MSGS update with recent Lakers Buy

Hi everyone, 

I'm an amateur investor at best so don't be too harsh. This morning the Los Angeles Lakers were sold for $10 billion. MSGS is a publicly traded company that owns 100% of the Knicks, Rangers, and other less relevant assets (Market Cap: 4.59B, Enterprise Value: 5.58B). I originally thought the discrepancy in valuation was because MSGE, a different stock, owns the garden. However, their market cap is only 1.77B. Overall it seems like both stocks could be extremely undervalued using the Lakers as a valuation comp, but I'm looking for a sanity check to see if I might be missing something or just wrong. Thanks in advance. 

6 Comments
 

Based on the most helpful WSO content, your observation about the valuation discrepancy is intriguing, but there are a few key factors to consider when comparing MSGS (Madison Square Garden Sports) to the Lakers' recent $10 billion valuation:

  1. Trophy Asset Premium: Sports franchises like the Lakers often command a "trophy asset" premium. These valuations are driven by emotional and ego-driven buyers rather than pure financial metrics. As noted in WSO discussions, valuation for sports franchises often "goes out the window" and is more about who wants to buy, which can inflate prices significantly.

  2. Market Dynamics: The Lakers are one of the most globally recognized sports franchises, with a massive fan base, historical success, and significant media rights value. The Knicks and Rangers, while valuable, may not command the same global appeal or premium valuation.

  3. Ownership Structure: MSGS owns 100% of the Knicks and Rangers, but the valuation of these teams might not scale directly to the Lakers' valuation due to differences in revenue streams, profitability, and market dynamics. Additionally, MSGE (Madison Square Garden Entertainment) owning the Garden could complicate the valuation picture, as the arena itself is a significant asset.

  4. Public vs. Private Valuation: Publicly traded companies like MSGS are often valued differently than private transactions. Public markets may apply a discount due to liquidity, transparency, and other factors, whereas private sales (like the Lakers) can reflect a higher willingness to pay by a specific buyer.

  5. Enterprise Value Considerations: MSGS's enterprise value of $5.58 billion includes debt, which impacts the overall valuation. Comparing this to the Lakers' $10 billion valuation requires careful adjustment for these financial differences.

  6. Sanity Check: While MSGS and MSGE might appear undervalued compared to the Lakers, it's essential to consider the unique factors driving the Lakers' valuation. Using the Lakers as a direct comp might oversimplify the analysis. Instead, consider looking at other recent sports franchise sales for a broader perspective.

In summary, while there may be an argument for MSGS being undervalued, the Lakers' $10 billion valuation likely reflects unique factors that don't directly translate to MSGS. A deeper dive into MSGS's financials, revenue streams, and asset breakdown would provide a clearer picture.

Sources: Mid-Market PE Valuations: Where Up is Down, Sports IB, SaaS LBO, An Overview of Technology Media and Telecom (TMT) - Part 1 of 2, Uber last 3.5B$ Raise - Debt disguised as Equity? (Technical Disc.)

I'm an AI bot trained on the most helpful WSO content across 17+ years.
 
Most Helpful

Not to go full Valuation 101 here, but you’re ignoring the control premium

Given their nature (vanity, personal meaning), it makes sense that a sports team would have a higher control premium than just about any publicly traded asset. 

When you buy a single share in MSG Group, you’re simply buying the rights to future cash flows. 

When someone buys the Lakers, they buy the right to control one of the country’s most star-studded sports franchises and all the glamor and privilege that comes with it. 

Not even comparable. 

 

Et pariatur ab ea delectus enim. Facilis voluptatibus sed tenetur reprehenderit aliquam. Similique eum doloribus non quia in rerum numquam. Dolorum quia adipisci delectus qui ut numquam pariatur.

Sint consequuntur accusamus id voluptatem laborum eius et. Delectus aut amet eum ipsa. Non voluptatem est tenetur saepe dolorem.

Vel omnis non voluptas eum enim. Hic totam consequatur omnis qui non nulla. Aut eaque nobis aut facere. Temporibus harum in consectetur quia et dignissimos quisquam. Aut aspernatur ratione enim. Repellendus quia excepturi vero necessitatibus eligendi libero ea.

Career Advancement Opportunities

July 2025 Investment Banking

  • Goldman Sachs 01 99.5%
  • Evercore 07 98.9%
  • Moelis & Company 04 98.4%
  • Citigroup 11 97.8%
  • Houlihan Lokey 08 97.3%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

July 2025 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 10 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company No 98.9%
  • RBC Royal Bank of Canada 03 98.3%
  • Houlihan Lokey 14 97.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 02 97.2%

Professional Growth Opportunities

July 2025 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 08 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Houlihan Lokey 11 98.4%
  • JPMorgan 01 97.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.3%

Total Avg Compensation

July 2025 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $321
  • Associates (60) $237
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (9) $210
  • Intern/Summer Associate (14) $167
  • 2nd Year Analyst (33) $166
  • 1st Year Analyst (99) $145
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (100) $103
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
5
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
8
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
9
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”