Murdoch Says “No,” Means “Maybe”

Rupert Murdoch New York Times Wall Street Journal.jpgAfter yesterday’s announcement that an “agreement” had been reached to secure the editorial independence of the Wall Street Journal, Rupert Murdoch said that he would not raise his current, $5bn bid for Dow Jones. “Everything is done. We are just waiting for a final approval of the Bancroft family. The final approval is in the next two, three week’s time or not at all,” Murdoch said today from Poland.

This, of course, doesn’t mean a modest bid increase is out of the question. One can hardly expect a perspicacious dealmaker like Rupe to tell Reuters, “I probably will up the offer, I just want to see if the Bancrofts will take the five billion first.”

It also seems that yesterday’s agreement on the Journal may have been prematurely announced. Parts of the deal remain, “sketchy or not yet written,” the New York Times is reporting. “The nuts and bolts are there, but not all the details,” a source involved in the negotiations said. Only a few of the Bancrofts, who have ultimate veto power over the deal, have been briefed on the still-unreleased Dow-NewsCorp. agreement.

Dow Jones Accord In Place, But Incomplete [Dealbook]
Murdoch: No plans to raise Dow Jones bid [Reuters]

Comments

Posted by anon anon anon, Jun 27, 2007 3:41PM

In my opinion, Murdoch's word, orally or written, means nothing to him. This "agreement" is merely a "save face" for the sellers. That is the way Murdoch sees it and he is right. Murdoch will die laughing about how everyone sells out. His last words, "They were all the same as me." This is only an opinion.

Posted by anon, Jun 27, 2007 3:48PM

So DJ is worth $5 billion and Facebook is worth $8 billion?

Posted by jt, Jun 27, 2007 4:35PM

While I see your point as to how DJ could be worth what 60% more than FB (and certaintly don't think FB is worth that much...at least not yet), the differientating factor is growth. As in facebook could rather easily increase cashflow, etc 10x+ over the next 5 or 10 years while the same jump for DJ had about an ice cube's chace in hell.

Posted by anon anon, Jun 27, 2007 5:09PM

FB and its ilk are just more aols.

Posted by Bulging Bracket, Jun 27, 2007 5:58PM

FB has fewer competitors, similar demographics, and gets more attention than DJ. FB is better compared to BB: network effect, must have product, all your friends & competitors are on it... FB has better chances of driving ancillary revenue, $0 user acquisition cost, and (for now) $0 advertiser acquisiton cost. FB is spending money to keep advertisers and purchasers AWAY... good business and while I don't see an $8B valuation now, next year is definitely believable.

News Corp's valuation of MySpace is the laughable variable. It definitely is the next geocities, while FB builds lasting value and connections with its users (focus on ultra high-end Ivy League helps).

Post Your Comment