What's in it for Rogers Communications?

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

Thanks for the reminder about the corporate ownership rule. I just checked Rogers' annual report (I googled something like "Rogers Communications structure). I wanted to see if it was private or public. It is public, but it is relatively closely held. The companies 18 owners hold over 91 percent of the company's stock. Three or four of them are survivors of Ted Rogers. It would seem that there could be enough personal wealth to see a primary owner emerge.

 

The rule blows a hole in my theory about Rogers' diversification. However, it brings me back to my original question. What's in it for Rogers? If it awfully expensive dabbling minus some intent. Another question: do any of you remember if the Bills sought this out, or did Rogers approach Wilson/Brandon?

Hey Mike:

 

Some people think that "marrying" content and distribution maximizes the value of both. There's an explanation of that here (using Rogers' recent agreement to purchase a partial ownership interest in MLSE as the main example):

 

http://offsidesportsblog.blogspot.com/p/mlse-buy.html

 

While that doesn't directly answer your main question, it might give you some insight into why a telecommunications company like Rogers is generally interested in owning sports "content."

 

As for the "corporate ownership rule" - - it is widely misunderstood. Publicly traded corporations with hundreds or thousands of shareholders can't own an NFL franchise, nor can non-profit corporations regardless of size (except for Green Bay). But closely held for-profit corporations with a small number of shareholders can own an NFL franchise. Here's one:

 

http://appext9.dos.state.ny.us/corp_public/CORPSEARCH.ENTITY_INFORMATION?p_nameid=415664&p_corpid=355631&p_entity_name=%42%75%66%66%61%6C%6F%20%42%69%6C%6C%73&p_name_type=%41&p_search_type=%42%45%47%49%4E%53&p_srch_results_page=0

 

When Ralph passes, there might be a way for the "Rogers Control Trust" to structure a purchase offer for the Bills that would comply with current NFL ownership rules. It depends on, among other things, how many people are beneficiaries of that trust. If you are interested in how that might work, see post # 164 in this archived thread:

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/130317-did-ralph-already-grant-toronto-an-option-to-buy/page__st__160

 

Finally, if you still have the link identifying or mentioning the 18 or so owners you mentioned, would you mind posting it? I'm curious about the details. Thanks.

[Rivermont Mike]

Hey Mike:

 

Some people think that "marrying" content and distribution maximizes the value of both. There's an explanation of that here (using Rogers' recent agreement to purchase a partial ownership interest in MLSE as the main example):

 

http://offsidesportsblog.blogspot.com/p/mlse-buy.html

 

While that doesn't directly answer your main question, it might give you some insight into why a telecommunications company like Rogers is generally interested in owning sports "content."

 

As for the "corporate ownership rule" - - it is widely misunderstood. Publicly traded corporations with hundreds or thousands of shareholders can't own an NFL franchise, nor can non-profit corporations regardless of size (except for Green Bay). But closely held for-profit corporations with a small number of shareholders can own an NFL franchise. Here's one:

 

http://appext9.dos.state.ny.us/corp_public/CORPSEARCH.ENTITY_INFORMATION?p_nameid=415664&p_corpid=355631&p_entity_name=%42%75%66%66%61%6C%6F%20%42%69%6C%6C%73&p_name_type=%41&p_search_type=%42%45%47%49%4E%53&p_srch_results_page=0

 

When Ralph passes, there might be a way for the "Rogers Control Trust" to structure a purchase offer for the Bills that would comply with current NFL ownership rules. It depends on, among other things, how many people are beneficiaries of that trust. If you are interested in how that might work, see post # 164 in this archived thread:

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/130317-did-ralph-already-grant-toronto-an-option-to-buy/page__st__160

 

Finally, if you still have the link identifying or mentioning the 18 or so owners you mentioned, would you mind posting it? I'm curious about the details. Thanks.

 

That's what I was driving at in one of my earlier replies mentioning the considerable personal wealth of the surviving Rogerses. It is conceivable that the bulk of the 91% control of Rogers may be the three or four family members, with the other directors holding nominal amounts. Thanks for the reminder on the difference between large, publicly-traded corporations and closely-held private corporations--or even LLCs. The 18 I referenced are directors of Rogers--if I can find that PDF again, I'll post the biographies of the owners in a reply. Thanks for all of the links and pointers--appreciate your help.

 

Update: this is even better than what I found earlier--here is the rundown on all of Rogers' directors, including the insiders. What this doesn't reflect is the value of the Rogers trust--and that is where the wealth lies. Anyway, for what it's worth:

http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/people/board.asp?ticker=RCI:US

Edited May 29, 2012 by Rivermont Mike

[Lurker]

What if there is a corporation where one person owns more than 50% of the stock? Just for liability reasons you don't want to hold title to the team as a personal asset. You want a corp. to hold title.

Then you create a new corporation in which one person owns the majority of the stock in the NFL franchise. Like Buffalo Bills Football, Inc.

[DrDawkinstein]

You guys are reading too much into this, with all the business stuff.

 

The answer is simple: Grandson Justin Rogers needs a spot on the team.

[Rivermont Mike]

You guys are reading too much into this, with all the business stuff.

 

The answer is simple: Grandson Justin Rogers needs a spot on the team.

You, sir, are a genius,

 

Now go tell the suits how to get this done!

[Lurker]

The answer is simple: Grandson Justin Rogers needs a spot on the team.

He must be the black sheep of the family...

[Arkady Renko]

I believe corporations can own teams. In fact, I believe LLCs or corporations own all NFL teams. I think the distinction is about there needing to be certain percentage ownership of the entity owning the team.

[Lurker]

I believe corporations can own teams. In fact, I believe LLCs or corporations own all NFL teams. I think the distinction is about there needing to be certain percentage ownership of the entity owning the team.

Of course a corporate entity can be set up to hold the franchise. But it must be a corporation whose "primary purpose shall at all times be and remain the operation of a professional football team...and the only material asset of which shall be the member club."

 

"The ownership interest in the Football Company shall be held directly by a holding company that shall have no operating business or material assets but only ownership interests in other entities, and the ownership interests in the holding company shall be owned directly by individuals (or certain trusts or partnerships approved by the Commissioner's office."

 

All the gory details can be found in Article III of the NFL bylaws...