NASCAR Making Move To Buy ISC

My first thought was this deal would be rubber-stamped and close before qualifying is over today. Then I wondered if SMI might room to squawk about a monopoly.
 
Wait... didn't they get the Deathbed memo? NASCAR is going broke and the tracks are worthless anyway... I saw it on Twitter.
 
Larsonfan1995 said:
My first thought is, this gives NASCAR more authority to move dates around or take them away from those tracks and give them to Nashville, Rockingham, etc.

But, it could also just be to look more attractive to buyers.
Click to expand...
It's the same people pulling both sets of strings. NASCAR isn't going to take races away from tracks it will now officially own.
 
If this deal goes through NASCAR just has to act in the best interest of NASCAR. If that means if they can reach a deal with some non ISC track that will get them more money than running at an ISC track they’ll gladly give that date up
 
Taking ISC public was a bad move for the sport in the first place, and this should correct that error. I see it as a good thing and it will allow NASCAR to be more flexible with race tracks and schedules. Whether they the choose to and how they choose to do that I can't say, but now there is at least the ability to make moves that might be good for NASCAR, if not necessarily for ISC.
 
kinda funny, they are doing it to themselves pretty much. I guess that is a big deal to some. But thanks to Jim France however it turns out.
 
Formerjackman said:
Taking ISC public was a bad move for the sport in the first place, and this should correct that error. I see it as a good thing and it will allow NASCAR to be more flexible with race tracks and schedules. Whether they the choose to and how they choose to do that I can't say, but now there is at least the ability to make moves that might be good for NASCAR, if not necessarily for ISC.
Click to expand...

If the buy out occurs then any decision made will benefit the new company. This was done to grease the sale of NASCAR in the future.
 
Roger Penske supports NASCAR's bid to buy into ISM Raceway's owner
Motorsports’ most successful team owner and entrepreneur supports NASCAR’s proposal to buy International Speedway Corp., the parent company of ISM Raceway, site of Sunday’s Can-Am 500.
“I think it’s a very smart move by the France family (NASCAR and ISC founders and majority owners),” Roger Penske told The Republic in an exclusive interview Saturday. “In today’s world, having a public company and not being able grow it at the level that shareholders have expectations (for) ... I think it de-complicates the relationship between NASCAR and the public (company) ISC. Overall, I applaud them for making the move.”
“Fans are looking for more action and sponsors want more for what they’ve paying,” said Penske, who has Brad Keselowski’s No. 2 Miller Lite Ford, Ryan Blaney’s No. 12 PPG Ford and Joey Logano’s No. 22 Shell-Pennzoil Ford in Sunday’s 312-mile (500 kilometer) race. “We’ve got to build value and be sure our television partners and the media understands where we’re going as an industry.”
https://www.azcentral.com/story/spo...-into-international-speedway-corp/1962129002/
 
Towmater said:
If the buy out occurs then any decision made will benefit the new company. This was done to grease the sale of NASCAR in the future.
Click to expand...
. While I wouldn't be shocked to see the France family sell a percentage of NASCAR, I for one do Not forsee them selling a majority stake in the business any time soon.
 
Formerjackman said:
. While I wouldn't be shocked to see the France family sell a percentage of NASCAR, I for one do Not forsee them selling a majority stake in the business any time soon.
Click to expand...

Yet they hired Goldman Sachs to explore a sale. By a strange coincidence, Goldman just happens to be involved in the ISC bid.
 
Formerjackman said:
. While I wouldn't be shocked to see the France family sell a percentage of NASCAR, I for one do Not forsee them selling a majority stake in the business any time soon.
Click to expand...

upload_2018-11-10_19-41-51.png
 
StandOnIt said:
View attachment 36822
Click to expand...



Public records show that the France family has been buying shares of ISC while Goldman has been selling the shares that it holds. This indicates that the France Family believes the shares are/have been undervalued. Thus they believe it is good for them to buy the shares. Their holdings now account for about 1/3 of the total in ISC. By making the offer, that means the company they control (NASCAR) would take ISC making it private if the sale goes through. Thus, it doesn't impact the France family and their desire to be involve in ISC and NASCAR - they'd owe both companies in one private entity, i.e., NASCAR. A sale of anything less than a controlling interest in NASCAR leaves them in control of its future. Also, what one seeks today can change tomorrow if they believe it is in their best interest to make the sale and get out of NASCAR.
 
Towmater said:
Yet they hired Goldman Sachs to explore a sale. By a strange coincidence, Goldman just happens to be involved in the ISC bid.
Click to expand...
Nothing strange about that. If you have a vendor or supplier that's already handling a type of business for you, you go back to them when you want more of that service. That doesn't mean the two transactions are related. You can go to Wal-Mart for toilet paper and sandpaper, but there's no 'strange coincidence' at work.

Formerjackman said:
I for one do Not forsee them selling a majority stake in the business any time soon.
Click to expand...
If for no other reason than they apparently can't find a buyer. :p
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Nothing strange about that. If you have a vendor or supplier that's already handling a type of business for you, you go back to them when you want more of that service. That doesn't mean the two transactions are related. You can go to Wal-Mart for toilet paper and sandpaper, but there's no 'strange coincidence' at work.
Click to expand...

If you say so. It interesting that Goldman is getting out of ISC while the people they represent are buying more of it.
 
Towmater said:
If you say so. It interesting that Goldman is getting out of ISC while the people they represent are buying more of it.
Click to expand...
Two different parts of the same operation, in legal theory. The side that holds stock and makes investment decisions for its shareholders and clients operates independently (supposedly) from the side that arranges mergers, acquisitions, EPOs, advises boards, etc.

NASCAR and ISC aren't worth Goldman Sachs risking insider trading charges; too small.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Nothing strange about that. If you have a vendor or supplier that's already handling a type of business for you, you go back to them when you want more of that service. That doesn't mean the two transactions are related. You can go to Wal-Mart for toilet paper and sandpaper, but there's no 'strange coincidence' at work.


If for no other reason than they apparently can't find a buyer. :p
Click to expand...

Well, at a price they would accept anyway. That may play some part in it, but I really think that the sale rumors probably only represented selling a solid stake in the company, not majority control or the whole company, and I think a post -Brian NASCAR might have changed the game a little. I think we will know more as all of the puzzle pieces start to fall into place in the next couple years and I think it will be telling what kind of role Ben Kennedy plays going forward. As long as NASCAR/ISC remains solidly profitable, (which it appears it is) I don't see a mad rush to sell off the company.
 
Timing is everything in the investment world. The smart time to sell NASCAR was 10-12 years ago. Only one of the owners was smart enough to do that, while the other two were the buyers. Yikes, what does that imply? :oops:
 
Maybe the other two owners were more interested in staying in the racing business and continuing their family legacy than making a quick buck.......
 
Or that the seller was apparently capable of making only one good decision about the family business, because he never made another one.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Two different parts of the same operation, in legal theory. The side that holds stock and makes investment decisions for its shareholders and clients operates independently (supposedly) from the side that arranges mergers, acquisitions, EPOs, advises boards, etc.

NASCAR and ISC aren't worth Goldman Sachs risking insider trading charges; too small.
Click to expand...

In theory, the meltdown shouldn't have happened. It did. I think GS sold around 80000 shares of ISC in May. Not saying it means anything. Just reporting it happened.
 
Well if they own all the tracks, makes it impossible to start a new series! I’ve heard a lot of chatter that a lot of owners and drivers want to do away with nascar, and start their own !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Tight in Loose off said:
Well if they own all the tracks, makes it impossible to start a new series! I’ve heard a lot of chatter that a lot of owners and drivers want to do away with nascar, and start their own !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
NASCAR won't own all the tracks. This deal doesn't involve SMI, the other major track owner. They own at least eight tracks and host at least 12 points races and the All-Star.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
NASCAR won't own all the tracks. This deal doesn't involve SMI, the other major track owner. They own at least eight tracks and host at least 12 points races and the All-Star.
Click to expand...
This is easily resolved by NASCAR not renewing contracts at SMI tracks, or buying SMI all together.
 
LouieLouie said:
This is easily resolved by NASCAR not renewing contracts at SMI tracks, or buying SMI all together.
Click to expand...

It all depends on what the Smith family wants in this case. It depends if Michael, Bruton's son, would be interested in selling SMI off to NASCAR.

Is Bruton still involved in day-to-day activities with SMI?
 
LouieLouie said:
This is easily resolved by NASCAR not renewing contracts at SMI tracks, or buying SMI all together.
Click to expand...
I don't think buying SMI would be that easy. I doubt NASCAR could scrounge up the cash. Since SMI owns some of the more popular / profitable tracks (Bristol, Texas, Vegas), there's little motivation for them to sell.

As to not renewing contracts, that goes back to my original concern regarding potential monopoly issues.
 
Towmater said:
If you say so. It interesting that Goldman is getting out of ISC while the people they represent are buying more of it.
Click to expand...
Goldman could have been buying for a future sale to Nascar which is done quite often so that
no future intent by Nascar is disclosed.
 
NASCAR makes bid for track operator ISC
Could this help remove obstacles that have prevented the sport from making major changes?

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com.../Leagues-and-Governing-Bodies/NASCAR-ISC.aspx

NASCAR’s surprising bid to purchase International Speedway Corp. was received positively by industry analysts who believe it primes the sport for much-needed consolidation, although sentiment was split as to whether the move foreshadows an eventual outright sale by the France family.

With a late Friday afternoon release earlier this month, NASCAR announced it would bid $42 a share, or around $1.9 billion, to acquire the publicly traded track operator, which the Frances tightly control with around 75 percent voting share. While NASCAR and ISC have integrated some high-level staffing this year, the timing and magnitude of the bid announcement caught most in the industry by surprise. Even some senior leadership at the companies were not informed of the move until just as it was being announced publicly, sources say.

The non-binding offer by NASCAR is subject to the approval of a majority of ISC’s shareholders, and the deal is expected to take several months to close even if it does not encounter any issues. ISC may end up having to increase the offer, which is a multiple of 11 from ISC’s current EBITDA of around $220 million, according to Morningstar analyst Jaime Katz, who follows ISC and believes the winning bid could have to hit a multiple closer to 15 times EBITDA, or closer to $50 a share. Market reaction to the bid was largely positive, as shares of ISC were up nearly 10 percent one week after the offer.

It was not clear whether the Frances took on financing to facilitate the bid, but NASCAR did retain Goldman Sachs as financial adviser and Baker Botts as counsel, while BDT & Co. is advising the France family.

The move sets up NASCAR to consolidate track ownership in the sport, and gives it vast control of the sport’s venues and schedule, which have been obstacles in implementing the dramatic change many feel is needed to offer exciting racing and fill grandstands. It could also allow the Frances to maximize efficiencies in staffing and operations. ISC operates 12 NASCAR tracks, including Daytona International Speedway.

Morningstar’s Katz noted that the bid to take ISC private makes sense because it will allow the sport to make long-term moves without the scrutiny of public earnings reports.

“When you have a business that is struggling to facilitate meaningful growth and you’re trying to change strategies — all of that is a lot harder to do when you’re under the scrutiny of Wall Street and public investors,” Katz said. “You step out of that scrutiny of everyone looking at every dollar and each incremental return.”

The precise structure and integration plan under the proposed deal was unclear, as well as who is orchestrating the deal, but sources said to expect ISC’s senior leadership to play an important role for the combined company. Two of the executives who were assigned dual roles this year, Craig Neeb and Daryl Wolfe, were originally at ISC, while the other two, Eric Nyquist and Paula Miller, were originally at NASCAR. People inside both ISC and NASCAR have credited the dual roles for creating efficiency and synergy.

Combining the companies and giving NASCAR greater control could also make it more attractive to a prospective buyer. Comcast had been in discussions with NASCAR as it digests its $40 billion acquisition of Sky, but a combined company would surely be reason for a closer look by any suitors.

Speedway Motorsports Inc., the publicly traded track operator tightly controlled by the Smith family, is seen as the next natural target for NASCAR to go after, if SMI also decided to go private, a notion that has been rumored as a possibility for years. SMI, which operates eight speedways, was trading around $17 per share late last week.

Formerly longtime rivals, a marriage between the companies owned by the Frances and Smiths was once unthinkable. However, sources say that the relationship between the families has never been better, and SMI President and CEO Marcus Smith even liked a tweet sent by France family scion Ben Kennedy that linked to the official announcement on NASCAR’s website. However, people close to SMI also noted that Marcus Smith remains as active as ever, working on major projects such as bringing NASCAR’s national series back to Nashville and helping the sanctioning body put together its new sponsorship model that is set to launch in 2020.

Smith’s activity seems to suggest that he’s not planning to exit the sport, these people said, but whether NASCAR could work out a deal that would bring the SMI tracks under its fold, while allowing some SMI executives to remain in leadership positions, was unclear. Smith has not yet commented on NASCAR’s ISC bid.

Independent tracks could also become a target of NASCAR, especially Dover International Speedway, which is publicly traded, and Pocono, which is private and family-owned. Those track executives have not commented on that topic in years.
Click to expand...
 
I really can’t figure what the end game is in all this. Is it to buy ISC, then SMI and then Dover/Pocono to sell it all off as one Or is it to have as many options as possible when it comes time to allegedly rework that schedule in 2020.
 
Do any other sanctioning bodies own the tracks their series race on?

If (big if) the combined NASCAR / ISC also brings SMI into the fold, I could see Dover and Pocono being told they can either sell to the UberConglomerate or wind up with no race dates.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Do any other sanctioning bodies own the tracks their series race on?
Click to expand...
No, for the most part. I mean, IMS and IndyCar are under common ownership, but that's just one track. There may be other isolated exceptions, but basically the answer is... No.
Snappy D said:
I really can’t figure what the end game is in all this. Is it to buy ISC, then SMI and then Dover/Pocono to sell it all off as one Or is it to have as many options as possible when it comes time to allegedly rework that schedule in 2020.
Click to expand...
Me too... wondering about the end game. If shaking up the schedule is an economic (earnings) problem for the ISC shareholders, then why shell out $1.9 billion to make that your own problem more than it already is?

I wonder if it's all part of a grand design for a France Family exit strategy. If I controlled ISC, I would want to also control NASCAR because that is where ISC revenues come from... race dates and TV money percentage splits. If I wanted to sell NASCAR, I'd also want to be out of ISC because my race dates and TV % are no longer "within the family." So I believe the tender offer for ISC shares is part of a plan to sell the combined company.

I've also been puzzled by the huge amounts ISC is spending to remodel its racetracks. I can't understand the economics, so I wonder if the ISC strategy is to spiff up the company to make it easier to sell both parts?

Daytona: $400 million; 101,000 seats. Phoenix: $187 million; 45,000 seats. Etc. I mean, each seat has to earn a return on ~$4,000 capital investment over and above what it was earning before. Holy Expensive Tickets, Batman!
 
LewTheShoe said:
No, for the most part. I mean, IMS and IndyCar are under common ownership, but that's just one track. There may be other isolated exceptions, but basically the answer is... No.

Me too... wondering about the end game. If shaking up the schedule is an economic (earnings) problem for the ISC shareholders, then why shell out $1.9 billion to make that your own problem more than it already is?

I wonder if it's all part of a grand design for a France Family exit strategy. If I controlled ISC, I would want to also control NASCAR because that is where ISC revenues come from... race dates and TV money percentage splits. If I wanted to sell NASCAR, I'd also want to be out of ISC because my race dates and TV % are no longer "within the family." So I believe the tender offer for ISC shares is part of a plan to sell the combined company.

I've also been puzzled by the huge amounts ISC is spending to remodel its racetracks. I can't understand the economics, so I wonder if the ISC strategy is to spiff up the company to make it easier to sell both parts?

Daytona: $400 million; 101,000 seats. Phoenix: $187 million; 45,000 seats. Etc. I mean, each seat has to earn a return on ~$4,000 capital investment over and above what it was earning before. Holy Expensive Tickets, Batman!
Click to expand...

Me too, I do not know what they are doing, but it drove the ISC stock up pretty nicely. If a person wanted to unload, it is a good time to do so. I went with Rogers Penske's reasoning
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom