Starz Entertainment Corp (STRZ) Jeffrey Hirsch, President & CEO, Nilay Shah, EVP IR

Speaker A: Stars Entertainment. Um, Neela is also the investor relations for Stars, as well as President and CEO Jeff Hirsch with us. So, quick background. Starz is the leading premium entertainment destination for women and underrepresented audiences and home to some of the most popular franchises and series on television. It's available across a wide range of digital OTT platforms and multi channel video distributors and is a bundling partner of choice. I won't get too much into it since I'll let you go ahead and do that. Um, but thanks so much for making the trip in from la and we're so happy to have you this year.

Speaker B: Thanks for having us.

Speaker A: Yeah. So we had Lionsgate up here earlier and Michael Burns gave you a good introduction. Um, so you completed the separation from Lionsgate just over a year ago. Um, how would you characterize where the business stands today versus where you hoped it would be? Um, and how has the first year as a standalone been so far?

Speaker B: Look, I think the business is structurally a lot stronger today than it was a year ago. And we've been separated now for about five quarters. We, uh, have spent the better part of the last year unwinding a lot of the constraints, uh, that were put on being owned by a studio for a network. And so right off the bat, cash management is probably the first thing you notice. You look at year, uh, over year, we're probably $136 million better on, uh, free cash flow than we were last year because we're managing cash for the first time. Um, we have set ourselves on a path to get to a 20% margin business by, uh, the back half of calendar 27. And a lot of that is really twofold, really self help, which is getting ownership of our own content back on the network. Um, for the most part, Lionsgate kept most of our IP when we separated. So, uh, we've started over the last. We've had three and a half from when we announced the separation, so we had a lot of time to plan for it. Um, our first original will be back on the network July 31, called Fightland, which is, uh, a world set in the world of boxing in the UK. Very similar to our power type shows, $0.50 attached to it. But the cost of that show because we own it, is somewhere between the neighborhood of 1 to 3 million an hour cheaper than when it came from the studio. And so if you think about, uh, 6, 7, 8, 9 shows that we can own on the network and somewhere between 1 to 3 million doll per hour of savings, that coupled with which we'll Talk about in a minute. Uh, exiting the Universal deal. We've got a real clear path to a 20% margin business. Uh, coming into 27. Then as we roll into 28 and 29, you start to see free cash flow as a percentage of margin, uh, hit that 70% number. So you've got this business that's got growing adjusted ebitda, growing free cash flow. And I think actually if you look at the three years, we probably have more free cash flow than the actual market cap of the company today. So we feel really good about the progress that we've made in kind of. Right. Sizing the cost of the business. Uh, and we're clearly on that path right now.

Speaker A: Mhm. So jumping into the Universal pay to exit, that was big news in the quarter. Um, walk us through the strategic rationale there.

Speaker B: So we signed, um, does everybody know what a Pay one and a Pay two is? When. Okay, so when movies come out of the theater, there's a first window. It comes to a streaming service called the pay one. That's usually 18 months. Then it goes to another service in the second window that's called the pay two. Um, so we, when in 2020 when Netflix, we had the Netflix, um, I mean, I'm Sorry, the Sony Pay 1. Netflix took it. We did a combination of Lionsgate Pay 1 and Universal Pay 2. We signed the Pay 2 with the Universal in 2020 before they had put partners into the Pay 1. Uh, historically in that Pay 1 was HBO. And so that wasn't going to be a big overlap between HBO and Starz. So there was great value for that Pay two window. Uh, for us, last minute, uh, Universal put Amazon into that window. Amazon is our single biggest distributor. So think greater than 6 million subs are sitting and watching those movies on Amazon. Then they come to Starz. So by the time they got the Starz, we were paying prices for Pay2, but we're getting Library performance. We are a massively data driven company from our D2C products. So we were able to see the revenue performance and the viewership performance of each of those titles. And what we were actually getting versus what we were paying. Uh, it wasn't aligned and we knew we could go into the marketplace and buy library at 20 cents on the dollar for what we were paying. And so working with Universal, we worked our way out of that deal. Uh, we've been able to get out of that deal. Um, we do have some payments to Universal in 27 and 28 and then they drop off. It's a massive spike in free cash flow in 29. Um, but we are able to kind of moneyball the performance of the Universal titles by going into the marketplace buying library and Right. Sizing the cost structure of the business. So fortunately Universal worked with and we were able to do that and that's partly why we've moved the guide from 20% margin from 28 to 27.

Speaker A: You touched on some of my additional questions in there already. Um, no worries at all. So just more on kind of that database that you're talking about. Um, how confident are you in uh, the logic and I guess what does it say about Starz's long term competitive differentiation?

Speaker B: So when we launched the app in 2015 one of the things that we really wanted to do is get first party data right when for those of you who don't know when you're when we were all 100% linear in 2014 or 15, the cable companies basically send you ah, one page an email every month saying here's how many subs we think you have and here's what we're willing to pay you and that's as much data you have on the consumer. So when we launched our D2C product it was really to get to have a product in the marketplace that could help us if somebody got into a dispute, but also to get first party data. So we've really become over the last 15 years, 10 years a data driven company. I mean I wake up to three reports every morning. I mean it's real. We really retail the business and so we've got you know, years and years of data points on revenue. Uh, it's actually been really great because we've been able to use AI to sit on top of the database to actually start to give us efficiencies in marketing cost, customer acquisition, price point retention, retention offers. Um, for example, you know we have got a revenue model now that we built an AI tool on top of it. It looks at the slate, looks at the movies that are coming, looks at gaps in content and makes a recommendation for what the price point offer should be, what's duration of the offer and actually how much we should spend. So if you look at last weekend we had a movie called Shelter with Jason Statham on the tool said that we were underspent by about 500,000 going into the weekend. We knocked it up and we came within 2% of the app in terms of the recommendation in terms of subs. So we feel really, really great about that differentiator that using data to drive this business is Going to make us uh, is a real big advantage for us that's helpful.

Speaker A: So Moving up the 20% adjusted margin target, um, talked about the pay to exit contributing to that. Anything else that you would like to highlight as driving that?

Speaker B: Yeah, I think there's two other things. One which is owning our own content. So when you control the entry point of a show, so when usually you buy a show from a studio, they'll write the show, they'll come back and you'll say, okay, we'll budget it out and this is what it costs. And you go, we're not willing to pay that. So they take some pages out, then they take some storyline out. Now that we control the inception point, we say to the things we like the show but we'll only willing, we'll pay $4 million an hour, write a $4 million show. And so they start that way. So it allows us to control the entry point of cost and then we get the international sales which we weren't getting as part of Lionsgate. So you know Fightland, which is like I said, is our first original sky came out as the co commission partner. So Fightland will be a Sky original in the uk and as we get more and more of our content on the network, we can then go out and do output deals in international territories that will bring incremental revenue onto the drop the cost per show down. So that's the other piece. And then I think again, as we continue to use data in our business and we continue to move. When I started in 2015, we were 100% linear. Today, 72% of our business is digital. As the business continues to become more digital, we continue to take linear cost off the business and just put that to the bottom line. So we'll continue to look at the organization and take cost out as we become more digital and less linear.

Speaker A: That makes sense. So Stars made the decision last quarter to stop reporting sub counts as its primary KPI. How should investors think about what metrics matter most now?

Speaker B: Yeah, back to your first question. I think uh, the other piece that as we separated we've really been aligned around what metrics matter. Right. So it's OTT revenue growth, it's adjusted EBITDA growth, it's free cash flow and it's delevering. Right. And so when we separated we were probably 3.4 times leverage. We ended last year at 2.9. We've guided 2.7 this year and I'm pretty confident that we're going to hit that number. Part of all of that is actually not focusing on quarterly subscribers. When you focus on a quarter metric, what you end up doing is you end up bringing in calorie light subs to hit a metric at the end of the quarter. And if you think about a subscription business, slow and steady kind of actually starts to build on each other. So if you bring in high quality subs that last longer and you can just layer that on top of it, you end up driving an incremental revenue for the business. But if you're slashing the business by starting and stopping, starting and stopping. If you look in December, there's always a holiday offer, does a 99 cent offer for two months. When you get to February, all those subs are gone. And when you get to March, you've got to replace those subs and you've got to grow for the quarterly metric. And so then you put low price offers on to drive that. What ends up doing is it's starting and stopping revenue and it's actually bringing up your marketing costs because you're spending more to get those subs that you know aren't going to be there. So when we stopped reporting subs it allowed us to actually take a much longer view on revenue. So the AI model that we talked about, we look at a 24 month revenue horizon now versus a three month revenue horizon. And so that's been really healthy for the business. Our ARPU is up, our marketing costs are down and there's more stability in the top line of the business. So we think it was the right and most importantly, from a morale point of view, there's less stress in the building.

Speaker A: Now that makes sense. You raised price effective April 1st, I believe. Um, and early indications suggest it's going to plan with minimal churn, which everything you just talked about probably factors into what specifically gave you the conviction to move when you did. And talk a little bit about Starz's position as a complementary service and bundling.

Speaker B: Yeah, so we're not a broad based streamer. We don't news, we don't have sports, we don't have advertising, we don't have kids, we don't have Bully for the Dog in the Home. We focus on women and underrepresented audiences and we do that deeper than anybody else and more efficiently than anybody else. And so that makes us complementary. And so we're partners to all competitors to none, I like to say. And so we're sold on top of Amazon, we're sold on top of Hulu, we're sold on top of YouTube. TV, we're sold on top of all the cable companies. So what we consistently we look at the industry and we look at the broad based streamers and as they raise rates we always want to have a significant gap below them because in the consumer's mind when prices are similar the consumer says well subconsciously you're making me pick one versus the other. If there's a big gap between, you know, call uh, it Peacock, Hulu and Starz, they were like I have to pick one of those two and I can add Starz with it. And so we will watch the industry, we'll see where it goes, we'll watch what content we have in terms of a slate and uh, then we'll make a decision based on where we think our consumer is in the economy to make a rate increase or not. So we did one April 1st. It's going very, very well. Maybe because people think we were kidding when we did on April Fool's Day. But that was, you know, part of what you do when you do a rate increase is actually you try to do it and defend it. And so you look at, when do you send the notification, when do people look at it, you know, that kind of stuff. But Churn is at a hist, you know, coupled with the fact that we're not chasing subs anymore, Churn is at a historic low for the business which is great for ARPU because we're keeping more full price subs.

Speaker A: Mhm, that makes sense. So mentioned Fightland which premieres July 31st as your first fully owned original and talked about the sky co commission model improving unit economics. What does each party own, who bears the production cost and how does this change the P and L and balance sheet treatment relative to the license show?

Speaker B: So on Fightland we own the whole show, right? Um, obviously we offload some of it with a co commission partner with sky. They take on a piece of the budget, um then we run it through our output deal in Canada. So uh, the cost is there but we're on the hook for, we do have uh, production loans that actually help us time, cash, content spend with when it comes on and we pay that off. So we have some of that which is a very uh, good use of um, leverage uh to get it to the right place cheaper than our revolver. So it's a good working capital there. And we only have one or two of those. Uh, but we bear the price of that on a co commission we cover a piece of it. Um, and so the models are all different depending on this but it's a much better model just licensing because ultimately you're renting and you don't really have that long term IP growth in building that library and the ability to monetize it in second windows domestically, second windows internationally. So it's really getting uh, ownership back onto the network on scale is a key, key goal for us as we separated from landscape. Mhm.

Speaker A: What, what are you anticipating in terms of owned versus licensing content moving forward and when do you want to get there?

Speaker B: So you know, we got it to 50% of the slate in 27. I think in 28 it'll be, you know, almost. If you think about will have an Outlander show from Sony, one or two shows from Lionsgate and the rest will be Star zone. So on 10 originals, figure 7 or 8 will be star Zones long term.

Speaker A: Mhm. And you mentioned cash content spending. Have you talked publicly about what you're anticipating and expecting to spend over the next several years?

Speaker B: Yeah. So in 25 we had 750 million of cash content spend. I think we've talked this year will be sub 650 and probably coming down somewhere between 550 to 600. Long term is kind of the steady state where we think we'll be.

Speaker A: Okay, that's helpful. And then on the returning franchise slate you have a bunch of shows coming back in 26. Um, what does your viewership data tell you about audience re engagement for these properties?

Speaker B: It's a great question. Our engagement is up 8% year over year, which is I think significant considering what's going on in the rest of the industry. I mean, I think the fact that we're focused on two demos and we have something on the air week in and week out for those demos keeps engagement really strong for us. Uh, the Housemaid was on uh, last couple weeks and that is been in a mass. It's the number one movie that we've ever had from Lionsgate. We're getting Michael in the fall, so that'll be great for us. Raising Canaan comes back for its final season June 12, will premiere Fightland out of Raising Canaan. P Valley comes back for its final season and it's been off the air for two years. That's one of our biggest hits. Uh, and then we bring Blood of My Blood, which is the Outlander prequel back and so we have a great slate for the rest of the year and then we roll into next year where we bring Power Origins on which is 18 episodes, which is a longer run for us normally. Uh, that is the reboot of the Original power with them at. So it's raising Kanan moves into origin. So the kanan character, that was 50s character will highlight that into origin. So we'll bring the audience from there with that character in. And it's a young Tommy and a young ghost that brings that on for 18 episodes. Uh, we will announce another power show probably next week, uh, with Lionsgate. We actually are a co commission partner in there, so we'll own half that show. So it's the first time we'll own a piece of our original IP again. That's a really big step for us. And thank you to John and team for working with us on that. So thank you. The content slate has never been as robust as it is and we're really thrilled about it. I think it's going to continue to be a great year.

Speaker A: How much incremental marketing spend is required to bring people back to franchises? Is that significant?

Speaker B: It's not significant at all. The nice thing about the digital business, the downside of the digital business is you can connect and disconnect by clicking a button. Unlike my cable days where you had to call the call center, you had to wait. And so people just didn't want to do it. So inertia was big back then. Um, but the good news is that Winback is a zero cost game. If you watch the power show and it's coming back, we just send you an in app message and say, hey, it's back on in two days, three days. And so that's a zero cost win back. Uh, so you don't really have to spend more marketing costs to bring it on. And the way we, if you think about the way we schedule the network, so because we're focused on those two demos, it's not like a show comes on the air for Neelay, then a show comes on for my sister, then a show comes on for my dog Bernard. We have a show for that audience and so Kaden will come on, then Fightland will come on on week eight. And they're very similar audiences, so we will. You know, unlike other networks that actually binge where they force you into the next episode, we don't binge. So we're weekly. So what we do is after your episode airs, we'll put you into another show that we think that the data says you like, whether it's a movie or a show. So after Kanan episode 8, we will actually then premiere and stitch Fightland to that episode so we can bring audience across. Um, if you look at Ghost Season 4 into BMF Season 1. 80% of the audience came across and went through it and that was a huge gain. So generally speaking, the industry average on prequel sequels and spin offs is about 55% of the audience goes to the other piece. We're north of 75% of most of our spins offs and prequels and sequels.

Speaker A: Yeah, that's great. Talked a little bit about Pay One relationship with Lionsgate. Um, how do you think about the economic contribution of that PayOne window versus your own slate? And how's that relationship evolving post separation?

Speaker B: Well, we have a long term deal to 28, so that uh, relationship continues to be, ah, great. We're across the street, we see them all the time. We have some overlap on the board, so we're uh, while we're separate, we still have a lot of connectivity into the business. Um, but we are separate. Um, and so, you know, the Pay one's a great, I mean Housemaid was as big as any. Uh, our original force was as big as, you know, from our first title stream, which is acquisition and viewership. It's as big as any of our originals. That movie was massive for us. Um, and so, you know, Michael coming I think will be even bigger. And so we really like the Pay one. Pay one has always been a hallmark of premium. Um, I think most of the movie stars like Pay one because we're smaller. I like to say we're lightly, we lightly touch these movies before they get to a big streamer. So Lionsgate, if you look at what we did before we separated the 18 month pay one window, we split it so we get it for six and Amazon gets it for 12. And so Alliance Gate's able to monetize M, that movie in that first window. A lot better. We were able to get a discount. Our data shows that on our service, the first six months are the most valuable. So we were okay with that. So great relationship there. I think it will continue. Um, they continue to make great movies and so that's been great.

Speaker A: Shifting gears a little bit towards M and A, optionality capital allocation, these sorts of dynamics. Um, you've been explicit that M and A is not required to maximize value for stars, but also said there's a second path for growth through acquisitions that would have to be complimentary to your core audiences within leverage parameters and create clear value. Talk specifically about what you're looking at in terms of M and A and what opportunities.

Speaker B: Uh, yeah, I mean, I think you said it right. I mean if you look at the path 20% and the free Cash flow conversion. You know, we're not, not eager to do a bad deal, right? I mean the core business is operating really well. Uh, we're going to return a lot of cash to shareholders and I think the business as it is is a very investable business. I still think even with you look at the chart, the run up, I still think we're undervalued for where we think the stock should be based on the free cash flow conversion of the business. However, I think there's a real opportunity based on what's going on in the space today to go and scale the business. Right. If you look at, we've done a lot of work around our customer base, women, underrepresented audiences, where they're watching shows on Starz and where they're going to other networks. So do they go to a linear network and watch a show there? The nice thing about social media now is you can go out and actually scan what people post. You can create um, connectivity between networks. And so there's about 14 networks that we think there's high correlation between people watching on Stars and watching there that are interesting for us. I think long term we can build a business that has svon at Starz avod with a bouquet of other services that we know the customers watch back and forth so that we can put that content into the Starz app without ads and bring Churn down because we know that that's what they watch in between watching our shows. So that should be engagement should go up, Churn should come down. We think then we can use that ad supported content that they have to create an AVOD business that looks like Starz. But so you have an AVOD business and SVOD business together. So you're diversifying revenue at Starz and scaling it. The nice thing about all these networks and ah, I've been in the business a long time, they were all built the same way. So the back ends are exactly the same. You look at our G and a is about 7.8%. Most of the networks that are public are around 20%. So if you can put the business together, there's a lot of cost you can pull out while you're standing up a digital business for both of us, put digital revenue on the top of the business, take cost out of the bottom and stand up a really profitable business that is revenue diversified in terms of AVOD S5 with a low cost base. And so uh, there's a lot of unrest in the industry today. We have to wait till some of that settles down. Um, but I think once a lot of these deals close and people start to operate their businesses, some of these networks will fall out. And I think you can buy them pretty reasonably pre synergies. And with the synergies on scale, I think you can actually buy them really well and make a lot of money for shareholders.

Speaker A: That makes sense. And then just on the leverage side mentioned, you're targeting 2.7 times at year end and, and moving down from there at the end of 27, given the free cash flow inflection, um, at what leverage level does capital allocation change, would you feel more comfortable doing some of this M and A once the unrest comes in?

Speaker B: Yeah, Neil and I did a lot of work pre separation and we looked at small cap companies and anything that had under 2.8 times leverage traded really well. So that's really important for us to get down, you know, two and a half. You know, two to two and a half is kind of our stated target. And I think we'll be there pretty quickly based on the characteristics of the business. Um, what we do when we get there, I think think that's a good conversation to have. I don't think we're prepared to have that conversation today. And I still think, you know, we're, we're five quarters out, so I think a little bit of a show me stock still. So as we keep stacking great quarters and marching to that 20% margin with that free cash flow conversion, you know, leverage at the end of 27 should be around that two net two number. And then we'll have that conversation on what to do with capital for shareholders.

Speaker A: Yeah, Starz put a shareholder rights plan in place in March after Byron Allen stake was disclosed. That'll be in place through, I believe, March 27th before coming up for a shareholder vote. Can you talk to us a little bit about the board's thinking?

Speaker B: Um, here, Look, I think the, you know, in any kind of special situation where you separate from a company, they're trying to find the right value of the company. I think you've seen that in the stock. And so I think the board was coalesced around the fact that the company wasn't valued properly. Uh, also I think they're very focused on our strategic vision to scale the business and so to protect all shareholders. We think that was the right step to put in place so that we can have time to get the value to the right place. I think you're seeing that in the stock today, uh, and give us the opportunity to go take advantage of the disruption that's going on in the industry to scale the business. And so the board, we think that was the right approach to make sure that all shareholders were treated equally.

Speaker C: Mhm.

Speaker A: So you alluded to it earlier with the stock price momentum more recently. Um, but what would you highlight as kind of the, the key catalyst from here in terms of valuation? Why is now a good point to still enter the stock?

Speaker B: Look, I think it's. Nilay said this yesterday. Don't look at the chart, look at the math. Right. I think if you still look at the math at 20% margin converting to the free cash flow trajectory divided by the 16.7 million shares outstanding, the math says you can get to uh, there's still a lot of value left in the company. And so I think you got to. The chart's fun to look at, but I think when you look at the performance of the business, the trajectory that we're on, the fact that everything that we've got we either hit or beat, I think we'll continue to do that. To me that means there's still a lot more value discovery going on in the stock. And we'll see there. Our goal is to execute. We stated a plan. Our goal is to stay focused and execute on that plan. Uh, Fightland's going to be the first real big mark to market on us having our own originals. I feel very confident about that. I saw the trailer yesterday, it's spectacular. Um, I've seen the whole show too, so I know what it looks like. Uh, it feels like the original power, just more robust. Um, but our goal is to execute. We keep stacking good quarters, keep showing and executing against the plan. I think the rest will take care of itself.

Speaker D: Yeah, I would just add to. When I think about the stock ultimately when I think about the valuation multiple, the multiple should be a function of growth and visibility and how much much growth is there in the business. And how confident are you that if something were to happen, the company can still hit its forecast? And given what we've outlined and the self help we have in the business, we're very confident that this is a business that we know what the trajectory looks like and we know that it is a growth business on an EBITDA front. And when you look at what the multiple we get compared to, it's against a lot of businesses where it's really hard for them to grow their ebitda. It's hard for them to delever when the denominator in their leverage calculation is falling. We think of this as an EBITDA growth business. We're inflecting on free cash flow. We're going to be delevering pretty quickly. And so I look at it and say the multiple that is trading at today, if we do the things we're doing, I think the market's going to look and say we were wrong to juxtapose it against a lot of linear first companies. Um, I think that, as Jeff alluded to, I think Fightland is going to be a really important proof of concept. We're highly confident that that will be a very, very successful original that we have, and we're doing it at a lower cost. And, you know, the operating leverage, when you can cut your content cost significantly and keep your revenue flat to growing over time will be pretty significant. So we feel like we're in a really good position and, you know, we're excited to kind of execute on the plan that we outlined. So.

Speaker A: Great. Any audience questions before we wrap here? Okay. Oh, here we go. One. Um, uh, great content. Thank you for, um, keeping all it all in the market, um, uh, on the unscripted side of the business. Um, and then also content that is kind of like in the TV renaissance era of, like 2015 to 2020. Um, a lot of the content is driven by the relationships with the showrunners and relationships with the eps, I guess. Can you share anything about your pipeline for EPS and showrunners?

Speaker B: Yeah, that's a great question. Uh, we've got 40 to 50 shows in development today. Uh, we've talked about, uh, Masquerade, which is kind of our version of the talented Mr. Ripley, but Ripley as a woman, because everything we do is focus on women. Represented audiences got a show called Kingmaker, which is a D.C. political show that Bo Willim of a House of Cards is attached to. Um, we just announced an untitled black rodeo show that feels a lot like P. Valley. And so we have a lot of content in development, but what we've done is we've mapped the content that's on the air. Right? So a little bit of what content development is, it's assembly line. Right. So if you look at the shows that are on the air, you look at the cost. So the cost of the shows escalates as it gets in between season three and four. It really steps up. Right. So we know what the allowable portfolio it is for us to get to 20% and stay at 20%. So we've kind of mapped all those shows. And so the, um, Untitled Rodeo show feels a lot like P Valley. P Valley's Got his last season. That will then come on next to replace it. But that's at season one cost versus season three costs. And so we are staying within the LAO portfolio to keep us at that 20%. So everything that we have in development is mapped to what we have on the air. There's three or four shows. It's a lot like, um, the NFL draft in a sense, which when you have a player on a rookie deal and he gets to the end of his rookie deal, if you, if he's a special teamer, you won't sign him, he'll go somewhere else. But you go back to the draft, he gets somebody in a rookie deal. That's kind of how we think about cost management or on content. But we've got development with all great showrunners and writers. There's a book called All Fours that is one of the hottest books for women in their 40s in this country. Uh, we were able to get that competitively because we are adult, we are R rated, and the author really felt like that talent and that story would best be told on Starz because of what we do and how we do it. And so we're able to attract that in a competitive way. We didn't overpay for it. It was just because of what we do and how we do it. Um, we're also domestic only. Right. So when you look at a lot of the content coming out of the uk, Amadeus is on the service today. We can buy the US from people that have need to keep rights in the uk and other competitors will want the world. So because they can't get the uk, they won't take it. So that gives us a leg up on getting a lot of great content coming out on an acquisition basis coming out of the uk. So the development pipeline is as robust as it's been. Um, we do work with all great writers and showrunners and directors. But I would say, I think the world of these big overall deals that you've seen are kind of becoming few and far between, uh, other than a handful and you can count them on hand, people that have had more than three hit shows, great stories, great content come from fresh voices all the time. And because what we do in terms of women and underrepresented audiences, and we have women at the forefront and the female gaze as kind of the lead, a lot of the stories aren't being taken to other places. And so we get some of the best writers, some of the best stories. We've self developed a lot of great stuff. We've always had a team of 20 great developers. Most of the stuff that we're talking content we're talking about has been self developed. Um, and then we bring great writers on and great directors on. So uh, I feel really comfortable and great about the content slate going forward. That coupled with the Lionsgate movies, I think we're in kind of a really sweet spot for content over the next kind of two to five years.

Speaker C: Thanks.

Speaker A: So I think we're actually about at time already, so have to table this question for another time. But thank you so much for being here. We really appreciate it.

Speaker C: Christopher Marangi is President and co CIO Sergey Luzhevsky, Hannah Howard, Gustavo Pifano and Alec Bakanfuso. Our portfolio managers, Justin McAuliffe and Jenny Moo are research analysts at Gabelli the above webcast is an Excerpt from Gabelli Fund's 18th annual Media and Entertainment Symposium. GAMCO is providing these links as a matter of general information. We do not intend for these links to be a complete description of any security or company, nor is it a research report with respect to any of the companies mentioned herein. As of March 31, 2026, affiliates of GAMCO Investors, Inc. Beneficially own, on behalf of their investment advisory clients or otherwise, approximately 31.2% of Atlanta Braves Class A and 5.4 of Class C 11.3% of Sinclair, 5.8% of E.W. scripps, 5.2% of Madison Square Garden Sports 4.7% of Sphere Entertainment, 3.3% of Manchester United 2.9% of Madison Square Garden Entertainment 2.6% of Gray Television Class A and less than 1% of Common 2.2% of Ryman Hospitality 2.0% of Liberty Global Class A 1.1% Liberty Global Class C 1.4% of Versant Media and less than 1% of all other companies mentioned. The analyst's views are subject to change at any time based on market and other conditions. The information in this posting represents the opinions of the analyst and is not intended to be a forecast of future events, a guarantee of future results, or investment advice. Views expressed are those of the analyst and may differ from those of other GAMCO officers, analysts, other employees, or of the firm as a whole. Because the investment personnel at Gamco and our affiliates make individual investment decisions with respect to the client accounts that they manage, these accounts may have transactions inconsistent with the information contained in this posting. Certain GAMCO personnel may know the substance of the posting prior to its posting. This webcast is not an offer to sell any security, nor is it a solicitation of an offer to buy any security. Stocks are subject to market economic and business risks that cause their prices to fluctuate. When you sell shares, they may be worth less than what you paid for them. For more information of prospectus or summary prospectus, visit our website at www.gabelli.com or 800-GABELLI.