I’ve collected several knowledgeable accounts of what happened during yesterday’s multi-hour contentious MGM conference call with bondholders who were “very loud and very upset”. Here’s why:
The call was for the benefit of the lenders, and MGM management made the presentation along with Stephen F Cooper, that Zolfo Cooper restructure specialist. MGM made a desperate plea for money because the studio had missed its numbers and was going to be out of funds very soon. “The implication was that it’s teetering on bankruptcy,” one source told me. MGM said it needed $20M in short-term cash flow to cover overhead, and an additional $150 million to get through the end of year and continue funding its projects, and to start Peter Jackson’s Hobbit.
Some say the call lasted 6 1/2 hours. Others said it lasted 2 1/2 hours with lenders, and then the lenders themselves had a conference call that lasted another 2 hours. After the MGM presentation, several bondholders spoke, “and they were irate”, an insider tells me. True, this regularly happens on bad news calls like this. But in this case the creditors who hold MGM’s term loan debt blame Harry Sloan for MGM overpromising and then missing its numbers, which was discussed during the summer and why he was removed as CEO. “They’re not happy that Sloan let the company go in this direction but they understand what’s going on. It’s unfortunate, but they get it that the company is in a distressed situation, and they have to figure out an action plan moving forward,” a source explains to me.
The conference call was planned to present the creditors with a request, or forebearance, to waive interest payments on MGM’s $3.5 billion killer debt until February 2010. Because if MGM doesn’t have to make those interest payments, then the studio can afford to use that money instead to fund the production slate. The bondholders couldn’t understand why the equity holders wouldn’t fork over the dough. But the equity holders aren’t interested in writing a check because they understand that their equity is way under water already, and there’s no upside for them. So, in essence, the equity holders have already written off their investment in MGM. But the bondholders have that $3.7 billion of nominal debt currently trading in the secondary market at about $.55–$.57 cents on the dollar. It’s been trading in this low $.50s range for a while, so the marketplace is saying that the company is not worth more than $.56 times $3.7 billion. (And that’s probably high.)
As a result, the bondholders are not in a great situation and therefore not feeling generous. On the other hand, if MGM were sold off today, most investment bankers don’t think it would fetch more than $1.5 billion to $1.75 billion at auction. This would mean that bondholders would recover less than $.50 on the dollar. This would be an even worse outcome.
So the bondhholders said to MGM, in essence, that they were going to let the studio go bankrupt and collect their money since they’d be first in line to get paid. But Cooper explained that this would be the worst possible outcome for the creditors and the company. Because if MGM were forced into bankruptcy, then it would lose James Bond and the studio doesn’t think it can stay alive without 007. Also, a lot of other issues would surface that would tremendously hurt MGM.
Also, if MGM goes through bankruptcy, that’s a very expensive prospect (where only the lawyers get rich), and extremely disruptive (since who would do business with MGM in the interim) and won’t get the creditors what they want which is their money back. It’s more than simply MGM losing Bond. The studio could lose a lot of other franchises.
I can’t tell you whether the bondholders will agree to the forebearance or not. It requires a 51% approval vote. But some of the smart people I’ve contacted do think the creditors will eventually realize that a restructuring of MGM outside of the bankruptcy process is probably the best course right now.
So what’s next? MGM now has to formally ask for forbearance, and the bondholders formally respond.






Something tells me that Warner Bros. may make out pretty well with The Hobbit if they swoop in and buy out. Would make the most sense if they don’t want to have to share profit & it would help MGM in the short run.
You win some, you lose some.
I would think just the Bond franchise alone is worth a billion or more. Every studio in town would love to own that series. Especially Sony, which tried wanted to launch its own 007 series many years ago.
Die Another Day?
Oh, clever!
Sony needs to step in and buy it all–Bond, I mean–the whole smash. Get Bond off of the Titanic.
After Time Warner lost MGM to the Sony/Comcast consortium all those years ago they’ve just been laying low, biding their time, waiting for something to happen so they can swoop again.
Ideally Sony would want MGM to ‘stay alive’ just long enough to be carved up and they can buy the Bond franchise without having to worry about those pesky foreign ownership laws.
But at the end of the day there is no better match for what’s left of MGM than Warner Bros. A Time Warner acquisition of MGM would mean….
– The original MGM library is finally reunited. WB have most of it at the moment and it makes sense (from just about every point of view) to bring everything together under ‘one roof’.
– Warners would get Worldwide control of the financing and distribution of The Hobbit films.
– MGM franchises (what there is of them) such as Bond, the (potential) Robocop reboot and even the Stargate franchise (which is crying out for a big screen redux) are all perfect fits for WB’s slate.
– And MGM’s foreign cable channels would fit well into Time Warner’s current cable portfolio and the mass crappy Cannon Films in MGM’s current patched together library would be perfect ( i.e., inexpensive) programming for them.
The only downside of such a buy out is the fact MGM would basically become nothing more than a label that would appear before Warner produced Bond films. I don’t see anyway Time Warner would keep MGM as a ‘production label’ under WB (a bit like New Line’s downsized existence) let alone a fully functioning ongoing studio in it’s own right.
But in saying that, with only one major release this year MGM have already resigned themselves to that fate. It’s not so much a case of ‘if’ as it is ‘when’.
As long as I’ve been in this business MGM has always been held together by gaffer tape and string one way or another. At one point they were owned by a French bank after defaulting on loans, and they still they survived. Not anymore I suspect.
Finally time has run out.
Why would they lose 007 or any other property in bk, would have an automatic stay on any bk contract provisions
El Jefe, despite the general stay on termination whoever owns the rights in Ian Flemings books and characters can terminate MGM’s license in BK under 365(c)(1) of the bankruptcy code. Executory contracts such as copyright licenses may not be assumed or assigned by licensee without consent of the licensor. So technically those rights would become available if MGM filed BK, although it would probably retain ownership rights in the prior 007 movies. Same holds true for the Hobbit. Bondholders would be idiots to force BK without some agreement with those licensors in place beforehand.
I doubt either the Bond series or the upcoming Hobbit films are in any danger. Sony could easily swing in and keep the Bonds going (they seemed to do a fine job releasing the last two). As for The Hobbit, I agree with Wally: Warner would make out exceptionally well.
Re: Shaun F
>Sony could easily swing in and keep the Bonds
>going (they seemed to do a fine job releasing
>the last two
They were goood films but they were almost ruined by the the gross, over the top, in your face Sony product placement – it almost looked like a Sony (and for that matter Ford) advert at times…
If I remember correctly from my days workin for bankruptcy lawyers, bondholders are unsecured creditors which means they get paid after secured creditors usually at pennies on the dollar. The lawyers (almost) always get paid at close to full value. Bondholders would be better with a deal where they can at least contunue to collect interest and where in a restructuring they might recover a larger portion their investments.
I thought Warner Brothers would end up fronting most of the cost for “The Hobbit,” if this happens — Warners through their New Line subsidiary would end up with all the LOTR franchise.
Okay, if MGM is forced into bankruptcy then what? A big fire sale of the company’s assets, like The Hobbit, and the 007 Movies. Except those can be a trap in themselves. Spending too much to buy the rights to the films before making them, could make those franchises unprofitable in these days of thin margins and big budgets. So MGM is not going to get the sort of big money they need from those sales.
Most of the company’s real value lies in its expansive film library.
However…
1. Most companies capable of buying the MGM/UA library have their own problems managing their own libraries, and the addition of Xenu knows how many thousand more titles will only add to those problems. So few would be willing to take on that responsibility, especially if it means dropping a few hundred million spondoolix.
2. Home video sales are down, for various reasons, and the TV market, at least judging by the channels my satellite dish gets, is way underexploited with many channels re-running Las Vegas, Bones, and Xena: Warrior Princess four times a day over older movies and TV shows.
This means that the bondholders are not going to get the full real value of that library. This forbearance scheme might be the only way they can get the company out of the shadow of this crippling debt and a going concern again.
The bondholders are right.
MGM is not a movie studio, it’s a holding company peretending to be a movie studio while it waits out failure.
Real studios make movies, MGM does not.
Does anyone in Hollywood still send them material or projects?
No, no, no!!!
I’m gonna live forever. I’m gonna learn how to fly. Bomb.
Why don’t they close their distribution office and stop pissing away millions of dollars on that. The rent in Century City is outrageous and the employees literally do nothing all day because they have no film to distribute. “Fame’s” release could have been set by a 3 person office, or farmed out to another company. A perfect example of another bloated, poorly managed company looking for a bailout from their investors…. RIDICULOUS!
Calling MGM “bloated” is absurd–they’ve been operating with a skeleton crew for the past few years. There’s not an ounce of fat on that company to trim.
You are obviously not familiar with their distribution office. It’s staffed like they were operating as a major with a full slate of releases. General Sales Manager, District Managers, Sales Managers, assistants, cash department, etc. For what 2 or 3 bad releases a year? I reiterate….POORLY MANAGED AND BLOATED! Sorry….
How many people do you need in an office that doesn’t make movies?
I’m sure Warner Bros./New Line would be more than happy to take The Hobbit off MGM’s hands, just like Sony would be willing to take James Bond.
Dave sounds right: how many Bond films = 1.5 to 1.75 billion dollars?
Wasn’t Icahn buying a lot of their debt? 3.7 Billion is a crushing debt load in this environment.
In addition to the lawyers, any strategic “white knight” can also benefit greatly in any backruptcy proceeding. For instance, when United Paramount Theaters purchased ABC in 1953, they acted as a white knight because ABC was nearly bankrupt, they were hoping to acquire a company they could turn around to produce greater profits. White knights can do the due diligence, set up the terms, etc. before the others and usually “win” as a result.
Whatever happens, don’t let the Bond/007 series fall into the wrong hands. The last few movies were great with Craig. Also looking forward to Jackson’s Hobbit.
All of you figure it out. You are all so emotional that undoubtedly
the bottom is in and egos and persoanalties are clashing. Someone or something is on the sidelines ready to pick up your pieces and really cheap to. Look out 5 years not 5 hours. Get in a room and not over a phone…otherwise Iger will sweep in and pick u up for an E Ticket.
Robbie Goldstein
is that a joke? when you owe millions of dollars of interest, are insolvent, have no tangible plan to pay off your debt, at a disadvantage to your competitors, and a brand new ceo you don’t get 5 years.
mgm is (unfortunately) gone unless someone or some organization swoops in at the 11th hour. the bondholders are devoid of emotion, they made a semi-secured investment that has been written off, the company cannot function, and it will have to declare.
Silly, really. When are people going to give up on MGM already? If it weren’t for Bond, James Bond, the studio would be worthless. It’s not like they’re buying or producing anything now or in the recent past. Well, there was Valkyrie and we all know how well that turned out. I say let it drop and then let the pieces get picked up by studios with deep enough pockets to sustain the worthwhile brands and let the rest of it all just fade away.
I don’t think Robbie Goldstein is in the movie business.
I’m sure Hot Tub Time Machine will solve this problem. If not they can take $20 million from Mary Parent they gave her a three year contract at $6 million per year she should be forced to work there on a profit percentage basis. If she really does make great movies she’ll earn more than her salary if not by working for free she saves the company. Here’s her chance to be a hero.
Thanks for the useless tidbit Cliff Clavin. 1933 was 76 years ago.
Thanks for the useful parcel of information Cliff Clavin. Gotta learn our history so we don’t repeat it repeat it, aww, there I did it again! :0(
The 007 series, as with other MGM/UA properties are real bread-and-butter for MGM. The MGM/UA archive is huge and golden. Ted Turner’s investment/TCM proved extremely productive and valuable. Many bondholders understand “investment.” MGM and it’s international name has always been a good investment. Hate to see this American company go bankrupt.
Even if MGM somehow gets enough money to actually fund and make The Hobbit — let alone the second film, remember, and Bond 23 as well — they’re still looking at two to four years before those movies come out and they might see a return on their investments. How are they going to get by in the meantime when they’re releasing under-performers, bleeding money and are billions in debt? Is their plan to just keep going hat in hand every six months looking for forbearances on their debt payments? Seriously, is that their game plan?
H E L P!