Let me start off by saying that Firebrand Partners is the perfect name for a fund that is willing to take on an entrenched management/board of directors at the New York Times (NYSE: NYT).
Firebrand will not seek to take on the big governance problems at the New York Times, but instead it hopes to offer suggestions to the company on how it can improve its operations. A quick peek at the 5-year chart for the stock shows that the company can use all the help it can get.
According to the New York Times, "In his letter, Mr. Galloway wrote that the Times Company should focus on its core publishing business. That should include selling assets to finance deals for digital media, he wrote."
The letter is expected to be made public via a 13-D filing today. When it is, you'll be able to find it here.
I'm not sure how much good Firebrand can do: By adopting such a shareholder-unfriendly governance structure, the New York Times Co. has made it very clear that it isn't interested in letting shareholders have a say in the company's operations.
However, maybe sucking-up will help Firebrand get an ear with the company. In the letter, Firebrand wrote that "The New York Times is a great institution controlled by the Sulzberger family, and we have no illusion about, or desire to change, that fact."
That works out well because the last portfolio manager who tried to shake up the company's ownership structure was dispatched rather rudely. A report commissioned by the company to defend its ownership structure concluded that "Aside from the dual-class structure, in nearly all respects, the company appears to be employing state- of-the-art corporate governance procedures."
So other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the show?
Why do we have a weak dollar?
Holiday hiring slow for retailers
Closing Bell: What sell-off? (AIG, ABK, EPR, MBI, JAVA, ORCL, ERTS)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-28-2008 @ 9:43AM
j casson said...
You have misspelled peek ( peak)