MSGE

How does MSGE’s valuation metrics (P/E, EV/EBITDA) compare to its direct competitors in the live entertainment sector?

Created August 07, 2025 at 01:10 PM

Answer

The news release you provided only announces Madison Square Garden Entertainment Corp. (MSG E)’s upcoming fiscal‑Q4 and full‑year 2025 conference call. It does not contain any valuation multiples—such as the price‑to‑earnings (P/E) ratio or enterprise‑value‑to‑EBITDA (EV/EBITDA) – for MSG E or for its peers.

Because the specific numbers are missing, I can’t give a direct, data‑driven comparison. However, I can outline a practical, step‑by‑step approach you can use to obtain the relevant metrics and see how MSG E stacks up against the other live‑entertainment companies that compete in the same space.

1. Identify the “direct competitors” in the live‑entertainment sector

Typical publicly‑traded peers that operate venues, concerts, and related entertainment experiences include:

Company	Ticker	Primary Business
Live Nation Entertainment Inc.	LYV	Concert promotion, ticketing (Ticketmaster)
The Madison Square Garden Company (the parent of MSG E) – note the split: MSG E is the venue‑operating spin‑off; the parent still holds a stake in the venue business.
Cox Enterprises (Cox Communications) – not a pure play but sometimes listed as a “venue‑related” peer in some analyst screens.
AEG Live (private) – not listed, but often appears in peer groups for valuation benchmarking.
SMG (SMG Ltd.) – private, but sometimes included in broader “venue‑operator” comps.
Other regional venue operators (e.g., Theatre & Entertainment Corp., Spectra Experiences, etc.) – many are private, so analysts often rely on public proxies like Live Nation and MSG E.

For a strictly public‑company comparison, the most common peer set is: Live Nation (LYV), MSG E itself, and perhaps a few other listed venue operators such as *Cvent Inc. (CVT)** (though more event‑management focused) or AMC Entertainment (AMC) (theater‑chain, not a perfect match but sometimes used for broader “live‑experience” comps).*

2. Pull the valuation data

You can retrieve the latest P/E and EV/EBITDA figures from any of the following sources:

Source	How to get the data
Bloomberg Terminal – “FA” (Financial Analysis) function for each ticker; “EV/EBITDA” is shown under the “Multiples” tab.
FactSet – “Company Overview” → “Valuation” section.
S&P Capital IQ – “Company Summary” → “Valuation Ratios”.
Yahoo! Finance – “Statistics” → “Valuation Measures” (P/E) and “Enterprise Value/EBITDA” (under “Enterprise Value”).
Morningstar – “Key Ratios” page for each ticker.
SEC filings – Pull the most recent 10‑K/10‑Q, compute EV = Market Cap + Total Debt – Cash, then divide by EBITDA from the same filing.

Tip: Ensure you are using the same point‑in‑time* data for all companies (e.g., the most recent quarter or the same fiscal year) to avoid mismatched seasonality effects.

3. Example of a quick “snapshot” comparison (illustrative only)

Below is a hypothetical illustration of how the numbers might line up. Do not treat these as actual values—they are only to show the format you would present once you have the real data.

Company	P/E (FY‑2024)	EV/EBITDA (FY‑2024)
Madison Square Garden Entertainment (MSG E)	12.5×	8.3×
Live Nation Entertainment (LYV)	15.2×	10.1×
AMC Entertainment (AMC)	9.8×	7.5×
Cvent (CVT)	18.0×	12.5×

Interpretation (using the numbers above):

- P/E: MSG E trades at a lower multiple than Live Nation, suggesting the market values MSG E’s earnings more modestly (perhaps due to slower growth expectations or higher perceived risk).

- EV/EBITDA: MSG E’s EV/EBITDA is also below Live Nation’s, indicating a cheaper enterprise‑value relative to cash‑flow generation.

When you replace the illustrative numbers with the actual data you pull, you can draw similar conclusions.

4. How to contextualize the multiples

Factor	Why it matters for the live‑entertainment sector
Growth outlook	Companies with higher projected ticket‑sale growth or international expansion (e.g., Live Nation) often command higher P/E/EV‑EBITDA.
Profitability mix	Venues like MSG E have relatively stable, location‑specific cash flows but limited upside, leading to more modest multiples.
Capital‑intensity	High‑capex (venue upgrades, new construction) can depress EV/EBITDA until the assets are fully amortized.
Debt profile	A higher leverage ratio inflates enterprise value, potentially raising EV/EBITDA even if EBITDA is modest.
Seasonality & pandemic exposure	Companies with broader geographic footprints may be less vulnerable to local restrictions, affecting risk premiums.

5. Suggested next steps for a complete, data‑driven answer

Gather the latest market data (price, shares outstanding, market cap, total debt, cash) for MSG E and each chosen competitor.
Extract the most recent earnings (net income, EBITDA) from the latest 10‑K/10‑Q filings.
Calculate:
- P/E = Market Cap ÷ Net Income (or use diluted EPS).
- EV/EBITDA = (Market Cap + Debt – Cash) ÷ EBITDA.
Place the numbers in a table (as shown above).
Add a brief commentary highlighting which company is the “cheapest” on a cash‑flow basis, which enjoys a premium based on growth expectations, and any outliers (e.g., a company with a very high P/E due to a recent acquisition).
Cite your sources (e.g., Bloomberg “FA” screen, SEC filings, Yahoo! Finance).

Bottom line

The press release you shared does not contain MSG E’s P/E or EV/EBITDA, nor any competitor data.
To answer the question, you’ll need to pull the valuation multiples from a market data platform (Bloomberg, FactSet, Yahoo! Finance, etc.) or compute them from the latest SEC filings.
Once you have those figures, you can present a side‑by‑side comparison and interpret the relative valuation in the context of growth prospects, profitability, and capital structure for each live‑entertainment player.

If you obtain the specific numbers and would like help interpreting them, feel free to share them and I can craft a more detailed comparative analysis.