Current private equity guys who are own pieces of NFL teams have invested as individuals using their own capital. This will allow private equity firm to invest capital from the partnerships that they raise from institutional investors as well. There are some very wealthy private equity people, but the funds they manage for third parties are much, much larger pools of capital than their individual bank accounts.What does this mean? Isn't ownership already PE, sometimes split amongst multiple owners? Does this just mean they can sell up to 10 percent of the team to anybody without the normal vetting and approval process for NFL owners?
The NFL is on the vanguard because their teams are worth the most, but I assume other leagues will follow for the same reasons. Could that very slow-moving Brady acquisition of a chunk of the Raiders have spurred some of this? I wonder if it's not really his money, along the lines of the Slappy McBluelips example cited above, so they needed to make a rule change to facilitate his purchase (and others).Seems like the NFL is running out of people wealthy enough to purchase teams, at least without having to resort to what European soccer has done in terms of accepting Middle Eastern money. This is a way for them to tap a large spigot of capital to keep valuations high and growing.
Curious -- are potential NBA investors paying attention to the general economic direction of travel of the streaming services/regional networks? On the one hand, I'd be worried about what kind of revenues will be coming to franchises in smaller cities if the regional network contracts continue blow up. On the other hand, these are smart/arrogant guys and I assume they assume they can come up with a lucrative plan for monetizing local TV broadcasts and are going to assume the national TV money will always be out there (not sure that's true, but...).I've seen pitches from several firms that specialize in purchasing pieces of teams (to date mostly in the NBA). The investment thesis largely seems to be "these assets have appreciated tremendously in the last 20 years so they will continue to appreciate tremendously."
In my experience, concerns about things like RSNs and the changing ways in which people consume media are waived away with a simple "people love sports - they'll always watch them! The ways in which we get paid might change, but we will still get paid, and even more in the future!" Right now, Amazon/Apple/Netflix are assumed to supply the next wave of money to wash into the industry.Curious -- are potential NBA investors paying attention to the general economic direction of travel of the streaming services/regional networks? On the one hand, I'd be worried about what kind of revenues will be coming to franchises in smaller cities if the regional network contracts continue blow up. On the other hand, these are smart/arrogant guys and I assume they assume they can come up with a lucrative plan for monetizing local TV broadcasts and are going to assume the national TV money will always be out there (not sure that's true, but...).
My understanding is the NFL is actually behind the times on this and the other leagues already accept PE investment and it's common in European soccer where franchise valuations rival the NFL. The NFL has always had weird ownership rules. Single person/family, can't own any other sports teams, etc.
Oh interesting - thanks for the info.The NFL is actually the last holdout on this among the major US sports leagues.
As someone who has developed a late-in-life fascination with corporate failures/scams (Theranos, Enron, FTX, Madoff), I always enjoy the documentary interview with the person who says, "I told [the regulator/owner/press] about the iceberg five years before things went wrong and they [ignored me/dismissed my concern/fired me]."In my experience, concerns about things like RSNs and the changing ways in which people consume media are waived away with a simple "people love sports - they'll always watch them! The ways in which we get paid might change, but we will still get paid, and even more in the future!"
In general, suggestions that sports valuations might not always rise or might even be due for a correction are met with looks that imply that I'm probably a simpleton.
edit: nm you covered it in the first part of your post, I had brought up DSG but the people you're talking to brush those types of situations off apparently lol.In my experience, concerns about things like RSNs and the changing ways in which people consume media are waived away with a simple "people love sports - they'll always watch them! The ways in which we get paid might change, but we will still get paid, and even more in the future!" Right now, Amazon/Apple/Netflix are assumed to supply the next wave of money to wash into the industry.
The multiples of cash flow at which NBA teams have traded recently are truly heroic, as high or higher than rapidly growing software businesses with 90%+ margins. In general, suggestions that sports valuations might not always rise or might even be due for a correction are met with looks that imply that I'm probably a simpleton.
First, thank you for these (and all your sports biz) posts - I always manage to learn something, even when I am actively not trying.In my experience, concerns about things like RSNs and the changing ways in which people consume media are waived away with a simple "people love sports - they'll always watch them! The ways in which we get paid might change, but we will still get paid, and even more in the future!" Right now, Amazon/Apple/Netflix are assumed to supply the next wave of money to wash into the industry.
The multiples of cash flow at which NBA teams have traded recently are truly heroic, as high or higher than rapidly growing software businesses with 90%+ margins. In general, suggestions that sports valuations might not always rise or might even be due for a correction are met with looks that imply that I'm probably a simpleton.