Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NEW YORK TIMES SELLS BOSTON GLOBE AT 93% LOSS
Breitbart.com ^ | Aug. 3, 2012 | JOHN NOLTE

Posted on 08/03/2013 10:10:28 AM PDT by libstripper

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next last
To: libstripper
I made this graphic about ten years ago. Hope you all listened to the fortune teller. He saw the future!


21 posted on 08/03/2013 10:45:54 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Please Help To Keep The
"Conservative News and Views"
On FR Coming By "Clicking Here"!!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


22 posted on 08/03/2013 10:47:16 AM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

Needs to be Nelsonized. thanks


23 posted on 08/03/2013 10:47:34 AM PDT by CincyRichieRich (“To learn who rules over you, simply find out whom you are not allowed to criticize.” ~ Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bob
Sheesh, do you expect me to read the excerpt? I have a proud history of posting without reading the article.

as does the fact the Times retains the Globe's pension liabilities, estimated at over $100 million.

I see that the author of this piece hasn't seen them either.

5.56mm

24 posted on 08/03/2013 10:48:15 AM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: boycott

YEA — another “Too Big to Fail” Obamaproject


25 posted on 08/03/2013 10:49:35 AM PDT by Polyxene (Out of the depths I have cried to Thee, O Lord; Lord, hear my voice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kempster

What are their land holdings and equipment worth in scrap?


26 posted on 08/03/2013 10:52:10 AM PDT by Average Al
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

Doesn’t matter.
It was worth it, to them.
Newspapers like this are not really businesses in a conventional sense. They are in fact now mainly political assets, valuable to the owners in obtaining or trading political favors, on their own behalf or in more complex tradeoffs.
Favorable coverage - or these days, more usually, non-coverage or alternate emphasis, i.e., distraction, and cooperation with media strategies - is traded for favorable regulatory treatment, legislative favors, etc. That all is worth far more to the owners than advertising and subscription income.
This explains quite a lot. Like why Carlos Slim bailed out the NYT, or why GE/NBC tolerated a money-losing MSNBC.
What makes this interesting is that only certain owners seem to be able to benefit from this.


27 posted on 08/03/2013 11:04:27 AM PDT by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
It’s hard being a Red Sox fan with this clown being the owner...

Root for the players of choice and forget about the owners... Curt Shilling looked into running for Senate as an 'R' at one point (but then he opened his mouth and showed how deep he knew the issues)... still, Curt was a big R supporter. The team is ALWAYS showing their leftist ankles.

The Yankees, AFAIK, are a relatively "Right" team; dunno about the Mets.

28 posted on 08/03/2013 11:07:03 AM PDT by C210N (When people fear government there is tyranny; when government fears people there is liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Average Al
What are their land holdings and equipment worth in scrap?

Back when it was first reported that the NYT was looking for buyers and had a few nibbles, there estimates mentioned on the radio that the land alone that the papers (Worcester Telegraph, too and maybe another) stand on is worth $70 million, and speculation as to whether a buyer might just dissolve the papers and turn the land to profitable use.

29 posted on 08/03/2013 11:11:02 AM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: kempster

“And John Henry could wait ten years and assume another 93% loss on his money. Don’t these people realize that there is no money in this type of news anymore?”

Apparently not. I initially figured Henry must have been another one of those billionaires who were so old that they had to turn the charging crank on the telephone before making a call when they were growing up, but I checked, and Henry is only 64. Like Vincent said in “Pulp Fiction”, he should fuching better know better.

It’s even a losing proposition for our side. Our billionaires would be much better to buy a struggling cable/satellite channel and convert it to a hard core conservative news and entertainment venue. At least, if I was a conservative billionaire and was looking for an entertaining hobby, that’s what I would do.


30 posted on 08/03/2013 11:13:24 AM PDT by catnipman (Cat Nipman: Vote Republican in 2012 and only be called racist one more time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: maryz

“... dissolve the papers and turn the land to profitable use. ...”

Like, uh, newspaper recycling. That’s it!


31 posted on 08/03/2013 11:17:55 AM PDT by USMCPOP (Father of LCpl. Karl Linn, KIA 1/26/2005 Al Haqlaniyah, Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: libstripper
They actually sold it for an amount estimated at a negative $40 million to a negative $100 million depending on the estimate of pension liabilities and other obligations that the NYT remains stuck with.

All estimates assume the pension liabilities are above $100 million. Depending on how much more it is the NYT is will lose that much money.

The only positive thing is that the NYT which ran the Boston Globe into the ground and saw circulation and advertising revenue plummet will no longer manage the newspaper. There is therefore a possibility that the Boston Globe will not go bankrupt in a few years as it would have done if the NYT continued to run it.

32 posted on 08/03/2013 11:21:07 AM PDT by detective
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

It’s kind of like Democrats selling Detroit for 7 cents on the dollar.


33 posted on 08/03/2013 11:29:22 AM PDT by AtlasStalled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

I would think the Globe would be worth more in the range of 27 cents.


34 posted on 08/03/2013 11:31:45 AM PDT by The Great RJ (construction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kempster
Don’t these people realize that there is no money in this type of news anymore?

A worthy question, kempster, to which I don't claim to have the answer. All I've got is a hunch: properly managed, a big city newspaper ought to be able to break even and turn a modest profit. The new owner ought to diversify the Globe into direct advertising media and internet sites, as well as transform the "news" paper back into a legitimate newspaper. I doubt the market for news has evaporated; whether newspapers can boot-strap themselves out of the past, however, remains to be seen.

35 posted on 08/03/2013 11:41:46 AM PDT by Standing Wolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Standing Wolf
In theory, yes. Part of the problem with the Globe was all the debt the Times took on to buy the paper. Part was the high salaries and extreme sense of entitlement the staff has.

Lucky papers, like the Times are basically going to become real estate companies, developing the property they have and living off the rents and other investments.

I have to wonder about the Globe, though. The paper keeps getting smaller and more expensive. That can't go on forever. There was even talk in liberal circles about a foundation or even the government taking over dying newspapers and running them as public utilities (something that's been tried in the Soviet Union and other dictatorships).

I guess getting bought out by the Red Sox owner was a good move, since many of the people who still read the paper only do so for the sports pages.

36 posted on 08/03/2013 11:54:08 AM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

And the Slimes screws another victim.


37 posted on 08/03/2013 12:16:15 PM PDT by Navy Patriot (Join the Democrats, it's not Fascism when WE do it, and the Constitution and law mean what WE say.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maryz

Well if that is the case, the trucks, presses, computers and furniture should be worth a few bucks too if only in scrap.


38 posted on 08/03/2013 12:17:50 PM PDT by Average Al
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: libstripper; a fool in paradise
AT 93% LOSS

That means 7% profit, yes? Not bad. Math is hard.

39 posted on 08/03/2013 12:19:46 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong! Ice cream is delicious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper
It doesn't get much better than this.

Die NYT, die!

40 posted on 08/03/2013 12:21:37 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson