Rumble At 620 8th Ave: Ochs Sulzbergers Vs. Hedge Funders
The New York Times is getting suckerpunched by hedge-fund investors.
Two firms, Harbinger Capital Partners and Firebrand Partners, have acquired more than 19% of The New York Times Company’s common stock. Both Harbinger and Firebrand have made it clear that they wish to have four directors of their choosing on the NYT corporate board.
This whole situation is happening damn rapidly. SEC filings disclose that Harbinger bought more than 3% of the company’s shares in a single week. It’s increasingly obvious that both Harbinger and Firebrand hustled to acquire as much stock as they could before last week’s deadline for gaining voting power at the annual meeting.
But the whole problem is that the hedge fund outfits are diametrically opposed to the Ochs-Sulzberger family in their vision of The New York Times Company’s future. The Ochs-Sulzbergers, judging by their past behavior, are keen on diversifying assets (The Boston Globe, about.com, the International Herald Tribune). In contrast, the hedge funders want the Times to sell its assets.
More importantly, we’ve yet to encounter any investment partnership or hedge fund firm who views journalism as a public service. Yes, newspapers are a capitalistic enterprise like any other — at the end of the day, they’re there to make money. But at the same time, newspapers fulfill a public service. Bringing the news to the public (and stay with us while we get idealistic for a second) is a genuine duty that newspapers and, yes, media outlets in general are obligated to perform. But too often, as we’ve seen in the past 15 years, investment outfits have viewed newspapers as a place to slash budgets and nothing more.
(Image via IGN)
Launch a social media campaign that will build your brand and deliver results in our online 
FishbowlNY Twitter feed loading...
