I work in a retail environment. ‘Muzak’ has evolved, so to speak, into an even worse abomination than that dreadful mild classical revamping of pop music that it started out as. As the holidays approach, the horror increases. Christmas classics, redefined. It seems every twit performer on the face of this planet has a holiday song(s) recorded. Badly. Kinda like the distorted national anthem thing at pro ball games. My question: Could someone buy the rights to Muzak (I know, big bucks, but anyway) and forever ban its existence? I seem to recall years ago that someone (rock star?) tried and failed.
Oh, sure. Will it happen? Not likely. They’ve made ungodly amounts of money with their, uh, special kind of “music”. I don’t think they’d be willing to sell any time soon.
I don’t think that it’s just Muzak anymore (regretfully). Many of the songs can be played by anyone as long as they hire thier own (dare I call them) musicians to play them. Much like anyone can make a cover of someone else song as long as they pay royalties to the copywrite holder. The genie is out of the bottle . . .
Muzak is currently controlled by Abry Partners, an investment firm. Minority investors include Clear Channel and some of the larger distributors of the service. Both Abry and Clear Channel are mostly financial investors, so yeah, for the right price you could probably buy the company as long as you make nice with the distributors.
If the music sucks, though, blame your bosses. Muzak offers over 70 channels of standard music programming, of which the “Montovani does Classic Rock” and “Christmas Classics on Bagpipes” kinds of abominations that most people associate with “Muzak” is a very small part.
Finally, be prepared to pay. Abry has really done a nice job with the company since they acquired it. Based on current earnings I’d say you’d have to pay between $700 MM and an even billion to get the company away from them. You can finance $500 MM or so of that.
“Christmas Classics on Bagpipes” Now I know how to make this holiday season special! :wally My kids are gonna thank you . . . 
You could ask your boss to switch to Sirius Satellite Radio. The ads claim it’s cheaper than Muzak, at $24.95 a month (including royalties).
Sirrius let’s you supply music to a unlimited audiance without you having to pay royalties? Not saying that it isn’t so, but that is news to me.
Here’s the page on their web site about business subscriptions.
It also says “starting at” $24.95 a month, so perhaps they charge more for larger businesses or something. There’s a contact form if you want more details.
Thanks Mr2001. Now I have something to talk about at work tomorrow. 
I wonder if the starting point is based on the increase in fees if you get, say, the NFL network. Like DirecTV charges over the published price if you get the NFL package.
“24.95 per month, unless you want to upgrade to the special services. Then it costs more.”
One good thing about Sirius. I can now consider subscribing since they’ve dumped Jimmy Spencer as a main sponsor. Same goes for Cingular, now that Robby Gordon was handed the pink slip. Though he was dumped 3 weeks after I renewed my CellOne contract for another 2 years. :smack: :mad:
Sirius doesn’t charge extra for certain channels or packages (unlike a certain other satellite radio provider which I’ll call “Brand X”). The price you pay gets you all 120+ streams. At least, I know that’s true for personal subscriptions, and a few quick searches at SiriusBackstage.com’s forums don’t turn up anything to make me think it’s different for business subs.
OK. I was just wondering about personal service. If it was the same as satellite tv service for programming. No idea how business deals are handled but if I can get all channels available for a flat fee, I may have to look into this soon. Thanks for the info.
Nobody is going to let him finance any part of this if he is just going to destroy the company.
Ted Nugent
Link, though a ten million dollar bid obviously wouldn’t cut it, even if the bidder hadn’t announced that his sole purpose for buying the company was to erase the assets.
True. But if he were just going to destroy the “objectionable” assets he could get some loans. At the very least, the company has some securitizable assets such as favorable satellite leases.
Note that even if Muzak was shut down, there’s nothing to prevent another company from immediately filling the void left by Muzak. Are you going to just keep buying out company after company?
(BTW: Muzak has mostly gotten out of generating their own versions. They actually do play the original in many cases now. But there are still a ton of hack cover versions to choose from, especially for Xmas songs.)
Even if the OP had the scrath to buy a controlling interest in Muzak, he couldn’t just dismantle it. Directors and Officers of a publicly-traded company have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders. Simply pulling the plug would get you sued by every other shareholder and possibly forced out of the Board.
–Cliffy
Presumably he is buying the company lock stock and barrel so that would not be an issue as the share holders would be him.
Even if you could theoretically buy out the company and shut it down, what’s to stop someone else from starting a company that does exactly the same thing? There’s nothing special about the business model of getting licenses to record and transmit “genericized” versions of sound recordings. And it’s apparently pretty profitable, so how would you stop someone else from doing it?
Nobody buys publicly-traded companies lock, stock & barrel. It’s essentially impossible, as well as being an insane waste of money.
–Cliffy