$1 Billion for next TV rights - forget it!

[morgoth]

You're the one who said it was a rumour, and your quote above says "as speculated by the media". ie rumour. You were right first time!



Your gun, it takes spuds not bullets.

Pfftttt, notice that you did not discuss the content of the post though. Simply becuase you have been shown to be hopelessly out of your depth and unable to respond.

Work it out, how come I can access this stuff so fast.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Pfftttt, notice that you did not discuss the content of the post though. Simply becuase you have been shown to be hopelessly out of your depth and unable to respond.

Work it out, how come I can access this stuff so fast.

Because you spend all day on internet forums ?

Anyway, you're arguing with yourself. Its a rumour, its not a rumour, blah, blah blah.

My comment: dont put your faith in rumours. Applies to most facets of life, not just financial.

 

[morgoth]

Yep, light weight. Leave this thread to people who can actually discuss the topic until you have some understanding.

 

[fairdinkum]

My comment: dont put your faith in rumours. Applies to most facets of life, not just financial.

What are you putting your faith in, just out of interest?

We know for a fact that advertising revenue has taken a big dive.

We know for a fact that the commercial stations are posting huge reductions in profits and profit forecasts.

We know for a fact that the owners of channel nine are up to their eyeballs in debt.

We know that the only reason the rights went for so much last time was because of a bidding war between seven/ten and nine.

We know that this is the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, and given this, it is unlikely to 'correct itself' in a short period of time.

We know all of this.

And yet you continue to claim that $1b is guaranteed? Based on what?

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Yep, light weight. Leave this thread to people who can actually discuss the topic until you have some understanding.

Nice retreat. Seems I've put you back in your box well and good.

Well Mr Morgoth, financial, media and AFL "heavy-weight", lay your credentials on the table.

No point taking the high ground without any backup.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

What are you putting your faith in, just out of interest?

We know for a fact that advertising revenue has taken a big dive.

True, and currently consumer confidence is very low as well.

We know for a fact that the commercial stations are posting huge reductions in profits and profit forecasts.

Profit is the key work here.

We know for a fact that the owners of channel nine are up to their eyeballs in debt.

It was up to its eyeballs in debt as soon as packer offloaded it. Ok, so being in debt right now is not the best place to be, and they will probably look to offload it soon. I hear bondy is cashed up.

We know that the only reason the rights went for so much last time was because of a bidding war between seven/ten and nine.

The only reason ?
There will be a bidding war again, as their always is. Even if 9 dont want it, they'll want 7/10 to pay top dollar.

We know that this is the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, and given this, it is unlikely to 'correct itself' in a short period of time.

Hang on nervous nelly. We havent even gone into recession yet, let alone depression. No one knows how this will play out, but I day say the late 90's with high interest rates, and the "recession" we had to have is lot tougher than November 2008.

We know all of this.

And yet you continue to claim that $1b is guaranteed? Based on what?

Experience. History.

 

[fairdinkum]

Profit is the key work here.

If only the stockmarkets shared your view.

It was up to its eyeballs in debt as soon as packer offloaded it. Ok, so being in debt right now is not the best place to be...

Correct.

The only reason ?
There will be a bidding war again, as their always is. Even if 9 dont want it, they'll want 7/10 to pay top dollar.

They will only bid what it is worth to them. The argument I am making is that it is now worth a lot less to them. Simple argument, really.

Hang on nervous nelly. We havent even gone into recession yet, let alone depression. No one knows how this will play out, but I day say the late 90's with high interest rates, and the "recession" we had to have is lot tougher than November 2008.

Would you like to put some coin on whether or not we enter recession?

How many countries were handing out billions of dollars of 'stimulus packages', guaranteeing deposits and nationalising banks back in the late 90's?

Experience. History.

In other words - nothing substantial or verifiable.

Typical.

 

[morgoth]

Nice retreat. Seems I've put you back in your box well and good.

Well Mr Morgoth, financial, media and AFL "heavy-weight", lay your credentials on the table.

No point taking the high ground without any backup.

Would have thought it was obvious that I work in the financial markets and therefore am exposed to inforamtion relating to listed companies and trends in their sectors. As FD said, you only have to put all the information together to come to the conclusion that $1b is not likely.

You are still to refute any of the arguments I have presented with anything like facts or supoprting evidence. As I said, light weight, resorting to sniping to try and hide your complete lack of knowledge.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Would have thought it was obvious that I work in the financial markets and therefore am exposed to inforamtion relating to listed companies and trends in their sectors. As FD said, you only have to put all the information together to come to the conclusion that $1b is not likely.

You are still to refute any of the arguments I have presented with anything like facts or supoprting evidence. As I said, light weight, resorting to sniping to try and hide your complete lack of knowledge.

You may have noted, if you were listening/reading, that I also work in the financial services industry, and my call, looking at the long term view, is that $1b is likely. If not, then very close.

Thats my 2 bobs worth.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

If only the stockmarkets shared your view.

The stock market factors in price x for y% profit, price z for w% profit. Profit downgrades reduce share price. Losses on the other hand..well...
The stock price also has a hundred and one other influences.

Correct.



They will only bid what it is worth to them. The argument I am making is that it is now worth a lot less to them. Simple argument, really.

The point was, they will all bid. Bank on it. Competition is

Would you like to put some coin on whether or not we enter recession?

How many countries were handing out billions of dollars of 'stimulus packages', guaranteeing deposits and nationalising banks back in the late 90's?

No banks have been nationalised in Australia as far as I'm aware. In fact most have recorded record profits. Australia's stimulus package consisted of bringing forward a few promised infrastructure projects. And deposit guarantee has been around for donkey's years at $20,000. To increase it to the level they have, they way they have has been debated hotly. $100K would have been better IMO.

In other words - nothing substantial or verifiable.

Typical.

Predicting the future is never verifiable. Thats the nature of the world.
And I aint seen anything verifyable from yourself or morgoth on this. Only articles of "media speculation".

 

[fairdinkum]

The point was, they will all bid. Bank on it. Competition is

Of course they will 'bid'. The point is that they will bid less.

Australia's stimulus package consisted of bringing forward a few promised infrastructure projects. And deposit guarantee has been around for donkey's years at $20,000. To increase it to the level they have, they way they have has been debated hotly. $100K would have been better IMO.

What what what?

Handouts to pensioners, parents and first home buyers are 'infrastructure projects'?

And how long has Australia had bank deposit guarantees?

And I aint seen anything verifyable from yourself or morgoth on this. Only articles of "media speculation".

Um... for starters, the huge fall in profits I refer to is verifiable. It happened.

Come clean - you are a troll, aren't you?

 

[fairdinkum]

You may have noted, if you were listening/reading, that I also work in the financial services industry, and my call, looking at the long term view, is that $1b is likely. If not, then very close.

Thats my 2 bobs worth.

Not another financial planner/bank teller who thinks they are an economist.

 

[Subprime]

CVC Asia-Pacific is the owner of Channel 9.

Hard to see them going broke any time soon:

CVC is currently investing from CVC Fund IV, CVC Asia III and CVC Tandem Fund with an aggregate of $16.9 billion (€12.7 billion) in equity capital.

We have one of the largest active funds in Europe and the largest in Asia. In funds raised, CVC ranks among the leading private equity firm’s worldwide.

http://www.cvc.com/Content/EN/OurApproach/OurFunds.aspx

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Not another financial planner/bank teller who thinks they are an economist.

Incorrect. But it does make me wonder what your "secret" credentials are ?


At the end of the day, its impossible to tell what will happen between now and the next rights. Aside from financial calls, Government policy could free up foxtel, digital FTA could take off, the internet will be a much bigger player, Some melbourne clubs could fold.

Time will tell. This thread sure splits the pesimists from the optimists.

 

[fairdinkum]

CVC Asia-Pacific is the owner of Channel 9.

Hard to see them going broke any time soon:

CVC is currently investing from CVC Fund IV, CVC Asia III and CVC Tandem Fund with an aggregate of $16.9 billion (€12.7 billion) in equity capital.

We have one of the largest active funds in Europe and the largest in Asia. In funds raised, CVC ranks among the leading private equity firm’s worldwide.

http://www.cvc.com/Content/EN/OurApproach/OurFunds.aspx

CVC is part of the joint venture with ConsMedia to form PBL Media (which holds Nine), with the former now holding 75% and the latter essentially walking away from the venture.

CVC are currently looking for other backers to tip capital into PBL Media now that Packer has signaled that he won't.

They might need some luck in this climate.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Of course they will 'bid'. The point is that they will bid less.

No, you said there will be less competition.

Handouts to pensioners, parents and first home buyers are 'infrastructure projects'?

Handouts to pensioners is tokenism at best. Do you think they are going to drive a turnaround, or put in under the bed ?

Um... for starters, the huge fall in profits I refer to is verifiable. It happened.
Come clean - you are a troll, aren't you?

How can I be a troll, when I am agreeing with the AFL projection ?

You are trying to verify the AFL wont get $1b. Not verify that profit fell in some sectors in late 2008.

 

[fairdinkum]

Incorrect. But it does make me wonder what your "secret" credentials are ?

Supervillain by night. Dolebludger by day.

At the end of the day, its impossible to tell what will happen between now and the next rights. Aside from financial calls, Government policy could free up foxtel, digital FTA could take off, the internet will be a much bigger player, Some melbourne clubs could fold.

If anything, government changes to anti-syphoning laws etc are likely to hurt, rather than help, football codes.

That is exactly why the football codes are rallying against proposals for such change.

 

[fairdinkum]

No, you said there will be less competition.

What are you on about?

If the two major parties are both less willing to make big bids for a certain prize, then the final bid is certain to be lower. How can you argue against this?

Handouts to pensioners is tokenism at best. Do you think they are going to drive a turnaround, or put in under the bed ?

You are the one who said that this tokenism was an 'infrastructure project', not me. And you are in the financial industry? No wonder we are in such a mess...

You are trying to verify the AFL wont get $1b. Not verify that profit fell in some sectors in late 2008.

No, I am making an argument based on verifiable premises.

You are making a counterargument based on... what was it again? Your own opinion?

 

[Subprime]

CVC is part of the joint venture with ConsMedia to form PBL Media (which holds Nine), with the former now holding 75% and the latter essentially walking away from the venture.

CVC are currently looking for other backers to tip capital into PBL Media now that Packer has signaled that he won't.

They might need some luck in this climate.

I guess they could dip into their US$17b in equity.

 

[pepsi]

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,24632904-19742,00.html

Even the AFL are cutting their expenditure. So how can we expect that TV networks will spend more than the last TV rights?

 

[fairdinkum]

I guess they could dip into their US$17b in equity.

That's the point - they don't want to.

Perhaps it says something about the state of PBL Media that they need a capital injection but won't provide it themselves.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

What are you on about?

If the two major parties are both less willing to make big bids for a certain prize, then the final bid is certain to be lower. How can you argue against this?

So you think the next TV rights will be lower than the current $780m.
Big call.

The same parties will bid as last time. Maybe more if there is more competition on the internet side.

You are the one who said that this tokenism was an 'infrastructure project', not me. And you are in the financial industry? No wonder we are in such a mess...

No, I said your examples were tokenism. Pensioners, parents, etc.

Infrastructure projects like broadband, highways, rail etc arent tokenism, and a long time overdue.

No, I am making an argument based on verifiable premises.

You are making a counterargument based on... what was it again? Your own opinion?

The gap between your argument and the "verifable premises" is called "your opinion".

 

[fairdinkum]

So you think the next TV rights will be lower than the current $780m.
Big call.

You are intentionally being obtuse, I see.

Lower (than would be the case if both major parties were willing/able to bid more).

No, I said your examples were tokenism. Pensioners, parents, etc.

Infrastructure projects like broadband, highways, rail etc arent tokenism, and a long time overdue.

And how much of the Stimulus Package went towards those projects? Pretty much none.

The gap between your argument and the "verifable premises" is called "your opinion".

No, it is called 'induction'.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

OK, lets put our money where our mouths are.

Mor - Heavy-weight - goth, name your figure for the next TV rights.

fair - unemployed -dinkum, name your figure for the next TV rights.

I've said $1b.

We'll see who is closest.

 

[Subprime]

That's the point - they don't want to.

Perhaps it says something about the state of PBL Media that they need a capital injection but won't provide it themselves.

It appears CVC paid too much for thier intial investment in PBL media (half the company for ~$4.5b). I understand they subsequently acquired another 25% from the Packer family for around ~$400m.

The way CVC seem to operate is to then get the purchased entity to use the profits of the business go to pay the interest bill on the debt. See below how their investment in F1 works:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/nov/11/formulaone-motorsports

I don't think it follows that PBL/Channel 9 is fundamentally a bad business because CVC appear to have paid too much, or because they structured the investment in such a way that all its profits go to pay off debt.