Letter #205: David Blitzer and Scott O'Neil (2019)
Blackstone Global Head of Tactical Opportunities & Harris Blitzer Sports & Entertainment Cofounder and CEO of Merlin Entertainments | Wharton Sports Business Summit Fireside Chat
Hi there! Welcome to A Letter a Day. If you want to know more about this newsletter, see "The Archive.” At a high level, you can expect to receive a memo/essay or speech/presentation transcript from an investor, founder, or entrepreneur (IFO) each edition. More here. If you find yourself interested in any of these IFOs and wanting to learn more, shoot me a DM or email and I’m happy to point you to more or similar resources.
If you like this piece, please consider tapping the ❤️ above or subscribing below! It helps me understand which types of letters you like best and helps me choose which ones to share in the future. Thank you!
Today’s letter is the transcript of a conversation with David Blitzer and Scott O’Neil. At the time, Scott was the CEO of David’s sports holding company, Harris Blitzer Sports & Entertainment. In this conversation, David and Scott discuss investing in sports, being the CEO of a sports holding company, the biggest inherent risk in sports investing and what worries them, on-field concerns, building an organization and the differences and similarities when doing that in finance vs sports, trash talk, whether people need a relevant background, whether its in sports or investing, to do well in that industry, what they look for when hiring, retaining talent, sports analytics and using data on and off the field, the usage of data, team culture, and more.
David Blitzer is the Global Head of Blackstone’s Tactical Opportunities (Tac Opps) Group, the Cofounder of Harris Blitzer Sports Entertainment, and the first and only person to hold team equity in the five major sports leagues of North America through his ownerships of the Philadelphia 76ers, the New Jersey Devils, the Washington Commanders, the Cleveland Guardians, and Real Salt Lake. David started his career at Blackstone, where he had held a variety of roles across the firm and was involved in the execution of firm investments across a variety of asset classes, including establishing and leading their European private equity business, before launching Tac Opps.
Scott O’Neil is the CEO of Merlin Entertainments. Scott started his career with the New Jersey Nets before moving on to become a corporate sales director with the Philadelphia Eagles. He then started a company called HoopsTV that offered a basketball entertainment service that let fans watch games on their computers. When the company failed, he joined the NBA’s executive office, where he served as senior vice president of team marketing and business operations. He was then recruited to be the President of Madison Square Garden, and then CEO of Harris Blitzer Sports & Entertainment.
I hope you enjoy this conversation as much as I did! David is someone I’ve learned a tremendous amount from with regards to sports, management, investing, life, and more!
(Transcript and any errors are mine.)
Related Resources:
Blackstone
Sports
Team Owners
Athletes
Transcript
Host: So let me start with the beginning. First of all, David, welcome back. Scott, welcome back to the Wharton School. Let me ask my first question. I'll ask it to both of you, but it'll be a slightly different spin. So what made you want to invest in sports teams when you could invest in lots of different things? And Scott--you're probably more modest than you should be--you could be the CEO of any company, why would you want to be the CEO of something that is basically primarily sports and entertainment? So David, maybe I'll start with you about investing in sports, and then Scott being a CEO of a sports holding company, if you would like.
David Blitzer: Sure. Well, I'm gonna break it between the business side of the investment and the fan side of the investment. So like, probably like 99% of this room--I'm sure there's some real athletes floating around here somewhere--I was one of those fake or failed athletes growing up. But I was a massive, massive sports fan, from--whenever--as a little kid all the way through--clearly--to today. So the fan side of it was pretty clear to me once I was not going to get much beyond middle school, let alone High School on the sports fields. I always had in the back of my mind, and my mother actually remembers this, I remember calling her when I told her that we were going to buy the Sixers, and she was like, I'm not surprised. You wanted to do that when you were seven years old. Got a little lucky, which enabled me to do it. But on the business side of the equation, I've talked about this a lot. We were never ever going to make--I would never make an investment just for the fun side of the equation. It's great that it comes along with it. And it's actually creates a perfect combination. But it had to make sense from a investment business perspective. And for me anyway, I've learned a ton in the--I guess it's probably been eight years now since we originally invested in our first sports team. And I learn a ton every week, every year, etc. And I'm still learning quite a lot. But in the beginning, my investment thesis was really, really simple. It was two things. It was media rights--and I never thought the NBA's media rights would do what they did in 2014, but I thought they would grow dramatically; they grew beyond my expectations--and scarcity value. So there's pick your league that you're excited about or whatever, but take the NBA for a second. There's 30 teams. Basic laws of supply and demand that you're all taught probably pre-Wharton, and the reality is the demand is growing and the supply is not. And so as long as you have patience, and as long as you have a long-term view, it's kind of, to me, a little bit like beachfront real estate. Like if you don't have liquidity dynamics, you're going to make money on that investment over the really long term. I'm not getting into IRR--you're just going to make money. And so I was really, really bullish on the NBA. And the way I think about it also is, we bought an incredible market. We bought Philadelphia 76ers, but we basically bought 3.3% of the NBA. And we happened to buy 3.3% of the NBA with a top six market. So that's just a really good place to be. The issue, at the time, was that the team was losing significant amounts of money. And we all have done plenty of our cash flow analyses, and that was the not so pretty part of the Investment Committee deck that that we ultimately put together on the team. Perfect combination of really strong from an investment standpoint, in my view, and then to be able to combine that with the fan side of the equation is pretty awesome.
Host: Well, Scott, let me ask you, again, as CEO of, now, obviously--well, two major sports franchises, but also--now I know you guys are into eSports. There's lots of things. What made you choose a career path that made you think that this is what you wanted to be a CEO of?
Scott O’Neil: Sure. So when I was really young, I mostly had labor jobs. So I worked digging pools and landscaping and vending machines. Every crap job you could possibly have I had growing up since I was 14 years old. And then in college, I interned with a sports marketing company that's now Octagon, called Advantage at the time, in DC. And I remember walking in the first day and everybody was happy. And I remember, like, Monday was a happy day, not a sad day. And Friday, everybody was planning on how they were going to connect over the weekend. And I've never seen so many kind of young, smart, interesting people so happy in the workplace. And so my thought leaving there this summer is like, I want to do that. Whatever that is, I want to do it. And so when I got a chance to get into the business, I knew that--I started as an assistant, a marketing assistant, and literally getting coffee and lunch, doing all the crap jobs. And I loved it. I was the first one in the morning in the office--I remember before they gave me a key, which took about a month, I would just sit there in the lobby until the first person came in. I would get up and walk in. And then I would be the last person--
David Blitzer: Still the first person in.
Scott O’Neil: Yeah, yeah. And back then on the weekend, we wouldn't have--pre-internet, believe it or not. So on the weekends, we worked in the office. And it was usually the President, the General Counsel, the CFO, and me, a kid. And so I got I got my hands dirty with a lot of stuff really early on. As far as working for this guy, I can tell you I had some--the sports business is not historically known for heavy up on culture, management, or leadership. And that was my family business growing up. My folks taught. And so I early on in my career decided that like, if I could ever have a chance in my career to make a difference, I wanted to create the greatest place to work in the world. And having getting kind of frustrated as I kind of kept ascending the business--I was at Madison Square Garden and got fired. And I thought I was gonna lead the business. Interviewed a lot of like fun--tried to buy a company, tried to take a public company private. I met with like many teams that were interested in having me come run them. And I just wasn't--I wasn't having it. I knew David socially. I knew Josh a little bit, but knew Blitz much better. And when I sat down with these guys--he's an incredible husband, he won't say it. He's an incredible father. He's the smartest guy I've ever been in a room with. He has a day job--
David Blitzer: Bonus time's coming up.
Scott O’Neil: No, no it's not. I always say this when he's not here, so you should hear it from me directly. And then what was most impressive though is we had complete value alignment. First of all, in my business, if your boss has a day job, it's really helpful. That means they don't want your job. And he has a day job. He doesn't want my job. He's not interested in it, which allows me to do it, and build it. So we were aligned on that. We aligned on sports being a vehicle to make the world a little bit better. We both have a fierce competitive nature and want to win. And we're both really interested in building big businesses. And so once I had value alignment, I was ready to go. And I remember--I don't know if you remember what you said to me. In the last meeting--I interviewed with these guys probably 10-12 times in one of their apartments in New York. It was always Sunday night. They had a bunch of kids, they were all younger at the time. They would all go to bed and then I was interviewing at like 10pm on Sundays. And I knew I was getting close when he threw there--Allison would come in and ask me a few questions. Like, okay, this a true pressure test now. But I remember the--he's like: is this big enough? I don't know if you remember that. And I said, But you say you want to grow. He was like, I know. But is this big enough? I go: but you say you want to grow. And three weeks later, he acquired the Devils and Prudential Center. And wah-lah, off we went. So it's been fun. And he's incredible.
Host: David, let me build--question for both people. Let me build on what your last statement was. What do you see as the inherent biggest risk? You talked about the long-term investment strategy of the--whether it's the Sixers or the Devils or in your case, Crystal Palace Esports. What's the long-term risk that you see in this investment? And then Scott I'll ask you what keeps you up on a day to day basis when you think about--things are going great for the NBA, things are going great for the NHL. Premier League Soccer has never been better here in the United States. Esports is exploding. But what could end that great run that it's having? What worries you the most?
David Blitzer: So, there's a difference between what worries me and the inherent risks in the sports business. But let me try to hit on both. So in leagues that don't have relegation, if you have a long term view, I--and this is going to come out a little trite--I don't think there are really many risks. I just don't.
Host: Just to interrupt for one second. Does everybody here know what relegation means? Like if you perform really poorly in Crystal Palace, they can actually get demoted to a lower league, which means revenue goes down dramatically. I just want to make sure everybody here knows.
David Blitzer: So English Premiership--simply, 20 teams. Three every year get demoted to--think about it, like to the minor leagues, to the next League. And then three come up into the league. So you don't have a permanent place in the league. And that's the case, basically, everywhere in global football, global soccer. And interestingly, there were some years in Philadelphia where there were some sports writers who kept talking about we should bring relegation to the to the NBA. And there's a little talk about it every once in a while as it relates to the MLS, which I don't think will happen because people sign franchise agreements, and they own their franchises in a non-relegation League. So if you take that off the table, I go back to my There's 30 of these teams. I don't see--I see risk in rate of growth, I don't see risk in growth, at the end of the day, in any of the major leagues. So again, I'm talking major leagues. There's tons of risks in some of the more startup leagues, if you think about--people are creating rugby leagues and professional fighting leagues and things of that nature. Or there's other football leagues people are talking about. But fundamentally, in the major leagues without relegation, long-term, I really don't think there's investment risk inherently within them. I think there's a lot of risk in the relegation leagues without a doubt. We've had--and Scott's had to listen to me, at least anyway, with a lot of stress on a number of occasions, with our soccer team when I felt like Wow, we actually could get relegated here, and that would be embarrassing and financially--well, I don't know about disastrous--it would not be a good day. But inherent--what do I worry about? I worry about a lot of things. And I'll let Scott hit on some from the business perspective, but of course I worry about performance. I worry about our role in the community. I worry about somebody doing something really stupid. You worry about injuries. We worry endlessly about things. But back to the from the investment side of the equation, I don't have a lot of worries. I don't think there's a lot of risk.
Host: Would your answer be the same if you own an MLB franchise where they're getting tortured with for hour games, the number of kids playing baseball is going down? I'm just wondering--would you see that, or maybe--I'm just wondering what--
David Blitzer: I think it's a really good question. I happen to be a huge baseball fan.
Host: I have Phillies season tickets too, so I like them as well.
David Blitzer: Look, 80mn people walk through a major league baseball stadium a year, and significantly more than that through a minor league baseball stadium turnstile every year. The games are too long. They're trying. They have to fix that. You can look at youth participation, and people talk about it's another generation, and when that generation starts to fall away, the next generation isn't gonna necessarily pick it up. I think those are fair demographic questions to wonder. I still am actually bullish, but I think it's a fair question. If kids aren't playing, and kids aren't watching, that's going to be a problem in--whether it's 20 years or 40 years. But I still think kids are playing baseball. And it could decline--viewership is declining a bit, and people walking into the stadiums are declining a bit, but they're declining from 80mn. So I feel pretty good.
Scott O’Neil: We've talked about Rob Manfred, the Commissioner. He's done a really good job.
David Blitzer: Rob's done great.
Scott O’Neil: He's addressing the right things. We've talked about horse racing in boxing before, in the 40s and 50s, and how they were these incredible sports--like number one and number two sports--long time ago. I'm not sure they had the leadership, the infrastructure, and the innovation that you see in baseball now--or some of our other sports. And I think there's so much at stake in that machine. I think some of that's a hair overblown.
Host: So Scott--when you were watching the--or you might have been there--but when you were watching the Sixer game the other night and Ben Simmons hurts his shoulder--
Scott O’Neil: I was there.
Host: Oh, you were there. Okay. So I can just say, as a fan--I'm not a particularly religious person, but as much as I can pray, I was praying.
Scott O’Neil: Yeah, yeah.
Host: So is that--do you have on-field concerns, because injuries are something that are hard to predict, but obviously can affect the product, they affect the marketing of the team, the success of the team? How do you think about that? Also, as building a bench and redundancy on the team?
Scott O’Neil: Yeah. Well, I turned 50 this year. I can tell you, I've been through a lot of the early stress in my life. And I think about stress really differently, and I think about worrying very differently now. For me, I think about do we have the best organization that we could possibly build. Do we have the smartest people? Do we have the right infrastructure? Do we have the right checks and balances in place? Do we have a culture where we can engage in debate? Is it okay to fail? Are we comfortable talking to each other? Is it a safe environment? Are we continuing to improve every day? And so once you have all that stuff in place, and we can check that box, my worry quotient goes way down. And then is there risk of someone getting injured? Of course. This is like, he's a 260 pounds, 6'10" point guard who runs like a running back. And so he's a freight train. And so is there a risk of him getting--of course. That's part of the sport. We definitely have a next man up philosophy on our team. We've got--Brett Brown's a wonderful coach, and I think Elton Brand should be GM of the year. And so I think we have the right infrastructure and the right leadership in place and the right culture has been built. So do I lean over as he's doing this in the first quarter, because he--was the second time when he came out? Yeah, yeah, I get a little uptight, of course. But that's not something we can control. And so I don't spend a lot of time focusing on stuff I can't control.
Host: So Scott's answer is a perfect segue to the next topic, about building an organization. So obviously, David, you--as Scott even mentioned, you have a day job. And it's a pretty big company that makes all kinds of investments--invest in teams. How do you think about building something at Blackstone? Or is it the same as building something at Harris Blitzer Sports Entertainment? I mean, how do you think about any differences?
David Blitzer: It's incredibly similar, which made it really efficient, nice--I mean, it's what I do for the last, whatever, 28 years of my life. And so I don't think there's actually differences in that sense. We can come back to I think there's differences fundamentally in the business of sports, particularly teams versus a widget manufacturer or a consumer products company. But as it relates to the management team, and the building of the organization, it's exactly what I'm used to. And at the end of the day, you hire the best people at every position, and you give them--you put the appropriate governance structures in place, but you give them the room to do their jobs. And I've said this, and I'm not saying it because Scott and some of my other colleagues are here--we have the best management team in sports. This management team could go and operate X, Y, and Z in a totally different industry. Scott's never going to leave the sports industry, but if you ever did, I would absolutely look at hiring Scott--or I would hire Scott to run businesses that are not in sports. But it goes beyond. Scott sets the tone, and he's incredible at it. And a lot of people in here do know Scott, so they know I'm not just saying that. But the reality is one of the things that's--probably Scott's greatest attribute is his ability to find the most talented people and put them in their positions and let them grow. And so I'm always super excited about the quality of our management team, which I do think is literally the best there is.
Scott O’Neil: We have--I’ll just add, like, it's funny. If you--Blitz's staff is very young. My team is very young. And so we have--Millennials are running this company, and probably 80% of our staff is probably under 27, 28. We've got--
David Blitzer: Oh, I thought you meant young like us at 50.
Scott O’Neil: No. I am--to them, I'm 100. Yeah. So we play hoop before every Sixers game. We have a little 3:30 basketball run. And every time I score, I say, It's like your father scoring on you, every time.
David Blitzer: And by the way, he talks more shit on the court than anyone.
Scott O’Neil: I do.
David Blitzer: By orders of magnitude. I don't play, because--a lot of reasons. I can't run the court, I can't shoot the ball anymore. But I have a lot of friends who play in Scott's game, and they come off the--after they played the first time with them, and they're like, Oh, my God.
Host: Let me just say, that may be the only dimension I could compete on Scott on, but we'll see how that goes, but--
Scott O’Neil: Yeah, yeah. But I will say, both of our organizations--I think our hallmark is we find really smart, talented people. And we believe in them. And we promote them until they can't, they say Uncle. And we work them to death, and we give them access and opportunity and the resources. And they go. This generation--
David Blitzer: And by the way, they do something wrong though--meaning, I don't mean like one--if they can't do their job, no different than in another business, they're going to find another job. I mean, I don't mean to be--there's no charity there. It is a credibly professionally run organization. The good news is, again, we have this incredible group of talent.
Host: Scott, let me ask you a question. And then it's same for David, but I'll start with you. Does someone have to be an expert in sports to work in a position in sports? And I'll turn it to David too. Does someone have to have a big investment background, or let's make it up--an extremely smart male or female is a physicist who just has an incredible--I always say you invest in the slope, not the intercept--I don't care what you know now, I care how quickly you learn. Could somebody not know sports and be a successful person with the Sixers, the Devils, etc?
Scott O’Neil: For sure. Yeah, I mean, actually I think we have a few physicists that were for us.
David Blitzer: Yeah.
Host: Or statisticians.
Scott O’Neil: We have some statisticians. We have, I think we have eight PhDs. But yeah, I don't think sports is a prereq for coming to work here. I don't know if we have somebody that hasn't worked in sports coach our team, for example--
David Blitzer: I’ve always wonder--
Scott O’Neil: But we might put them in a performance job where they're kind of looking at how we improve performance or health and wellness. So I think from a from a business end, we're looking for really smart people with a gear who are extraordinary teammates, who aren't afraid to get their hands dirty, and and have a passion for this work.
Host: How do you guys think about it at Blackstone? About--I'll call it specific domain knowledge and expertise versus just someone with high IQ, good work ethic, general skills that can then learn quickly?
David Blitzer: Yeah, I think, again, it's very consistent with all the companies that I work with over the years, etc. We're looking--at the end of the day--we also love IQ--
Scott O’Neil: Yeah, he’s--IQ, IQ, IQ. If we fire someone or lose somebody that's smart, he's like, IQ is running out the door! IQ is running out the door!
David Blitzer: I don't like when IQ runs out the door. But we also like really--we like great team players. We really do. We're working in such an intense environment, like I'm a huge, huge believer in--are you going to be a great member of a team, even if your IQ is completely off the chart? I won't take IQ over team. But once they're a great team person and a quality individual, then I do like having a lot of IQ in the building. But big picture, Scott answered it really well. I'll slice it a little bit like--on the business side, know it, meaning you don't need to come from sports whatsoever in my judgment, to be on the business side. It's great if you do, but there's no prerequisite whatsoever. On the sporting side of the equation, we could slice and dice that into multiple categories. I agree with Scott. I doubt we would take a super smart person and put them in as a coach. I think the GM question would be really interesting, actually. I tend to lean on that person should probably have some background in the sport, but like, I don't know. It'd be an interesting experiment. But there's so many other positions that people don't see, within basketball operations--from sports science to the data and analytics to just go what goes on behind the scene every day in communications and engagement. All of that I don't feel like there's any prerequisite from being in sports or that sport at all.
Host: Well, you just mentioned the topic that I'm going to transition to next. And most people will find it impressive that I've been able to hold my tongue on data analytics for 20 minutes and we've been sitting here as the Vice Dean of Analytics at the school. So why don't we transition there? How do you guys think about the use of analytics both on--let's actually use the same bifurcation that you did, David--both on the business side, for example, dynamic pricing, optimal marketing and email campaigning versus let's say the on field side? So David, maybe we'll start with you. And then Scott, you can talk about, as the CEO, how do you think about using it both off the field and on?
David Blitzer: So why don't we split the question? And Scott, maybe start on the business side of the equation, and maybe I'll jump in on the sports side of the equation?
Scott O’Neil: Sure. Yeah, we have several--
David Blitzer: The big--the first answer is yes, yes, and yes.
Scott O’Neil: Yeah.
David Blitzer: We believe deeply in it.
Scott O’Neil: You can't tee me up the answer, and then cut me off. It's really awkward.
David Blitzer: Fair point.
Yeah, no, we have--boy, I don't know--we put them under a kind of a strategy bucket. We have a few of them here. Two here, right here in the front. So we have, I think, five or six analytics, strategy, I'd say, resident smart people. They're engaged in every facet of the business. So almost everything we touch, they touch. So optimizing the core business, looking at new opportunities, pricing models. We recently--we had one of our partners want to renegotiate a deal, and three people squirrel in a room, come back and say, here's the recommendation. So we're very much focused on making smarter decisions faster. And to do that, I think--I don't--it's not so much you don't hear it anymore, but it used to be--you used to hear people rail on kind of an anti-analytics view, an anti-data view. And we would always talk, it's like, wait a second. Are you telling me like, if you had better data, you would not use it? Like it doesn't make sense, like, we couldn't--and there's a--I think we both come from the same school of thought, and that is you want--like it's never perfect. Like you can never have a 100%-sure decision in our business. There's never enough time and never enough information, generally. And so we're trying to get as close to a sure answer, and sometimes a really good bet, and sometimes a, Hey, it's now better than a coin flip type decision, just given the nature of our business. But we want as many smart people as we possibly can on as many decisions as we can quickly.
Host: David, how do you--
David Blitzer: And you're in a perfect spot, in a sense. And you and I have spent time on this, and I expect we'll spend a lot of time on this in the future--but data science, which has obviously been around for quite a long period of time, is changing dramatically in front of our all of our eyes. I forget the exact stat, but the amount of data in the last 12 months that has been created and analyzed is like more than the rest of data, like in history. And it's going to just keep growing--not at linear rates--at exponential rates. And so again, I take it back to what I do every day. And we use data very intensely as we're analyzing companies to invest in that have nothing to do with sports. And you always want to get--but as much data as you can, and incredibly smart people to analyze that data--but you also can't be blind to what it's either not telling you, or if your data is not really good, it could lead you to some places that you don't necessarily want to be. So I don't want to overplay it or underplay it. It's incredibly important. I mean, the investment we're making in data scientists at Blackstone, as an example, is massive. And I work with them intensely, and it's such a pleasure to be able to have a problem--I would have no idea how to solve that problem or get a better read on how to analyze that, and then we have these teams of people that come in, and they do it. It's absolutely awesome. So bringing it to the sport side of the equation, myself and Josh like always came from a data and analytics sort of mindset and background. It's always super important to have as much as you can, and have incredibly talented people with which to observe and ultimately analyze. So I think we were--well, look, I think we've been very consistent. As soon as we came into the Philadelphia 76ers, we added some data and analytics people, but I think the reality is, over the past three years ish, three years, we've just taken it up to another level. And we continue to, because it's a little like machine learning in the sense that like, it just keeps getting better. So we have an unbelievable team at the Sixers. We also, more recently, so I would say it was, what, 18 months ago--and again, we had some data and analytics people at the Devils, but we invested significantly, both in datasets, in equipment, and in people, to dramatically expand what we're doing in hockey. And similarly, we're doing that in soccer as well. And frankly, in eSports, as well. So it's kind of everywhere. The problem, or the differences, really come with how good is the data, and how is that data being delivered. So as an example, if you went back, baseball really started Moneyball in a sense. But baseball, and I, again, I love baseball--but it's much easier to analyze. You're stationary, for the most part. You have a pitch, and you have a swing. And when you start thinking about the movement of what's going on on a basketball court, or a hockey rink or a soccer pitch, it's very different to be able to analyze that. And so player and ball or puck, etc.--tracking is the key, from a data set perspective. The NBA has been putting cameras in arenas for over a decade, maybe. Now, that just means that you're getting really good data. What you then do with that data is a whole 'nother kind of story, in terms of how good you are at it, and with it, etc. And hockey is just kind of getting there. They're testing a whole variety of systems, but player and puck tracking, I think, is going to completely change hockey analytics over the next bunch of years. And I think similarly, I view hockey reasonably similarly to soccer. And so I think that's going to take sort of a big leap forward over time. But it's--it's what you think.
Host: Well, I have to ask the two of you the same question I ask everybody on our radio show when anybody comes on and we talk about analytics. I always ask them, maybe I--David, you already said what the answer would be, but I have to ask the question. If you could have better data, better math, or better--I'll call it usage of that data in the organization--I'll ask both of you: which of the two do you think you guys, both at--let's call it the Sixers, the Devils, Crystal Palace eSports--which one would accelerate your advantage through analytics? Is it better data--just kind of you need more data scientists--or just like you got to convince people in the organization to use data science. I like the term, by the way, strategy. We're not in the backroom doing data science anymore. We're helping with strategy. So how do you think about that?
David Blitzer: Well, I'll start, and then Scott will finish. But I meant to say this earlier, and that's why I was--at the end of your last question--like, the way I think about it is, once again, you can have the smartest data science people and wonderful data. But like, what is that going to tell you? So we can have somebody sitting in their office cube, who's a genius, who has figured out that when Ben goes left, the defenses tend to do this versus when he goes right. And because of that, and X, Y, and Z other factors, the players should do extra--or coach could call a certain play. But if the players and the coaches aren't bought into that, you just have some great science people that have created some really cool things and it's not really going to do a whole lot for you. So what I feel like we've done really well, is embed our data and analytics teams--and we do this even more broadly across the organization. Again, Scott's a huge believer in lack of silos. So people should know what the holistic approach is, not just what one department is doing, and they should know what another department is doing. And we have a similar philosophy as it relates to--really, it's the coaching staff together with the data analytics staff. And then the coaching staff working with the players, and the player development staff, which is part of the coaching staff, being able to articulate in ways the players, things that are quite meaningful, but that the players can understand and execute. Because you can't overcomplicate things given the speed of which sports are occurring. You don't want too many things in people's heads. You want to really synthesize it down to a small group of value added plays or views. So our analytics team is totally embedded. They are in all of the coaching meetings.
Host: Wow.
David Blitzer: Like again, we do a great job of breaking down silos. I do not think you would see this in a lot of organizations. When the coaching staff is sitting in their meetings, and they have three of our data analytics people that are attached to them at all times--and they're taking feedback. So of course, the data analytics people have views of what--it's like mad scientists. Stuff they want to create and figure out, etc. But again, if it's not what the coaches are looking for, it's pretty hard to make it effective. So I think we do a great job of integrating that, so the coaches are getting what they want. It doesn't mean that people don't make suggestions that the coaches haven't thought about, even as it relates to process, etc. And then like anything, we've continued to bring the players into that equation. And some love it. And others are like, Yeah, thanks.
Host: The reason I said Wow is because I spent five years working with the Eagles with Jeff Lurie, Joe Banner, and Howie Roseman, and I can say in the meetings that Andy Reid was in with us, it wasn't Welcome Eric to the room. And so it was a very--that's why I said Wow when you said that that's integrated with the coaching staff, because they were--
David Blitzer: That doesn't happen in 10 minutes, either.
Host: It just doesn't happen.
David Blitzer: It's process.
Host: So Scott, how do you think about--
Scott O’Neil: Yeah, I guess I can tell you. I mean, a friend of ours, former GM, Sam Hinkie told me a story and I think it articulates the whole story pretty well. He said when he was a really young analyst in Houston--I'll spare you the teams and the players for purposes of confidentiality, but he said--and Jeff Van Gundy was a coach who's now a commentator--and Sam had figured out the best lineup against this team for the last four minutes of the game, and he was convinced. He waited--because Jeff Van Gundy's a crazy worker--so he waited till 12 o'clock when Jeff was going, walked to his car with him--he was a young guy. Said here's what it is. Coach stopped at the car, they had a 25 minute conversation. Okay, I got it. Game tomorrow. Got it. So this is the lineup. Yes. This is the lineup. So next game, four minutes to go--subs out this guy. Sam's like, what are you kidding me--young guy, like this is ridiculous. I spent three weeks on this lineup. This is crazy. And so he waited for him, tapping his foot. The coaches go through their postgame, watch video, meet with the team, coach's meeting? He's waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting. Walks Jeff out to his car--he's like, I don't get it. We spent 25 minutes at midnight last night. We agreed on this. He says, Sam, I knew I lost X player. Said I could see at the bench, I could see his body language. So I just checked him in the game the last four minutes. He's like, but we lost. He's like, I know, but I got a four game roadtrip. I lose this guy now--and Sam, it was the first time, he says, in his career, he kind of got it. Okay, I got it. It's art and science, and how you blend those two together is through the ecosystem. And how you build that ecosystem is about culture.
If you got this far and you liked this piece, please consider tapping the ❤️ above or sharing this letter! It helps me understand which types of letters you like best and helps me choose which ones to share in the future. Thank you!
Wrap-up
If you’ve got any thoughts, questions, or feedback, please drop me a line - I would love to chat! You can find me on twitter at @kevg1412 or my email at kevin@12mv2.com.
If you're a fan of business or technology in general, please check out some of my other projects!
Speedwell Research — Comprehensive research on great public companies including Constellation Software, Floor & Decor, Meta, RH, interesting new frameworks like the Consumer’s Hierarchy of Preferences (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3), and much more.
Cloud Valley — Easy to read, in-depth biographies that explore the defining moments, investments, and life decisions of investing, business, and tech legends like Dan Loeb, Bob Iger, Steve Jurvetson, and Cyan Banister.
DJY Research — Comprehensive research on publicly-traded Asian companies like Alibaba, Tencent, Nintendo, Sea Limited (FREE SAMPLE), Coupang (FREE SAMPLE), and more.
Compilations — “A national treasure — for every country.”
Memos — A selection of some of my favorite investor memos.
Bookshelves — Your favorite investors’/operators’ favorite books.