www.ditl.org

https://variety.com/2024/biz/news/sony- ... 235981220/

In the latest twist in Paramount Global’s M&A saga, Sony Pictures Entertainment and Apollo Global Management have made a bid to take Paramount private with an all-cash buyout offer of $26 billion.

Sony and private-equity giant Apollo submitted a letter with the non-binding offer Wednesday to Paramount Global, as first reported by the Wall Street Journal. The bid, which would include the assumption of debt and could be negotiated, would be a premium over the company’s current $22 billion enterprise value.

Slowly but surely, Buy and Large will be real.

When they say "assumption of debt", do they mean that Sony and Apollo take out a loan to buy Paramount, the two of them purchase Paramount, then they turn over repaying the debt to Paramount? So Sony and Apollo get a source of cash from Paramount's sales, while Paramount is stuck paying off the loan?

Coalition wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2024 6:11 pm When they say "assumption of debt", do they mean that Sony and Apollo take out a loan to buy Paramount, the two of them purchase Paramount, then they turn over repaying the debt to Paramount? So Sony and Apollo get a source of cash from Paramount's sales, while Paramount is stuck paying off the loan?

I assumed, and after reading your post I did some looking into it, it seems to be that Paramount Global's debts will be taken on by Sony/Apollo, and thus they would now be liable to pay them off if the deal is made.

Tinadrin Chelnor wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2024 6:53 pm

Coalition wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2024 6:11 pm When they say "assumption of debt", do they mean that Sony and Apollo take out a loan to buy Paramount, the two of them purchase Paramount, then they turn over repaying the debt to Paramount? So Sony and Apollo get a source of cash from Paramount's sales, while Paramount is stuck paying off the loan?

I assumed, and after reading your post I did some looking into it, it seems to be that Paramount Global's debts will be taken on by Sony/Apollo, and thus they would now be liable to pay them off if the deal is made.

Better than how Red Lobster's purchasers did. They borrowed money, bought Red Lobster as a whole, and ordered Red Lobster to sell off the property the restaurants were on to a 'separate' entity and be leased back. This sale of properties gave a profit to Red Lobster's owners, which was a nice dividend. The company owning the property then increased the lease rates, which also gave a nice dividend to that set of owners. Red Lobster restaurants were now stuck with a higher monthly cost due to the lease payments.