SKT Sky Network Television Limited.

[Getty]

Is that photo a portent to what the share price is going to do?
Does HD stand for heavy demolition?
They need to change the colour scheme, it blends in with the Sky.

[Dlownz]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/123...rts-broadcasts

Its a good move by sky to release this article. It puts more pressure on comcom to stop the mucking around with the sale. Either let the sale go through or we shut it down anyway and carry on with our plan.

[mistaTea]

Its a good move by sky to release this article. It puts more pressure on comcom to stop the mucking around with the sale. Either let the sale go through or we shut it down anyway and carry on with our plan.

Agreed. It is just nuts that it should take so long to assess this Piss Willy deal. It just further highlights to me how out of touch the Comcom are when it comes to this industry.

If it were up to them they would continually cripple Sky.

Fortunately, if they do reject the deal, our Plan B is almost as good as Plan A for Sky shareholders. Not good for OSB staff though - so I hope for their sakes the Comcom stop faffing around making mountains out of molehills and get on with it.

[mfd]

As it has been pointed out before - if Comcom block the deal then Sky are just going to dump the trucks on the side of the road and do a supply deal with NEP anyway.

The only difference is a bunch if OSB staff will get the sack and have to hope NEP will give them a job after (even though they are not obliged to). But, either way, Sky are going to avoid the $50M CAPEX.

So hopefully Comcom are reasonable in this instance. God knows they tend to give Sky a tough time. Their job is to assess competition concerns which is fair enough, but I think they need to apply a dose of pragmatism to their decision.

If you think Sky are capable of paying ~$50 million in dividends in the next year, why would they not be capable of putting up $50 million for a productive investment over the next few years? Are NEP chumps?

[mistaTea]

If you think Sky are capable of paying ~$50 million in dividends in the next year, why would they not be capable of putting up $50 million for a productive investment over the next few years? Are NEP chumps?

Nobody has ever said that Sky is not CAPABLE of paying the $50M to upgrade their trucks dude.

It is just not a good use of shareholder money, especially given NEP has entered the market. Sky is trying to reposition itself as a less capital intensive business so that it can slim down and be able to compete into the future.

[Dlownz]

Nobody has ever said that Sky is not CAPABLE of paying the $50M to upgrade their trucks dude.

It is just not a good use of shareholder money, especially given NEP has entered the market. Sky is trying to reposition itself as a less capital intensive business so that it can slim down and be able to compete into the future.

Agreed. Less hands on. less costs.
If I can't do a job around the house to a level I deem good enough I'll pay someone to do the faster and better job. Then I can't put my energy into something else more productive.

[winner69]

When the Board needed to appoint a new CEO I hope they didn’t came up with Sophie’s as a ‘safe’ choice - like ‘who is least likely to fail?’ rather than taking a risk hiring somebody fresh who could take Sky to new heights.

They took a ‘risk’ with Martin and it didn’t play out well.....maybe SKY have a weak Board not prepared to risk their own reputations and used the old ‘accelerated succession planning’ trick as the excuse to take the easy option.

I fear Sophie will use Martin’s playbook with a decent amount of cost cutting thrown in as well .....and that won’t lead to a good long term outcome for SKY

[steveb]

Can you imagine any of the board going for a job interview,first question:-
" were you on the board of sky when the shareprice went from $6.00 to 15c?" second question."and what do you think you have to offer us"
I don't think any of the board have any reputations left,but wouldn't it be great to be proven wrong!

[mistaTea]

Clearly the market has not reacted favourably to any of the moves that Martin made.

We can nitpick on individual decisions, but on the whole I think Martin and The Board made the only reasonable decisions possible for a company in Sky’s position.

In fact, most of the things they did were in line with what the market and the analysts were saying sky should be doing to transition to streaming etc.

Yet the SP continues to languish.

Purchases like rugby pass haven’t panned out (COVID could not be predicted), but on the whole - what else could or should they have done if the strategy to date is no good?

Genuine question.

[steveb]

I think they should have done what Ogg was predicting looking for a cashed up partner to merge with,but usually that does not bring job security for the board members.Just look at STU the fat cats are still there collecting their dues despite rejecting a $2.00 per share offer