<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[BB&amp;T May Be a Suitor for Sterling Bancshares]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/01/14/bbandt-may-be-a-suitor-for-sterling-bancshares/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/01/14/bbandt-may-be-a-suitor-for-sterling-bancshares/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/01/14/bbandt-may-be-a-suitor-for-sterling-bancshares/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/major-movement/" rel="tag">Major Movement</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/good-news/" rel="tag">Good news</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/rumors/" rel="tag">Rumors</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/bbt/" rel="tag">BB and T (BBT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/options/" rel="tag">Options</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/analysis/" rel="tag">Technical Analysis</a></p><p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="BB&amp;T (BBT) logo"  src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2011/01/bbtlogo.jpg" />BB&amp;T (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/bbandt-corporation/bbt/nys">BBT</a> - <a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/bbandt-corporation/bbt/nys/option-chains">option chain</a>) shares are rising today after the <em>Wall Street Journal</em> reported that Sterling Bancshares (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/sterling-bancshares-inc/sbib/nas">SBIB</a>) has <a target="_blank" href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSSGE70D03T20110114?feedType=RSS&amp;feedName=marketsNews&amp;rpc=33">put itself up for sale</a>. The <em>Journal</em> listed BBT as one of the banks interested in acquiring Sterling. If you think that the stock won't fall by too much in the coming months, then now could be a good time to look at a bullish hedged trade on BBT.</p>
<p>BBT opened this morning at $26.83. So far today the stock has hit a low of $26.80 and a high of $27.90. As of 12:15, BBT is trading at $27.87 up $1.00 (3.7%). The chart for BBT looks bullish and <a target="_blank" href="http://www.iotogo.com/spoutlookonline">S&amp;P</a> gives BBT a positive 4 STARS (out of 5) buy ranking.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/01/14/bbandt-may-be-a-suitor-for-sterling-bancshares/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>BB&amp;T May Be a Suitor for Sterling Bancshares</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/01/14/bbandt-may-be-a-suitor-for-sterling-bancshares/">BB&amp;T May Be a Suitor for Sterling Bancshares</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/01/14/bbandt-may-be-a-suitor-for-sterling-bancshares/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19801664/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/01/14/bbandt-may-be-a-suitor-for-sterling-bancshares/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>BBT</category><category>BBT Bank</category><category>deal</category><category>inthenews</category><category>Investors Observer</category><category>options</category><category>SBIB</category><category>Sterling Bancshares</category><category>Wall Street Journal</category><category>WSJ</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Brent Archer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Put Trading Spikes as Debt-Strapped A&amp;P Plunges]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/10/13/put-trading-spikes-as-debt-strapped-aandp-plunges/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/10/13/put-trading-spikes-as-debt-strapped-aandp-plunges/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/10/13/put-trading-spikes-as-debt-strapped-aandp-plunges/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/major-movement/" rel="tag">Major Movement</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/bad-news/" rel="tag">Bad News</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/options/" rel="tag">Options</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/analysis/" rel="tag">Technical Analysis</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/08/grocery-store.jpg"  alt="" />Shares of Great Atlantic &amp; Pacific Tea Co. (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/great-atlantic-and-pacific-tea-company-inc-the/gap/nys" class="inlinked">GAP</a>), the holding company for the A&amp;P grocery chain, are getting hammered today. The stock shed more than 15% by midday following a <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704164004575548363771271580.html?mod=wsjcrmain">less-than-bullish article</a> in <em>The Wall Street Journal</em>, with the newspaper describing GAP as "bludgeoned by lower-price rivals and strapped for cash."<br />
<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/10/13/put-trading-spikes-as-debt-strapped-aandp-plunges/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Put Trading Spikes as Debt-Strapped A&amp;P Plunges</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/10/13/put-trading-spikes-as-debt-strapped-aandp-plunges/">Put Trading Spikes as Debt-Strapped A&amp;P Plunges</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 13 Oct 2010 13:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/10/13/put-trading-spikes-as-debt-strapped-aandp-plunges/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19672443/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/10/13/put-trading-spikes-as-debt-strapped-aandp-plunges/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>debt</category><category>Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea</category><category>inthenews</category><category>options</category><category>puts</category><category>Wall Street Journal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Elizabeth Harrow]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2010 13:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Facebook Grows as a Source for News]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/02/07/facebook-grows-as-a-source-for-news/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/02/07/facebook-grows-as-a-source-for-news/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/02/07/facebook-grows-as-a-source-for-news/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/goog/" rel="tag">Google (GOOG)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/msft/" rel="tag">Microsoft (MSFT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/yhoo/" rel="tag">Yahoo! (YHOO)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nyt/" rel="tag">New York Times'A' (NYT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nws/" rel="tag">News Corp'B' (NWS)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/media-world/" rel="tag">Media World</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/technology/" rel="tag">Technology</a></p><p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/12/facebook-logo-240.jpg" alt="" />How are readers finding the news? Well, increasingly, <a target="_blank" href="http://digital.venturebeat.com/2010/02/03/is-facebook-becoming-a-portal/?utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_medium=twitter-publisher-main&amp;utm_campaign=twitter">the answer is Facebook</a>. The social networking site, which boasts well over 350 million registered users, is now the fourth largest referral source of traffic to online news destinations. Almost a year ago, only 0.5% of traffic to news and media sites came from <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/tag/Facebook/">Facebook</a>. Today, that level is 3.5%, according to <a target="_blank" href="http://weblogs.hitwise.com/us-heather-hopkins/2010/02/facebook_largest_news_reader_1.html">data from Web analytics firm Experian Hitwise</a>.</p>
<p>Only Google (<a target="_blank" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/google-inc/goog/nas">GOOG</a>), Yahoo! (<a target="_blank" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/yahoo-inc/yhoo/nas">YHOO</a>) and MSN (<a target="_blank" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/microsoft-corporation/msft/nas">MSFT</a>) send more traffic to news sites. <a target="_blank" href="http://news.google.com">Google News</a>, a subset of the search engine giant, failed to keep pace with Facebook, despite the fact that it exists specifically to send Internet users to media outlets. Only 1.39% of referrals came from this source.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/02/07/facebook-grows-as-a-source-for-news/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Facebook Grows as a Source for News</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/02/07/facebook-grows-as-a-source-for-news/">Facebook Grows as a Source for News</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Sun, 07 Feb 2010 10:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/02/07/facebook-grows-as-a-source-for-news/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19347948/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/02/07/facebook-grows-as-a-source-for-news/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>experian</category><category>facebook</category><category>goog</category><category>google</category><category>hitwise</category><category>inthenews</category><category>media</category><category>Microsoft</category><category>MSFT</category><category>msn</category><category>new york times</category><category>new york times company</category><category>news</category><category>news corp</category><category>newspapers</category><category>nyt</category><category>nytimes</category><category>social media</category><category>social networking</category><category>wall street journal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 10:20:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Newsday Shows Future of Online Subscription Model]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/27/newsday-shows-future-of-online-subscription-model/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/27/newsday-shows-future-of-online-subscription-model/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/27/newsday-shows-future-of-online-subscription-model/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/competitive-strategy/" rel="tag">Competitive Strategy</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nyt/" rel="tag">New York Times'A' (NYT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nws/" rel="tag">News Corp'B' (NWS)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/media-world/" rel="tag">Media World</a></p><p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2010/01/newsdaycom-logo.jpg" alt="" />The recent announcement by the <em>New York Times</em> (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/the-new-york-times-company/nyt/nys" target="_blank">NYT</a>) that it would start to require subscriptions next year has drawn no shortage of attention and commentary. It has tried to put content behind a pay wall before (and failed), as have other newspapers.</p>
<p>Almost universally, newspapers have struggled with online subscriptions, with the <em>Financial Times</em> and <em>Wall Street Journal</em>, a News Corp (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/news-corporation/nws/nas" target="_blank">NWS</a>) property, the only two that have really delivered results better than awful. Whether the <em>New York Times</em> can operate at that level is in doubt, particularly given the stunning realization about Long Island daily newspaper <em>Newsday</em>.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/27/newsday-shows-future-of-online-subscription-model/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Newsday Shows Future of Online Subscription Model</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/27/newsday-shows-future-of-online-subscription-model/">Newsday Shows Future of Online Subscription Model</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 27 Jan 2010 11:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.observer.com/2010/media/after-three-months-only-35-subscriptions-newsdays-web-site>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/27/newsday-shows-future-of-online-subscription-model/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19333529/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/27/newsday-shows-future-of-online-subscription-model/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>financial times</category><category>inthenews</category><category>long island</category><category>media</category><category>new york times co.</category><category>news corp</category><category>news corporation</category><category>newsday</category><category>newspaper industry</category><category>newspapers</category><category>NewYorkTimes</category><category>NWS</category><category>nyt</category><category>nytimes</category><category>Optimum</category><category>wall street journal</category><category>wsj</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 11:20:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[New York Times Online Business Model Could Be Only Days Away]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/18/new-york-times-online-business-model-could-be-only-days-away/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/18/new-york-times-online-business-model-could-be-only-days-away/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/18/new-york-times-online-business-model-could-be-only-days-away/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/internet/" rel="tag">Internet</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/goog/" rel="tag">Google (GOOG)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/aapl/" rel="tag">Apple Inc (AAPL)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nyt/" rel="tag">New York Times'A' (NYT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nws/" rel="tag">News Corp'B' (NWS)</a></p><p><img border="1" hspace="4" alt="" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/11/new-york-times-logo-200.jpg" />The <em>New York Times</em> (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/the-new-york-times-company/nyt/nys" target="_blank">NYT</a>) has been struggling to figure out the web, which has led to a debate over whether to charge for electrons that has spanned years. Well, the Times seems likely to take the plunge, hoping to replicate the successes of the <a href="http://www.ft.com" target="_blank"><em>Financial Times</em></a> and <em><a href="http://www.wsj.com">Wall Street Journal</a></em> ... except, of course, that the <a><em>Wall Street Journal</em></a><em> </em>is famous for not really delivering profits. Fortunately, the new pay wall is expected to look more like the <em>Financial Times </em>than the <em>Wall Street Journal</em>. The <a href="http://www.nytimes.com" target="_blank"><em>New York Times</em></a> is considering a "metered" system. Visitors will be able to read a certain number of articles free before being required to subscribe.</p>
<p>A friend of Arthur Sulzberger, according to <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/01/new_york_times_set_to_mimic_ws.html" target="_blank"><em>New York Magazine</em>'s Daily Intel</a>, said that the final word could come in a few days, a sentiment corroborated by a newsroom source who said that the plan could be announced within weeks. Yet, plans need to be implemented, so it could take months for the Times to begin charging for content.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/18/new-york-times-online-business-model-could-be-only-days-away/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>New York Times Online Business Model Could Be Only Days Away</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/18/new-york-times-online-business-model-could-be-only-days-away/">New York Times Online Business Model Could Be Only Days Away</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/18/new-york-times-online-business-model-could-be-only-days-away/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19320705/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/18/new-york-times-online-business-model-could-be-only-days-away/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>aapl</category><category>Apple</category><category>apple tablet</category><category>arthur sulzberger</category><category>featured</category><category>financial times</category><category>ft</category><category>FT.com</category><category>goog</category><category>google</category><category>inthenews</category><category>maureen dowd</category><category>media</category><category>new york city</category><category>new york times</category><category>News Corp.</category><category>newspaper advertising</category><category>newspaper industry</category><category>newspapers</category><category>NWS</category><category>nyt</category><category>nytimes.com</category><category>online ads</category><category>online advertising</category><category>tablet</category><category>Tom Friedman</category><category>wall street journal</category><category>wsj</category><category>WSJ.com</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Google to media: Your problems aren't our fault]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/04/google-to-media-your-problems-arent-our-fault/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/04/google-to-media-your-problems-arent-our-fault/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/04/google-to-media-your-problems-arent-our-fault/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/internet/" rel="tag">Internet</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/goog/" rel="tag">Google (GOOG)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nws/" rel="tag">News Corp'B' (NWS)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/media-world/" rel="tag">Media World</a></p><p><img border="1" hspace="4" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/12/google-logo-200x150.jpg" alt="" />The newspaper industry continues to blame Google (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/google-inc/goog/nas" target="_blank">GOOG</a>) for its woes, and Google continues to claim its innocence. The search engine giant's CEO, Eric Schmidt, says that his company could actually help the newspaper industry survive the shift from print to digital ... a shift that's been more than a decade in the making, he was kind enough not to note.</p>
<p>According to Schmidt, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5B23ED20091203" target="_blank">publishers need to dig into the online environment and find new ways to generate revenue</a>. "With dwindling revenue and diminished resources," he wrote in an op-ed piece published in News Corp's (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/news-corporation/nws/nas" target="_blank">NWS</a>) <em><a href="http://www.wsj.com" target="_blank">Wall Street Journal</a></em>, "frustrated newspaper executives are looking for someone to blame."<br /><br /></p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/04/google-to-media-your-problems-arent-our-fault/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Google to media: Your problems aren't our fault</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/04/google-to-media-your-problems-arent-our-fault/">Google to media: Your problems aren't our fault</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 04 Dec 2009 11:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/04/google-to-media-your-problems-arent-our-fault/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19264949/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/04/google-to-media-your-problems-arent-our-fault/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>eric schmidt</category><category>goog</category><category>google</category><category>inthenews</category><category>news corp</category><category>news corporation</category><category>NewsCorp</category><category>newspaper industry</category><category>newspapers</category><category>NWS</category><category>search engines</category><category>wall street journal</category><category>wsj</category><category>WSJ.com</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 11:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Goldman Sachs discusses pay with major investors]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/03/goldman-sachs-discusses-pay-with-major-investors/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/03/goldman-sachs-discusses-pay-with-major-investors/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/03/goldman-sachs-discusses-pay-with-major-investors/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/management/" rel="tag">Management</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/gs/" rel="tag">Goldman Sachs Group (GS)</a></p><img hspace="4" align="right" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/11/200px-goldman_sachs_logo.jpg" />Brokerage firm Goldman Sachs (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/the-goldman-sachs-group-inc/gs/nys">GS</a>) has started <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703735004574572363440861826.html">meeting its major investors</a> in an attempt to stop criticism over its record compensation, the <em>Wall Street Journal</em> reported. Think this is a bit of overkill? Not when the average GS employee is set to earn $700,000 this year (how do I sign up for that gig?). These meetings are the first of their kind and are expected to continue for several more weeks. The Wall Street firm is defending its pay, especially in the wake of the economic crisis that some contend it partially behind. <br /><br />GS is trying to win support for its compensation packages, which is why the company is going to the shareholders. These investors are the actual owners of the firm and hold the power to change the company's compensation structure. Of course, employees and executives are hoping there would be no change, and the campaigning is heavy. <p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/03/goldman-sachs-discusses-pay-with-major-investors/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Goldman Sachs discusses pay with major investors</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/03/goldman-sachs-discusses-pay-with-major-investors/">Goldman Sachs discusses pay with major investors</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 03 Dec 2009 10:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/03/goldman-sachs-discusses-pay-with-major-investors/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19263483/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/03/goldman-sachs-discusses-pay-with-major-investors/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>executive pay</category><category>ExecutivePay</category><category>featured</category><category>goldman sachs</category><category>GoldmanSachs</category><category>GS</category><category>investment banking</category><category>InvestmentBanking</category><category>Wall Street Journal</category><category>WallStreetJournal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 10:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Google gives newspapers what they want]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/02/google-gives-newspapers-what-they-want/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/02/google-gives-newspapers-what-they-want/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/02/google-gives-newspapers-what-they-want/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/newspapers/" rel="tag">Newspapers</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/goog/" rel="tag">Google (GOOG)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nws/" rel="tag">News Corp'B' (NWS)</a></p><p><img  border="1" hspace="4" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/12/google-logo-200x150.jpg" alt="" />Free content's getting locked down. Google (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/google-inc/goog/nas" target="_blank">GOOG</a>), which has been criticized by the newspaper industry for <strike>sending them traffic</strike> making it easy for readers to find the stories they want without forcing them to make a purchase, is <a href="http://blogs.usatoday.com/technologylive/2009/12/google-to-limit-free-newspaper-articles.html" target="_blank">starting to play ball with the print industry</a>. </p>
<p>What's the harm? The way things are going, Google will only have to be nice for a little while. Then, this latest defensive measure by the newspaper industry will have run its course, and Google will be free to do what it wants.</p>
<p> </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/02/google-gives-newspapers-what-they-want/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Google gives newspapers what they want</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/02/google-gives-newspapers-what-they-want/">Google gives newspapers what they want</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 02 Dec 2009 11:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/02/google-gives-newspapers-what-they-want/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19261078/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/02/google-gives-newspapers-what-they-want/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>goog</category><category>google</category><category>GoogleNews</category><category>inthenews</category><category>News Corp.</category><category>NewsCorp.</category><category>newspaper industry</category><category>newspapers</category><category>NWS</category><category>rupert murdoch</category><category>wall street journal</category><category>wsj</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 11:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[New Facebook share structure hints at IPO]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/25/new-facebook-share-structure-hints-at-ipo/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/25/new-facebook-share-structure-hints-at-ipo/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/25/new-facebook-share-structure-hints-at-ipo/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/goog/" rel="tag">Google (GOOG)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nyt/" rel="tag">New York Times'A' (NYT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nws/" rel="tag">News Corp'B' (NWS)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/initial-public-offerings/" rel="tag">Initial Public Offerings</a></p><p><img hspace="4" height="267" border="1" align="right" width="200" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/12/facebook.jpg" /><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/tag/Facebook/">Facebook</a> is implementing a new stock structure to make sure the founders retain control, immediately causing <a target="_blank" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34134876/ns/business-us_business/">rumors about an impending initial public offering</a>. Why would Facebook need Class A and Class B shares otherwise? Under the new structure, which is similar to Google's (<a target="_blank" href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/google-inc/goog/nas">GOOG</a>), Mark Zuckerberg and other early entrants wouldn't have to worry about yielding the floor to outsiders <strike>when</strike> if the company goes public.</p>
<p>The stock structure was adopted to ensure that existing shareholders keep control on voting issues, according to Facebook statement. No details were given as to who the winners are in this arrangement, but a <em>Wall Street Journal</em> <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704779704574556053908778352.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTWhatsNews">report</a> says that, according to its sources, all current shareholders would be converted to Class B shares, which carry 10 times the voting rights of Class A shares. <br /></p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/25/new-facebook-share-structure-hints-at-ipo/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>New Facebook share structure hints at IPO</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/25/new-facebook-share-structure-hints-at-ipo/">New Facebook share structure hints at IPO</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34134876/ns/business-us_business/>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/25/new-facebook-share-structure-hints-at-ipo/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19253318/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/25/new-facebook-share-structure-hints-at-ipo/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>bancroft</category><category>Dow Jones</category><category>DowJones</category><category>facebook</category><category>featured</category><category>goog</category><category>google</category><category>ipo</category><category>Mark Zuckerberg</category><category>MarkZuckerberg</category><category>new york times co.</category><category>news corp</category><category>NewsCorp</category><category>NewYorkTimesCo.</category><category>NWS</category><category>nyt</category><category>pla</category><category>playboy</category><category>social media</category><category>SocialMedia</category><category>wall street journal</category><category>WallStreetJournal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Looser auditing rules keeping some newspaper heads above water]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/looser-auditing-rules-keeping-some-newspaper-heads-above-water/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/looser-auditing-rules-keeping-some-newspaper-heads-above-water/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/looser-auditing-rules-keeping-some-newspaper-heads-above-water/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/gci/" rel="tag">Gannett Co (GCI)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nws/" rel="tag">News Corp'B' (NWS)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/media-world/" rel="tag">Media World</a></p><p><img hspace="4" height="175" border="1" align="right" width="200" vspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/10/coffee_stock.jpg" alt="" />Bundling is beautiful for newspapers. Since April 1, 2009, <a target="_blank" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34094479/ns/business-media_biz/">new rules for counting circulation have turned some newspapers from losing to gaining</a>, even in a market where the print community is getting thrashed. Instead of selling more copies every day, these publications are counting online visits, as long as they are from paying subscribers - for either protected portions of the website or digital replica editions.</p>
<p>The new auditing standards, which affect <em>USA Today</em>, a Gannet (<a target="_blank" href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/gannett-inc-del/gci/nys">GCI</a>) property, and News Corp's (<a target="_blank" href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/news-corporation/nws/nas">NWS</a>) <em>Wall Street Journal</em>, among others, often allow newspapers that bundle print and digital editions to count the subscriber twice. According to a report by the Associated Press, the new rule is preventing circulation from looking as bad as it really may be.</p>
<p> </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/looser-auditing-rules-keeping-some-newspaper-heads-above-water/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Looser auditing rules keeping some newspaper heads above water</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/looser-auditing-rules-keeping-some-newspaper-heads-above-water/">Looser auditing rules keeping some newspaper heads above water</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34094479/ns/business-media_biz/>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/looser-auditing-rules-keeping-some-newspaper-heads-above-water/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19249895/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/looser-auditing-rules-keeping-some-newspaper-heads-above-water/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>abc</category><category>audit bureau of circulations</category><category>circulation</category><category>GannettCo.</category><category>GCI</category><category>inthenews</category><category>news corp</category><category>news corporation</category><category>newspaper circulation</category><category>Newspaper circulation declines</category><category>newspaper industry</category><category>NewspaperCirculation</category><category>NewspaperCirculationDeclines</category><category>NewspaperIndustry</category><category>NWS</category><category>subscriptions</category><category>usa today</category><category>UsaToday</category><category>wall street journal</category><category>WallStreetJournal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Microsoft and News Corp talk about pushing Google aside]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/microsoft-and-news-corp-talk-about-pushing-google-aside/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/microsoft-and-news-corp-talk-about-pushing-google-aside/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/microsoft-and-news-corp-talk-about-pushing-google-aside/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/internet/" rel="tag">Internet</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/goog/" rel="tag">Google (GOOG)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/msft/" rel="tag">Microsoft (MSFT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nws/" rel="tag">News Corp'B' (NWS)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/media-world/" rel="tag">Media World</a></p><p><img hspace="4" height="46" border="1" align="right" width="200" vspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/08/microsoft-msft-logo.jpg" alt="" />Often, we confuse winning with being the best. This isn't always the case. There are plenty of ways to get ahead when you don't have the top product on the market. The smoke-filled backroom meetings may be a thing of the past, but the net effect lingers. This is exactly what went down, <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34099291/ns/business-us_business/" target="_blank">according to a Reuters report</a>, when Microsoft (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/microsoft-corporation/msft/nas" target="_blank">MSFT</a>) had a chat with News Corp (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/news-corporation/nws/nas" target="_blank">NWS</a>).</p>
<p>Microsoft suggested a relationship with News Corp which would involve the latter's yanking its news sites from Google (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/google-inc/goog/nas" target="_blank">GOOG</a>) ... for a fee, of course. This would cost the search engine giant -- which is also a news aggregation giant -- access to some hefty publications, including the <a href="http://www.wsj.com" target="_blank"><em>Wall Street Journal</em></a>, the <em><a href="http://www.thesun.co.uk/" target="_blank">Sun</a></em> and the <em><a href="http://www.nypost.com" target="_blank">New York Post</a></em>.</p>
<p> </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/microsoft-and-news-corp-talk-about-pushing-google-aside/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Microsoft and News Corp talk about pushing Google aside</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/microsoft-and-news-corp-talk-about-pushing-google-aside/">Microsoft and News Corp talk about pushing Google aside</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34099291/ns/business-us_business/>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/microsoft-and-news-corp-talk-about-pushing-google-aside/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19250417/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/23/microsoft-and-news-corp-talk-about-pushing-google-aside/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Bing</category><category>goog</category><category>google</category><category>inthenews</category><category>Microsoft</category><category>MSFT</category><category>new york post</category><category>news</category><category>news corp</category><category>NewsCorp</category><category>newspaper</category><category>NewYorkPost</category><category>NWS</category><category>rupert murdoch</category><category>RupertMurdoch</category><category>wall street journal</category><category>WallStreetJournal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[AIG recoups billions in collateral payments]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/aig-recoups-billions-in-collateral-payments/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/aig-recoups-billions-in-collateral-payments/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/aig-recoups-billions-in-collateral-payments/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/sec-filings/" rel="tag">SEC Filings</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/gs/" rel="tag">Goldman Sachs Group (GS)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/aig/" rel="tag">Amer Intl Group (AIG)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/options/" rel="tag">Options</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/financial-crisis/" rel="tag">Financial Crisis</a></p><p><img border="1" hspace="4" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/12/aig-american-international-group-logo.jpg" alt="" />A report in Thursday's <em><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125677194092914501.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTWhatsNews">The Wall Street Journal</a></em> [subscription required] reveals that <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/american-international-group-inc/aig/nys">American International Group</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/american-international-group-inc/aig/nys">AIG</a>) is actually reaping the benefits of its risky bets in the credit-default swap market. </p>
<p>AIG was forced to shell out billions to Wall Street banks amid last year's credit crisis, as the assets backed by the credit-default swaps plummeted in value. However, the market's reversal of fortune means that banking heavyweights, such as <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/the-goldman-sachs-group-inc/gs/nys">Goldman Sachs Group</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/the-goldman-sachs-group-inc/gs/nys">GS</a>), are now returning collateral to the infamous insurance giant.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/aig-recoups-billions-in-collateral-payments/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>AIG recoups billions in collateral payments</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/aig-recoups-billions-in-collateral-payments/">AIG recoups billions in collateral payments</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:10:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/aig-recoups-billions-in-collateral-payments/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19214733/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/aig-recoups-billions-in-collateral-payments/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>AIG</category><category>American International Group</category><category>CDS</category><category>credit default swap</category><category>Goldman Sachs</category><category>GS</category><category>inthenews</category><category>investor sentiment</category><category>Liam Pleven</category><category>options</category><category>short sellers</category><category>technical analysis</category><category>Wall Street Journal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Elizabeth Harrow]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:10:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Coca-Cola CEO speaks out against soda tax in WSJ]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/08/coca-cola-ceo-speaks-out-against-soda-tax-in-wsj/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/08/coca-cola-ceo-speaks-out-against-soda-tax-in-wsj/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/08/coca-cola-ceo-speaks-out-against-soda-tax-in-wsj/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/ko/" rel="tag">Coca-Cola (KO)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/politics/" rel="tag">Politics</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/djia/" rel="tag">DJIA</a></p><p><img border="1" hspace="4" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/08/cokebottle.jpg" width="220" height="190" alt="" />Muhtar Kent, CEO of <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/the-coca-cola-company/ko/nys">The Coca-Cola Company</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/the-coca-cola-company/ko/nys">KO</a>), took to the pages of <em>The Wall Street Journal</em> to argue against the government's proposed "fat tax" on soda. In a column titled <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703298004574455464120581696.html">"Coke Didn't Make America Fat,"</a> Kent noted that "our industry has become an easy target in this debate." However, he believes the sedentary lifestyle of Americans is to blame for our nation's obesity problem.</p>
<p>"If we're genuinely interested in curbing obesity, we need to take a hard look in the mirror and acknowledge that it's not just about calories in. It's also about calories out," wrote Kent. He also cited the "regressive nature and inherent illogic" of trying to rectify obesity by taxing soft drinks, observing that West Virginia and Arkansas -- two states which currently tax sodas -- are among the states with the highest obesity rates in the nation.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/08/coca-cola-ceo-speaks-out-against-soda-tax-in-wsj/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Coca-Cola CEO speaks out against soda tax in WSJ</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/08/coca-cola-ceo-speaks-out-against-soda-tax-in-wsj/">Coca-Cola CEO speaks out against soda tax in WSJ</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 08 Oct 2009 12:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/08/coca-cola-ceo-speaks-out-against-soda-tax-in-wsj/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19188847/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/08/coca-cola-ceo-speaks-out-against-soda-tax-in-wsj/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>CEO</category><category>Coca-Cola</category><category>featured</category><category>inthenews</category><category>KO</category><category>Muhtar Kent</category><category>obesity</category><category>soda tax</category><category>Wall Street Journal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Elizabeth Harrow]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 12:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Rupert Murdoch has it all wrong about fee-based web content]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/10/rupert-murdoch-has-it-all-wrong-about-fee-based-web-content/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/10/rupert-murdoch-has-it-all-wrong-about-fee-based-web-content/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/10/rupert-murdoch-has-it-all-wrong-about-fee-based-web-content/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/competitive-strategy/" rel="tag">Competitive Strategy</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nws/" rel="tag">News Corp'B' (NWS)</a></p><p><img border="0" hspace="4" alt="" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/08/murd.jpg" />When <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/news-corporation/nws/nas">News Corp.</a> (NASDAQ: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/news-corporation/nws/nas">NWS</a>) outspoken Chairman Rupert Murdoch reversed himself recently and declared that all his company's web properties would soon move to a fee model, were you perplexed? After all, Murdoch runs one of the largest media empires on the planet. Combine that with a conditioned customer used to getting almost all content for free and yes, we have a problem.</p>
<p>Murdoch's empire just suffered an advertising meltdown with the rest of the world, with News Corp. declaring a huge decline in ad revenue for its latest quarter. Just a few years ago, Murdoch was toying with the idea of dropping the fee for looking at the <em>Wall Street Journal</em>'s articles and columns. <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2007/sep/19/business/fi-dowjones19">He's done a 180 here</a> and wants to bring the <em>Journal</em>'s pay-per-use model to just about every web property his company owns while he shouts "<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/aug/06/rupert-murdoch-website-charges">quality journalism is not cheap</a>" from the rooftops of Fox News.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/10/rupert-murdoch-has-it-all-wrong-about-fee-based-web-content/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Rupert Murdoch has it all wrong about fee-based web content</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/10/rupert-murdoch-has-it-all-wrong-about-fee-based-web-content/">Rupert Murdoch has it all wrong about fee-based web content</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/10/rupert-murdoch-has-it-all-wrong-about-fee-based-web-content/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19121283/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/10/rupert-murdoch-has-it-all-wrong-about-fee-based-web-content/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Fox News</category><category>inthenews</category><category>Murdoch</category><category>NWS</category><category>Pay websites</category><category>Rupert Murdoch</category><category>Wall Street journal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Brian White]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:20:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[WSJ says that in order for real estate market to rebound, prices have to stop crashing]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/26/wsj-says-that-in-order-for-real-estate-market-to-rebound-prices/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/26/wsj-says-that-in-order-for-real-estate-market-to-rebound-prices/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/26/wsj-says-that-in-order-for-real-estate-market-to-rebound-prices/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/housing/" rel="tag">Housing</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p><p><img border="1" hspace="4" alt="" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/05/foreclosure.jpg" />In one of the least enlightening stories you'll ever see,<em> The Wall Street Journal</em>'s normally insightful "Ahead of the Tape" column <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124328420507952007.html#mod%3Dtodays_us_money_and_investing%26articleTabs%3Darticle">reports</a> (subscription required) that "A full recovery for housing, and maybe the broader economy, depends on a third step: Prices must stop falling. On that front, as with other economic data, the "second derivative" is improving -- things are still getting worse, but at a slower rate."</p>
<p>That's right: In order for the real estate market to be good again, real estate prices have to stop crashing. In a related story, The Washington Nationals will need to start winning baseball games if they are to have a shot at playing in the post-season.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/26/wsj-says-that-in-order-for-real-estate-market-to-rebound-prices/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>WSJ says that in order for real estate market to rebound, prices have to stop crashing</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/26/wsj-says-that-in-order-for-real-estate-market-to-rebound-prices/">WSJ says that in order for real estate market to rebound, prices have to stop crashing</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Tue, 26 May 2009 10:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/26/wsj-says-that-in-order-for-real-estate-market-to-rebound-prices/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1562794/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/26/wsj-says-that-in-order-for-real-estate-market-to-rebound-prices/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Housing</category><category>inthenews</category><category>Real Estate</category><category>Wall Street Journal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Zac Bissonnette]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 10:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Is the end to the recession on the horizon?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/is-the-end-to-the-recession-on-the-horizon/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/is-the-end-to-the-recession-on-the-horizon/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/is-the-end-to-the-recession-on-the-horizon/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/forecasts/" rel="tag">Forecasts</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/good-news/" rel="tag">Good news</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/consumer-experience/" rel="tag">Consumer Experience</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/employees/" rel="tag">Employees</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/marketmatters/" rel="tag">Market Matters</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/mandftoday/" rel="tag">Money and Finance Today</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/housing/" rel="tag">Housing</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/financial-crisis/" rel="tag">Financial Crisis</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="0" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/03/wantadspic.jpg" alt="recession" />The entire country has been struggling with the current recession, and while we are still not out of the woods just yet, there are signs that the economic free fall is <a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/04/10/economists-expect-recession-to-end-in-september/">at least close to coming to an end</a>.<br /><br />This morning President Obama stated that we were starting to see "<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123937844769608771.html">glimmers of hope</a>" in the economy, claiming that we are "starting to see progress" on a number of fronts. While Obama admits that the economy is still under "severe stress", he noted that we are seeing a boom in demand for mortgage loans and refinancing, and a thaw in some credit markets.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/is-the-end-to-the-recession-on-the-horizon/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Is the end to the recession on the horizon?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/is-the-end-to-the-recession-on-the-horizon/">Is the end to the recession on the horizon?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/is-the-end-to-the-recession-on-the-horizon/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1514048/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/is-the-end-to-the-recession-on-the-horizon/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>credit crisis</category><category>CreditCrisis</category><category>forecasts</category><category>lending</category><category>mortgages</category><category>Obama</category><category>recession</category><category>Wall Street Journal</category><category>WallStreetJournal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Fowlkes]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[One more time: Start new banks]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/07/one-more-time-start-new-banks/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/07/one-more-time-start-new-banks/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/07/one-more-time-start-new-banks/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/financial-crisis/" rel="tag">Financial Crisis</a></p><p><img alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/12/blog-money-winners-jeff-greene-subprime-200x267.jpg" align="right" vspace="4" border="1" />Since last October, I have been repeatedly suggesting that the U.S. would be better off creating new banks rather than putting capital into zombie banks -- whose financial toxic waste prevents them from lending. This is the fifth time I have made the suggestion -- I previously posted on it <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/07/memo-to-washington-start-100-new-banks/">here</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/25/one-more-time-create-100-new-banks/">here</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/23/dont-nationalize-the-banks-create-new-ones/">here</a>, and <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/26/dont-nationalize-create-new-banks-and-reverse-securitize/">here</a>. Until today, I had no idea whether anyone was listening. Now I have a hunch that at least one person might have gotten wind of the idea -- maybe he listened to <a href="http://www.kcrw.com/news/programs/ww/ww090122should_americas_bank">this radio interview</a> last month on KCRW.</p>
<p>That one person is none other than Paul Romer, an economist at Stanford's Institute for Economic Policy Research. Yesterday Romer wrote in the <em><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123388681675555343.html">Wall Street Journal</a></em> that the U.S. needs banks that can lend and that it would be easier for that to happen if we put TARP money into new banks rather than trying to use the money to revive the zombie ones.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/07/one-more-time-start-new-banks/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>One more time: Start new banks</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/07/one-more-time-start-new-banks/">One more time: Start new banks</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Sat, 07 Feb 2009 10:10:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/07/one-more-time-start-new-banks/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1453263/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/07/one-more-time-start-new-banks/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Mortgage-Backed Securities</category><category>paul romer</category><category>tarp</category><category>toxic waste</category><category>wall street journal</category><category>zombie banks</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Peter Cohan]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 07 Feb 2009 10:10:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[A billion? A trillion? What's the difference?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/16/a-billion-a-trillion-whats-the-difference/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/16/a-billion-a-trillion-whats-the-difference/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/16/a-billion-a-trillion-whats-the-difference/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/newspapers/" rel="tag">Newspapers</a></p>Writing on TheDailyBeast (where I also <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/author/zac-bissonnette/">have a column</a>), Christopher Buckley <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-01-14/the-wall-street-journals-trillion-dollar-error/2/">points</a> out an interesting correction from <em>The Wall Street Journal</em>:<br /><br /><em>The U.S. budget deficit is projected to total $1.2 trillion this year. A page-one World-Wide news summary in some editions Jan. 8 incorrectly put the figure at $1.2 billion.<br /><br /></em>Oops! The difference is only a factor of 1,000 but once you get over the $700 billion mark, does it really even matter? And since we're just going to be printing the money anyway -- we certainly don't have it sitting around -- and foisting the bill on future generations, who cares? <br /><br />But that got me thinking: How many other brilliant newspaper errors have there been? It turns out that there's an entire website devoted to them. Log-on to <a href="http://www.regrettheerror.com/">Regret The Error</a> and check out their <a href="http://www.regrettheerror.com/regret-articles/crunks-2008-the-year-in-media-errors-and-corrections">best corrections of 2008</a>. The best correction of the year goes to <em>The Daily Mail</em>:<br /><br /><em>In articles published on 23 and 26 May 2008, we gave the impression that Mr Gest had contracted a sexually transmitted infection and alleged that he had Liza Minnelli's dog killed without her knowledge. This was wrong. David Gest has never had a sexually transmitted infection and did not have Ms Minnelli's dog killed. We apologise to Mr Gest for any embarrassment caused.</em><em></em><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/16/a-billion-a-trillion-whats-the-difference/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>A billion? A trillion? What's the difference?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/16/a-billion-a-trillion-whats-the-difference/">A billion? A trillion? What's the difference?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:14:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-01-14/the-wall-street-journals-trillion-dollar-error/1/>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/16/a-billion-a-trillion-whats-the-difference/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1431278/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/16/a-billion-a-trillion-whats-the-difference/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Christopher Buckley</category><category>ChristopherBuckley</category><category>Corrections</category><category>inthenews</category><category>journalism</category><category>media</category><category>The Daily Beast</category><category>TheDailyBeast</category><category>Wall Street Journal</category><category>WallStreetJournal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Zac Bissonnette]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:14:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[How much of the business press will disappear?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/06/how-much-of-the-business-press-will-disappear/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/06/how-much-of-the-business-press-will-disappear/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/06/how-much-of-the-business-press-will-disappear/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/forecasts/" rel="tag">Forecasts</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/industry/" rel="tag">Industry</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p><p>This website is in the business and financial news business. So are a number of other online financial sites like <em>SeekingAlpha, TheBigMoney, ClusterStock, and Minyanville. </em>Just a few years ago, none of these operations existed.</p>
<p>Last year, advertising pages in tradition business magazine like <em>BusinessWeek</em> and <em>Forbes </em>were down by double digits. With the recession deepening and marketers pulling back, 2009 may not be any better.</p>
<p>On TV, there are now two business channels, <em>CNBC</em> and <em>Fox, </em>which is barely a year old and has horrible audience numbers. So far. But <em>CNBC </em>is owned by <a href="http://www.kcra.com/news/18334106/detail.html">GE </a>(NYSE:<a href="http://www.kcra.com/news/18334106/detail.html">GE</a>) and <em>Fox </em>is owned by <a href="http://www.kcra.com/news/18334106/detail.html">News Corp</a> (NYSE:<a href="http://www.kcra.com/news/18334106/detail.html">NWS</a>). That means both are likely to be around for a long time. They both compete against Bloomberg TV.<br /></p>
<p>In the news service business, <em>Bloomberg, Reuters, </em>and the <em>AP</em> all have large financial reporting operations. In the newspaper business, <em>The Wall Street Journal</em> and <em>The New York Times </em>compete for readers.</p>
<p>Lest you say that this post is just a bunch of names typed onto a page, consider that the economic downturn will not support all of these media. Advertising will disappear. Perhaps more frightening, as people pull money out of the stock market, the interest in investing will drop. As investment professionals are fired, they may drop out of the business news consumption population as well.</p>
<p>Who may not make it? The traditional business magazines publish on weekly or fortnightly cycles. That is too long a time between articles in a world where the web delivers information in real time. They may not get enough readers on the internet to offset sales lost in print.</p>
<p>One thing for certain. A number of the operations with their names in this piece won't be here in 2010.</p>
<p><em>Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 237wallst.com.</em></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/06/how-much-of-the-business-press-will-disappear/">How much of the business press will disappear?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:38:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/06/how-much-of-the-business-press-will-disappear/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1419802/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/06/how-much-of-the-business-press-will-disappear/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>advertising</category><category>Clusterstock</category><category>GE</category><category>inthenews</category><category>media</category><category>NWS</category><category>NY Times</category><category>NyTimes</category><category>Seeking Alpha</category><category>SeekingAlpha</category><category>Wall Street Journal</category><category>WallStreetJournal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Douglas McIntyre]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:38:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Is Ben Bernanke in the tank for Obama?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/21/is-ben-bernanke-in-the-tank-for-obama/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/21/is-ben-bernanke-in-the-tank-for-obama/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/21/is-ben-bernanke-in-the-tank-for-obama/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/presidential-elections/" rel="tag">Presidential Elections</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/federal-reserve/" rel="tag">Federal Reserve</a></p><p><img alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/12/ben-bernanke.jpg" align="right" vspace="4" border="1" />It looks like Ben Bernanke is getting under the <em>Wall Street Journal's</em> skin. That's because <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/31/ruperts-rag-bancrofts-give-up/">Rupert's Rag</a> is not happy with the direction of its candidate for President. And it is annoyed that a Republican appointee, Ben Bernanke, is helping out the Democratic candidate -- Barack Obama. That's what prompted the <em>Journal</em>'s headline -- <em><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455027730552509.html?mod=googlenews_wsj">Bernanke endorses Obama</a></em>.</p>
<p>Oh poor <em>Wall Street Journal</em>! Is this the best you can do? Why does it bother you so much that Ben Bernanke is supporting Obama's call for a new stimulus package? In an October 13th speech, Obama "urged Congress to act 'as soon as possible' before the Bush administration leaves office on January 20 to pass a stimulus measure. If Congress and the president didn't act 'it will be one of the first things I do as president of the United States.'" says <em><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&amp;sid=aebz5Nqclh6E&amp;refer=home">Bloomberg News</a></em>.</p>
<p>But Rupert's Rag is in the tank for McCain and although Obama is already setting U.S. policy on big issues -- a few months ago, Iraq and Bush agreed with Obama's Iraq withdrawal plan -- the <em>Journal</em> is upset that Bernanke and ultimately Bush will go along with Obama's proposed stimulus plan as well. First Colin Powell, and now Ben Bernanke are reading the tea leaves and choosing to position themselves for power in the next administration.</p>
<p>And the <em>Journal</em> is finally waking up to the fact that it will be on the outs for at least the next four years.</p>
<p><em>Peter Cohan is President of</em> <a href="http://petercohan.com/"><em><font color="#0072bc">Peter S. Cohan &amp; Associates</font></em></a><em>.</em><em> He also </em><a href="http://www3.babson.edu/Academics/Divisions/management/facultyprofile.cfm?pageid=391236"><em><font color="#0072bc">teaches management at Babson College</font></em></a><em> and edits </em><a href="http://petercohan.blogspot.com/2007/01/cohan-letter-up-15-in-2006.html"><em><font color="#0072bc">The Cohan Letter</font></em></a><em>.</em></p>
<p> </p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/21/is-ben-bernanke-in-the-tank-for-obama/">Is Ben Bernanke in the tank for Obama?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:45:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/21/is-ben-bernanke-in-the-tank-for-obama/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1348276/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/21/is-ben-bernanke-in-the-tank-for-obama/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Barack OBama</category><category>BarackObama</category><category>Ben Bernanke</category><category>BenBernanke</category><category>Federal reserve</category><category>FederalReserve</category><category>inthenews</category><category>The Fed</category><category>TheFed</category><category>Wall Street Journal</category><category>WallStreetJournal</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Peter Cohan]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:45:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
