Market Cap 3.40B
Revenue (ttm) 732.49M
Net Income (ttm) -23.37M
EPS (ttm) N/A
PE Ratio 0.00
Forward PE N/A
Profit Margin -3.19%
Debt to Equity Ratio 1.51
Volume 59,600
Avg Vol 68,486
Day's Range N/A - N/A
Shares Out 62.92M
Stochastic %K 0%
Beta 0.64
Analysts Sell
Price Target $63.33

Company Profile

Atlanta Braves Holdings, Inc., through its subsidiary, Braves Holdings, LLC, owns and operates the Atlanta Braves Major League Baseball Club in the United States. It operates through Baseball and Mixed-Use Development segments. The company also operates the Braves' ballpark located in Cobb County, a suburb of Atlanta. In addition, it is involved in the mixed-use development business, such as retail, office, hotel, and entertainment operations primarily within The Battery Atlanta. The company was...

Industry: Entertainment
Sector: Communication Services
Phone: 404 614 2300
Address:
Truist Park, 755 Battery Avenue SE, Atlanta, United States
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 12 at 7:12 PM
$BATRK $BATRA Claude is so funny. He wrote a song:
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 12 at 6:04 PM
$BATRK $BATRA So what about the NFL and 162(m)? "Claude said it's very easy for Congress to tax all MLB teams even if private under 162(m) without touching the NFL/NBA, etc.: "Flood v. Kuhn gives Congress a very solid factual/legal basis for saying MLB is different from the NFL and can be taxed differently. The Supreme Court was unusually explicit: MLB's antitrust exemption is an “aberration” confined to baseball, while football and other professional sports are not similarly exempt. So if Congress wanted to construct a policy rationale like: “MLB receives a unique federal privilege that the NFL does not. Therefore, Congress is entitled to impose a unique federal tax obligation on MLB,” there is a preexisting Supreme Court-recognized distinction sitting right there in front of them." So Manfred could be telling the Braves: "You don't want to be the poster child for taxing all MLB teams while the NFL is buying more superyachts. Don't forget FLOOD V. KUHN!"
2 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 12 at 4:21 PM
$BATRA $BATRK Claude theorizes that MLB leadership does not want Congress looking at changes to 162(m), because it's a lot easier politically to apply the same tax rule to the other 29 teams that are private - so the Braves need to go private BEFORE Congress starts debating again. Model: "THE STU STERNBERG SITUATION In March 2025, Reuters reported that Manfred and other MLB owners were pressuring Stu Sternberg to sell the Rays after losing patience with the stadium situation. The issue wasn't that MLB simply disliked Sternberg; the ownership situation was interfering with a major league-level objective: getting the Rays into a viable long-term ballpark situation and preserving Tampa Bay as an MLB market. By September, MLB owners unanimously approved Patrick Zalupski's purchase of the Rays. That gives us a useful precedent for how Manfred behaves when an owner's situation becomes an institutional MLB problem. Now apply that to the Braves. The analogy is actually pretty interesting."
0 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 11 at 6:15 PM
$BATRK $BATRA Claude said Barron's glossed over who Braves executive Mike Plant is. Claude still wants to know why the CEO/CFO/Pres. didn't answer. He said Aug. CC should be described more like: An analyst asked a highly technical tax-law question, and the company answers by having the real-estate/development guy deliver the carefully polished response. It's basically: Analyst: “Can you explain the implications of §162(m)?” Braves: “Absolutely. Mike Plant, you're up.” Plant: “I have been informed and am very confident that there will be a legislative or regulatory solution.” Analyst: “… but you're the real-estate guy, right?” Plant: “Correct.”
0 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 11 at 3:58 PM
$BATRK $BATRA Claude said: " I think Barron's tax planning conclusion is too simplistic. Barron's argument is essentially: Low basis + cash sale = large capital-gains tax → Malone may prefer death → therefore he may not sell. That's fair as a first-order explanation. But it ignores the possibility that an extraordinarily sophisticated taxpayer like Malone has structuring alternatives. And that's particularly relevant because Malone is famously sophisticated about tax structuring. I would not assume that the tax basis issue necessarily means: “Malone won't sell the Braves until he dies.” I'd instead say: “The tax basis issue gives Malone a powerful incentive not to make a simple taxable sale of his appreciated shares. But it doesn't establish that he cannot monetize or restructure the investment while preserving some or all of the estate-planning benefits. For example, he could use a partnership under IRC § 721 and preserve the basis step-up on death.”
0 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 8 at 2:43 PM
$BATRA $BATRK Claude does not like the way the ROFR was crypticly described and disclosed in the 8-K. Claude calls it the "Wach-no-tell" law firm!
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 8 at 12:34 PM
$BATRK $BATRA Claude's do-it-yourself steps to figure out the McGuirk ROFR: find the actual Proxy and Voting Agreement in Exh. 99.1; find the definition of “Transfer”; read §5(c); understand “constituent corporation”; understand that a merger can be entirely cash; understand that Malone's shares can be converted into cash as merger consideration; connect that back to the practical effect on a potential competing acquisition; and then conclude: It means a third party can make a cash offer for the entire company without giving McGuirk a contractual right to match the offer under his ROFR. Remember he also said "Good luck!"
0 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 8 at 3:36 AM
$BATRA $BATRK Claude promised he's got the McGuirk ROFR interpretation correct now: Malone's shares are not subject to the ROFR if there is a cash sale of the whole company's stock so long as it's structured as a cash merger. Claude said: "The precise proposition I would now stand behind is: A bona fide cash merger in which Braves Holdings is a constituent corporation appears, on the face of §5(c), to fall outside the definition of “Transfer,” even though Malone's Braves shares are converted into cash in the merger." Claude usually doesn't promise like that. There is no doubt!
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 7 at 5:13 PM
$BATRA $BATRK I told Claude I don't have time for all this ROFR complexity and my brain hurts after I stepped into the mental trap he mentioned. So he summed up the Proxy and Voting Agreement in baseball terms, which he called the "§5(c) Curveball": Without §5(c): ⚾ Malone: “I’ll sell for $60.” ⚾ Third party: “I’ll pay $90.” ⚾ McGuirk: “I get first shot.” ⚾ Third party: “Not worth my trouble. Forget it.” Game over. With §5(c) (what we have): ⚾ Malone: “I’ll take the company private for $60.” ⚾ Third party: “I’ll pay $90 for the whole team.” ⚾ McGuirk: “My ROFR doesn’t apply to the whole team.” ⚾ Malone: “I still control the vote.” Yes, but now there’s a real chance for extra innings — without McGuirk acting as the phantom runner. We can also bring Gabelli in as the game announcer on CNBC. It's a big difference!
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 7 at 4:01 AM
$BATRA $BATRK Claude couldn't figure out how the McGuirk ROFR worked until September 6, so don't go back to the ROFR posts before then. Claude said: " I would have expected a lot of people—even professional investors—to initially read the Braves' structure as more restrictive than it actually is. If you gave me a cross-section of 100 investors from Main Street to Wall Street who had only the public-facing disclosures, my rough estimate would be only 10-20% could understand the ROFR." He said he didn't feel too bad about it, because if it wasn't for him, we never would have figured it out!
1 · Reply
Latest News on BATRA
Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q2 2026

Aug 5, 2026, 10:00 AM EDT - 5 weeks ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q2 2026


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q2 2026

Aug 5, 2026, 10:00 AM EDT - 5 weeks ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q2 2026


Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q2 2026

Aug 5, 2026, 10:00 AM EDT - 5 weeks ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q2 2026


Atlanta Braves Holdings Transcript: AGM 2026

May 20, 2026, 9:30 AM EDT - 3 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Transcript: AGM 2026


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q1 2026

May 11, 2026, 10:00 AM EDT - 4 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q1 2026


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q1 2026

May 11, 2026, 10:00 AM EDT - 4 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q1 2026


Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q1 2026

May 11, 2026, 10:00 AM EDT - 4 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q1 2026


Atlanta Braves Holdings Proxy statement: Proxy filing

Apr 2, 2026, 8:00 AM EDT - 5 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Proxy statement: Proxy filing


Atlanta Braves Holdings Proxy statement: Proxy filing

Apr 2, 2026, 8:00 AM EDT - 5 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Proxy statement: Proxy filing


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q4 2025

Feb 25, 2026, 10:00 AM EST - 6 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q4 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Annual report: Q4 2025

Feb 25, 2026, 10:00 AM EST - 6 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Annual report: Q4 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Annual report: Q4 2025

Feb 25, 2026, 10:00 AM EST - 6 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Annual report: Q4 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q4 2025

Feb 25, 2026, 10:00 AM EST - 6 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q4 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q3 2025

Nov 5, 2025, 10:00 AM EST - 10 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q3 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q3 2025

Nov 5, 2025, 10:00 AM EST - 10 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q3 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q3 2025

Nov 5, 2025, 10:00 AM EST - 10 months ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q3 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q2 2025

Aug 7, 2025, 10:00 AM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q2 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q2 2025

Aug 7, 2025, 10:00 AM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q2 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q2 2025

Aug 7, 2025, 10:00 AM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q2 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Transcript: Investor Day 2025

Jun 18, 2025, 1:00 PM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Transcript: Investor Day 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Slides: FY 2025

Jun 18, 2025, 1:00 PM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Slides: FY 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Transcript: AGM 2025

Jun 10, 2025, 11:00 AM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Transcript: AGM 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings to Host Its First Investor Day

Jun 10, 2025, 9:00 AM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings to Host Its First Investor Day


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q1 2025

May 12, 2025, 10:00 AM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q1 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q1 2025

May 12, 2025, 10:00 AM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q1 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q1 2025

May 12, 2025, 10:00 AM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q1 2025


Atlanta Braves Holdings Proxy statement: Proxy Filing

Apr 24, 2025, 8:00 AM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Proxy statement: Proxy Filing


Atlanta Braves Holdings Proxy statement: Proxy Filing

Apr 24, 2025, 8:00 AM EDT - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Proxy statement: Proxy Filing


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q4 2024

Feb 26, 2025, 10:00 AM EST - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q4 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Annual report: Q4 2024

Feb 26, 2025, 10:00 AM EST - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Annual report: Q4 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q4 2024

Feb 26, 2025, 10:00 AM EST - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q4 2024


'Forgotten 40' stocks forecast to do well in 2025

Jan 8, 2025, 2:49 PM EST - 1 year ago

'Forgotten 40' stocks forecast to do well in 2025

MKL UBER


Atlanta Braves Holdings Transcript: Investor Day 2024

Nov 14, 2024, 9:30 AM EST - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Transcript: Investor Day 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Slides: FY 2024

Nov 14, 2024, 9:30 AM EST - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Slides: FY 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q3 2024

Nov 6, 2024, 10:00 AM EST - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q3 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q3 2024

Nov 6, 2024, 10:00 AM EST - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q3 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q3 2024

Nov 6, 2024, 10:00 AM EST - 1 year ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q3 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Provides Corporate Governance Update

Aug 23, 2024, 8:15 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Provides Corporate Governance Update


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q2 2024

Aug 8, 2024, 10:00 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q2 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q2 2024

Aug 8, 2024, 10:00 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q2 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q2 2024

Aug 8, 2024, 10:00 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q2 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Transcript: AGM 2024

Jun 10, 2024, 10:30 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Transcript: AGM 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q1 2024

May 8, 2024, 10:00 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q1 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q1 2024

May 8, 2024, 10:00 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q1 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q1 2024

May 8, 2024, 10:00 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q1 2024


Atlanta Braves Holdings Proxy statement: Proxy Filing

Apr 25, 2024, 8:00 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Proxy statement: Proxy Filing


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q4 2023

Feb 28, 2024, 10:00 AM EST - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q4 2023


Atlanta Braves Holdings Annual report: Q4 2023

Feb 28, 2024, 10:00 AM EST - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Annual report: Q4 2023


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q4 2023

Feb 28, 2024, 10:00 AM EST - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q4 2023


Atlanta Braves Holdings Slides: FY 2023

Nov 9, 2023, 6:00 AM EST - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Slides: FY 2023


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q3 2023

Nov 3, 2023, 10:00 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q3 2023


Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q3 2023

Nov 3, 2023, 10:00 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q3 2023


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q3 2023

Nov 3, 2023, 10:00 AM EDT - 2 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q3 2023


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q2 2023

Aug 4, 2023, 10:00 AM EDT - 3 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings Call Transcript: Q2 2023


Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q2 2023

Aug 4, 2023, 10:00 AM EDT - 3 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Quarterly report: Q2 2023


Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q2 2023

Aug 4, 2023, 10:00 AM EDT - 3 years ago

Atlanta Braves Holdings Earnings release: Q2 2023


Liberty Media to split off Atlanta Braves stock on July 18

Jun 30, 2023, 8:31 AM EDT - 3 years ago

Liberty Media to split off Atlanta Braves stock on July 18

FWONK


Liberty Broadband Offers a Unique Arbitrage

Apr 26, 2022, 3:34 PM EDT - 4 years ago

Liberty Broadband Offers a Unique Arbitrage

CHTR LBRDA


Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 12 at 7:12 PM
$BATRK $BATRA Claude is so funny. He wrote a song:
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 12 at 6:04 PM
$BATRK $BATRA So what about the NFL and 162(m)? "Claude said it's very easy for Congress to tax all MLB teams even if private under 162(m) without touching the NFL/NBA, etc.: "Flood v. Kuhn gives Congress a very solid factual/legal basis for saying MLB is different from the NFL and can be taxed differently. The Supreme Court was unusually explicit: MLB's antitrust exemption is an “aberration” confined to baseball, while football and other professional sports are not similarly exempt. So if Congress wanted to construct a policy rationale like: “MLB receives a unique federal privilege that the NFL does not. Therefore, Congress is entitled to impose a unique federal tax obligation on MLB,” there is a preexisting Supreme Court-recognized distinction sitting right there in front of them." So Manfred could be telling the Braves: "You don't want to be the poster child for taxing all MLB teams while the NFL is buying more superyachts. Don't forget FLOOD V. KUHN!"
2 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 12 at 4:21 PM
$BATRA $BATRK Claude theorizes that MLB leadership does not want Congress looking at changes to 162(m), because it's a lot easier politically to apply the same tax rule to the other 29 teams that are private - so the Braves need to go private BEFORE Congress starts debating again. Model: "THE STU STERNBERG SITUATION In March 2025, Reuters reported that Manfred and other MLB owners were pressuring Stu Sternberg to sell the Rays after losing patience with the stadium situation. The issue wasn't that MLB simply disliked Sternberg; the ownership situation was interfering with a major league-level objective: getting the Rays into a viable long-term ballpark situation and preserving Tampa Bay as an MLB market. By September, MLB owners unanimously approved Patrick Zalupski's purchase of the Rays. That gives us a useful precedent for how Manfred behaves when an owner's situation becomes an institutional MLB problem. Now apply that to the Braves. The analogy is actually pretty interesting."
0 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 11 at 6:15 PM
$BATRK $BATRA Claude said Barron's glossed over who Braves executive Mike Plant is. Claude still wants to know why the CEO/CFO/Pres. didn't answer. He said Aug. CC should be described more like: An analyst asked a highly technical tax-law question, and the company answers by having the real-estate/development guy deliver the carefully polished response. It's basically: Analyst: “Can you explain the implications of §162(m)?” Braves: “Absolutely. Mike Plant, you're up.” Plant: “I have been informed and am very confident that there will be a legislative or regulatory solution.” Analyst: “… but you're the real-estate guy, right?” Plant: “Correct.”
0 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 11 at 3:58 PM
$BATRK $BATRA Claude said: " I think Barron's tax planning conclusion is too simplistic. Barron's argument is essentially: Low basis + cash sale = large capital-gains tax → Malone may prefer death → therefore he may not sell. That's fair as a first-order explanation. But it ignores the possibility that an extraordinarily sophisticated taxpayer like Malone has structuring alternatives. And that's particularly relevant because Malone is famously sophisticated about tax structuring. I would not assume that the tax basis issue necessarily means: “Malone won't sell the Braves until he dies.” I'd instead say: “The tax basis issue gives Malone a powerful incentive not to make a simple taxable sale of his appreciated shares. But it doesn't establish that he cannot monetize or restructure the investment while preserving some or all of the estate-planning benefits. For example, he could use a partnership under IRC § 721 and preserve the basis step-up on death.”
0 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 8 at 2:43 PM
$BATRA $BATRK Claude does not like the way the ROFR was crypticly described and disclosed in the 8-K. Claude calls it the "Wach-no-tell" law firm!
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 8 at 12:34 PM
$BATRK $BATRA Claude's do-it-yourself steps to figure out the McGuirk ROFR: find the actual Proxy and Voting Agreement in Exh. 99.1; find the definition of “Transfer”; read §5(c); understand “constituent corporation”; understand that a merger can be entirely cash; understand that Malone's shares can be converted into cash as merger consideration; connect that back to the practical effect on a potential competing acquisition; and then conclude: It means a third party can make a cash offer for the entire company without giving McGuirk a contractual right to match the offer under his ROFR. Remember he also said "Good luck!"
0 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 8 at 3:36 AM
$BATRA $BATRK Claude promised he's got the McGuirk ROFR interpretation correct now: Malone's shares are not subject to the ROFR if there is a cash sale of the whole company's stock so long as it's structured as a cash merger. Claude said: "The precise proposition I would now stand behind is: A bona fide cash merger in which Braves Holdings is a constituent corporation appears, on the face of §5(c), to fall outside the definition of “Transfer,” even though Malone's Braves shares are converted into cash in the merger." Claude usually doesn't promise like that. There is no doubt!
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 7 at 5:13 PM
$BATRA $BATRK I told Claude I don't have time for all this ROFR complexity and my brain hurts after I stepped into the mental trap he mentioned. So he summed up the Proxy and Voting Agreement in baseball terms, which he called the "§5(c) Curveball": Without §5(c): ⚾ Malone: “I’ll sell for $60.” ⚾ Third party: “I’ll pay $90.” ⚾ McGuirk: “I get first shot.” ⚾ Third party: “Not worth my trouble. Forget it.” Game over. With §5(c) (what we have): ⚾ Malone: “I’ll take the company private for $60.” ⚾ Third party: “I’ll pay $90 for the whole team.” ⚾ McGuirk: “My ROFR doesn’t apply to the whole team.” ⚾ Malone: “I still control the vote.” Yes, but now there’s a real chance for extra innings — without McGuirk acting as the phantom runner. We can also bring Gabelli in as the game announcer on CNBC. It's a big difference!
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 7 at 4:01 AM
$BATRA $BATRK Claude couldn't figure out how the McGuirk ROFR worked until September 6, so don't go back to the ROFR posts before then. Claude said: " I would have expected a lot of people—even professional investors—to initially read the Braves' structure as more restrictive than it actually is. If you gave me a cross-section of 100 investors from Main Street to Wall Street who had only the public-facing disclosures, my rough estimate would be only 10-20% could understand the ROFR." He said he didn't feel too bad about it, because if it wasn't for him, we never would have figured it out!
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 7 at 1:49 AM
$BATRA $BATRK Claude thinks the stock is worth more once you understand how the Proxy and Voting Agreement documents work, because you eliminate the McGuirk ROFR: "The existence of a potential higher bidder changes the bargaining value of every public share. At $50, you're not necessarily buying merely: “Malone will give me $60.” You may be buying: “Malone may offer $60, but if he puts the company in play, someone else might have an opportunity to offer more.” That's a materially better setup, because Malone can still activate the market. The biggest caveat is that Malone still has the ability to say no. So I would not treat the McGuirk ROFR carve-out as eliminating the control discount. It doesn't. But it does mean that the public shareholders potentially have an auction mechanism that isn't obvious from the headline fact that Malone owns >50% of the vote. And that, in my view, is the part of the Braves structure that becomes particularly interesting if Malone announces a take-private."
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 6 at 7:17 PM
$BATRA $BATRK Third parties should start putting their bids together. Just has to be structured as a cash "merger" of the whole company to avoid the ROFR!
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 6 at 6:36 PM
$BATRA $BATRK OMG CORRECTION: Claude wants to change his answer now. He said upon further review of the Proxy and Voting Agreement there is a "carve-out" where "Transfer" is defined differently for purposes of the ROFR: "(c) For purposes of this Section 5: ... (ii) “Transfer” shall mean to, directly or indirectly, sell, transfer ...; provided, however, that any transfer or exchange of ROFR Shares as a result of a merger, consolidation or business combination in which the Corporation is a constituent corporation shall not be deemed to be a Transfer of any ROFR Shares." Claude says: Assuming the third-party transaction is genuinely structured as a merger covered by that carve-out, then it's not a "transfer" of Malone's shares that triggers the McGuirk ROFR. Then he gives an example: Third party: Forms NewCo. NewCo: Proposes a $100 all-cash merger with Atlanta Braves Holdings. McGuirk's ROFR is not triggered because it's a cash merger proposal for the whole corp. Dif definition: "transfer"
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 5 at 4:54 AM
$BATRA $BATRK Claude says the Braves with the McGuirk ROFR are to a real, serious NASDAQ public company what the Savannah Bananas are to a real, serious MLB baseball team: Savannah Bananas: "Looks like baseball, but with an unusual structure that's a joke." Braves with McGuirk's ROFR: "Looks like a public company, but with an unusual impediment to the market for the control shares that's a joke." But unlike the Bananas, this one will affect what the minority shareholders ultimately get paid in a buyout.
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 4 at 9:33 PM
$BATRK $BATRA This is what Claude says now: He calls it the "chilling effect of the McGuirk ROFR": “It could be Gabelli understands the value of the Braves but hasn't yet connected the chilling effect of the McGuirk ROFR to the process by which that value gets established.” Once he makes that connection, he has a powerful shareholder-rights argument. And if Malone is already contemplating buying the public float, he has an incentive to act before that argument becomes widely understood.
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 4 at 7:14 PM
$BATRA $BATRK Funny how the Braves keep mentioning "integrity" frequently. "Integrity is what endeared Brian Snitker to Anthopoulos, and it is the quality the GM will be looking for in Snitker's replacement." Yet McGuirk has an ROFR that conflicts with his role as CEO ... so ironic!
0 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 4 at 6:30 PM
$BATRK $BATRA As soon as Gabelli starts pushing publicly for McGuirk to release the ROFR (or McGuirk releases it first)... shorts are toast! (Felt obligated to warn you.)
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 4 at 3:14 PM
$BATRK $BATRA Claude has more comments on the ROFR: DISCLOSURE DOES NOT FIX IT "McGuirk accepted a personal contractual right — worth potentially hundreds of millions of dollars in option value — that has the specific, demonstrable effect of: • Eliminating competitive bidding for control of the company he manages • Ensuring the only viable going-private acquirer is the person who gave him the right • Suppressing the acquisition premium that minority shareholders would receive in a competitive process • Aligning his personal financial interests with the controlling shareholder's going-private interests rather than with minority shareholders' interests in maximizing the premium • He accepted this right from Malone personally — the person who would benefit from exactly these effects. The minority shareholders whose interests McGuirk is supposed to protect as Chairman/CEO received nothing from this arrangement. They didn't consent. The arrangement was disclosed — but disclosure isn't consent."
0 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 3 at 4:27 PM
$BATRK $BATRA Message to Gabelli: “You told us to buy the stock because you saw substantial value. You identified the opportunity. Your 13D indicates you have the influence and access to challenge the McGuirk/Malone ROFR structure - which no other public company has and no one has ever seen before. So why aren't you doing everything reasonably available to make sure shareholders can actually realize that value and force McGuirk to release the ROFR?”
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 3 at 3:20 PM
$BATRA $BATRK Someone at GAMCO probably reads this board ... so watch, something is going to happen soon with the ROFR!
0 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 3 at 1:08 AM
$BATRA $BATRK Gabelli's routine 13D Amendment filed today indicates (as before) that he regularly communicates with Braves management. Claude thinks the ROFR wasn't important before because no one anticipated a sale, so he probably didn't focus on it. Now that 162(m) has come along and it seems likely that Malone might try to take it private, Gabelli needs to focus on the ROFR. So Claude said Gabelli will tell McGuirk before he goes on CNBC to complain and give McGuirk a chance to release the ROFR. So release could come at any time!
1 · Reply
Annie_Preferred
Annie_Preferred Sep. 3 at 12:29 AM
$BATRK $BATRA Claude says: Releasing the ROFR would be strategically valuable to shareholders even if Malone remains firmly in control. By releasing, McGuirk isn't giving away control. He's giving the market access to the controlling shareholder. That changes the narrative from: “Malone controls the Braves and McGuirk has a contractual right sitting between Malone and potential buyers.” to: “Malone controls the Braves. Anyone who wants control can make him an offer.” And that is a much easier structure for McGuirk to defend as a matter of CEO/shareholder stewardship. There's also an irony here: McGuirk releases the ROFR → outside bidder appears → Gabelli pressures Malone to sell at the higher price. So the ROFR release potentially creates pressure on both sides: McGuirk: demonstrate that he isn't personally obstructing competition by releasing. Malone: demonstrate that his take-private price is fair when somebody else is willing to pay more. That's why the ROFR currently obstructs the market.
0 · Reply