Business & Investing
Sponsored by

Value of Content - Investable?

1,225 Views | 8 Replies | Last: 5 mo ago by superunknown
I bleed maroon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So, watching current events, several things stand out to me:

- Broadcast media is beaten down, with few prospects for improvement outside of M&A and consolidation
- Traditional sources of journalism (newspapers, magazines, etc.) are at their lowest valuations in memory
- Social media content providers (META, RDDT, PINS, etc.) are a mixed bag, with most struggling how to best monetize the subscription value of their content outside of advertising
- Advertising on the above is nearing saturation (maybe?), and consumer fatigue is growing (maybe?)
- Movie studios appear to be fighting for a bigger slice of a shrinking pie
- Specialty content providers (ESPN, reality TV, celebrity trackers, political loudmouths, etc.) don't seem to have the growth prospects they used to enjoy.
- Outside of Netflix, it's a terrible segment of the market, with bad results and worse prospects.

Bottom line, they're all in a world of hurt. The bright side I see involves AI - - I've seen several deals where RDDT (as an example) has been paid by Chat GPT or the like for access to their content. This is still a bit strange to me, as RDDT isn't really a content creator, just a glorified message board, but they are apparently able to justify a value for what they have. Clearly, several news sources (FoxNews, The Atlantic, NY Times, and others) have done similar things. The terms of these deals have not been disclosed, to my knowledge, so I don't know if they're paid a pittance, or is it replicable throughout the industry, with growth prospects going forward?

The investable question for me is does this future income stream (I'm assuming they aren't paid a lump sum up front for unlimited future rights to their content) justify investing in this beaten-down sector? I'm intrigued, but unconvinced. Anyone have insights to share, here?


NOTE: Full disclosure: I bought PARA, DIS, WBD, and RDDT over the past 6-12 months, partially due to this premise, but mostly as M&A targets. It has been a failed premise, thus far. PARA's recent acquisition was a total snoozer, from a financial reward perspective.
Heineken-Ashi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And this at a time when the stock market has never been higher. Just wait until the depression sets in.

Advertiser money is driving the majority of these industries. When the consumer pulls back, hard, you will feel it first in companies whose revenue comes from advertising.
"H-A: In return for the flattery, can you reduce the size of your signature? It's the only part of your posts that don't add value. In its' place, just put "I'm an investing savant, and make no apologies for it", as oldarmy1 would do."
- I Bleed Maroon (distracted easily by signatures)
JSKolache
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Nothing justifies buying media. Better to buy bitcoin on an up day or literally anything else.
superunknown
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
JSKolache said:

Nothing justifies buying media. Better to buy bitcoin on an up day or literally anything else.


Agree with this. If you're looking as investing as buying stock? Well.... good luck. Maybe if you'd catch one of the new media type things on a pump & dump/meme stock thing but as a long term thing? Hell no.

Every single broadcast media company is leveraged with debt due to the endless M&A thinking somehow they're going to consolidate into profitability due to blahblah synergies and all that but as the OP laid out, the marketplace is splintered and there's a whole lot more slices out of the pie than ever before and tech companies like Amazon and Apple are throwing in on media too because they like the cash flow and the idea of selling ads to a captive market. One need look no further than our Mays Business school and what happened with Clear Channel and see what the current media landscape is. Radio went through this (still is) and TV is going through this more in the last 5-10 years.

No need to mention print media at all, because it died.
12thMan9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If your question is what to invest in, then you should look at tangible assets.

Humans needs a place to live & food to eat. It's not that hard.
Ronnie '88
I bleed maroon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well, a mixed bag of responses, to be sure.

I think most have missed the point of the post, which is:

Does content have unlocked or unappreciated value (given the rise of AI), and if so, how can we make money on it?

I'm not looking for advice on what to invest in, if bitcoin is great, or if media companies have been junk stocks lately (that's been proven).
K_P
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The biggest risk to your idea is that it depends on strong copyright enforcement. See the NY Times lawsuit vs OpenAI. If someone asks OpenAI about a current event, should it direct them to the NY Times article or correctly summarize it? Can OpenAI be trained on copyrighted content?

I think copyright protection will ultimately be undermined. The content owners will lose and the AI companies will win.

See similar copyright disputes with YouTube. Anyone can use a song in their personal YouTube video and Google (or the individual) doesn't automatically have to pay a licensing fee. The owner of the song can complain, but the onus is on the copyright holder, not the creator or social media company. I think it will go a similar direction for AI companies.
I bleed maroon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
K_P said:

The biggest risk to your idea is that it depends on strong copyright enforcement. See the NY Times lawsuit vs OpenAI. If someone asks OpenAI about a current event, should it direct them to the NY Times article or correctly summarize it? Can OpenAI be trained on copyrighted content?

I think copyright protection will ultimately be undermined. The content owners will lose and the AI companies will win.

See similar copyright disputes with YouTube. Anyone can use a song in their personal YouTube video and Google (or the individual) doesn't automatically have to pay a licensing fee. The owner of the song can complain, but the onus is on the copyright holder, not the creator or social media company. I think it will go a similar direction for AI companies.
Yep - that seems like one of the biggest concerns. The onus is on the content creator, and it has to be proven that a violation has occurred. That's why I'm interested in the idea of licensing their content, as a way to get ahead of the issue and monetize something they've already expensed on their books. Once again, if they're paid a pittance, it hardly matters, but if they can negotiate sizable ongoing income streams, this "annuity" or "royalty" stream is just like a recurring subscription that Wall Street tends to value highly.

I guess we'll see.
superunknown
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
When you mention those things it does make me think that all these giant artists who've sold their rights to these PE groups for licensing purposes...i do feel those might be worth something. Gut feeling is that we get a bunch of AI generated slop based on that. Because it's cheap content I'm sure it'll be somewhat profitable.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.