The Old Gray Lady comes a cropper. A lesson in obstinate liberal stupidity: the New York Times bought the Boston Globe in 1993 for $1.1 billion and just sold it for $70 million while retaining $110 million of pension liabilities. In other words, they took $1.1 billion and turned it into a negative $40 million while adamantly spewing a hard-left version of the news that nobody wants to read. These are not overly smart people.
This post was last modified on August 3, 2013
View Comments (18)
Now, how about Bezos buying the Post?
Given what he paid for it, I'd say he was ripped off. The Graham family must be laughing their asses off.
See give a liberal a lot of money and they buy the dumbest thing they can.....A newspaper????? How long before Google boy wonder runs it into the ground?
Amazon, not Google.. Stellar company all around. I know some youngsters who have gotten gigs there. I probably wouldn't survive the interview process
Bezos is worth over $25B. He paid cash for the paper. The cost was less than 1% of his net worth. A rounding error.
Yep.. as much as i respect his business acumen and knack for enterprise software architecture, i'm still going WTF
Maybe he's got some new model planned for a news outlet, and wanted to slap a classic brand on it (and pull the whole mgmt and ops of a news organization in with it..) But still.. WTF? Having not read any good analysis of his decision yet, i don't get it
He best get busy then.
Obama and his gang have done exactly the same to this country as the Times has done with the Globe.
Being liberals, they ought to burn through this 70 mil in no time at all and have nothing substantial to show for it. In a few months they'll be whining for a government bailout.
Pinch is busy making a small fortune....out of a big one.
These are the smartest people i the room and they know how the economy should be run. Just ask them.
I'm betting Paul Krugman told the NY Times it was a good economic investment.
Damn Bob, you stole my idea!
$1.1 billion minus eleventy = negative $40 million
See--it adds up. Just ask Mr. Krugman
And knowing him when the investment started going bad he told them to invest more money.
The problem is that Americans are just too stupid to appreciate the brilliance of the news coverage at the Boston Globe and the New York Times.
(attention libtards, the preceding was sarcasm)
When stupid meets ignorant, the results are on display for everyone to see. Will they NY Times or the Boston Globe go groveling to quagmire that they need help from the feds? Will they claim they are too big and too important to fail?
Good bye, good riddance. When you put out a product that the people do not wish to read or have any part of, you fail. Fail the Times did and they failed miserably.
California, Detroit, Boston Globe, Air America - all of these failed with most being heavily propped up with government money. Obamacare will fail too - just like they planned. And then, of course, the only fix will be having the National Health Service (NHS) like England.
What has been a big liberal success? Something the liberals have pushed that have enabled economic growth, or security....can't think of one. Any help?
Who keeps propping up these leftist rags? Newspapers should go the way of the Edsel, That was also a bad idea, just like a liberal newspaper. What we should take away from this is that liberals are only good at two things, wasting money and running a business into the ground....Beyond that they have no real skills, well besides bitching and moaning.