elusive moonwalker
Guests
The money he gets via katherine by any chance lol
Latest on MJJC
- Latest Michael Jackson News
- Click Here to Join Our Community
- Follow us on Twitter
- Wanna talk Michael? Come join the chat rooms
- The Michael Jackson Chart Watch
- Become an MJJC Patron
- Join the Premium Member Group and Get Lot's of Extra's
- Major Love Prayer - Worldwide Monthly Prayer Every 25th
- MJJC Exclusive Q&A - We talk to the family and those in and around Michael
- Join us in the Chat Rooms
- Find us on Facebook
Sony and Jackson Estate reach agreement for Sony to acquire remaining half of Sony/ATV Music Publish
- Thread starter Ms. BlueGangsta
- Start date
The money he gets via katherine by any chance lol
elusive moonwalker
Guests
Been seperated donkeys years but neither are the rest of the family supp to get mjs money. Doesnt stop branca and co handing out money like sweets to them.
Joe sees $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ just like the rest of them now an asset has been liquidated. Hes clever enough to kiss brancas u know what unlike others with their fake outrage
How Much Is Sony/ATV Worth? A Deep Dig Into the Financials of the ATV Buyout
3/19/2016 by Ed Christman
FACEBOOK
TWITTER
EMAIL ME
In announcing that Sony Corp. has agreed to pay $750 million for the Michael Jackson’s estate 50 percent stake in Sony/ATV, to some it might appear that the music publishing company has a $1.5 billion valuation. But Billboard estimates that the deal carried a price tag between $2.2 and $2.4 billion.
So far the only financial details puclicly announced have been that Sony will pay the Jackson estate $733 million as well as its last annual dividend payment from the company, totaling $750 million.
Since leading a consortium to buy EMI Music Publishing, Sony/ATV generates between $600-650 million in annual revenue, depending on exchange rates. Of that, about $125 million annually comes from Sony/ATV's administration of EMI, a relationship that won't be impacted by the change in ownership structure, sources say. Together, the portfolios generate about $1.2 billion in annual revenue, with EMI’s portion sitting around $700 million before paying out Sony.
Inside Sony/ATV's Buyout of Michael Jackson's Estate -- And Why They Cashed Out
Press reports suggest that, due to a prior agreement that had Sony/ATV serving as the guarantor of Jackson’s loans to his creditors, the right to a discount was included if and when the company bought out Jackson's stake. A source says this sale price was "25 percent off half of Jackson's equity," working out to a discount of 6.25 percent of the total value.
A valuation model constructed by Billboard citing a discount of $138 million was refuted by some sources familiar with the deal, saying it was a higher amount. While the sources didn't disclose the exact amount to Billboard, if a discount of $150 million -- as reported by one publication -- is the correct amount, this implies an enterprise valuation (debt plus equity equals enterprise value) of $2.4 billion for Sony/ATV.
A Timeline of Michael Jackson's Best Bet: The Sony/ATV Catalog
If a $150 million discount is applied added to Jackson $750 million payment, that means Jackson's and Sony’s equity, is each worth $900 million. So with equity totaling $1.8 billion, that implies $600 million in debt being carried from the acquisitions that Sony/ATV made down through the years -- of Famous Music, Lieber & Stoller, and Rose/Acuff catalog -- giving Sony/ATV an enterprise value of $2.4 billion.
On the other hand, sources tell Billboard Sony/ATV was carrying around $400 million in debt from those acquisitions. If so, an enterprise valuation of $2.2 billion is implied. ($900 million for Jackson’s stake plus $900 million for Sony’s stake plus $400 million in debt.) In addition to the discount, other accounting adjustments were made to reach the valuation. Without knowledge of what those were, it becomes impossible to pin down the precise value of Sony/ATV.
Billboard’s estimate stands at $2.2 billion to $2.4 million.
Sony/ATV Head Martin Bandier's Memo to Staff Following Jackson Buyout: 'Very Positive News'
One source said that the negotiations netted out a higher than expected valuation so the discount didn't matter to the sellers. So how did they agree on this valuation?
Typically, when an asset is up for sale the seller tries to inflate the price while the buyer attempts to lowball -- but the buy-sell option triggered by Sony/ATV made it unwise to play that game, since both parties could have wound up on either side of the transaction.
Initially, the Jackson estate's posture seemed to indicate that it wanted to be the buyer, and Sony the seller. But if the Jackson estate low-balled the valuation and Sony became the buyer instead, it would have hurt its return on the investment, and vice-versa. The same conundrum could occur with a overly generous bid also, if you became the buyer instead of the seller.
Consequently, the buy-sell process used a mechanism in which each side generated an independent valuation for Sony/ATV. If these valuations were close to one another, the difference would be split to come up with a final price tag. If they weren’t close to one another, a third independent investment bank was to be hired to come up with its own valuation, which would then be averaged against whichever valuation -- Sony or the Jackson estate -- was closest to it.
However, sources say the third independent investment bank was never brought into the deal and that the two sides negotiated the final valuation.
http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/7263906/sony-atv-value-deep-dig-michael-jackson-buyout
3/19/2016 by Ed Christman
EMAIL ME
In announcing that Sony Corp. has agreed to pay $750 million for the Michael Jackson’s estate 50 percent stake in Sony/ATV, to some it might appear that the music publishing company has a $1.5 billion valuation. But Billboard estimates that the deal carried a price tag between $2.2 and $2.4 billion.
So far the only financial details puclicly announced have been that Sony will pay the Jackson estate $733 million as well as its last annual dividend payment from the company, totaling $750 million.
Since leading a consortium to buy EMI Music Publishing, Sony/ATV generates between $600-650 million in annual revenue, depending on exchange rates. Of that, about $125 million annually comes from Sony/ATV's administration of EMI, a relationship that won't be impacted by the change in ownership structure, sources say. Together, the portfolios generate about $1.2 billion in annual revenue, with EMI’s portion sitting around $700 million before paying out Sony.
Inside Sony/ATV's Buyout of Michael Jackson's Estate -- And Why They Cashed Out
Press reports suggest that, due to a prior agreement that had Sony/ATV serving as the guarantor of Jackson’s loans to his creditors, the right to a discount was included if and when the company bought out Jackson's stake. A source says this sale price was "25 percent off half of Jackson's equity," working out to a discount of 6.25 percent of the total value.
A valuation model constructed by Billboard citing a discount of $138 million was refuted by some sources familiar with the deal, saying it was a higher amount. While the sources didn't disclose the exact amount to Billboard, if a discount of $150 million -- as reported by one publication -- is the correct amount, this implies an enterprise valuation (debt plus equity equals enterprise value) of $2.4 billion for Sony/ATV.
A Timeline of Michael Jackson's Best Bet: The Sony/ATV Catalog
If a $150 million discount is applied added to Jackson $750 million payment, that means Jackson's and Sony’s equity, is each worth $900 million. So with equity totaling $1.8 billion, that implies $600 million in debt being carried from the acquisitions that Sony/ATV made down through the years -- of Famous Music, Lieber & Stoller, and Rose/Acuff catalog -- giving Sony/ATV an enterprise value of $2.4 billion.
On the other hand, sources tell Billboard Sony/ATV was carrying around $400 million in debt from those acquisitions. If so, an enterprise valuation of $2.2 billion is implied. ($900 million for Jackson’s stake plus $900 million for Sony’s stake plus $400 million in debt.) In addition to the discount, other accounting adjustments were made to reach the valuation. Without knowledge of what those were, it becomes impossible to pin down the precise value of Sony/ATV.
Billboard’s estimate stands at $2.2 billion to $2.4 million.
Sony/ATV Head Martin Bandier's Memo to Staff Following Jackson Buyout: 'Very Positive News'
One source said that the negotiations netted out a higher than expected valuation so the discount didn't matter to the sellers. So how did they agree on this valuation?
Typically, when an asset is up for sale the seller tries to inflate the price while the buyer attempts to lowball -- but the buy-sell option triggered by Sony/ATV made it unwise to play that game, since both parties could have wound up on either side of the transaction.
Initially, the Jackson estate's posture seemed to indicate that it wanted to be the buyer, and Sony the seller. But if the Jackson estate low-balled the valuation and Sony became the buyer instead, it would have hurt its return on the investment, and vice-versa. The same conundrum could occur with a overly generous bid also, if you became the buyer instead of the seller.
Consequently, the buy-sell process used a mechanism in which each side generated an independent valuation for Sony/ATV. If these valuations were close to one another, the difference would be split to come up with a final price tag. If they weren’t close to one another, a third independent investment bank was to be hired to come up with its own valuation, which would then be averaged against whichever valuation -- Sony or the Jackson estate -- was closest to it.
However, sources say the third independent investment bank was never brought into the deal and that the two sides negotiated the final valuation.
http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/7263906/sony-atv-value-deep-dig-michael-jackson-buyout
IMHO Neverland is very important and it was way more, again IMHO, to MJ than a retreat or a getaway, although it was that of course as well, but it had deep spiritual meaning to MJ and was the place he lived from 88 to 05--so that's 17 years, years of amazing creativity. Neverland is very connected and central to a lot of Michael's thinking about the way we need to live and reconnect with the Earth, with nature, and recapture our childlike wonder and creativity. I think it gave him a place to evolve in a magnificant way and to do powerful charitable and creative work.
As far as what could be 'done' with Neverland now--there are many options. I agree MJ's young kids probably would not want to live there all the time--but later when they are older, they might want to spend a lot more time there. It could be, for example, a place where Michael's library is re-established and a place for research and study into his life, thought, art, and so on. It could be a place where seminars are held, or where people who want to study and write about MJ could go on a sabbatical. It could be a lot of things--things that can evolve over time.
The other big point (IMHO) is that it is land, beautiful land in a wonderful location that MJ took a great deal of time to find. Just looking at it as real estate and as a tangible possession in that sense, we can acknowledge that prime, beautiful, historic real estate is hugely valuable. In today's investment situation, I think it would be something that would make a significant return over time. I think the Estate should look at this more carefully and try to negotiate with the partners in the NL venture. Look at the gorgeous theater and train station MJ built. I have never been there, but people I know who have, say MJ's spirit is felt there very strongly.
As far as what could be 'done' with Neverland now--there are many options. I agree MJ's young kids probably would not want to live there all the time--but later when they are older, they might want to spend a lot more time there. It could be, for example, a place where Michael's library is re-established and a place for research and study into his life, thought, art, and so on. It could be a place where seminars are held, or where people who want to study and write about MJ could go on a sabbatical. It could be a lot of things--things that can evolve over time.
The other big point (IMHO) is that it is land, beautiful land in a wonderful location that MJ took a great deal of time to find. Just looking at it as real estate and as a tangible possession in that sense, we can acknowledge that prime, beautiful, historic real estate is hugely valuable. In today's investment situation, I think it would be something that would make a significant return over time. I think the Estate should look at this more carefully and try to negotiate with the partners in the NL venture. Look at the gorgeous theater and train station MJ built. I have never been there, but people I know who have, say MJ's spirit is felt there very strongly.
redfrog
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2015
- Messages
- 947
- Points
- 0
Sure, like Sony was ever concerned that the Estate would buy their share. BS. They knew from the moment they
triggered the clause that Branca would sell.
Meanwhile, Joe Jackson should explain to Paris that she should be happy, if in fact Joe wrote that
without being pressured, which I doubt. His statement sounds like pure propaganda.
https://twitter.com/IJCSLYMJ77/status/711428727834615809/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
BTW does anyone know if Mijac includes every song performed by MJ and written by him or for him or only the ones
which he wrote or co-wrote himself?
Last edited:
144000
Proud Member
correction: edit
Last edited:
Ms. BlueGangsta
Proud Member
This will be my last post in this thread, and all I have to say is in the end I'm not happy with what happened, but what's done is done and cannot be undone.
Psychoniff
Proud Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2015
- Messages
- 933
- Points
- 0
This is why I'm sick of stans and conspiracy theories/theorists. This was a brilliant business decision by the estate. What would you stans want, for them to be more in debt?
Allusio
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 580
- Points
- 0
redfrog;4141847 said:
I respect everyone’s opinion, no matter if I agree with it or not.
However, it is sad for me to see that Michael’s child is taking part in ANY fan fighting on ANY side!
That is just one more unresolved stressful situation for her.
I guess, she has a free spirit and a strong will to fight for what she believes is right, but this is not her fight, IMHO.
And I am not talking that she can be wrong and later regret few words.
At the end of the day, it is nothing more but fans talking on both sides, it will not bring any justice or peace to anyone. Only division.
I just feel sorry for the girl.
In addition, I wish some fans could be wiser not to get her into this craziness!!!
We all have different experience being Michael’s fans and that catalog was a part of Michael’s legacy he once asked us to protect. I know that!
But being realistic and thinking about the future is important.
Depend on the past so much will not help anyone, IMO.
redfrog
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2015
- Messages
- 947
- Points
- 0
Allusio;4141904 said:
She is mad at losing the catalog his father died trying to keep. I don't blame her.
these are the tweets she recently liked:
And what a coincidence that right after she expressed her opinion about Sony in no uncertain terms
she is called ***** by the Daily Fail. The media is doing to her what they did to his dad
once he dared to step on a few toes and buy the ATV catalog in 1985 he became *****, of course.
144000
Proud Member
Allusio;4141904 said:
You say you respect opinions whether or not you agree. Once you make a personal assessment of the person stating an opinion, rather than the opinion, itself, that is not respect. You said you feel 'sorry' for Paris. I don't know of anybody who doesn't feel frustrated or angry, if they hear somebody tell them, "I feel sorry for you'.
Allusio
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 580
- Points
- 0
144 said:
Everybody has a right to state an opinion; I have no problem with this.
The problem is that the girl has to deal with this craziness! That what my concern is about.
And yes, I feel sorry for Paris, I’m sorry and sad to see that the girl has to go through such stress.
You just misunderstood my post.
Allusio
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 580
- Points
- 0
Any fights on Twitter are fan fights, nothing more.
HIStory
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 6
- Points
- 0
144000
Proud Member
Let's say you have a stock in McDonalds. I want to buy it from you. Both of us have bills to pay, every day. I decide to buy the stock from you. You say yes. You end up with this big wad of cash. I end up with the stock. Life goes on. Bills still gotta be paid. Which one of us is gunna end up not having money, first, while we still both have to pay bills? You. Bills have to be paid throughout life. The stockholder=Sony. The wad of cash owner= Branca. That's why what you call a brilliant business decision isn't a brilliant business decision. People will still be going to McDonalds long after you run out of that wad of cash.
What are you going to do when you run out of that wad of cash, and you still have to pay the bills?
Everybody has to pay bills as long as they are on this earth. Bills=debt.
HIStory
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 6
- Points
- 0
innuendo141
Proud Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2003
- Messages
- 3,559
- Points
- 83
- Country
-
And pathetic too...
HIStoric
Proud Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 3,456
- Points
- 48
Looks like he's filing claims about 9-10 years before Sony's control expires, so that when they can go back to him, they are all ready to transferred immediately on day one.
Allusio
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 580
- Points
- 0
Yes, and especially if the smart man managed to pay one very big debt. The world is not enough.
gerryevans
Premium Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2009
- Messages
- 1,761
- Points
- 63
respect77;4141972 said:
Plus...why do you invest in any company or stock? To hopefully grow value and therefore CASH for your USE. If you have held on to that McDonald stock through thick and thin and then you're hit with some major crisis, you sell the stock. Which MJ himself did when he sold half of his interest in the catalogue years ago. To think he would NEVER EVER sell it isn’t indicated by his past actions. It's a matter of timing of when. I do believe he would have tried to retain some interest in it, just like he did when he essentially put Neverland on the block, but in the end, his ownership would be minimal.
He was a very smart man to let it grow and grow, but he definitely tapped it himself in major ways to benefit from that growth.
If after TII and all his other efforts, he was still under the burden of massive debt, I think he would have tapped it again, even if that meant selling it completely.
Last edited:
144000
Proud Member
I was using McDonalds as an example to make a point, though I have a hard time believing there is a better investment than the number one restaurant on the planet for many years. But what smart man is into getting rid of assets, if he's interested in attaining assets? That's contradictory. And, there's no guarantee that there is a better asset than the one he gave up. All Branca did was wade into a situation of the unknown, by getting rid of the known.
Last edited:
144000
Proud Member
I think there is a huge difference in selling something completely and merging with Sony. He still had the sure thing. The changing of the fraction is just semantics. I disagree that you are guessing what he would have done. His pattern indicating he was not into completely letting go of such an asset. Selling it completely, means going and wading into unknown waters. I wish I could have seen this post, so I could double quote. And Michael proved that he was not into what Branca's into..having cash on hand. He used very little if any cash. He was into financing.gerryevans;4141982 said:
As far as what was 'massive debt', it's interesting that he never filed for bankruptcy. There was another great artist who, we never heard about, being in any sort of trouble. His name is Barry Manilow. Suddenly, one day, he reported that he filed for bankruptcy. I'm interested in knowing why MJ seemed to be the only star that was 'reported' to always be in trouble, but never filed for bankruptcy, but Manilow and others, we never heard about, and suddenly, out of the blue, boom, bankruptcy reports.
Finally, Michael never asked sony for the merger. sony asked for it. so MJ didn't act like he was in trouble. Since people are into guessing what Michael would have done, I'll guess why Branca did what he did: greed. He wanted to see liquid cash, NOW. Big cash.
Last edited:
gerryevans
Premium Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2009
- Messages
- 1,761
- Points
- 63
Because BOOM. That's how it happens. The public doesn't know everything until stuff hits the fan. How many of us knew MJ hadn't paid taxes for three years, or that he had more lawsuits hanging over him than suits hanging on a retail store rack...the list is endless of what we did and did not know. But facts have become evident since his death. Check out legal paper work and the accounting that the estate must submit to the court, and is on this site, and see the millions being spent yearly just to service that debt and provides evidence of its massive size.
As I stated and am in agreement with you, I do believe MJ would have tried to retain some ownership, but his contract when he did merge with Sony may not have allowed either party to do so when they desired to buy out the other.
HIStory
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 6
- Points
- 0
Actually there is information in this thread about why MJ did not file for bankruptcy: Sony bailed him out. Part of the deal was apparently exactly this shotgun clause.
Actually, McDonald's stopped growing in the past years because more and more people get conscious about how unhealthy their food is and it's a major contributor to why so many Americans are overweight and so unhealthy. The more people get informed and conscious about the effects of fast food on their health the weaker McDonald's will be (unless they change to healthy food). Obviously, it's still a profitable business, but I am not convinced they always will be. There are already signs of their business slowing down.
Anyway, do you know how many companies and investments are in the world in all kinds of industries? How can you say you are sure there is nothing better than McDonald's? And if it is true then let Branca put all the Estate's money in McDonald's stocks, after all there is no better business in this world.
It's not at all contradictory. People get rid of certain assests to attain others every day. That's what business is about. Religiously clinging on one asset, as if there is nothing elese out there, is not necessarily a smart thing to do. Everything depends on the circumstances.
This specific case with the catalogue wasn't a choice between everything staying as it is or selling it, it was a choice between selling it or acquiring more debts (close to the range of $1 billion) to be able to keep it. Considering that circumstance it might not have been smart at all to religiously cling to it at any cost.
Nothing is "known". With the current state of the music industry no one can tell for sure where the industry will be in 10-20 years. There is just as much risk in sticking to stocks than getting rid of them and opt for other stocks. All business carries risk. That's why a smart investment is usually one where the assets are put into diverse investments, not just in one.
Last edited:
Allusio
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 580
- Points
- 0
144 said:
Have you ever played chess? It calls strategy.
So going and wading into unknown waters is a problem!
As if to buy out Sony’s part with help of investors would be all so clear and 100% reliable and profitable deal for the Estate in probate.
So NOW, we supposed to be afraid of future debts for a debt free Estate…
And just because Michael did not file for bankruptcy, we should not worry about the debt that actually keeps the Estate in probate.
HIStoric
Proud Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 3,456
- Points
- 48
Honestly if MJ was still here today and Sony pulled the same clause, I could legitimately see him doing exactly what Branca and McClain did.
After all, didn't the Estate just make the equivalent of ~44 years of profit from the catalogue alone in this one deal? It's exponentially more than enough times to support the children for their entire life (biggest understatement ever). For the last few years it was giving them profits of ~13-17 million or something, so if the children were to spend that amount each year and live on that solely, with no other income, it would last them until Prince was in his early 60s (and that's not even counting interest, which would probably do a good job counterbalancing inflation? Not too sure on that but even then).
Honestly this deal was really good and I'm really happy for the Estate and Michael's children. It's completely cleared Michael's debt and secured his children financially for life.
After all, didn't the Estate just make the equivalent of ~44 years of profit from the catalogue alone in this one deal? It's exponentially more than enough times to support the children for their entire life (biggest understatement ever). For the last few years it was giving them profits of ~13-17 million or something, so if the children were to spend that amount each year and live on that solely, with no other income, it would last them until Prince was in his early 60s (and that's not even counting interest, which would probably do a good job counterbalancing inflation? Not too sure on that but even then).
Honestly this deal was really good and I'm really happy for the Estate and Michael's children. It's completely cleared Michael's debt and secured his children financially for life.
144000
Proud Member
Sony is clinging 'religiously' to that one asset. And, got the whole thing. And you say it 'might' have not been a smart thing. It worked for Michael, for years. The bottom line is, whatever debts MJ has were constantly being paid off by the power of this asset. The value of the asset is tremendously huge. If it wasn't doing it's job, why was such a big company desperate to have the whole thing? Nobody ever could say that, eventually, the debts couldn't be paid off, because it paid the bills, every year. There were just estimates being made of when those debts would be paid off. That asset was much more of a sure thing than the uncharted waters of 'diversifying'.
Last edited: