Article

2005-12-13 Home Front: Culture Wars

NYTimes common stock has had an awful year

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by mhw 2005-12-13 12:23|| || Front Page|| [11127 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of moonbats. Lay down and die old grey whore!

Posted by Secret Master 2005-12-13 12:33|| 2005-12-13 12:33|| Front Page Top

#2 Actualy buying back your own stock when the price is down is a very good move.

Posted by Redneck Jim 2005-12-13 13:16|| 2005-12-13 13:16|| Front Page Top

#3 Unless it goes down further.

Posted by Griting Shineper9048 2005-12-13 13:26|| 2005-12-13 13:26|| Front Page Top

#4 The NYT has two classes of stock: one class that's owned by the Sulzbergers and is not publicly traded, and another class that us proles are allowed to own. The Yahoo chart is for the publicly traded class of stock. Hmm, I wonder who gets to appoint most of the directors.

Posted by Matt 2005-12-13 13:27|| 2005-12-13 13:27|| Front Page Top

#5 All media stocks have had an awful year (including radio and TV broadcasters). They're trimming their staffs and dealing with the problem. Dow Jones and Company - which publishes the Wall Street Journal - has worse margins. And Hollinger, which publishes the UK's (conservative) Daily Telegraph, is no longer even in Conrad Black's hands, thanks to some big time financial problems.

The problem they're all having is reduced ad revenues - the theory is that a lot of it is being diverted to the internet. Ad companies are feeling the pinch - Interpublic Group, which racks up billions in revenues, had its stock hit a five-year low recently.

The interesting thing is that the liberal media are actually run pretty efficiently. The operating principle appears to be this - media companies already contribute to the liberal cause by putting out liberal propaganda, so (in the minds of the managers) they're allowed to run their companies for maximum profit, even if that means laying off workers and breaking strikes.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2005-12-13 13:33|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2005-12-13 13:33|| Front Page Top

#6 I hope MoDo gets paid with lots of options, and I hope Krugman has a ton of company stock in his 401(k).

Posted by WhitecollarRedneck 2005-12-13 13:53|| 2005-12-13 13:53|| Front Page Top

#7 their Boston Globe is doing even worse in sales, adverts

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-12-13 14:20|| 2005-12-13 14:20|| Front Page Top

#8 It must really suck to be MoDo's financial advisor:

"No, I don't recommend that you build a portfolio of stocks that rhyme with each other.... No, Paul was the one who told you to buy Enron, not me.... No, there's not a lot of point in buying Halliburton just so you can sell it.... No, I won't have dinner with you tonight- I'm unnecessary, remember?... Yes, twenty years is a long time, but that's not my fault."

Posted by Matt 2005-12-13 14:37|| 2005-12-13 14:37|| Front Page Top

23:25 C-Low
23:07 DMFD
23:06 Bolo
23:02 DMFD
23:01 .com
22:59 Bolo
22:54 Desert Blondie
22:51 49 pan
22:44 Frank G
22:43 Frank G
22:27 Mahou Sensei Negi-bozu
22:21 Valentine
22:21 Frank G
22:17 jules 2
22:13 newc
22:12 xbalanke
21:47 Besoeker
21:43 Besoeker
21:42 jules 2
21:39 jules 2
21:38 Frank G
21:37 Besoeker
21:33 Besoeker
21:31 anon