Hipgnosis Songs Fund
Page: 2
Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s board of directors said on Monday that it would support a takeover bid from Blackstone if the private equity giant officially files its $1.5 billion offer for the music royalty fund. Blackstone said on Saturday (April 20) in what it called a “possible offer” that it was prepared to bid $1.24 per […]
Private equity giant Blackstone bid $1.5 billion to buy Hipgnosis Songs Fund on Saturday (April 20), marking a significant escalation in the fight for control of the troubled music royalty fund and its collection of rights to songs by Neil Young, Journey, Lindsey Buckingham, Blondie and others.
Blackstone is offering $1.24 per share in an all-cash offer that represents an 8.7% premium over the previous day’s closing share price, and is significantly higher than the $1.4 billion takeover bid that Nashville-based Concord Chorus made for the fund earlier this week.
Blackstone already owns two other entities under the Hipgnosis name — the private music assets investment fund Hipgnosis Songs Capital and the investment advisor Hipgnosis Song Management — and its bid on Saturday showed the private equity behemoth is willing to flex its muscle to maintain assets under the Hipgnosis umbrella.
Trending on Billboard
The five-year-old, London-listed Hipgnosis Songs Fund has cut its net asset value and shareholder dividends in recent months, as it struggled to address accounting errors and infighting between its board and investment manager that have angered investors already frustrated by an underwhelming stock price.
On Thursday (April 18), the board of directors announced in a filing with the London Stock Exchange that it had agreed to recomment a $1.402 billion proposed takeover bid from Concord to shareholders, which values each Hipgnosis share at £0.93 ($1.14). While the board said that institutional investors representing 30% of the fund’s outstanding shares were on board to vote in favor of the deal with Concord, it still needs shareholder approval from investors holding a total of 75% of shares.
Blackstone’s Hipgnosis Song Management, the investment adviser to the public fund and the private fund (Hipgnosis Songs Capital), has the right to outbid Concord and any other rival bidders to take the fund’s assets private, according to an option in its contract laid out when the fund went public in 2018.
The option was created with the sensitivities unique to music rights in mind. Hipgnosis Songs Fund was founded and built by Merck Mercuriadis, a longtime music executive and manager for artists like Elton John, Beyoncé and Guns N’ Roses. Mercuriadis used his relationships in the music industry to build the fund’s portfolio of rights to hit songs, and this option in the investment advisory contract was designed to give artists confidence that their catalogs would never trade hands — something that famously angered Taylor Swift.
However, since Hipgnosis Songs Fund investors served the board of directors the equivalent of a no-confidence vote last fall, this option has presented hurdles for the board in its effort to secure outside bids for the portfolio.
In its offer, which references Concord’s bid as $1.16 per share due to fluctuations in exchange rates, Blackstone said it “strongly encourages the board of Hipgnosis to recognise the significant increase in value available to all shareholders under the terms of its Fourth Proposal, over the $1.16 as set out in the Concord Offer, and to work with Blackstone to reach agreement on a unanimously recommended Firm Offer in an expeditious manner.”
Accounting scandals may not get the public’s attention like a raid by Homeland Security, but questions about the quality of a publicly traded company’s books is a serious matter. This week, an internal report made public by Hipgnosis Songs Fund, the London-listed company that played a major role in turning music rights into a stable, attractive asset class, confirmed what some analysts and shareholders had long suspected.
At best, the 26-page report by Shot Tower Capital, the firm hired by the company’s board of directors in the wake of a shareholder revolt in October, details how the investment advisor, the Merck Mercuriadis-led Hipgnosis Song Management (HSM), made numerous missteps in accounting and financial projections of its vast music rights portfolio that includes music by Red Hot Chili Peppers, Shakira and Journey. At worst, the report suggests the investment advisor chose accounting standards that overstated revenue, inflated the portfolio’s valuation and — as the board previously stated — resulted in larger fees paid for managing the portfolio. In any case, information released Thursday presents an unflattering portrait of HSM and its internal operations.
Trending on Billboard
For its part, HSM considers some “aspects of the report…to be factually inaccurate and misleading,” the company said in a statement on Thursday (Mar. 28). HSM said it received the report the evening before its release and will respond to the board “in due course.”
To be clear, Shot Tower did not explicitly comment on the investment advisor’s intent in using certain accounting practices. The data-heavy report offers analysis, not speculation. But the report, part of the board of directors’ effort to regain shareholders’ trust, made clear that annual revenue was “materially” overstated and laid out numerous examples where the fund’s numbers didn’t reflect the reality behind its assets.
Take, for example, something called right to income (RTI), which are royalties that are paid to the buyer at the close of an acquisition. (If the acquisition’s effective date is prior to the closing date, royalties received by the seller after the effective date are credited to the buyer.) Normally, the amount of the RTI is deducted from the purchase price and is not included in annual revenue figures. However, Shot Tower found that some RTI revenue from Hipgnosis acquisitions was counted as annual revenues rather than an adjustment in the purchase price. As the board’s Mar. 18 update noted, including RTI revenue with annual revenue amounts to “double counting.” Misclassifying RTI “significantly” increased the fund’s income in 2021 and 2022, according to the report. In fiscal 2019 and fiscal 2020, zero and 5.3% of deals had RTI periods that extended for more than one year. In fiscal 2021 and 2022, those numbers jumped to 43.9% and 60.0%.
RTI also came into play with the proposed sale of a portion of the portfolio to Hipgnosis Songs Capital, a joint venture of HSM and investment firm Blackstone. The catalog was presented to shareholders as having a net purchase price of $424.7 million (including RTI revenue of $15.3 million). With pro-forma annual revenue (PFAR) of $24.1 million, HSM assigned a 17.6x multiple to the proposed sale. But Shot Tower believes the catalog’s multiple should have been 14.9x based on higher annual revenue of $28 million and believed the net sale price should have been $416.7 million. Shareholders voted against the proposed sale in October.
In fiscal 2022, the investment advisor changed how it accounted for accrued revenues. The fund is required to make estimates on revenue earned in the period, rather than recognize revenue when the royalties are collected. A new approach, called “usage accruals,” calculated accruals “based on expected usage” rather than when revenues “are paid to, and processed by, collection societies, publishers and administrators.” Shot Tower noted the adoption of usage accruals occurred “at a time when RTI revenue was declining and the Fund could no longer raise capital for continued acquisitions.” In other words, a lack of fresh funding halted acquisitions and reduced the amount of RTI revenue added to annual revenue. Without the change, Shot Tower believes the fund “would have breached its lender covenants” and fiscal 2022 revenue would have been $36 million lower.
Accrued revenue also caused problems with PFAR, a non-IFRS metric meant to show investors organic growth excluding accruals and RTI. But Shot Tower found PFAR did indeed include accrual estimates of income expected to be included in the period, which “presents a picture of organic growth that is higher than growth suggested by the statement data,” according to the report. As such, Shot Tower warned investors not to rely on PFAR as a metric.
More issues arose in Shot Tower’s due diligence investigations into how individual catalogs were valued. The entire portfolio, which stood at $2.8 billion on Mar. 31, 2023, is instead worth $1.95 billion, according to the report — a difference of some $850 million. Given the transparency into the fund’s accounting practices, however, shareholders were unfazed by the demotion. On Thursday, Hipgnosis Song Fund’s share price jumped 8.3% to 69 pence, its highest closing price since Jan. 31 and 30.4% above its low point in 2024, 52.9 pence, set on Mar. 4. Whether the share price will improve further could depend on how shareholders view the board’s reaction to this report.
Hipgnosis Songs Fund, the troubled publicly traded music royalty company that owns full or partial rights to song catalogs from the Red Hot Chili Peppers, Shakira, Justin Bieber and Neil Young, issued a damning report Thursday (March 28) compiled by a third party that details missteps the fund and its investment advisor made leading to a 26% portfolio downgrade earlier this month.
The London-listed fund, which became the poster child for music as an investable asset class, cut the value of its portfolio earlier this month and told investors not to expect the resumption of dividends “for the foreseeable future” while the company focuses on paying down debts.
Trending on Billboard
Compiled by the board’s lead independent adviser, Shot Tower Capital, the report found that Hipgnosis Song Management, run by Hipgnosis founder and music manager Merck Mercuriadis, materially overstated the fund’s revenue and earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) and supported catalog acquisitions with financial analysis that failed to meet “music industry standards.” Hipgnosis Songs Fund itself overstated the scope of its music assets — the kinds of royalties and administration rights it owned and its share of those rights — in disclosures to investors and regulators. And in a pitch last September to investors to sell some 29 catalogs to a sister Hipgnosis company, the fund included a better-than-could-be-expected post-deal valuation, the report found.
In a statement announcing the report, the fund’s board said it is exploring “all options for the future of the company,” and that it will release its strategic review and proposals by April 26.
Hipgnosis Song Management said it was still reviewing the report, which it received late yesterday. “However, there are aspects of the report that HSM strongly disagrees with and considers to be factually inaccurate and misleading,” the company stated.
“Throughout the life of the company, HSM has worked constructively, and in good faith, with the company’s board and other advisers to deliver the best outcome for the company’s shareholders,” the company continued. “Each adviser was recruited by the company’s board to advise on their specific area of expertise and with clear areas of responsibility.”
Investors found heart in the report; at the close of London markets on Thursday, Hipgnosis Songs Fund was trading at 0.69 pounds ($0.87), up 8.3% on the day and 30.43% above its 52-week low of 0.53 pounds ($0.69) set on March 4.
Here are some of the most revealing findings from Shot Tower’s report:
“The Fund overpa(id) for the majority of the catalogs it acquired.”
Hipgnosis Songs Fund, at the investment adviser’s direction, famously paid top-dollar for music assets — more than $2.2 billion overall. Today, those assets are worth $1.948 billion, with 67 of 105 acquisition deals currently worth less than their purchase price.
The investment advisor’s “diligence and underwriting standards” are the reason why.
Hipgnosis Song Management predicted aggressive growth, but three-quarters of its catalogs missed those expectations “by an average of 23% annually” and the overall annual royalties the fund earned from catalogs has fallen to $121.6 million from $134.2 million.
“Passive catalogs grew significantly better than catalogs managed by the Investment Advisor.“
A significant portion of the rights the fund had in its portfolio included passive rights. However, Mercuriadis and Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s board frequently touted that their industry expertise would be a valuable tool to make these rights outperform passive catalogs.
“The fund’s public reports contain disclosures that imply greater ownership control over songs… than would have been the case.”
Multiple reports from the fund presented that it had 100% “interest ownership” in acquired catalogs, which suggests ownership and control. “In fact, a material number of catalogs represent only a fractional, non-controlling income stream in the compositions without any copyright ownership,” the report reads.
Despite promoting itself as a caretaker of artists’ and songwriters’ works, Mercuriadis’ investment advisory group “failed to invest in systems and provide the services required to effectively manage a catalog of 40,000+ songs generating +120 million of royalty income annually.”
Hipgnosis Songs Management has not tracked or managed the catalog at the song level, and its legal bookkeeping included numerous oversights and missing files that could present complications to the collection of royalties.
The report found “multiple areas where fund expenses appear unrelated to the fund and/or are excessive.”
These costly items included $1.5 to $2 million spent annually for awards shows and public relations, “including significant payments to multiple music industry periodicals”; $1.2 million in fees in 2023 from deals the fund ended up not doing; and $5.7 million in fees related to the abandoned deal to sell catalogs to its sister fund, Hipgnosis Songs Capital.
When the board of directors at Hipgnosis Songs Fund (HSF) cut the value of the company’s catalog by 26% last week, it admitted something investors had long believed. Although the London-listed royalty fund had amassed an enviable collection of songs since going public in 2018, changes in market conditions and the very nature of some of those rights may have merited a significantly lower fair value all along.
A new valuation by Shot Tower Capital put the portfolio of music rights — which includes Neil Young, Shakira and Red Hot Chili Peppers, among other A-list artists and songwriters — at $1.8 billion to $2.06 billion. As recently as Sept. 30, the catalog was given a fair value of $2.62 billion by HSF’s longtime valuation expert, Citrin Cooperman (previously Massarky Consulting). Six months earlier, it was said to be worth $2.8 billion.
Trending on Billboard
HSF’s new board of directors hired Shot Tower in the wake of investors’ Oct. 26 votes against continuation and a partial catalog sale — effectively a vote of no confidence in both the previous board and the investment advisor, Hipgnosis Song Management. Shot Tower will give HSF’s board its final due diligence by Mar. 25, and HSF will provide an update on those findings by Mar. 29.
Some longtime critics of HSF’s previous valuation found validation in Shot Tower’s lower number. Stifel analysts claimed the new number shows HSF “clearly overpaid for catalogs,” they wrote in a Mar. 4 investor note. To date, HSF has spent about $2.2 billion on acquisitions. It raised over 1.3 billion pounds ($1.67 billion) from an IPO and seven successive offerings and has drawn $604 million from a revolving credit facility.
Such a large decline in the valuation suggests the various experts had differing opinions on both the catalog’s revenues and the riskiness of those revenues. Shot Tower calculated HSF’s net revenue after third-party royalties and administration expenses at $121.7 million for the 12-month period ended June 30. The accounting firm BDO calculated a similar amount — $119.4 million for the 12-month period ended Sept. 30 — for a quality of earnings analysis.
The higher $2.62 billion valuation appears to be based on a higher annual net revenue. A July 2023 investor presentation put HSF’s annual revenue at $134 million (based on a $2.8 billion portfolio fair value and an implied historic net publishers share, or NPS, multiple of 20.89). That’s $12.3 million more than Shot Tower’s figure and $14 million more than BDO’s estimate. The difference in annual revenues, however, only explains part of the difference in valuations.
The discount rate appears to have also played a major role in HSF’s lower valuation. Shot Tower used a weighted average discount rate of 9.63% for the entire catalog, more than 1.1 percentage points higher than the discount rate used for previous valuations. Experts Billboard spoke with called the rate “on the high side” and “a particularly high number.” Some other recent valuations used a lower discount rate. Discount rates and valuations are inversely related: A higher discount rate will produce a lower present value of cash flows, and vice versa.
Until this week, HSF had been valued using an 8.5% discount rate since the Sept. 30, 2020, valuation conducted by Citrin Cooperman. FTI Consulting’s valuation of a Kobalt portfolio used in an asset-backed security (ABS) offering in February used an 8.5% discount rate for songs older than 18 months (and 11.75% for songs aged 3 to 18 months). FTI’s valuation of the portfolio behind Concord’s $1.65 billion ABS used an 8.25% discount rate for catalog songs (and 11.75% for recorded music frontline content and options for future releases).
The HSF discount rate has been a point of contention amongst analysts and investors in recent years. When HSF lowered its discount rate to 8.5% in 2020, analysts complained the valuation increased even though the investment manager had not yet added value and market assumptions hadn’t changed. When interest rates started rising in 2022, analysts wondered why HSF stuck with the 8.5% discount rate.
The discount rate depends on the riskiness of those future cash flows. Perfectly safe revenue is discounted using a risk-free rate of return such as a 10-year U.S. Treasury Rate. Because no business is without risk, a company’s revenues would merit a higher rate. If a company carries debt, its borrowing cost — also more than the risk-free rate — would also be baked into the discount rate.
Shot Tower’s discount rate took a variety of factors into account, according to the press release, which could explain how it got to 9.63%. For example, Shot Tower found that 65% of HSF’s revenue derived from passive rights where the company does not control publishing, administration or licensing. In many cases, HSF owns only a songwriter’s share rather than the publisher’s share, or the producer’s royalties from a sound recording. Investors might have assumed that HSF had more control over administration, distribution and licensing: In HSF’s annual report for the year ended March 31, 2022, it said it had 100% interest ownership in 96% of the songs in its catalog (138 of the 146 catalogs).
“That control has a lot of value,” explains an industry insider. Strategic buyers — usually music publishers and record labels — will pay a premium to control a song’s administration and licensing or a recording’s distribution. Passive rights typically trade at a discount because they carry more potential risks of counterparts (co-writers, for example) and potential collection risk (as is the case when royalties are re-directed from a label rather than received from a PRO). With a writer’s share, “you’re a lot more along for the ride,” this insider says. The producer royalties that HSF acquired — such as RedOne, Jimmy Iovine and Timbaland — are also passive.
For a company looking to bolster its credibility with investors, Shot Tower’s valuation was a double-edged sword. The lower number confirmed some investors’ long-held belief that the portfolio is worth less than HSF had claimed. But the decrease in valuation further hurt HSF’s share price. Shot Tower’s lower valuation prompted HSF’s board to commit to using its cash to pay down debt rather than resume the dividend it suspended in October. So, while the lower valuation better reflected HSF’s market capitalization, the continued loss of a dividend was the likely cause behind the stock dropping 11% the day of the announcement.
LONDON — Hipgnosis Songs Fund has cut the value of its portfolio by more than a quarter and told investors that it does not intend to recommence paying dividends “for the foreseeable future” as it focuses on paying down debts.
The London-listed fund, which owns full or partial rights to the song catalogs of Red Hot Chili Peppers, Neil Young, Justin Bieber and Blondie, among many others, announced the updated valuation on Monday (March 4).
It follows a detailed review of the company’s portfolio “on a bottom-up basis” by Shot Tower, which was appointed following a public fallout between the firm’s board and its investment advisor, the Merck Mercuriadis-led Hipgnosis Song Management (HSM), over the fund’s worth.
In a financial filing, Hipgnosis Songs Fund (HSF) said Shot Tower’s preliminary report estimates the fair market value of the company’s portfolio at between $1.8 billion and $2.06 billion (and $1.74 billion and $2 billion after deducting contingent catalog bonuses of just under $60 million).
Trending on Billboard
Shot Tower gave a midpoint valuation of $1.93 billion, reflecting a multiple of 15.9x net royalty income, which is around 26% lower than the valuation of September 2023.
Hipgnosis Songs Fund said the new valuation was based on a range of criteria, including whether a catalog was made up of publisher, writer, producer or artist’s share of rights royalties. Shot Tower’s report also took into account royalty income streams and administration rights or copyrights due to be returned to the firm in future years, the fund said.
The firm’s cash net revenue (after third party royalty reductions and administration expenses) was $121.7 million for the 12-month royalty statement period ended June 30, 2023, according to Shot Tower’s analysis.
When adjusted solely for the new valuation, the company’s operative net asset value would be approximately $1.17 (92p) per share, compared to the last reported net asset value of $1.7392 (137p) per share at the end of September, the firm reported.
As a result of the decrease, the board said that it would be using free cashflow to pay down debt “and, therefore, does not intend to recommence paying dividends for the foreseeable future.”
In a statement accompanying the filing, Hipgnosis Songs Fund chairman Robert Naylor said the company’s newly constituted board “is making good progress with the due diligence work” underpinning its ongoing strategic review and that the board “remains focused on identifying all options to deliver shareholder value.”
Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s share price initially fell by 11% to £0.56 on Monday morning following the news.
The slashed valuation represents another blow for HSF, which underwent a turbulent end to 2023 and just-as-rocky start to the year.
In October, shareholders voted against the music royalties fund’s proposed $440 million deal to sell 29 catalogues to Hipgnosis Songs Capital – a partnership between investment giant Blackstone and the fund’s investment adviser Hipgnosis Song Management – citing the lack of an “up-to-date” valuation.
The same month’s annual meeting of shareholders also saw a majority of investors vote against a resolution “to continue running the fund in its current form” — a so-called “continuation vote” — commencing a six-month countdown for the board to come up with a plan “for the reconstruction, reorganisation, or winding-up of the company.”
That led to the installation of a new executive board with Naylor replacing Andrew Sutch as chairman, while last month shareholders passed a special resolution that authorizes the payment of up to 20 million pounds ($25 million) to prospective bidders seeking to acquire the fund’s assets. The fund hopes that the enticement of a large fee will help draw potential bidders to acquire some of the company’s catalogs.
February also saw Mercuriadis step down as chief executive officer of Hipgnosis Song Management to take up a newly created chairman role with Ben Katovsky replacing him as CEO.
Shot Tower is due to present its final due diligence findings to the firm’s board later this month.
LONDON — Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s shareholders have voted overwhelmingly in favor of passing a special resolution that authorizes the payment of up to 20 million pounds ($25 million) to prospective bidders seeking to acquire the fund’s assets.
The special resolution was approved by 99.9% of the fund’s shareholders at an extraordinary general meeting held in London on Wednesday (Feb. 7), according to a regulatory filing.
It gives Hipgnosis Songs Fund‘s (HSF) board of directors the power to pay a fee capped at £20 million to any prospective bidder or bidders making a “bona fide” offer or offers to acquire one or more of the company’s subsidiaries which own music assets, and/or some of the fund’s music rights on favorable terms. The fee is meant to reduce the risk of making an offer for Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s music catalogs by providing “significant protection” against their due diligence and acquisition costs.
In a statement, Robert Naylor, chairman of Hipgnosis Songs Fund, thanked shareholders “for their continuing support” and said the company’s board “remains focused” on its strategic review, “under which it is looking at all options to deliver shareholder value.”
The London-listed fund, which owns full or partial rights to the song catalogs of artists ranging from Justin Bieber, Neil Young, Bruno Mars, Jimmy Iovine, 50 Cent, Shakira, Blondie, Justin Timberlake, Lindsey Buckingham and many more, hopes that the enticement of a large fee will help draw potential bidders.
In October, shareholders voted against the music royalties fund’s proposed $440 million deal to sell 29 catalogues to Hipgnosis Songs Capital – a partnership between investment giant Blackstone and the fund’s investment adviser Hipgnosis Song Management – citing the lack of an “up-to-date” valuation.
October’s annual meeting of shareholders also saw a majority of investors vote against a resolution “to continue running the fund in its current form” — a so-called “continuation vote” — commencing a six-month countdown for the board to come up with a plan “for the reconstruction, reorganisation, or winding-up of the company.”
That led to the installation of a new executive board with Naylor replacing Andrew Sutch as chairman in November.
Last year wrapped with Hipgnosis lowering the value of its music portfolio following what Naylor described to investors as a strained relationship with its investment advisor, the Merck Mercuriadis-led Hipgnosis Song Management (HSM), over the catalog’s worth.
This year has so far begun on an equally rocky footing with the fund’s board of directors calling into question HSM’s ability to field competitive bids for its assets.
A major sticking point is the investment advisor’s call option, which gives it the right to purchase the company’s portfolio if its contract with the fund is terminated with less than 12 months’ notice, among other scenarios. The fund’s board contends that Hipgnosis Song Management’s call option harms its ability to receive competitive bids.
Last week, Mercuriadis announced that he will be stepping down as chief executive officer of Hipgnosis Song Management to take up a newly created chairman role with Ben Katovsky replacing him as CEO.
Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s share price was roughly flat at 65 British pence ($0.84) following Wednesday’s extraordinary general meeting.
Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s board of directors levied two complaints at its investment advisor, the Merck Mercuriadis-led Hipgnosis Song Management, on Tuesday (Jan. 23) that call into question the company’s ability to field competitive bids for its assets. Shareholders have told Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s newly constituted board they believe the investment advisor’s call option — a […]
Hipgnosis Song Fund’s board of directors wants a workaround to the call option that gives the investment advisor, the Merck Mercuriadis-led Hipgnosis Song Management, the ability to purchase the company’s music catalogs if its contract is ended. After consulting with shareholders who own more than 60% of outstanding shares, Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s board of directors […]
The Billboard Global Music Index — a diverse collection of 20 publicly traded music companies — finished 2023 up 31.3% as Spotify’s share price alone climbed 138% thanks to cost-cutting and focus on margins. Spotify is the single-largest component of the float-adjusted index and has one of the largest market capitalizations of any music company.
The music index was outperformed by the tech-heavy Nasdaq composite, which gained 43.4% with the help of triple-digit gains from chipmaker Nvidia Corp (+239%) and Meta Platforms (+194%). But the Billboard Global Music Index exceeded some other major indexes: the S&P 500 gained 24.2%, South Korea’s KOSPI composite index grew 18.7% and the FTSE 100 improved 3.8%.
Other than Spotify, a handful of major companies had double-digit gains in 2023 that drove the index’s improvement. Universal Music Group finished the year up 14.7%. Concert promoter Live Nation rode a string of record-setting quarters to a 34.2% gain. HYBE, the increasingly diversified K-pop company, rose 34.6%. SM Entertainment, in which HYBE acquired a minority stake in March, gained 20.1%.
A handful of smaller companies also finished the year with big gains. LiveOne gained 117.4%. Reservoir Media improved 19.4%. Chinese music streamer Cloud Music improved 15.8%.
The biggest loser on the Billboard Global Music Index in 2023 was radio broadcaster iHeartMedia, which fell 56.4%. Abu Dhabi-based music streamer Anghami finished 2023 down 34.8%. After a series of large fluctuations in recent months, Anghami ended the year 69% below its high mark for 2023. Hipgnosis Songs Fund, currently undergoing a strategic review after shareholders voted against continuation in October, finished the year down 16.6%.
Sphere Entertainment Co., which split from MSG Entertainment’s live entertainment business back in April, ended 2023 down 24.4%. Most of that decline came before the company opened its flagship venue, Sphere, in Las Vegas on September 29, however. Since U2 opened the venue to widespread acclaim and earned Sphere global media coverage, the stock dropped only 8.5%.
For the week, the index rose 1.1% to 1,534.07. Fourteen of the index’s 20 stocks posted gains this week, four dropped in price and one was unchanged.
LiveOne shares rose 15.7% to $1.40 after the company announced on Friday (Dec. 29) it added 63,000 new paid memberships in December and surpassed 3.5 million total memberships, an increase of 29% year over year. iHeartMedia shares climbed 14.6% to $2.67. Anghami continued its ping-pong trajectory by finishing the week up 16.9%.