Well, I am not sure many people would describe Sky as an...

Well, I am not sure many people would describe Sky as an "experienced IT tech" company!

They are a broadcaster, and have had numerous tech mishaps/failures in the past. The market is naturally skeptical about anything "techy" Sky are trying to do given the track record, including the new set top box they want to do. Their execution has left a lot to be desired.

But you are right that the whole "what happens from 2026?" question does weigh on some investor's minds. People assume that Sky will have to pay an amount to retain rugby that they cannot afford or lose the rights. Nobody knows what the landscape is going to look like in 5 years time, but people seem to be baking in the worst case scenario.

RP could still be the most valuable asset Sky own in time - it certainly won't happen over night, or even in the next year or two. These things take time to nurture, and relationships are key. I am optimistic for the future prospects - RP is already the destination that rugby fans around the world flock to for their news. So why couldn't RP become the NETFLIX of rugby? (not just rugby union, but also league and AFL etc).
It is also a volume game - they need to start off with really sharp pricing to get the numbers up high (just like they have done with NEON). Once you get people on the service and prove that your platform is reliable, user friendly and has the content they want...lifting prices over time becomes easier. If you have 1M subs worldwide, even a lift of NZ50c a week raises an additional NZ$26M a year (most of which will hit the bottom line by that stage).

But it is all about sentiment right now - which is not very good.

If a fair value can be agreed for Sky and Vocus, I favour a merger with Vocus. Done in a way that ends up with "Sky 2.0" listed on the NZX/ASX so that I can still have a piece of the bigger pie.

Sky's revenue streams would be highly diversified in that situation:

• Entertainment and Sport Content
• Broadband
• Mobile
• Energy
• International (RP)

Lot's of cost savings too as infrastructure and services are shared between the businesses. A lot of C-level execs would get the boot to avoid double ups)

That should improve the sentiment towards the business moving forward as the local sport component of the revenue becomes a smaller percentage of the total even though I expect it to continue growing too, over time. You get to the point where a loss of the NZ rugby rights would hurt, but not be deemed 'fatal' because Sky has its fingers in so many pies.

That is a big advantage Spark have. They paid through the nose for the RWC...$13M for the rights plus probably double that again to actually put a show together and broadcast it. Paying that kind of money would have been devastating to Sky shareholders, but was barely a rounding error to Spark. That is where we need to be. We don't have to try and replicate Spark...we need to become something different...but the principal is there. We cannot have all of our eggs in the content bundle business.