Comments on: The financial-media rollup strategy http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/11/15/the-financial-media-rollup-strategy/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Setty http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/11/15/the-financial-media-rollup-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-48649 Sat, 23 Nov 2013 02:58:45 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22745#comment-48649 to be a useful mobile-native news experience, it has to be linked to a trading platform. i don’t think yahoo could do that. or rather, if someone wants to do it, they can do it better building from the ground up.

forbes may have revenues but it has no future. it’s been devouring its own reputation for years.

]]>
By: y2kurtus1 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/11/15/the-financial-media-rollup-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-48627 Sat, 16 Nov 2013 04:13:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22745#comment-48627 Blooomberg is the most valuable property on the web. Tompson-Reuters is #2. If Yahoo finance wants to stay #3 they will need to stop “improving” their user experience as they did a week or 10 days ago by upping the add space on their home page to about 50% of the screen.

]]>
By: crocodilechuck http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/11/15/the-financial-media-rollup-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-48626 Fri, 15 Nov 2013 23:58:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22745#comment-48626 Felix,

You weren’t the spruiker for another ginormous media roll up twelve years back?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsb ysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/media  /8031227/AOL-merger-was-the-biggest-mis take-in-corporate-history-believes-Time- Warner-chief-Jeff-Bewkes.html

;)

]]>
By: thispaceforsale http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/11/15/the-financial-media-rollup-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-48625 Fri, 15 Nov 2013 20:31:21 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22745#comment-48625 Felix, it’s possible you are a little too close to the pie cooling on the ledge, so to speak, and it might be coloring your value assessment.
There is a fine line between cheap and in trouble, and a sale of $400m would be substantially less than what Elevation Partners allegedly paid when they took 45% at $237m.

Further, according to Fortune, at least, the contract between the two does murky the waters substantially (this is a direct quote):

Elevation’s contract includes a “put” option giving it the right to force Forbes to buy back the 45% stake at fair market value anytime between Aug. 4, 2011, and Aug. 3, 2016, according to a footnote in Forbes’s 2010 financial statement.
(In a twist that could prove lucky for Forbes, it has a “call” option to force Elevation to sell back its stake at fair market value anytime after Aug. 4, 2011. If the company’s value does not rise above what Elevation paid in 2006, Forbes could buy back the stake and stick Elevation with a loss.)
Elevation also got Forbes Media to give it a hitherto-undisclosed escape clause: After the put option expires, Elevation has a 90-day window during which it can sell its stake back to Forbes Media at its original price.

]]>