0/5

Mogul deal close with TEN

A peace deal is reportedly close between the Packer / Murdoch camp and TEN.

In the latest saga of TEN ownership, there are reports today that suggest a deal is close between the Packer / Murdoch camp and TEN.

Packer is in the process of selling half his stake to Lachlan Murdoch but there has been conflict with TEN over Board seats.

Packer has been pushing for three seats on the Board, including Seek’s Paul Bassat. Last week TEN announced its second largest shareholder WIN TV’s Bruce Gordon had been offered a seat at the Board, in a move that was seen as asserting more control.

The Sydney Morning Herald reports a source close to Murdoch expects an announcement this morning.

That could help avoid the need to muster support from other shareholders ahead of the annual AGM.

So far the moguls have succeeded in having Executive Chairman Nick Falloon agree to step down.

According to TEN’s annual report released yesterday Falloon earned $3.7m in cash, superannuation and shares for the 12 months to August 31. Falloon has worked part-time with TEN.

That figure places him behind Austar’s John Porter, who received $5.3 million in 2009, and Amalgamated Holdings’ David Seargeant on $4.4 million.

Chief executive was paid $2.4m while chief programmer David Mott earned $1.2m in total remuneration.

Source: The Australian, SMH

3 Responses

  1. Well, if the story on Newsradio this morning is correct, it looks like Mr Conroy will be handing the bully-boy Packer a Xmas present by ‘relaxing’ the anti-siphoning rules for the AFL, thereby moving (at the least) several games to Foxtel.

    Funny the timing on that isn’t it? And you thought Packer bought into TEN coz he liked the Simpsons!

    With money you can achieve anything you want – and stuff the viewers, they’re just collateral damage.

  2. Could one assume that Packers interest in Ten has nothing to do with making it more competitive, but in stifling its sports channel, therefore allowing his Pay TV channel to operate without competition.

    One must wonder how a man can own considerable shares in both free to air and subscription tv at the same time, without having a conflict of interest???

Leave a Reply