them feel good, and that a viable sports program drives admissions, if we should suddenly see the sports rights industry take a decline it will be coming at a very inopportune time for those looking to boost their enrollment via their sports profile.

I think 2023-5 will be far more interesting than just for realignment news. The story that could swamp the importance of any realignment will be just how much these next contracts are going to deliver. I was listening to a representative of Facebook on CNBC yesterday when they specifically asked him about the social media giant entering into sports carriage. He was tepid at best in his response while dissing football outright as a social health problem, criticizing baseball as being way too long, downplaying soccer for having too little action, and zeroing in on basketball as something they might be interested in. And he seemed to believe that would be the case for other Tech style companies.

If FOX is bailing, and the tech companies aren't interested in football, baseball, or soccer, and if we are 6 more years into the retirement years and die off of the Boomers then just how much will ESPN or their competitors want to put into the rights purchases in 2024 and could it be that if the tech companies see an upside in hoops that the ratio of the future sports contracts might be a bit more weighted in that direction? Let's say in 2024 that basketball might be more like 35 to 40% of the revenue package and football might be more like 65% to 60% of it.

What this board has not discussed much is the possibility that the tech companies may be interested in one sport, which in the words of the Facebook rep puts the audience closer to the action and has continual play with something happening every few seconds instead of every few minutes or every half hour.

I'm a big football first guy and an old coot in that I still love baseball, but the SEC put an emphasis on basketball in Slive's last year as commissioner. The last couple of years it's paid off for us in the post season.

So perhaps 6 years was chosen for contract renewal on the Big 10 precisely because it will be a pivotal time for trends and demographic shifts in the marketplace. And because leadership in the conferences are wrestling with changing culture and trying to hedge their bets. ESPN has the ACCN and SECN locked up and the T1 & T2 of the ACC and the T2 of the SEC into the 2030's so they've hedged their bets too but in a different direction. Should the tech companies get into college football the value and cost will go up and ESPN will have pulled of a coup by sewing that product up for that duration. But if the tech companies take a pass on college football then those contracts could be locking them into rates which while not high, are also not flexible.

Realignment therefore is very likely on hold. Why be in a rush to take Oklahoma and pay out huge sums for a short term gain which ends when Boomers have passed? Remember the oldest Boomer's turn 80 in 2026. In 2024 Kansas might have a bigger upside, unless they've gone broke spending 315 million on football renovations. Oh the irony!

If the theory is correct that college basketball is where the companies are going (not college football) than that would change the dynamics bigly. Brand new FB upstarts would be screwed.
05-14-2018 06:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 16,468
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 909
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #148
RE: Disney - FOX deal likely to consummate by "mid-2019"
(05-14-2018 06:03 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(05-10-2018 01:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-10-2018 12:28 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(05-09-2018 07:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-09-2018 06:56 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  But again, Murdoch doesn't WANT cash. He wants stock, and seeing as he's in a position to where they don't NEED to sell, I think Comcast is wasting their time.

Yes, some seem to think that "cash" is inherently better than "stock". But not necessarily. E.g., I'd much rather get a million shares of Disney stock at $50 a share than $50 million in cash.

As long as that "stock" is stable and backed by a huge market cap/robust cash flow with minimizing risk. Still, as we all know, companies come and go. What's solid today may not be in the future. I'm no financial wiz but there's always a trade-off in every decision, especially at the high finance/mega-corp level.

I think the trend of the cable business may be what's making Comcast unappealing for Murdoch. If he wants stock then it's reasonable to think he wants a suitor that has a better upside.

Murdoch operates in a macro picture business world. There have been more than a few super wealthy investors globally who have been seeking safety. Italy's debt crisis is growing (it is a crisis in that their national debt exceeds the GDP of the ECM). Recently one of the Egyptian oil barons converted stock to precious metals. Remember the super wealthy move to cash when things get dicey. And it's not a defensive move but rather an offensive one. They let the average investors take the hit and when prices crash they buy on the cheap. It is not inconceivable that Murdoch realizes that the college sports bubble is nearer to its end than some believe and with the changes coming to cable he's simply looking to cut future losses but do so in a way where he doesn't have to get taxed on capital gains. If this is the case then he will unload FOX Sports, FS1, and FS2 shortly. He'll sit on his cash and blue chip stock and wait until the bubble collapses to get back into whatever business he sees has an upside.

The question that gets overlooked because of the lucrative nature of the Big 10's last rights contract, is who was it that wanted to sign a 6 year deal? Was it the Big 10 or the networks?

I'm thinking it was the networks who had much more data on the trends and changing models of their own industry. It doesn't mean the decline of college football is nigh, but it does mean the days of locker room waterfalls could be. And if it is coming it will be arriving at precisely the wrong time for what many college presidents have been preparing to deal with which is namely a significant drop in enrollment.

The economy right now looks great with unemployment being at an all time low but this wasn't anyone's political victory, but rather the result of retiring Boomers. Retiring Boomers will mean more competition for labor which means that for a while things will boom. Younger people will earn more and while alive in later years Boomer's will spend more. But then as Boomers begin to die out a trend that began with the deaths of the WWII generation will come to completion, namely the loss of the last large individual donors whether that is to philanthropy, education, or athletics. Corporate donors have slowly been taking their place for decades so it won't be the loss of capital per se, but there will be more strings attached to the donations other than good seats. And with the high cost of tuition currently in our schools, and with the post graduation jobs not really paying that well at the entry level, the new generation is weighing the starting pay scale of skilled labor and trade versus the cubicle jobs. It looks now like more are opting for a less expensive path forward in life.

So while school officials like Zenger at Kansas have openly talked about the importance of sports being a lure for incoming students who identify with schools they've seen on TV and want a place that makes them feel good, and that a viable sports program drives admissions, if we should suddenly see the sports rights industry take a decline it will be coming at a very inopportune time for those looking to boost their enrollment via their sports profile.

I think 2023-5 will be far more interesting than just for realignment news. The story that could swamp the importance of any realignment will be just how much these next contracts are going to deliver. I was listening to a representative of Facebook on CNBC yesterday when they specifically asked him about the social media giant entering into sports carriage. He was tepid at best in his response while dissing football outright as a social health problem, criticizing baseball as being way too long, downplaying soccer for having too little action, and zeroing in on basketball as something they might be interested in. And he seemed to believe that would be the case for other Tech style companies.

If FOX is bailing, and the tech companies aren't interested in football, baseball, or soccer, and if we are 6 more years into the retirement years and die off of the Boomers then just how much will ESPN or their competitors want to put into the rights purchases in 2024 and could it be that if the tech companies see an upside in hoops that the ratio of the future sports contracts might be a bit more weighted in that direction? Let's say in 2024 that basketball might be more like 35 to 40% of the revenue package and football might be more like 65% to 60% of it.

What this board has not discussed much is the possibility that the tech companies may be interested in one sport, which in the words of the Facebook rep puts the audience closer to the action and has continual play with something happening every few seconds instead of every few minutes or every half hour.

I'm a big football first guy and an old coot in that I still love baseball, but the SEC put an emphasis on basketball in Slive's last year as commissioner. The last couple of years it's paid off for us in the post season.

So perhaps 6 years was chosen for contract renewal on the Big 10 precisely because it will be a pivotal time for trends and demographic shifts in the marketplace. And because leadership in the conferences are wrestling with changing culture and trying to hedge their bets. ESPN has the ACCN and SECN locked up and the T1 & T2 of the ACC and the T2 of the SEC into the 2030's so they've hedged their bets too but in a different direction. Should the tech companies get into college football the value and cost will go up and ESPN will have pulled of a coup by sewing that product up for that duration. But if the tech companies take a pass on college football then those contracts could be locking them into rates which while not high, are also not flexible.

Realignment therefore is very likely on hold. Why be in a rush to take Oklahoma and pay out huge sums for a short term gain which ends when Boomers have passed? Remember the oldest Boomer's turn 80 in 2026. In 2024 Kansas might have a bigger upside, unless they've gone broke spending 315 million on football renovations. Oh the irony!

If the theory is correct that college basketball is where the companies are going (not college football) than that would change the dynamics bigly. Brand new FB upstarts would be screwed.

That's quite possible. But it also depends upon what region of the country they are located in. The Southeast and Southwest will give up the pigskin when you pry their cold dead fingers off the laces. Meanwhile in the East Buffy and Jody will be donning their lacrosse gear and out west the just won't care at all. Up North they will want to cling to football and defend hockey (a high concussion rate also). True Southerners and guys from the Rust Belt have far more in common with each other than they do guys from the East or West. They hunt and we hunt. They fish and we fish. They tailgate and we tailgate. They reenact and we reenact. They are proud of their heritage and so are we. If they weren't so easy to sunburn and didn't eat brats we'd be fine.
(This post was last modified: 05-14-2018 06:46 PM by JRsec.)
05-14-2018 06:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.