So it's Friday, and we'd hope that reporters could take the weekend off, as the Bancroft whirl promises to move into week 2.
With the Denver wing of the family -- don't you start to feel like we're learning a bit too much about this family? -- now saying yes, but more, more, demanding that Rupert pay an extra premium for Class A Bancroft shares, we're left to wonder what the impact will mean.
Sure Murdoch's said $60 is his price, but why not a few tens of millions more?
What he has had working in his favor is simplicity: $60 a share, no Brad Greenspan-like loan/partial buyback/recapitalization moves or Ron Burkle ESOP maneuvers (and we know, courtesy of Tribune and Sam Zell how long that process can take). No, just $60 a share. So as part of the family wants to clearly say "no" and another wants to buy fifth homes, that could make it just a little more complicated. Still Wall Street may think the push for a little more will actually help get the deal done, as DJ stock went back up today. (See Eric Savitz report on the DJ stock turnaround today and comments here.)
If you do really like the family angle on the Dow Jones/Bancroft story, do not miss the 4000-word letter to fellow family members from Crawford Hill (don't these people have any first names?), who's in favor of selling. He does much recounting of family history, leading him to his conclusion. Sample excerpt:
So, I knew Gay well. What most of you do not know however is that the very same Jessie B. Cox that is mentioned at every turn as "family matriarch" and to whom many of us owe "the legacy" forced her incredibly talented husband, William C. Cox, top student at Milton and Harvard luminary, to retire prematurely from Dow Jones at age 40 so he could be full time in the social swirl of Cohasset. He was a star at the company! My firstborn child -- Hadley -- has that "C." in her name -- Coburn -- to honor the talented and caring Bill Cox, Gramps to his grandchildren.
Meanwhile, forgetting for a moment potential change in editorial practices upon sale, consider News Corp's business practices for a moment.
Fortune contributes a new point of view. Entitled "News Corp's Trouble in Aisle Three" (magazine department: "Litigation"), writer Jennifer Reingold reports that News America Marketing is the subject of four lawsuits. The company -- which Reingold points out makes triple the operating profit of Dow Jones -- is in the grocery ad and direct marketing business. Newspaper coupons and inserts and those lovely machines that push ads to you (or take out your rib) as you stroll down the aisles. The story details the suits over illegal competition, forced bundling, anti-trust, etc. The kicker was especially instructive: News America Marketing CEO Paul Carlucci, who sits on News Corp's executive committee, was appointed publisher of the New York Post in 2005.
I'm sure that the Wall Street Journal would be subject to no influence in covering these suits. Aren't you?

Comments