And I think I remember the number one thing they pointed out was that the big platforms are prioritizing their own content or their own verticals over third party, and it’s reduced their ability to monetize their content. So, what does that mean for acquisitions? You go out and you buy something that you think has whatever, 10 million unique visitors and 500 million page views, and then six months later, an algorithm’s changed, and that’s been cut in half. That happens. It’s happened to us on a smaller scale. But — and so you’ve got to be really, really, really careful. We look at digital acquisitions. We look at something every year. In fact, we were nosing around a public company this year that ended up doing a deal somewhere else.
So, yes, we want to figure out how to do that to scale it. But it’s tricky, so. And lastly — and then operator, we’re going to just open up one more question after that. And lastly, a lot of these digital acquisitions, these guys don’t make any money, right? So, they want you to — yes, they want you to — and remember I said earlier that we tend to be cash flow buyers. So they want you to give them a value and they don’t make money. It’s a problem. BuzzFeed bought this company Complex, which was like one of the top urban content publishers in the space, had a big brand for a long time, was doing a $100 million of revenue, they lost $11 million and BuzzFeed paid $300 million for them. And I just like — we just can never do anything like that.
Hal Steiner: Yes. I understand. If you mind — if I could just ask one before you switch to the last question. I was just going to ask on the — for the terms of the indenture, I think you needed to make an offer to repurchase the bonds if — with the amount of excess proceeds. But I guess, your belief would be through doing debt buybacks and maybe any other sort of investments you’ll be able to — you’ll fulfill — you’ll have no excess proceeds back — excess proceeds left by the time it is, you would’ve to make that repurchase offer. Is that correct?
Alfred C. Liggins: We don’t know, but there is a number of things that we’ve invested in that count towards those investments that aren’t just buying radio assets. Like, our Houston transaction counts. There’s some programming investments that we make that count. So, we’re not sitting there right now with $137 million of investible basket that we got to deal with. It’s something significantly less than that already. But as Peter said to me yesterday, we’re not going to go out and make a stupid acquisition just so we don’t have to offer to buy back bonds at par. That’s not going to happen. But to your point, we’re probably at something close to $80 million of the $137 million already, like sheltered, if you will, for stuff that we invest in on a regular basis. And I don’t know what’s going to happen between now and April.
Operator: And our last question here will come from Brad Kern with Fort Breaker [ph].
Unidentified Analyst: So, on the use of cash, you brought in Churchill Downs as a partner, would you be open to being sort of a minority partner in another, whether it’s a — another gaming endeavor or some other sort of minority partner where you’re not like — you’re not in control of the investment, but you’re sort of either a capital solutions provider, maybe there’s even something strategic? How you think about those types of opportunities?
Alfred C. Liggins: Yes. We would look at something like that. However, we are a bit spoiled because our MGM deal gave us like a cash return off the bat off the top of gaming revenue. So that was one of those unique situations where we put money in and we got money out, like kind of like the first year. And we looked at one deal with a small public gaming company, and they wanted us to invest like $20 million or $25 million in it. But, they had us subordinated under a whole bunch of stuff and it was like a really traditional equity investment and they were — it was — they were up-valuing it from what their value was. And so, we didn’t like it. And so, we’re spoiled. So we would like — yes, we would look at being a minority investor.
I think that would be one of those situations where if we ended up making a real equity investment and we’re sitting behind debt and when — it is got to be paid down and there is no dividends or restricted payments going out to the equity for a significant period of time where you’d want not a 20% return, you’d want something much higher. But we’ve seen two investments like that, and we passed on both.
Unidentified Analyst: Okay. Appreciate it. The discipline makes sense.
Operator: And that does conclude the conference for today. Thanks for your participation and for using AT&T Teleconference. You may now disconnect.
