ping
"...led to earnings of 4 cents a share BEFORE special items are EXCLUDED...."
I suspect it's even worse. I'm not going to waste my time digging into the numbers, but anyone remotely familiar with corporate accounting knows that including so-called "special items" ( usually translated as "one-time, non-recurring" are often used to cook the books, as long as the auditors are willing to sign off...which they usually do, unless it's blatantly egregious) could mean that the loss was far greater. It's the TREND LINE that the Times can't escape...
One percent return on revenue. Revenues dropping like a rock or the margin would be even smaller. Newsprint costs soaring; fortunately offset by a drop in circulation. Approximately 60 days operating expenses in cash, with that amount dropping at an annualized rate in excess of 20 percent. Credit lines tapped. Debt service coverage dismal.
I'd love to short their stock, and would too, if only they only weren't such a tempting takeover target to some not-too-bright over-endowed libtard with a hefty inheritance.