Next TV deal discussion 2028 -

[Trifili13]

I could

But won’t

Google is your friend even if I am not

I did and your same source of Statista.com has cable TV and broadcasters at 7x to 8x EBITDA so Dazn paid broadly the market rate.

 

[Wb1234]

I did and your same source of Statista.com has cable TV and broadcasters at 7x to 8x EBITDA so Dazn paid broadly the market rate.

I saw 11.7 times on average and up to 40 times for big names

But at least you know how to use google search

 

[Trifili13]

I saw 11.7 times on average and up to 40 times for big names

But at least you know how to use google search

The 11.7x is an ave for media and advertising entities which is obviously skewed as it includes entities that are not only pay tv operators. Do you honestly think that Rupert would have sold for 7x, a circa 50% discount on the average? This would suggest that Rupert was desparate to sell. The 40x as you say is for larger companies like Netflix and Disney+ but they have over 200m and 150m subscribers respectively globally compared to a small local company with less than 5m subscribers that is underpinned by a sport that half the country doesn't care about and the majority of the world has never heard of. Hardly a good comparison to then say it was undervalued at 7x.

Moral to the above, we both know how to use Google but only 1 of us knows how to interpret the data

 

[Wb1234]

The 11.7x is an ave for media and advertising entities which is obviously skewed as it includes entities that are not only pay tv operators. Do you honestly think that Rupert would have sold for 7x, a circa 50% discount on the average? This would suggest that Rupert was desparate to sell. The 40x as you say is for larger companies like Netflix and Disney+ but they have over 200m and 150m subscribers respectively globally compared to a small local company with less than 5m subscribers that is underpinned by a sport that half the country doesn't care about and the majority of the world has never heard of. Hardly a good comparison to then say it was undervalued at 7x.

Moral to the above, we both know how to use Google but only 1 of us knows how to interpret the data

Maybe as a us citizen Rupert doesn’t think owning a pay tv operator in Australia is a good use of his capital whilst obviously Dazn does

And he needs the money for the succession battle that is happening at news corp

He’s retaining six percent in Dazn and it’s hard to find out what’s that’s worth

Could be worth billions in an ipo the way it is aggressively expanding

 

[Mother Nature's Son]

Do you honestly think that Rupert would have sold for 7x, a circa 50% discount on the average? This would suggest that Rupert was desparate to sell

In all fairness though they were desperate, twice in the last few years they`d pulled IPO`s due to a lack of investor interest and even only last year the company was being valued at 2b dollars. No wonder the Herald was reporting on Rupert`s "Christmas miracle".

 

[Iamback]

In all fairness though they were desperate, twice in the last few years they`d pulled IPO`s due to a lack of investor interest and even only last year the company was being valued at 2b dollars. No wonder the Herald was reporting on Rupert`s "Christmas miracle".

Not just the Herald. A few non sport journos have claimed the deal to be overs.

Makes you wonder why they were desperate?

 

[Trifili13]

In all fairness though they were desperate, twice in the last few years they`d pulled IPO`s due to a lack of investor interest and even only last year the company was being valued at 2b dollars. No wonder the Herald was reporting on Rupert`s "Christmas miracle".

Agree. I think the numerous streaming options that people have these days and the ease with which you can switch makes owning such a business risky. The NRL must be careful to not just go with the provider that offers the most money but also balance it out with whether that provider will be around for the term of the deal so they actually get their money.

 

[Iamback]

Agree. I think the numerous streaming options that people have these days and the ease with which you can switch makes owning such a business risky. The NRL must be careful to not just go with the provider that offers the most money but also balance it out with whether that provider will be around for the term of the deal so they actually get their money.

No contracts in streaming either doesn't help

 

[Maximus]

Not just the Herald. A few non sport journos have claimed the deal to be overs.

Yeah but did they ask the self-declared expert on every topic in existence?

 

[Iamback]

Yeah but did they ask the self-declared expert on every topic in existence?

I am sure he will tell them how wrong they are with zero evidence behind it

 

[Wb1234]

Penrith bogan commenting on financial matters is hilarious

How long have they used fiat currency instead of barter ?

Maxipus why did you stop posting on thr png thread ??

 

[yakstorm]

Regardless of whether DAZN has paid overs, unders or just right to buy Foxtel/Binge/Kayo, the acquisition shows that they are wanting to very quickly grow their market share.

Whilst not a big player in Australia, DAZN has had a presence here for a number of years now, mainly holding boxing & rally car rights (as well as the NFL Game Pass). They could have, if they wanted to, used some of that $3.4bn they spent on the Fox acquisition to pay overs to try and steal the AFL, Cricket and/or NRL rights if they felt that was possible, but they clearly felt (or have been told) that money alone wasn't going to be enough.

Now that they've made such a big upfront investment, they aren't going to let someone take the big sports off them, especially AFL & NRL which not only can they commercialise in the Australian market, but they can actually leverage overseas (I would not be surprised to see WatchNRL & WatchAFL simply be absorbed into DAZN globally).

 

[Iamback]

Regardless of whether DAZN has paid overs, unders or just right to buy Foxtel/Binge/Kayo, the acquisition shows that they are wanting to very quickly grow their market share.

Whilst not a big player in Australia, DAZN has had a presence here for a number of years now, mainly holding boxing & rally car rights (as well as the NFL Game Pass). They could have, if they wanted to, used some of that $3.4bn they spent on the Fox acquisition to pay overs to try and steal the AFL, Cricket and/or NRL rights if they felt that was possible, but they clearly felt (or have been told) that money alone wasn't going to be enough.

Now that they've made such a big upfront investment, they aren't going to let someone take the big sports off them, especially AFL & NRL which not only can they commercialise in the Australian market, but they can actually leverage overseas (I would not be surprised to see WatchNRL & WatchAFL simply be absorbed into DAZN globally).

It matters because all they said was the deal finalised at the back end of next year.

That could be up to 9 months post loss of HBO and with these rights, are set up where people paying for cable covers the cheaper streaming options.

News Limited have made the Fox sports channels and Sky News available for free on Binge. If that continues then the numbers will drop

If that is the case and they need to cut costs then that is where the commentary about AFL and NRL rights being in danger comes from.

Hence why A League who produce it's own content and is cheap is mentioned especially if the overpay plays out as being the case

 

[The_Wookie]

It matters because all they said was the deal finalised at the back end of next year.

That could be up to 9 months post loss of HBO and with these rights, are set up where people paying for cable covers the cheaper streaming options.

The deal is expected to be finalised in the second half of financial year 2025 - ie. Between March 31 and June 30, 2025, pending regulatory approval