New Mountain Capital
BMI, which was acquired by New Mountain Capital in February, last night notified songwriters and publishers that its previous owners, mainly radio and TV stations, have followed through on their commitment to disburse a $100 million bonus from the undisclosed amount received for the sale — which sources say was over $1 billion — to songwriters and publishers. What’s more, it disclosed to each songwriter and publisher how much they will be receiving.
Songwriters and publishers expressed gratitude for the payout — after all, the sellers were under no legal obligation to share any of the sale price with BMI members. In fact, some consider it a very generous reward from the prior owners. However, other sources have suggested that morally, the previous owners should shared something, considering it was songwriters’ and music publishers’ rights that generated all the licensing revenue and created the value for the sale price to be achieved.
Trending on Billboard
In any event, publishers and songwriters contacted by Billboard Thursday (March 28) said they were engaging in mathematical analysis to try and figure out what their payment represented, even though BMI laid out on its website some details on how it arrived at each individual payout. According to the website, BMI looked at the most recent five years of payouts (2019-2023) and used that as a basis to determine how much each payout should be — after taking into consideration whether the songwriter’s catalog was there for all five years or is still there even if the songwriter has left. Then, it apparently divided songwriters into tiers based on undisclosed parameters and paid every songwriter or publisher in that tier the same amount according to the website. Only songwriters or publishers that had received over $500 in royalties were eligible for a bonus distribution.
BMI didn’t provide any information on how it calculated allocations other than to say it split the bonus payouts evenly between songwriters and publishers — and that sold catalogs’ bonuses would be pro-rated between the new owners and old owners. But it did disclose that the method it used “is different from how we calculate our quarterly distributions,” according to the letter signed by BMI president/CEO Mike O’Neill that accompanied news of the allocation. “We thought very carefully about how we determined this allocation and made every effort to be as inclusive as possible and have it applied to the greatest number of earning BMI affiliates,” O’Neill’s letter stated. “Your allocation is truly well deserved, and I’m very pleased to deliver it to you on behalf of BMI’s former shareholders. Moving forward, your future with BMI is brighter than ever.”
Meanwhile, publishers’ data teams spent the day analyzing the payouts, looking at instances where they could see payouts on multiple catalogs or songwriters with similar characteristics for the five-year terms in order to compare them. Others measured their bonus payout as a percentage of the $100 million or compared it to the suspected sale price.
Still others decided that the best way to measure the bonus was to add up all the royalties BMI paid for a song catalog for the five-year period to see what percentage of that amount the bonus comprised; and then to compare that percentage with other songwriters or catalogs. One such catalog, an A-level writer/producer with several No. 1 hits during the period, earned about $4.1 million from BMI over those five years and received a bonus of $47,000 — or a 1.15% bonus on the earnings for the period, according to one source who had access to that data.
Another publishing source says comparing songwriters on its rosters who are equally successful to what each received as a bonus created quite a bit of confusion. In one instance, when they compared two songwriters at the same level, both got the same amount even though one has been at BMI for all five years while the other has only been there for only a few of the five years. “BMI might file this under ‘no good deed goes unpunished’ or ‘looking a gift horse in the mouth,’ but so far I can’t see any rhyme or reason on how they are determining the payouts,” that publisher says, but quickly adds, “Having said that, I am very happy for getting the money.”
A BMI representative was unavailable to comment at deadline — the organization was holding its Trailblazers of Gospel Music Awards event in Atlanta on Thursday. But the O’Neill letter to those receiving bonus payments also noted that the new owners will give BMI increased capabilities and leave the organization in “the best possible position to tap into numerous growth opportunities that will ensure your long-term success…increasing your distributions, elevating the services we provide and exploring new revenue streams that will benefit you.”
BMI is being sold to a New Mountain Capital-led shareholder group in a deal that is expected to close by the end of the first quarter of 2024, a company spokesperson confirmed with Billboard.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
While terms of the deal were not disclosed, the buyer announced that as part of the deal BMI’s current shareholders will allocate $100 million of the sale’s proceeds to songwriters and publishers affiliates “in recognition of [their] creativity.” That planned payout will adhere to BMI’s distribution methodologies.
The deal still needs to be approved by the broadcaster shareholders that have long owned the performance rights organization and will also need regulatory approval.
“Today marks an exciting new chapter for BMI that puts us in the best possible position to stay ahead of the evolving industry and ensure the long-term success of our music creators,” BMI president and CEO Mike O’Neill said in a statement. “New Mountain is an ideal partner because they believe in our mission and understand that the key to success for our company lies in delivering value to our affiliates.”
As part of the agreement, New Mountain is reserving additional capital to fund growth investments and technology enhancement to help BMI’s long-term plan to maximize distributions for its affiliates and improve the service it provides to songwriters and publishers.
“BMI has been a trusted guide and champion of music creators from the beginning, and we are privileged to work with the company and its 1.4 million affiliates to build on that incredible legacy,” New Mountain managing director Pete Masucci said in a statement. “There are numerous growth opportunities ahead for BMI with significant potential to generate more value for the work of its songwriters, composers and publishers. We look forward to working together alongside Mike and his team to capitalize on those opportunities for the benefit of all BMI stakeholders.”
In emphasizing the buyer’s commitment to investment in next generation technology platforms, New Mountain director Mike Oshinsky said in a statement, “There is tremendous opportunity to modernize this critical part of music infrastructure and ensure that long term royalty collections for songwriters, composers and publishers continue to grow. With our support, BMI is ideally positioned to drive this transformation as the only PRO in the world to combine an open-door policy to all music creators with the innovation and commercial drive of a for-profit business.”
Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC served as financial advisor to BMI and Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP served as its legal advisor. Moelis & Company served as financial advisor to New Mountain, and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP served as its legal advisor. As part of New Mountain’s investment, CapitalG will also invest a passive minority stake in BMI.
BMI’s October 2022 switch to operating as a for-profit company didn’t cause a big reaction in the music business until a July 2023 Reuters article about the company being put up for sale revealed that it had generated $147 million in earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. Then the response was significant – and mostly negative. The fear was that profit would essentially come at the expense of royalty payouts.
Even so, BMI executives and other music business sources familiar with the way private equity funds think about business suggest that songwriters and executives should wait to see how the performance rights organization’s vision, backed by the right strategic partner — such as New Mountain Capital, with which BMI is negotiating — could help them.
BMI has said it is switching models and seeking a buyer in order to respond to a changing market. “We need to continue to invest in our business and explore new avenues for revenue generation,” CEO Mike O’Neill said in an Aug. 18 letter to creators groups that was shared with Billboard, “so we can continue to expand our distribution sources.”
To do that, while delivering the kind of growth a buyer will presumably want, BMI plans to explore new businesses to build a company that can operate at scale, and across national borders, more efficiently than it now does. The idea, according to sources inside and familiar with BMI, is to create a new interdependent royalty-collection ecosystem that will benefit BMI and its potential new owner, as well as its affiliates.
BMI is looking for “a partner who can help us take advantage of new opportunities and provide a new level of investment and technological expertise,” according to a Sept. 5 letter from O’Neill to creators groups published on BMI’s website. New Mountain Capital, which is in an exclusive period to negotiate a deal with the performance rights organization, could be such a partner, executives familiar with the private equity sector suggest, since the firm has a track record of investing in companies to help them achieve significant growth. Since its 1995 launch, New Mountain — which now oversees more than $35 billion in assets and funds — has acquired or founded more than 60 companies, without any going into bankruptcy and without missing an interest payment, according to the company.
In particular, sources familiar with New Mountain Capital point to its investment in Blue Yonder, a software company the private equity firm acquired for $565 million in 2010 and sold to Panasonic in 2021 for an enterprise value of $8.5 billion. The private equity firm, “through continued investment and improvement” helped grow it from a “somewhat sleepy niche company to being the 14th largest software company in the nation,” New Mountain Capital’s CEO Steve Klinsky wrote in the May-June 2022 issue of Harvard Business Review. “We offer the capabilities and access to capital that a large corporate parent would, without forcing companies to become part of a conglomerate culture. At the same time, we bring a fresh, entrepreneurial vision to strategy, talent, R&D, technology, and corporate alliances.”
Still, BMI has not specifically addressed many of the concerns raised by its switch to a for-profit model, which is why songwriters and publishers remain nervous. In fact, on Sept. 18 a letter signed by dozens of lawyers called on BMI to engage in open and honest conversations with affiliates, saying that the PRO owes them the responsibility to respond with “specificity and transparency.”
“I get it that some writers may have legitimate worries because in a vacuum there is not a clear picture of what such a deal could be and how it could be a positive for BMI,” says a veteran music business executive. “But a lot of people with their own interest have been spreading very negative spins with shrill voices that what BMI is doing will be bad for publishers and songwriters.”
In the case of New Mountain Capital, the executive says, they “are nice, smart people” that help businesses add new processes to help them grow substantially and become even more profitable. New Mountain Capital has been studying the music industry for a few years and looked at some substantial deals, sources say, but so far has passed on them until now.
“There is so much negativity out there that doesn’t give this deal the benefit of the doubt,” says another executive. “New Mountain Capital are not corporate raiders; they are intelligent and love the business and want to grow the revenue base so that publishers and writers will be making more money and still make a profit for BMI.”
That’s exactly the kind of approach BMI is looking for, according to executives familiar with its strategy. In its first year as a for-profit business, for example, BMI announced a partnership with the United Arab Emirates company Music Nation to try to establish a public performance licensing and royalty infrastructure there. BMI has also undertaken an “extensive customer service initiative” to enhance the service it provides to affiliates, with plans for an improved online service portal to follow.
The company has said that its move to a for-profit model made these investments possible. But one music publishing executive, who requested anonymity, wonders “why is it easier to invest in systems upgrades as a for-profit entity rather than as a not-for-profit organization?” One answer: The level of investment would impact distributions to affiliates under the previous not-for-profit system.
Publishing executives also believe that growing outside the U.S. will become a priority for BMI. Most of the growth for royalty collections is now coming from the growth of streaming services, and most of that will be international. Over the past decade, some of the European collective management organizations teamed much with publishers to license repertoire for online purposes across Europe, as European law allows. Such a model could also work in other territories, such as Latin America, Asia, or even the Middle East.
Given the opportunity for BMI outside the U.S., another executive wonders if it could be the first organization to try to rollout a global model, with a global membership. And if so, whether that would re-ignite competition to sign writers around the world.
Meanwhile, some executives speculate about whether New Mountain might be frightened off by the antitrust consent decree under which BMI operates, but “they understand deeply what that means,” says a source familiar with the fund, “and that it is baked into the business.”
Private equity is known for growing profits, not restraining them, but sources familiar with BMI’s thinking say that potential suitors need to understand that the company will prioritize payouts. In fact, a potential deal would not involve an expectation of “insane margins,” says one music industry executive who has worked with private equity. If a sale takes place, said O’Neill in an Aug 19 letter, BMI “would ensure that any partner embraces our mission of prioritizing the interests of songwriters, including their financial success.”
For-profit, for whom?
It’s “easy to assume that if we kept doing business the way we always had, distributions would continue to grow,” O’Neill wrote in his Sept. 5 letter posted on the company’s website. “That is a dangerous assumption to make, because in an evolving industry like ours, you run the risk of settling for a larger slice of a shrinking pie. Our goal is to grow that pie to your benefit.”
So far, in the three quarterly distributions since BMI announced its shift to a for-profit model, combined payouts were 9% greater than the same periods of the previous year. That’s almost as good as the 10.2% increase to $1.471 billion that BMI distributed in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022, when overall revenue grew 15.6% to $1.573 billion, when it was still operating as a non-profit. (BMI is not releasing how much distributions increased for the full year ended June 30, 2023, and it will no longer release any company-wide revenue results, sources say. Instead, it will provide more information to songwriters and publishers to help them measure BMI’s payments in comparison to the past, and in some cases, if songwriters so request, to other PROs.)
Some songwriters and executives argue that, if BMI is sold, affiliates deserve some of the revenue from that sale. But as one industry executive familiar with private equity points out, it’s actually surprising that BMI’s owners – radio and television stations – didn’t sell it a long time ago.
“For over 80 years, you have had owners — all for-profit companies with their own businesses — and yet they didn’t make any profit on BMI,” that executive says. “And I guess it would be unseemly for them to pull dividends out at the same time they are paying licensing fees.” At the same time, he adds, those owners had to watch SESAC and GMR come along and build very profitable businesses.
SESAC, which is considerably smaller than BMI, was sold to the private equity firm Blackstone for about $1 billion in 2017. Ironically, at the end of 2018, one of Blackstone’s investment funds acquired a passive minority equity stake in New Mountain Capital, a fact that U.S. regulators could look at, if New Mountain Capital moves forward with its BMI acquisition.
“The fact is that the broadcasters own BMI; and they are entitled to sell it,” the executive says. “I understand that the music industry likes the status quo, but if you start with the premise that the owners will sell, then you would want them to sell it to someone who is decent and understands the industry. It’s not smart to push [New Mountain Capital] away with a big outcry, because you don’t know who will come along next.”
There is also the potential for BMI to grow into a more modern company in a way that benefits the entire industry, the source says. “Take a year or two and see how things roll forward and how things shake out. If [BMI] songwriters are happy, then they can stay; and if not, then they can look to make a move.”
BMI has accepted an offer to sell to New Mountain Capital, a private equity firm that has been quietly looking at music assets over the last few years, according to sources. It’s unclear if the deal has been signed yet.
Sources suggest that New Mountain Capital will pay about $1.7 billion for BMI which claims $145 million in earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization in its first year acting as a for-profit entity, which was announced last October. That suggests that BMI — aka Broadcast Music Inc. — is trading on a nearly 12 times EBITDA multiple. Since BMI has no debt, it’s likely that New Mountain Capital will use a healthy level of debt to finance the deal.
According to New Mountain Capital’s website, the firm has $40 billion in assets under management and chases a “growth-oriented, value-add investment approach, rather than reliance on excessive risk, as the best path to high and consistent long-term returns.” The firm has made investments in such industries as software, business services, information and data, logistics and financial services among a few other sectors.
Besides New Mountain, sources say, bidders included Apollo Global Management, Brookfield Asset Management and its music investment Primary Wave, and RedBird Capital Partners. New Mountain and Brookfield/Primary Wave became the finalist, until BMI accepted New Mountain’s offer. Moreover, sources add that Moelis & Co. has been acting as an advisor to New Mountain while BMI has acknowledged that it hired Goldman Sachs to explore a strategic partnership.
BMI first put itself up for sale last year and at the time said it was switching from a not-for-profit operation to a for-profit company. In its fiscal 2022, before it switched to a for-profit entity, BMI reported that it collected $1.573 billion, while distributions totaled $1.471 billion. While the company has stated that the move is being made to benefit its affiliates and will allow the company to spend more money on developing technology and infrastructure so it can better services and songwriters, the strategy shift has caused consternation among songwriters and publishers.
Last week, a group of songwriters and creative advocates wrote a letter to BMI asking how such a move would benefit songwriters and questioning whether the profit would come at the expense of songwriter payments. The groups that signed the letter were Black Music Artists Coalition; Music Artists Coalition; Songwriters of North America; SAG-Aftra and Artists Rights Alliance.
Since its formation in 1940, BMI has been operating as a not-for-profit organization, paying out all of the money it collects to songwriters and publishers, even though it was a private company. In response to the songwriter and creator organization letter, BMI president Mike O’Neill said that because of its first year acting as a for-profit entity, it has allowed the company to upgrade its services portal, including new dashboards, among several other initiatives. He also said in pursuing a BMI sale, the company “would ensure that any partner embraces our mission of prioritizing the interests of songwriters, including their financial success.
BMI declined to comment for this story, and other firms mentioned didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment or couldn’t be reached.
-
Pages