So check this out: John Ellis over at something called RealClearMarkets is all a-ponderin’ about a possible sale of the New York Times Company to those fast-mogulizing-former-upstarts-now-just-plain-barons over at Google. And though Ellis notes that he’s been told “by smart people who know the business that the Sulzbergers will never sell,” he still manages to make a decent argument for the transaction.
“[A]s everyone knows, and the Sulzbergers know better than most, the game has changed,” he writes. “Classified advertising has been gutted by Craig’s List (and a thousand other web-sites). Department stores have consolidated and newspaper advertising budgets have consequently declined. The way people access information has fundamentally changed, thanks to the Internet. On and on it goes.”
And, according to Ellis, it’s about to get scarier for the Times: “The New York Times is squarely in the cross-hairs of…Rupert Murdoch. Mr. Murdoch recently acquired Dow Jones for $6 billion. He did not buy Dow Jones because of its growth potential. It’s a mature business, to say the least. He did not buy Dow Jones because he sees limitless growth opportunities in financial news and business information. It’s a crowded field. He bought Dow Jones so that he could own The Wall Street Journal. He intends to use The Wall Street Journal as a precision-targeted weapon. And the target he has locked onto is The New York Times.”
Ugh. It’s almost enough to root for Google to expand their, um, empire–an event that might, if all holds firm, set-up an ultra-neato good vs. evil knock-down drag-out.
‘Cause Darth Murdoch’s been done. I offer you the GRebelAlliance. Anyone? Anyone?
6 Comments
January 22, 2008 at 8:02 pm
I dunno…it seems to me like Mr. Ellis doesn’t have a very good understanding of the media or advertising world or is just looking to be a bit sensational. I wouldn’t worry too much about either Google or Murdoch buying the NYT. A) Google is not in the content creation business and I don’t think they want to be. Their current business model works well because as long as people use the web – regardless of the sites they go to – Google makes money. It doesn’t make sense, in my opinion for them to become a vertical media company. B) I think that Murdoch has his hands full with the WSJ for the time being. The author’s suggestion that the acquisiton of Dow Jones was to have a “weapon” to get his real object of desire, the NYT, seems a bit…..silly. If Murdoch really just wanted the NYT, and if it’s that cheap, he could figure out a much easier way to get it.
January 22, 2008 at 8:14 pm
I’d guess that it’s more about being sensational. Maybe a slow news day? Though, considering the scope of the site, you’d think that wouldn’t be the case.
Good point about Murdoch and the Times. Still, it’s fun to have a bad guy. And he plays the role SO well–which brings up a fair question about my take on Google: NYT acquisition rumors aside, there can be no doubt the the G-People are acquiring web stuffs, and I think that it’s fair to classify their efforts as aggressive.
I know one or two librarians that are kinda sketched by this. And by kinda I mean that they would prolly be bummed about any sort of heroic casting on my part.
January 23, 2008 at 2:52 pm
i dunno if i’d call google agressive. just smart and opportunistic.
January 28, 2008 at 4:27 pm
[...] piece is a near-echo (with maybe a bit more in the hard numbers department) of the one that John Ellis of RealClearMarkets wrote last week, including the questions he offers about the motivations for [...]
January 30, 2008 at 7:35 pm
[...] Yet. [...]
February 14, 2008 at 4:16 pm
[...] the New York Times. Or Something. Jump to Comments About three weeks ago, Um was all about pushing Google (why was that blog allowed to lapse?) to acquire the New York Times, an action that, if [...]