intellectual vanities… about close to everything

what I read, and what I don’t… thu, 3rd may 2007: Rupert Murdoch

with 4 comments

On Friday, 2nd February 2007, I read that media baron Rupert Murdoch has given each of his six children $100 million in News Corp. stock, a company spokesman in New York said Friday. I read further in The Financial Times that Murdoch’s move comes as News Corp. completes a stock swap with John Malone’s Liberty Media Corp., raising the Murdoch family’s voting share in News Corp. to 38 percent from 30 percent.

In regulatory filings Friday, the Murdoch Family Trust said it distributed slightly more than 26 million News Corp. class A shares, which do not have voting rights, worth just over $600 million at Friday’s share price.

“The distribution from the Murdoch Family Trust was made equally to each of Mr. Murdoch’s six children,” the News Corp. spokesman said.

I read that Murdoch, 75, controls News Corp. through the trust.

tomorrow-never-dies-ii.jpg

On Monday, 26 March 2007, I read the announcement that Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp and NBC Universal would launch an online library of big media video assets that could be licensed by any online distributor, provided they accept the terms and conditions set forth by big media. Towards such ends, the new big media joint venture also announced that Yahoo!, MSN, AOL, and MySpace had signed up as licensees and distributors.

Given the significant difference between a web of text vs. that of video for Google, the big media companies made a very smart move last week. Although not necessarily a checkmate, it was a “check” on Google. If all the other media companies fall in line as well, then it could become a “checkmate” against Google when it comes to big media content.

In other words, Google would have no choice but to accept the demands of the big media companies for the licensing and distribution of their content. The only way for Google to regain leverage against the big media companies, at that point, would be to change the game altogether (e.g. by owning content and becoming a full-fledged media company, as I had suggested they might in my last post).

But at the end of day, it may turn out that both sides of this titanic struggle were merely pawns in a higher-level game benefiting one single player… Rupert Murdoch.

Using Google as the red herring, Murdoch may actually have succeeded in rallying all of his competitors to join forces by contributing their combined digital video assets into one pool (which he has significant control over). But through his ownership of MySpace, Murdoch is in a very unique position relative to all his big media brethren.

Namely, he will be the only one that ends up owning both content (via the new joint venture) and distribution (via MySpace) in any material and meaningful way.

Owning the whole value chain has always been a strategy that has served him well, and by the looks of it, he’s going to continue enjoying such advantages. Not only that, Murdoch could very well have out-maneuvered Google by positioning MySpace to ultimately become what YouTube was supposed to be.

On Thursday, 8 February 2007, I read that Rupert Murdoch announced the launch of Fox Business Channel in the United States this fall by his News Corp. media conglomerate.

The new channel, developed by Fox News Chief Executive Roger Ailes, will be “business friendly,” Murdoch told a New York media and technology conference. He characterized NBC Universal’s CNBC financial cable network as “negative” toward business.

Murdoch would not disclose programming details because, he said, CNBC “would immediately copy” them. But he said his channel would not “leap on every scandal.”

Ailes said the new channel would “extend the Fox News brand” to business journalism.

The network, based at News Corp.’s New York headquarters, has 30 million subscribers under contract through Comcast, Time Warner Cable, DirecTV and Charter Communications, Fox officials said.

Murdoch has said he would only launch the channel, talked about for the past two years, if he had enough distribution in place.

“I look forward to introducing new competition and a new voice to the business-news arena,” Murdoch said.

On Friday, 9 February 2007, I read that British lawmakers are trying to prevent media baron Rupert Murdoch’s British satellite TV company from controlling the country’s commercial ITV network.

More than 60 lawmakers signed a motion calling on the government to bring the matter before Britain’s Competition Commission, Member of Parliament John Grogan says.

Murdoch BSkyB owns 17.9 percent of ITV. Controlling ITV would also let Murdoch control ITV’s news channel, The Independent reported Friday.

BSkyB controls 40 percent of all British television revenue — almost twice that of the BBC, the newspaper said.

I read between the lines that Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown — widely expected to be elected the next Labor Party leader, replacing Tony Blair as prime minister — faces a dilemma, being afraid of retaliation by Murdoch’s newspaper Sun in the September election, once he would support Labor lawmakers.

On Tuesday, 3 April 2007, I read that News Corp. shareholders Tuesday approved a deal to swap the company’s stake in DirecTV Group Inc. for Liberty Media Corp.’s News Corp. shares.

I read that Rupert Murdoch’s media conglomerate will give its 38 percent stake in DirecTV in exchange for $550 million in cash and Liberty’s 16 percent stake in News Corp., valued at $11 billion, the company said.

The tax-free deal is intended to strengthen Murdoch’s control of his New York company. Murdoch, who controls 31 percent of the votes, was concerned Liberty, of Englewood, Colo., might use its stake to challenge his direction.

The deal, originally worked out in late December, lets News Corp. shrink the company’s shareholder base and increase Murdoch’s stake to close to 38 percent.

“DirecTV and the regional sports networks represent a critical step in our efforts to transform Liberty Media into a well-positioned, focused operating company,” I read Liberty Media stating in December.

On Tuesday, May 1 2007, I read, that News Corp. made an unsolicited offer to buy Dow Jones & Co. for $60 a share or $5 billion, the publishing company said Tuesday.

The Dow Jones board of directors and members and trustees of the Bancroft family, which controls 62 percent of Dow Jones voting stock, are “evaluating the proposal,” the company said in a statement. “There can be no assurance that this evaluation will lead to any transaction,” the statement said.

The $60 a share offer is roughly 67 percent above Dow Jones’s recent market value.

Dow Jones publishes The Wall Street Journal, Barron’s, the Far Eastern Economic Review, MarketWatch, Dow Jones indexes and the Ottaway group of community newspapers. It also owns Factiva and co-owns SmartMoney with Hearst Corp.

In addition, it provides news content to CNBC television operations and to U.S. radio stations.

News Corp. has major newspaper and broadcast properties in Britain and Australia. Its U.S. holdings include The New York Post, the Fox Broadcasting Co. and Fox News Channel.

It also owns several entertainment cable channels and the 20th Century Fox film studio.

Earlier, on Monday, 26 March 2007, I read the announcement that Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp and NBC Universal would launch an online library of big media video assets that could be licensed by any online distributor, provided they accept the terms and conditions set forth by big media. Towards such ends, the new big media joint venture also announced that Yahoo!, MSN, AOL, and MySpace had signed up as licensees and distributors.

Given the significant difference between a web of text vs. that of video for Google, the big media companies made a very smart move last week. Although not necessarily a checkmate, it was a “check” on Google. If all the other media companies fall in line as well, then it could become a “checkmate” against Google when it comes to big media content.

In other words, Google would have no choice but to accept the demands of the big media companies for the licensing and distribution of their content. The only way for Google to regain leverage against the big media companies, at that point, would be to change the game altogether (e.g. by owning content and becoming a full-fledged media company).

But at the end of day, it may turn out that both sides of this titanic struggle were merely pawns in a higher-level game benefiting one single player… Rupert Murdoch.

Using Google as the red herring, Murdoch may actually have succeeded in rallying all of his competitors to join forces by contributing their combined digital video assets into one pool (which he has significant control over). But through his ownership of MySpace, Murdoch is in a very unique position relative to all his big media brethren.

Namely, he will be the only one that ends up owning both content (via the new joint venture) and distribution (via MySpace) in any material and meaningful way.

Owning the whole value chain has always been a strategy that has served him well, and by the looks of it, he’s going to continue enjoying such advantages. Not only that, Murdoch could very well have out-maneuvered Google by positioning MySpace to ultimately become what YouTube was supposed to be.

carver.jpg

I don’t read “Tomorrow Never Dies”, because that was not in the news, but the title of a rather stupid movie. At times reality seems to take a more dangerous turn than even the plot in productions of 20th Century Fox. Could you tell on the spot how many google queries you did run and how many google mails you did send during the last four weeks?

You know what is the best about it? Everybody has so much fun, yet nobody seems to notice…

walther.jpg

Written by huehueteotl

May 3, 2007 at 3:17 pm

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. They guy’s brilliant

    Count

    May 3, 2007 at 11:36 pm

  2. […] what I read, and what I don’t… thu, 3rd may 2007: Rupert Murdoch […]

  3. […] what I read, and what I don’t… thu, 3rd may 2007: Rupert Murdoch Tagged with: democracy, in your face television, political discourse, political psychology, talkshow […]

  4. I have a post up this weekend about Rupert Murdoch that may interest you. When I found the information, my eyes popped out.

    The Glenn Beck Review

    June 19, 2010 at 9:22 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: