SKT Sky Network Television Limited.

[Ogg]

You might be right mistaTea

Found another video of him:

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/elde...021354483.html

He is almost exclusively long only.

He's focused on "corporate finance renovation turn around stories on the long side."

Seems like he might be in Sky for the long term and is looking to turn it around with some kind of finance arrangement.

[k14]

Here's a good example. My sister got Disney+ a few months ago. She said it's great, but sometimes their modem plays up and it disconnects. She also had to buy a new TV because of the App. It does work on the kids tablets but sometimes that can be difficult for them to navigate on the computer. Sometimes it logs out etc or the wifi drops out. Where as with Sky you just flick on Cartoon Network and it goes. The point is, she has both Disney+ and Sky because they're both good value.

I totally agree on that point. After being a satellite customer for upwards of 15 years, I got it disconnected in September last year. I subscribed to Sky Sport Now (as sport is all I watched on Sky) in November. It worked ok, but 1 time out of 20 it would take 5-10 mins to get it going with something going wrong with chromecast. I was intending to get satellite hooked back up this month (that obviously is on hold now). Yes the sky box is clunky and the UI is dated but it just works. I am happy with that. Now that SkyGo can be "cast" and it has some time shifting capability I think the best option is satellite sub without MySky.

[winner69]

Sky is one of those companies that would have been heaps more successful in private ownership away from the scrutiny of institutional and investment fund managers who only see SKT as a ticker code and are generally only worried about a squiggly line on a chart .....and not about the long term sustainability of the business.

[blackcap]

. Yes the sky box is clunky and the UI is dated but it just works. I am happy with that. Now that SkyGo can be "cast" and it has some time shifting capability I think the best option is satellite sub without MySky.

That's the bit that I like about it.... it works. And the fact you do not need internet to get the thing going.

[mistaTea]

Sky is one of those companies that would have been heaps more successful in private ownership away from the scrutiny of institutional and investment fund managers who only see SKT as a ticker code and are generally only worried about a squiggly line on a chart .....and not about the long term sustainability of the business.

Agreed 100%. Sky would absolutely do better if they were not a lsited company as they could just get on with aking the changes required to transition the business without the intense scrutiny which is largely unhelpful to management right now.

Regardless of what they seem to do, they get slaughtered for it.

For example, they won the rugby after pretty well everyone said they needed to keep Rugby to have a chance of survival. Immediately there was unfounded speculation that they agreed to pay half a billion dollars over 5 years to hold on to the rights...they Sky had to pay way over the odds and would have no hope of making any money from it etc etc.

However, I know damn well that if Sky had of walked away from rugby sighting the asking price was way more than the value of the content etc etc...they would have been asolutely crucified for that to.

It's riduculous.

[mistaTea]

Sky is one of those companies that would have been heaps more successful in private ownership away from the scrutiny of institutional and investment fund managers who only see SKT as a ticker code and are generally only worried about a squiggly line on a chart .....and not about the long term sustainability of the business.

Yeah its a fair point. If you forgo MySky (a real possibility now that SkyGo can be cast) you could have a comprehensive entertainment package from Sky including Sport for about $76/month now.

That equates to about $2.50 a day...less than a cup of coffee and a huge amount of entertainment.

I am happy with my current Sky Sport NOW/NEON subs... for now...I pay about $54/month ($1.76 per day). However Sky Sport NOW is not as 'live' as satellite... and NEON doesn't give me all of their entertainment content.
So there are pros and cons.

I live in a new sub division that only has fibre. I don't want to instal a satellite dish on my house, and streaming is the way most entertainment is consumed now.

I am just waiting for Sky to release their new digital offerings. I would be very keen to cancel my NEON and Sky Sport NOW subs in favour of a more comprehensive streaming bundle. If they can give me 'everything' for $70-$80/month I would be keen.

[Sideshow Bob]

Agreed 100%. Sky would absolutely do better if they were not a lsited company as they could just get on with aking the changes required to transition the business without the intense scrutiny which is largely unhelpful to management right now.

Regardless of what they seem to do, they get slaughtered for it.

For example, they won the rugby after pretty well everyone said they needed to keep Rugby to have a chance of survival. Immediately there was unfounded speculation that they agreed to pay half a billion dollars over 5 years to hold on to the rights...they Sky had to pay way over the odds and would have no hope of making any money from it etc etc.

However, I know damn well that if Sky had of walked away from rugby sighting the asking price was way more than the value of the content etc etc...they would have been asolutely crucified for that to.

It's riduculous.

Sky is a company everyone loves to hate.

[winner69]

It all started going downhill for Sky TV when Derek Handley somehow squirmed his way on to the Board.

[mistaTea]

Sky is a company everyone loves to hate.

Yeah, and previous management caused a lot of that sentiment because they were effectively a monopoly and certainly acted like one.

I think the new team are making progress repairing relationships with content partners AND customers. But they won't be able to fix the negative perception issues overnight.

For many years consumers felt they were getting ripped off with excessively expensive bundles but had no other choice if they wanted premium TV. Remember, in the bad old days... just to get hooked up with what I would consider 'the essentials' you had to purchase Sky Basic + My Sky + HD Ticket.

That was $49 + $15 or $20 (depending on hard drive size)+ $10 = $74 or $79 per month from the get go. Before you had even added Sport or any of the premium entertainent channels you actually wanted to watch!

It's no wonder they never penetrated the majority of households even back then. No skin off their nose at the time though because they were raking in huge profts and paying huge dividends. It all worked out well for years...until it didn't.

[Traderx]

Hi all, interested in your take on the balance sheet "strength" and the ability to repay the bonds due 31 March next year - $100m

There is essentially no cash on the balance sheet, appears that the use the bank facilities as a from of revolving credit. As at 31 Dec they appeared to have c. $84m of headroom in this facility (limit $200m, $114m of non bond borrowings). The facility reduces to $150m in July 2021 (i.e just after bond due). The whole facility expires in July 2022.

Cashflow appears positive, and may remain so over coming 1-3 months.

My questions

If sport gets cancelled long term will SKT receive any compensation for rights? What is the ability to pay from sports? Have they paid upfront or is there a run rate component?

What is scenario where SKT cant repay the bonds?

What is ability for SKT to screw bondolders in some way other than in a receivership or other process?

I'm consider buying bonds at current 60-70% yield for next 12 months

Interested in your thoughts?