Dan Rozansky recently spoke to Adweek about Warner Bros. Discovery's lawsuit over the recent NBA TV deal. The lawsuit alleges that the NBA violated Warner Bros. Discovery's contractual rights to match Amazon's $1.8 billion proposal. Among the purported differences is that Amazon's offer calls for Amazon to put $5 billion upfront into escrow. Warner Bros. Discovery is seeking a jury trial to determine monetary damages and an injunction against Amazon's offer. It also wants the court to declare that WBD and TBS' offer constitutes a 'match.'
“Let’s say that there’s a buyer who’s very creditworthy—take somebody like Amazon, who has billions of dollars basically in the bank, and let’s say somebody else comes along who has a matching right, but isn’t as financially stable,” Dan told Adweek. “They could match on price, but what about these other factors? Does it matter that they’re not as financially stable, can there be payment terms, does that mean that the price all has to be paid first, what’s the length of time to close? That can be an issue if it’s not exactly spelled out.”
“The challenge is to anticipate the unanticipated,” Dan said. “Let’s say you did a media deal 30 years ago and there’s a matching right and suddenly there are new technologies that aren’t anticipated: The delivery of content over the internet, streaming to your cell phone, delivery of content through an app… delivery of content through a place where you buy most of your goods,” Dan asks, can you match that?
Click the link below to read the full article (with an Adweek subscription).
What Warner Bros. Discovery's Lawsuit Over NBA TV Deal Means for Matching Rights
