SKT Sky Network Television Limited.

[mistaTea]

If someone wanted to they could get the whole lot for $1 a share right now. No need to pay $1.50. (They might not get your shares MT, but they would get the 90% easy.)

Look, anything is possible I suppose.

But I have reservations about $1/share being enough.

If they went by Scheme of Arrangement (which, as we know blackcap from NZOG is 'all or nothing') I think it would fail. Of the shareholders who bothered to vote, getting 25% to vote NO would not be too hard particularly given RP and NZR would be unlikely to sell their shares in a strategic partnership with Sky for less than what the shares were worth when they did their deals with Sky not too long ago.

A suitor could try to do a hostile takeover and just start buying up the shares I suppose. But I doubt they would be able to hit the magical 90% unless they offered a price that was a better representation of 'fair value' for the business. RP and NZR alone have over 11% of the shares outstanding and I doubt they would let go of their shares too easily. There will be other long term investors who arent too bothered by the current low SP, but would be open to sell for a reasonable price (like me).

I stand to be corrected, but my view is that the current SP is so far divorced from the realistic price shareholders would get if they sold the business to someone who wanted to take it private - like in the order of 5x minimum.

[Ogg]

Have you bought any more on market MistaTea? You got half a million shares yet?

[steveb]

There are so many shareholders way under water on this that $1.00 a share is just not going to cut it.Quietly accumulate then go in at your $1.50 and hope like hell the commerce commission gives the green light.
But yes you are quite right Blackcap that $1.00 should be enough normally a 40-60% premium would secure most companies.

[k14]

Was about to post this link.

Unlike other media companies, Sky's revenue isn't falling. In fact, the pandemic could be a positive as more people watch TV. The streaming part of their business is likely off setting any declines.

Sport will return shortly. People are happy with the free movie deal and also happy to watch old sport replays in the mean time.

Management taking paycut likely because of the long term stock performance.

Why the stock price fell 50% in March is bazaar. Sky is a great little cash cow that has a future.

It will never be a billion dollar company again but it's a joke that it's trading at just over $100m. If this isn't ripe for a take over I don't know what is.

The other side which I have not got a full understanding on is that it seems Sky only have to pay for the rights if the sport is actually played (someone correct me if I am wrong). I make this comment on the basis of all the sporting codes asking government support. So not only is revenue down only slightly, expenses are also reduced. Although that would possibly be offset by advertising revenue?

[blackcap]

There are so many shareholders way under water on this that $1.00 a share is just not going to cut it.Quietly accumulate then go in at your $1.50 and hope like hell the commerce commission gives the green light.
But yes you are quite right Blackcap that $1.00 should be enough normally a 40-60% premium would secure most companies.

I actually think 60 cents would be enough, a 100% premium on the 30 day weighted average, but as I am a holder too, I was being optimistic. The share price is at 31 cents for a reason. I would jump at the chance to get $1.

[mistaTea]

I actually think 60 cents would be enough, a 100% premium on the 30 day weighted average, but as I am a holder too, I was being optimistic. The share price is at 31 cents for a reason. I would jump at the chance to get $1.

60c would make a huge amount of sense to a stock trader, agree 100%.

It would be ludicrous for an investor though. I think there are more investors in Sky TV than you give credit for.

[blackcap]

60c would make a huge amount of sense to a stock trader, agree 100%.

It would be ludicrous for an investor though. I think there are more investors in Sky TV than you give credit for.

Maybe, maybe not. The question I keep asking is, why is the price 31 cents. If investors were so convinced, then the price would not be trading where it is. I am not a trader, I am an investor. If I could get 60 cents today, I should thank my lucky stars because the market is not giving that to me today. As financial theory goes, "the best predictor of tomorrow's price, is today's price".
And you may be right and the market may be wrong but that "wrong market" can last longer than most investors can stay liquid/sane/patient etc. Lets hope we are right and the market is wrong. I might be tempted to pick some more up at these levels, the signs are more encouraging than I thought but the debt really worries me.

[Ogg]

I actually think 60 cents would be enough, a 100% premium on the 30 day weighted average, but as I am a holder too, I was being optimistic. The share price is at 31 cents for a reason. I would jump at the chance to get $1.

60 cents would probably be enough to start a take over but given the amount of potential buyers there would likely be a bidding war. Same thing happened with Sky UK.

It could also take months to play out and involve the commerce commission again. The market has changed a lot since the Vodafone proposal. My feeling is that there has been a material change to the current environment and that a telco company should be able to take over Sky, except for Spark obviously. I don't know why Vodafone doesn't try and do another take over attempt and argue that things are different now then they were back in 2017. Technology changes fast.

[steveb]

yes agree ogg of course vodafone have new owners now,but have you given any thought to NZ Rugby or even Sanzar having a go?

[Ogg]

have you given any thought to NZ Rugby or even Sanzar having a go?

They don't have any money do they?