value of management contracts

It would appear that the revised banking agreement will go ahead whether or not BNB is put into administration, since BBIPL and not BNB actually own the assets and hold the debt. It is in the interest of BNB, BBIPL and the banks to stop BNB being put into administration as this is likely to dissolve many of the management contracts forged with BNB. The power of BNB noteholders is therefore in our ability to decide the fate of BNB. If we pull the pin on BNB, the book value of the management contracts will evaporate under administration. Noteholders are guaranteed through BBIPL, so the administration route makes little difference. If we want to negotiate some monetary compensation for not pulling the pin on BNB, then we need to have some idea of what the management contracts are worth. IT has been suggested that BNB may want to start selling the management contracts to make cash available to pay down debt. On the other hand, it may wish to keep these contracts to retain its income stream.

In the 2008 interim results, the revenue from Assets Under Management (AUM) was:

$138 million in base fees
$137 million in advisory fees
$22 million in performance fees

Totaling $297 million for the first half.

The results for the previous comparable period were:

$89 million in base fees
$81 million in advisory fees
$5 million in performance fees

Totalling $175 million for the first half.

We need to recognize that BNB has sold its management rights to some of the satellites. Does anyone know which ones were sold and what they may have contributed to the above revenues?

Also, I am wondering what proportion of the assets (if any) under management are contracted to BBIPL rather than BNB? Can anyone enlighten me here?