Author Topic: FOXA - Twenty-First Century Fox Inc  (Read 25937 times)

Phaceliacapital

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1004
Re: FOXA - Twenty-First Century Fox Inc
« Reply #10 on: June 11, 2015, 01:02:14 PM »
It's at least interesting that there is an executive shuffle only weeks after ValueAct considerably increased its position. I think it's their number 5 position (by heart so not completely sure).

I like Fox as a company, they are really an international content company with significant franchise power. They were going international way before anyone else (their India numbers are impressive and I expect them to remain that way for the coming years). As a "content" company they are less dependent on advertising revenues than their peers (Viacom, CBS, TW, ...) + they have the best content for advertising stickiness (sports, news, ..). My guess is earnings will be up considerably in coming years as affiliate fees get renegotiated (they negotiated lower fees for FXX as it was in the startup phase) and the investments in those channels temper off (gross investment was 2015 and prior years). Movie business is hit & miss but they have the highest EBITDA margin in the business from a long term perspective. There is much to like at Fox but it doesn't screen well on people's estimates (which I think are too low but what do I know).

As a cable operator it's impossible to not offer Fox networks. Some people argue that distribution will take the most of the value created but it seems to me that once you are done competing for your customer in terms of capabilities (4G, 6G, Wifi, triple play, whatever, ...) you have to compete with something else, and that something else can only be content. I think Fox will do well in coming years and would have loved them buying Warner, HBO is one of the most undervalued assets in the market as Warner's valuation significantly depresses its true value.
The harder you work, the luckier you get.


InsecurityAnalysis

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: FOXA - Twenty-First Century Fox Inc
« Reply #11 on: June 12, 2015, 01:48:02 AM »
I couldn't imagine cable providers not offering Fox most notably for the sports content, something that competitors like VIAB don't have.

Phaceliacapital

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1004
Re: FOXA - Twenty-First Century Fox Inc
« Reply #12 on: June 16, 2015, 01:53:25 AM »
There is a write up available at VIC for us "normal" users. It basically says what I wrote above but with significantly more words, so for those wishing a little bit more background it's a quick and interesting read.
The harder you work, the luckier you get.

ZenaidaMacroura

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 374
Re: FOXA - Twenty-First Century Fox Inc
« Reply #13 on: August 06, 2015, 06:11:03 AM »
down premarket -looks to be going for another 7% hit.  The broadside didn't seem so bad, time to go through the transcript

bigbluffzinc

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 48
Re: FOXA - Twenty-First Century Fox Inc
« Reply #14 on: September 02, 2015, 03:31:46 PM »
Anyone know why Fox is up 8.5% today after hours?
Current Portfolio: VB, LBTYK, HWO, BAM, AGN, LNR, FB

Nnejad

  • Lifetime Member
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 211
Re: FOXA - Twenty-First Century Fox Inc
« Reply #15 on: September 02, 2015, 03:41:44 PM »
Probably just someone using a market order after hours to buy 508 shares.

Schwab711

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1626
Re: FOXA - Twenty-First Century Fox Inc
« Reply #16 on: September 03, 2015, 09:26:24 AM »
Why would FOXA be any different from EA with their reliance on pro sports contracts? If you really believe there is long-term value in these deals then EA would be a higher leverage play.

merkhet

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2997
Re: FOXA - Twenty-First Century Fox Inc
« Reply #17 on: September 03, 2015, 10:07:05 AM »
I don't know that live sports and video games are comparable...

Schwab711

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1626
Re: FOXA - Twenty-First Century Fox Inc
« Reply #18 on: September 03, 2015, 10:51:52 AM »
I don't know that live sports and video games are comparable...

You could be right, but they both just sports entertainment. One niche happens to be [much] larger. Both have their "moat" due to their status as the highest [qualified] bidder for licensing. I'd actually argue that video games is equally [non-]competitive market, in this specific instance (TTWO the only other possible bidder for sports rights). Both have business models with a significant amount of operating leverage built in. You could argue that broadcasting is less prone to volatile demand, but sports video games have now been with us since 1989 and new video game business models work really well with sports games in particular. I'm not sure video game and live sports markets will look all that different once bundling ends.

By the way, Hulu set the market price for new content without ads at $11.99/mth. Sling TV (ESPN and a few other channels) is a lite bundle that hasn't really gain traction with just 250k subscribers.

http://time.com/4020168/hulu-no-commercials-plan/
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/05/sling-tvs-web-tv-subscriber-numbers-keep-growing-now-around-250000.html


undervalued

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 385
Don't gamble; take all your savings and buy some good stock and hold it till it goes up, then sell it. If it don't go up, don't buy it. - Will Rogers