1 / 8

New York Times - Facts

New York Times - Facts. Sulzberger family owns 20% but control 70% Uses dual class structure April 2006, MSIM et al (28%) w/h votes (30%) MSIM proposal – subject dual class to a vote Conflicts: readers, family, other NYT owners. Issues with single ownership of media outlets.

lovey
Télécharger la présentation

New York Times - Facts

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. New York Times - Facts • Sulzberger family owns 20% but control 70% • Uses dual class structure • April 2006, MSIM et al (28%) w/h votes (30%) • MSIM proposal – subject dual class to a vote • Conflicts: readers, family, other NYT owners. • Issues with single ownership of media outlets.

  2. Why Newspapers Family Owned? • Founders - shape news & public opinion. – 70% family • Preserving journalistic integrity • Reality – slant the news, Boston Globe, WSJ • Focus on content versus bottom line? • Current deals by private equity firms • Reorganize as endowed, non - profit? • Examples – Boston Beer, cable, automotive, service stations, hotels, apparel stores, entertainment but not mining, rail and air transportation. • Minority ownership did not work. • Print media “took a beating”– radio, TV, internet, <50%

  3. How is it done? • Dual class of stock – different voting rights and BOD election rights. • Study of family firms, primarily four ways: • Disproportionate BOD representation.* (70%) • Dual class stock.* • Voting agreements-Buffett & Katherine Graham. • Pyramids – indirect ownership –Europe & Asia

  4. NYT versus Dow Jones • Dow Jones- more typical structure. • Difference in two deals – DJ 1/3 “B” stock, NYT, majority of “B” stock needed. • Bottom line – Murdoch likely to fail. • As it turned out, Murdoch was able to buy. • 78% of A • 54% of B

  5. Institutional Shareholders • Behavior – push for changes but different investors have different objectives. • Withholding 28% is big deal – usually 1% • The 28% consisted of: • MSIM 5.6% - all directors • Others (22.4%):T Rowe Price; Fidelity & Vanguard - various votes W/H

  6. What Happened? • December 2006 – NYT N/C; MSIM protested • December 2006 – MSIM proposal W/H from Proxy • 2007 - $800 M write down – Boston Worcester • Sulzberger – moves assets out of MSIM, Mack’s comments regarding Elmasry. • Elmasry and T Rowe Price address NYT BOD • NYT raises quarterly dividend by 31%

  7. What Happened? • Three advisory firms – 2 support MSIM. • Washington Post’s Graham – op ed WSJ – NYT • April 2007 – 42% shareholders W/H votes • October – MSIM sells out for $183M • 2007-2008 – mixed results • 2008 – Harbinger Capital (hedge) buys 19.4%. • Conciliatory – NYT accepts BOD candidates HC • Carlos Slim – 6.9% By 2011: 17.1% • 2008 – Current – no dividends, sell off, stock $4 • January 2012 - $5.5 - $11.00 – CEO Robinson resigns late 2011 • Blackrock. Fairpoint & T Rowe Price own 25%

  8. Dual Class Article –Good or Bad?¹ • In theory, yes. Investors accept risk for profits. • Return inadequate, vote out BOD and Mgmt. • News Corp & CalPers – hacking scandal issues • Trend is ↓ 10% 5 years ago; 6% today. • Pros – strong leader can be insulated, stock may be cheaper, returns need not be lower. • Berkshire Hathaway – 9/1/A($107,549),B ($71.81) • B = 1/30 A price, 50:1 split. B s/b priced $71.70 • Boston Beer - $20 in 1995 to $141 1/31/2013 ¹ Are Dual Class Shares Bad for Investors? August 1, 2011, Morgan, See Website

More Related