is an interesting read, although people would be hard pressed to classify it as fiction or non-fiction. Just from the information in the Yahoo and SB Daily reports there are red flags and sirens going off in potential investor minds. The questions start with the valuation and $750 million for a 10% stake. Any investor doing their due diligence is going to turn over every rock to understand how the valuation was derived, how reasonable the assumptions are and how the valuation essentially jumped by another $2.5 Billion between December 2018 and March 2019. The follow on questions will evaluate the investment term, the projected rate of return, and the ultimate exit strategy for the return of investment principal. You can bet a lot of time will be spent poring over details especially considering that 93% of the original investment stake will enter through one door and go right back out another door in to the pockets of the PAC 12 and its members. That leaves 7%($50 million) in the new entity to manage the media rights going forward. That is not a lot of resources to cover transaction fees associated with this original deal or the efforts involved in future rights negotiations and deals.

The fact they specify a 25 year term and minimum investment of $100 million defines the pool of investors they are seeking. Given the changing landscape(Disney/Fox, Time Warner/AT&T, etc.) this document seems to me to be an initial salvo by the PAC 12 to land the partner they should have had prior to the network going live. That valuation is merely setting the bar high enough that the PAC 12 has negotiating room to come down to the number they really want. It will be interesting to see who shows interest. Plenty of investors(pension funds, venture capital, the aforementioned combined entities, Google, Apple, etc.) with cash, however, the deal that gets done, to be successful, will need industry connections, distribution channels, etc.. This is essentially a Hail Mary by PAC 12 and Larry Scott admitting he sold them a bill of goods up front that they could go it alone. Not really sure if they are better off keeping Larry Scott or getting rid of him for a more experienced media type who has no ties to previous PAC12 decisions and can look at any deal proposed realistically as opposed to Scott who would view it through the tainted glasses of his past missteps.