The timing of the Thomson-Reuters merger could not have been worse as many of their biggest customers on Wall Street are struggling. Now, Thomson Reuters Corporation (NYSE: TRI) is trying to make the best of a bad situation. Investors may like what they are seeing today but they won't over the long term.

Shares of Thomson Reuters are trading up even though the financial information company reported disappointing earnings. The stock is rallying following an earlier sell-off. Revenue was $3.13 billion, a 73% rise but short of the $3.32 billion analysts surveyed by Bloomberg News expected. The results benefited from the merger. Earnings were $172 million, or 22 cents per share, down from $375 million, or 58 cents per share a year earlier.

Chief Executive Tom Glocer told reporters that financial services markets "are likely to remain challenging through at least the end of the year." That means that big clients are going to be asking for big discounts. Bloomberg, my former employer and the company's biggest rival, has usually been able to resist this temptation.

Reuters reports that today is a big one for bank and technology earnings. It looks like Merrill Lynch (NYSE: MER) will lose big and will try to soften the blow with an announcement about selling its 20% of Bloomberg LP for $4.5 billion to its founder, New York mayor, Michael Bloomberg. JP Morgan Chase (NYSE: JPM) and a handful of big technology companies are expected to report profits. But will they be enough?

Meanwhile, how can we make sense of yesterday's 276 point rally on Wall Street? Nobody knows what happened, but theories abound: the price of oil fell -- possibly due to anticipation that the Fed would raise interest rates to deal with inflation that is roaring out of control. Higher interest rates would strengthen the dollar, which would drive down the price of oil since it's traded in dollars. But I think yesterday's market was a short-covering frenzy. With the SEC foolishly squeezing the shorts, they needed to cover their bets that financials would fall further. Of course good news from Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC) didn't hurt.

Today's earnings -- with estimates courtesy of a Reuters analyst survey -- are likely to move the market. Here's a roundup:

• Merrill Lynch is expected to lose $1.94
• JPMorgan was expected to make $0.44, down 63% from 2007. At a Price/Earnings to Growth (PEG) ratio of 0.4 and a P/E of 12 on earnings forecast to grow 31% to $3.34 in 2009, it looks cheap. CNNMoney reports it made 54 cents -- well ahead of expectations and its shares are up 5% in premarket.
• Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ: MSFT) will earn 47 cents a share, a 21% increase from last year. At a PEG ratio of 1.1 and a P/E of 15 on earnings forecast to grow 14.3% to $2.16 in 2009, it looks reasonably priced.

As expected, New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg's blind trust is interested in buying Merrill Lynch & Co. (NYSE: MER)'s 20% stake in Bloomberg LP for between $4.5 billion and $5 billion, according to The New York Post.

The acquisition would give Bloomberg total control over his namesake media company and my employer for seven years. Merrill, of course, also is looking to unload its 49% stake in Blackrock Inc. (NYSE: BLK) to shore up its balance sheet. No word on potential buyers there.

As I posted yesterday, Mike Bloomberg is a logical buyer for the Merrill stake in his company. Bloomberg has the right of first refusal of the sale as well, which probably scared away the few other potential buyers that were out there. Bloomberg LP also prides itself on being a private company that marches to the beat of its own idiosyncratic drummer.

Merrill shareholders, including a close relative, have not had too much to smile about lately. Shares of the New York-based investment bank are down more than 41% this year. Obviously, it's selling its assets from a position of weakness. The New York mayor will gain control over his media empire at a bargain that would have been unimaginable a few years ago.

Merrill Lynch & Co. (NYSE: MER) may wind up selling its 20% stake in Bloomberg L.P., the parent of Bloomberg News, to Mike Bloomberg.

Bloomberg, whose personal fortune is estimated by Forbes magazine at $5 billion, can easily afford the buy back the 20% stake in his company that he does not already own. Given its financial condition, Merrill better hope that the New York mayor is willing to open his check book. Other media companies are not going to shell out big bucks for a minority stake in the company where I worked for seven years. This is especially true given that many of Bloomberg's biggest customers in Wall Street are cutting spending given the uncertainties in the world's financial markets.

Maybe the private equity players would be willing to pay up provided that they could see an exit strategy through an IPO. I don't see that happening either. Bloomberg, which the Wall Street Journal says has the right of first refusal for the sale, likes being a private company because it enables it to march to the beat of its own drummer. That was especially true when Mike Bloomberg ran the show.

In a quarterly dance routine that's becoming quite familiar -- call it the write-down, capital raising dance -- the Wall Street Journal reports that Merrill Lynch & Co. (NYSE: MER) is planning to sell a $5 billion stake in Bloomberg, the media company, and to cash out of its 49% stake, estimated at $12 billion, in Blackrock (NYSE: BLK).

Why is Merrill doing this? As we've seen over and over again in the last year, banks must maintain specific levels of capital to assets in order to meet regulatory requirements. When a bank reduces the value of its assets, as accounting rules require, the bank writes off the decline in asset values against its capital. In order to maintain a sufficiently high ratio of capital to assets, banks seek to raise capital equal to the amount of the write-down.

Merrill anticipates taking $6 billion in write-downs for the quarter. These could come from its $41 billion in Level 3 assets -- assets valued based on computer models since there is no active market that prices them. Merrill is fortunate to have these stakes available to sell because it will be able to raise capital without diluting current shareholders. Unfortunately, once it sells these stakes, Merrill shareholders will no longer get the earnings stream they generated.

Who is the boss of Bloomberg News?

During my career there, there was no question that Matthew Winkler was in charge. My colleagues laughed hysterically when I told them I asked Winkler about his bow ties during my interview with him before I was hired. Bloomberg's editor-in-chief is not known for his sense of humor. Good thing I didn't bring up bow ties -- which he wears every day -- again.

That's why I found the appointment of former Wall Street Journal top editor Norman Pearlstine as Bloomberg's chief content officer so curious. Does this mean that Pearlstine, who was Winkler's boss at the Journal, will supervise him again? What exactly does a chief content officer do that's different than an editor-in-chief? I am not sure of the answers to those questions and neither is the New York Times.

As the Times opines, "the move suggests that Bloomberg, whose fortunes have been buoyed by the selling of its hugely profitable data terminals to brokerage firms and investment banks, plans to expand the journalism side of its business."

Merrill Lynch (NYSE: MER) Chief Executive Stan O'Neal, who is holding onto his job by a thread, likely will sell the Wall Street firm's 20% stake in my old employer, Bloomberg LP, to shore up his company's bottom line. Heck, O'Neal's successor probably will sell it as well.

If I was a betting man, I would bet that company founder and current New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg will probably buy out Merrill. Maybe a private equity player would buy the Merrill interest, reportedly valued at $20 billion, that Fortune values at least $4 billion. The magazine says Bloomberg LP is worth at least $20 billion. But I'm not sure Bloomberg would be willing to cede any management control to an outside investor. The same goes for a huge media company such as News Corp (NYSE: NWS) or Time Warner (NYSE: TWX).

What was obvious to even the lowliest peons at Bloomberg -- including me -- is that the company really likes being private. Management was always willing to try almost anything to keep people glued to their Bloomberg terminals even if it didn't earn an immediate profit. Legend has it, one time Mike Bloomberg noticed that people were away from their Bloombergs and learned that a major sporting event was going on -- he decided on the spot that the company would provide sports news. I have no idea whether this story is true, but knowing the company's corporate culture, it sure seems to be on the mark.

When Fox Busines Network debuts on October 15, it will be a fly buzzing around the elephant that is CNBC. All the talk about the looming war, battle, or clash of the titans is hype.

As BusinessWeek points out, Fox Business Network will have one-third of CNBC's reach and will also lag behind Bloomberg TV. News Corp. (NYSE: NWS) Chief Executive Rupert Murdoch has said his channel will be geared toward Main Street instead of CNBC's Wall Street focus. I don't know what that statement means. CNBC's mission is to try and convince individual investors they must act RIGHT NOW to avoid financial ruin or to gain immediate riches. That seems to speak directly to Main Street.

Murdoch, though, is a patient man. People thought he was nuts to take on Time Warner Inc.'s (NYSE: TWX) CNN, and now Fox News rules the ratings. He keeps the New York Post going because he wants to stick it to the liberal media establishment A.K.A. The New York Times. Power motivates him almost as much as money. That's why the media tycoon doesn't care if Fox Business News isn't immediately profitable or even if it takes some time to get into the black. He's trying to prove a point.

The biggest challenge facing Fox Business News is the same one facing the General Electric Co. (NYSE: GE) cable channel: attracting an audience. For most people who don't read stock market blogs, business news is pretty dry stuff. That's why CNBC's anchors always yell the news written in their teleprompters to make things seem more exciting.

This post is part of our Money Face-Offs feature. Let us know who you think comes out ahead in this head-to-head match-up, and check out our other Money Face-Off posts.

From the bodegas of Brooklyn to the penthouses of Central Park, most New Yorkers would probably tell you that they like the present mayor Mike Bloomberg a whole lot better than the previous occupant of Gracie Mansion, Rudy Giuliani.

Neither Bloomberg nor Giuliani suffers from low self-esteem. I worked for Bloomberg LP for seven years and had some brief encounters with Bloomberg over the years. One time, I called him "Mr. Bloomberg" when I shook his hand at the company's Christmas party. He insisted that I call him "Mike." I continued to call him Mr. Bloomberg. Warm and cuddly, he is not, and working for Mike's company wasn't always easy.

Thomson Corp. (NYSE: TOC) and Reuters Group Plc. (NASDAQ: RTRSY) joining forces to fight a common enemy: Bloomberg Plc. LP

The company founded by New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg -- and my former employer -- is the 1,000 pound gorilla in the business data market. It has gained marketshare at the expense of both Reuters and Dow Jones & Co. (NYSE: DJ) for years.

Bloomberg and Thomson were on friendly terms until fairly recently. Then, Thompson wouldn't answer questions from Bloomberg reporters about the company's earnings estimates. Eventually, Bloomberg decided to do its own polls of analysts.

The combined company may be able to erode Bloomberg's pricing power. When I first started with Bloomberg, it was a mark of status on Wall Street to have your own Bloomberg terminal. Most users that I see now share a Bloomberg to save money.

Nonetheless, Thomson and Reuters have a tough challenge. In addition to Bloomberg, there's the potential that a Rupert Murdoch-owned Dow Jones can pour money into digital publishing products that compete against offerings of the merged company. The Bloomberg threat isn't theoretical.

Though the Bloomberg terminals aren't cheap and aren't very user friendly for the untrained, it's tough to beat their functionality. Many companies have tried and failed to develop a "Bloomberg killer" over the years. Bloomberg terminals even have survived the Internet age.

But it's going to take more than just data for the combined Thomson-Reuters to thrive. More and more financial data is available on the Internet for free. Most individual investors don't need the proprietary data that these companies offer. To survive, they will need compelling content, which in the old days was called news.