Originally Posted by
JohnnyTheHorse
I believe we may be looking at a reverse takeover of sorts... hear me out.
We can see from financials that it basically isn't a good purchase if we have to pay for it and assume the debt. So why the hell would Sky be looking at it, and saying that it'll need to be voted on by shareholders (indicating the transaction is >50% of market cap). Are management really that stupid to pay a large some for something that doesn't really fit and carries significant risk???
What if Oaktree and Quadrant realise that they cannot get out of their investment without merging with another undervalued company. What if the deal proposed is a merger, with Oaktree/Quadrant paying shareholders for say 51% of the shares and Sky distributing the cash on balance sheet prior to shareholders. Shareholders would need to vote on that.
Sky then becomes a bigger vehicle, that can be further sold in future as it could be a strategic asset for several companies.