A state comptroller candidate is proposing to steer a slice of New York’s $290 billion pension fund into Madison Square Garden Sports, the company behind the Knicks and Rangers. The idea signals a rare push to tie public retirement savings to one of the country’s most watched sports brands. It also raises questions about risk, governance, and the role of public money in professional sports.
The proposal comes from Adem Bunkeddeko, who is seeking the office that oversees the giant pension portfolio. The plan would allocate a percentage of the fund to purchase shares in Madison Square Garden Sports. The goal, he suggests, is to capture steady cash flows and long-term growth from sports media rights and franchise values.
“Adem Bunkeddeko, a state comptroller candidate, wants to use some of New York’s $290 billion pension fund to buy a percentage of Madison Square Garden Sports.”
The fund’s role and the stakes
New York’s state pension fund is among the largest in the United States. It covers hundreds of thousands of current and retired public workers. The comptroller serves as the sole trustee, with a duty to protect benefits and invest prudently.
Public pension funds already hold large positions in public equities. Some have also gained exposure to sports through private equity vehicles that take minority stakes in teams and leagues. A direct or concentrated buy into a single sports company, however, would be unusual and would invite scrutiny.
Why Madison Square Garden Sports
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. is the parent of the New York Knicks and New York Rangers. It trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker MSGS. Sports teams have seen values rise over the last decade, helped by media rights, streaming demand, and global fan bases.
Supporters argue that sports businesses can offer resilient revenue from ticketing, sponsorships, and broadcast deals. They point to recent increases in franchise valuations across the NBA and NHL. A stake in MSG Sports could give the fund direct exposure to that growth, while also distributing dividends when authorized.
Risk, governance, and fiduciary duty
The plan would face strict safeguards. State law and policy require the fund to follow fiduciary standards, including diversification and reasonable risk. A large position in a single entertainment company could run counter to those principles.
Madison Square Garden companies and their leadership have been the subject of frequent public debate. That creates reputational and governance considerations for any public investor. Proxy voting, board independence, and minority shareholder rights would be central to any decision.
- Concentration risk: exposure to one stock tied to team performance and media cycles.
- Liquidity risk: limited float and potential market swings during news events.
- Governance risk: questions around control, related-party transactions, and investor rights.
- Return potential: long-term franchise value growth and media revenue trends.
Industry context and market mechanics
Professional leagues have opened the door to institutional capital in recent years. Private equity funds now hold passive stakes in several teams, within league limits. Public pensions often access such deals indirectly through those funds, spreading risk across multiple holdings.
A direct purchase of publicly traded MSG Sports would be simpler to execute but would not guarantee influence. It would also expose the pension to stock volatility. Any allocation would require careful sizing within the fund’s public equity bucket and ongoing risk review.
What supporters and skeptics are watching
Backers of the idea see long-term upside from media rights renewals and new streaming packages. They also highlight the scarcity value of New York franchises and strong regional demand. A disciplined entry price and prudent position size could help manage volatility.
Critics warn that public pensions should avoid headline risk and sector concentration. They argue that broad index exposure already captures entertainment gains without single-name risk. They also stress the need for a clear exit plan and transparent governance benchmarks.
The path forward
Any move would require thorough due diligence. That includes scenario testing, correlation analysis, and legal review of league rules and shareholder rights. It would also call for clear performance targets and an annual review against the fund’s policy benchmarks.
If advanced, the proposal could set a fresh precedent for how public pensions access sports assets. The key test remains unchanged: whether the investment improves the risk-adjusted returns needed to pay benefits on time.
The idea has injected a live debate into the comptroller race. It combines a popular brand with the sober math of pension management. The next steps will hinge on detailed analysis, public transparency, and strict adherence to fiduciary duty. Watch for formal vetting, position sizing guidance, and any signals on media rights that could sway the calculus.
