New York Times sell off FSG shares

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...-stake-in-boston-red-sox-liverpool-owner.html

apparently the decision was made due to low paper sales - it also makes them look a bit more balanced when reporting on the Yankees

 

Heres Forbes version of things.

http://blogs.forbes.com/mikeozanian...alues-fenway-sports-at-more-than-1-2-billion/

I wish they'd have named the 3 parties that bought the shares,because we dont want anyone of a similar ilk as H&G putting a spanner in the works.

 

Interesting. Share price must of gone up after buying Liverpool!

Or not looking at the Forbes article.

 

I guess it makes sense from the New York Times point of view. The main part of the company (the newspaper) is losing revenue and they need a cash boost. They then decide to sell off some assets which aren't as important to the company's core business model. It would be nice to know who brought the stake from the New York Times though.

Sorry for going all business-like on everyone!

 

It always useful to have a qualified business guru on our forum!

 

The 2 valuations of FSG are based on totally different criteria. Whilst not toally true, the NYT valuation concentrates upon physical asset value whereas the 'true' market value is proably vey much higher. Now you may ask why NYT would adopt such a low valuation when they are about to sell their shareholding. This has more to do with with feelings, expectations and the general economic climate as it is understood on Wall Street. In US markets, risk is negative at the momnt so NYT are trying to present a less risk opportunity and hence maximise the likelyhood of a scuccessful sale.

 

It doesn't matter who would have brought them. They are class B shares with no voting rights. Sale of class A shares would require NYT to get permission from the board before selling them as FSG is a private consortium

 

Ta Bozz,Just wondering if the names can be divulged by FSG or whether anonymity is the buyers right?

 

Bozz.
Exactly.
If NYT had a minimum share-holding in Liverpool,It was more than likely ''Preference shares''.Now Preference shares are issued to generate extra income for the ordinary share-holders.Preference shares when the company is dissolved are paid after creditors.They also carry a fixed rate of interest in terms of dividend and have no voting rights.They also also issued in a rights issue to prevent the majority share-holders from reducing their overall share-holding.I also reckon LeBron James has preference shares rather than ordinary shares.