« Unsolicited Advice for CNBC | Main | Google vs the Ad Market »
Latest Stories
- Me Media: CNBC Power Lunch Today
- Bubbles are Good For You Because ... They Are
- Quote of the Day: Commodities Markets
- San Diego Homes Bottoming?
- The Myth of the Angel Investor
May 1, 2007
Some Context on WSJ, Dow Jones, and the Bancroft Family
Any WSJ/Dow Jones acquisition involves inevitable discussion of the Bancroft family, which has owned the company for more than a hundred years, meanwhile consistently spurning buyout offers. For more, read this lengthy Ken Auletta piece from the New Yorker back in late 2003:The Journal, like two other great American newspapers, the New York Times and the Washington Post, is controlled by a family, and there is concern that the younger generation might want to sell the company. Unlike the Washington Post Company, which has diversified, and which expects to generate more revenue from its Kaplan unit, an educational-testing and teaching service, than from the Post, Dow Jones relies on the Journal for fifty-five per cent of its revenues and, in most years, seventy per cent of its profits. And Dow Jones, with revenues of about $1.5 billion, is just half the size of the New York Times Company. The Bancroft family has owned Dow Jones since the beginning of the twentieth century, and has steadfastly spurned overtures to sell, but its resistance may be softening. "Anything is possible--you never say never," said Leslie Hill, an American Airlines pilot and one of three Bancrofts who serve on the Dow Jones board, along with a family trustee, Roy Hammer. While the family has "a lot of pride" in its journalistic property, Hill says that family members sometimes disagree about financial issues. "I hear comments that they’re not happy with the company’s performance."Read more here.
Sphere It
| 
Digg it
| 
Bookmark it
| 
Stumble it
Free press is the key here: free to be liberal, free to be conservative, free to be biased (or not). I hate to see this type of media consolidation because it limits choices and outlets for that freedom. But don't forget that CNBC came out of nowhere during the dot com boom when everyone was ready for a new take on tv news journalism that was both entertaining and informative for the man on the street, as will someone else if they become extinct.
Man, the resources (and cash) News Corp could throw at that paper... yowza. The old gray lady would be toast.
I just hope Rupert makes the WSJ archives fully accessible for a single annual fee, rather than that uber-annoying $2.95 per article or whatever it is. That's the one thing that tweaks me about the journal.
Consumers of financial news are the most discerning and demanding of all, if Murdoch Postifies the WSJ it will sink like a rock and he knows this way better than I do. I expect great things from this if it goes through. I trust Neil Cavuto a lot too, he knows a 24 karat ground floor when he sees it. It will of necessity improve CNBC as well...
>>> Hill says that family members sometimes disagree about financial issues.
True of every family that ever existed, even predates language itself.
and the stock is down from the mid 50's in late '03 and the time of the quote...
compared to the 36 close yesterday would be madness not to acquiesce...