Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?
-
BTW:
In selling the Silver Lake transaction to its member unions, NZR said it would set up seven new business initiatives, one of which would be NZR+ and that it forecast it would make accumulated profits of $20.4m from this platform across its first four years.
Now this is the scenario:
The decision to effectively decommission NZR+ as the weight-bearing pillar of the content strategy is an indication that neither the audiences nor the associated data have yet been generated – which is just one of many issues that Fenton will be wrestling with when he begins renegotiating NZR’s broadcast contract in the next few months.
@Tim so it seem like they just though there was loads of people with money burning a hole in their pocket just looking for a way to spend it on AB content.....and didn;t think they needed to do much at all to actually raise interest in the AB's or NZ rugby at all
-
@Tim so it seem like they just though there was loads of people with money burning a hole in their pocket just looking for a way to spend it on AB content.....and didn;t think they needed to do much at all to actually raise interest in the AB's or NZ rugby at all
@Kiwiwomble said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
so it seem like they just though there was loads of people with money burning a hole in their pocket just looking for a way to spend it on AB content.....
NZR+ is a free platform
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
so it seem like they just though there was loads of people with money burning a hole in their pocket just looking for a way to spend it on AB content.....
NZR+ is a free platform
@Duluth what really? i thought it was subscription based....it was going to make a $20M profit on advertising?
-
@Tim so it seem like they just though there was loads of people with money burning a hole in their pocket just looking for a way to spend it on AB content.....and didn;t think they needed to do much at all to actually raise interest in the AB's or NZ rugby at all
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
so it seem like they just though there was loads of people with money burning a hole in their pocket just looking for a way to spend it on AB content.....
NZR+ is a free platform
-
@Kiwiwomble I'm very sceptical of any talk of "international fans", as rugby is a hard game to understand, and very few people watch or play it overseas. Much different to different flavours of motor-sport or fighting sports.
@Tim especially if we're not doing anything different to "sell" the ABs...there are definitely out there that will just jump on a bandwagon (T swift and the chiefs)....but you have to do...something...to sell it to them...have we tried introducing Taylor to scooter?
-
Launched last year on the eve of the World Cup, NZR+ was hoping to win one million registrations by the end of the tournament.
By the week of the quarter-finals, it had just 60,000 and that was after spending an estimated $2m plus on content that featured Hollywood director Taika Waititi and various former All Blacks such as Dan Carter, Richie McCaw, Andy Ellis and George Bower.
This is the time for the US fund manager to shine – to deliver on the presentations it made in 2021 and play an influential role in helping NZR secure a much-improved broadcast contract.
Since Silver Lake came on board, it has produced no new or innovative ways to grow revenue and increasingly, those who supported bringing the US fund manager in as an equity partner, have told the Herald that they are beginning to think that significantly upping the value of the broadcast deal is the only trick in the investment house’s playbook.
But several sources have said that the difficulty of improving the current deal, can’t be underestimated.
To start, Silver Lake’s 7.5 per cent equity stake means that NZR needs to up the next deal to $108.1m just to have the equivalent amount of money.
NZR chief executive Mark Robinson has, however, said that audience numbers for the early rounds of Super Rugby Pacific are up about 25 per cent on last year and Sky has never hidden the fact that rugby continues to help it win and retain subscribers.
But without the fear of losing the rights, few analysts expect Sky will be willing to offer anywhere near the $100m it currently pays.
There is an assumption that Sky will be looking to reduce the price to around $80m-a-year, leaving Fenton having to find close to another $30m-a-year just to hold the current financial position.
As the Herald understands it, Fenton will target winning a major uplift in the price of the international rights to off-set any reduction in the home market.
It is thought that the current value of the international rights is only about US$10m – through deals with the UK and France which Sanzaar negotiated.
Nations Cup will be needed to increase revenue.
Yet the NZRPA supported this deal didn't they. That's looking more and more like a total disaster
Maybe the NZR Board members responsible for it should all resign. As should anyone else who supported it. Although if it's as bad as it seems to be it's too late now. As its unlikely there is any way to get out of it
-
Yet the NZRPA supported this deal didn't they. That's looking more and more like a total disaster
Maybe the NZR Board members responsible for it should all resign. As should anyone else who supported it. Although if it's as bad as it seems to be it's too late now. As its unlikely there is any way to get out of it
@Winger that would be dependant on what they were sold, if silver lake isn't doing what they said they would to grow things then THEY should be held to account
-
Yet the NZRPA supported this deal didn't they. That's looking more and more like a total disaster
Maybe the NZR Board members responsible for it should all resign. As should anyone else who supported it. Although if it's as bad as it seems to be it's too late now. As its unlikely there is any way to get out of it
@Winger said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
Yet the NZRPA supported this deal didn't they.
They were very sceptical of it, and forced a review of the deal. That lead to a reduction of the revenue share sold to Silver Lake, which was sold at a much higher price.
I wouldn't blame the NZRPA for this deal. They wanted NZR to explore raising money locally instead.
-
@Winger that would be dependant on what they were sold, if silver lake isn't doing what they said they would to grow things then THEY should be held to account
-
@Winger that would be dependant on what they were sold, if silver lake isn't doing what they said they would to grow things then THEY should be held to account
@Kiwiwomble said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
@Winger that would be dependant on what they were sold, if silver lake isn't doing what they said they would to grow things then THEY should be held to account
But so what? I doubt if there is a clause to cancel the agreement if SL doesn't perform. I kind of think NZR might have been taken for fools. Just on the little I have read on it. So, it could in fact be a wonderful deal.
-
@Kiwiwomble Holding a well-funded US private equity firm to "account". Not easy!
-
@Tim very true....but at very least the poor semi amature PU board members shouldnt be punished if it was to be found silverlake had dropped the ball
@Kiwiwomble said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
found silverlake had dropped the ball
Thye haven't though. From their viewpoint. It's a small up-front investment for guaranteed ongoing good returns it seems.
I just hope its not as terrible as it seems from NZR viewpoint. 7.5% is a lot of money to loss year after year
poor semi amature PU board members shouldn't be punished
Aren't 6 out of 9 appointed. So, they shouldn't be incompetent. But if proven to be just that they should go. Along with the 3 too. We don't want fools on the board of NZ rugby
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
found silverlake had dropped the ball
Thye haven't though. From their viewpoint. It's a small up-front investment for guaranteed ongoing good returns it seems.
I just hope its not as terrible as it seems from NZR viewpoint. 7.5% is a lot of money to loss year after year
poor semi amature PU board members shouldn't be punished
Aren't 6 out of 9 appointed. So, they shouldn't be incompetent. But if proven to be just that they should go. Along with the 3 too. We don't want fools on the board of NZ rugby
@Winger my understanding of the deal was they had actions in growing the revenue too, it wasn't a straight equity injection (we give you some money and you give us some profit later), silverlake sold the idea of tapping into new revenue streams they had access too...and we havent seen any of that
-
@Winger my understanding of the deal was they had actions in growing the revenue too, it wasn't a straight equity injection (we give you some money and you give us some profit later), silverlake sold the idea of tapping into new revenue streams they had access too...and we havent seen any of that
@Kiwiwomble said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
silverlake sold the idea of tapping into new revenue streams they had access too...and we havent seen any of that
Fine. And NZ rugby might not ever see it. But what then? Is there a remedy for NZR?
I don't know so I suppose I shouldn't criticise, I guess. But I'm starting to feel uneasy about this SL buy-in. Esp as the Board has bene publicly criticized as not fit for purpose. And the recent Board makeup proposal by NZR was truly awful.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
silverlake sold the idea of tapping into new revenue streams they had access too...and we havent seen any of that
Fine. And NZ rugby might not ever see it. But what then? Is there a remedy for NZR?
I don't know so I suppose I shouldn't criticise, I guess. But I'm starting to feel uneasy about this SL buy-in. Esp as the Board has bene publicly criticized as not fit for purpose. And the recent Board makeup proposal by NZR was truly awful.
@Winger said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
.... But I'm starting to feel uneasy about this SL buy-in....
i think we all are, i just dont think we can jump on the PU board members for fing up until we know for sure whats gone on, could also be big bad american private equity firm takes advantage of well meaning amateurs
-
@Winger my understanding of the deal was they had actions in growing the revenue too, it wasn't a straight equity injection (we give you some money and you give us some profit later), silverlake sold the idea of tapping into new revenue streams they had access too...and we havent seen any of that
@Kiwiwomble said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
@Winger my understanding of the deal was they had actions in growing the revenue too, it wasn't a straight equity injection (we give you some money and you give us some profit later), silverlake sold the idea of tapping into new revenue streams they had access too...and we havent seen any of that
Aren't we hoping for a lot if we think these new revenure streams would be instant? I genuinely doubt whether SL wanted to just have a stake in NZR with no thoughts etc and ideas that it was going to get bigger. I think you can see it with leaning toward more games towards USA etc, and especially Asia. I actually think we will see even more games from MAB etc happening to spread the name and get even more markets opened I will still be surprised if we don't see some kind of online game in next 5 years or so.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
@Winger my understanding of the deal was they had actions in growing the revenue too, it wasn't a straight equity injection (we give you some money and you give us some profit later), silverlake sold the idea of tapping into new revenue streams they had access too...and we havent seen any of that
Aren't we hoping for a lot if we think these new revenure streams would be instant? I genuinely doubt whether SL wanted to just have a stake in NZR with no thoughts etc and ideas that it was going to get bigger. I think you can see it with leaning toward more games towards USA etc, and especially Asia. I actually think we will see even more games from MAB etc happening to spread the name and get even more markets opened I will still be surprised if we don't see some kind of online game in next 5 years or so.
@Dan54 obviously not all of them...but their first one (NZR+) hasn't been revolutionary/innovative or a success...so not a great start
notice im not saying ditch them...but would be good to see what else it planned
-
NZR+ (to the best of my knowledge) doesn’t play games - everything still goes through TV deals. If they set it up to be an online rugby site with all games then it will quickly get members. The question is of course whether it’s worth running it in all markets, but in my case I I pay about $30 a month to a service I only use for rugby. I’d happily pay that directly to NZR+ but I doubt there are enough customers like me.
As a pay per game idea, it could have merit for people like my family who don’t have it but might pay $10-20 for a one match payment (eg, super final, AB games).
All of that is to say that any rugby space without actual live (or even delayed games) is always likely to be a failure.
-
NZR+ (to the best of my knowledge) doesn’t play games - everything still goes through TV deals. If they set it up to be an online rugby site with all games then it will quickly get members. The question is of course whether it’s worth running it in all markets, but in my case I I pay about $30 a month to a service I only use for rugby. I’d happily pay that directly to NZR+ but I doubt there are enough customers like me.
As a pay per game idea, it could have merit for people like my family who don’t have it but might pay $10-20 for a one match payment (eg, super final, AB games).
All of that is to say that any rugby space without actual live (or even delayed games) is always likely to be a failure.
