<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>DealZone &#187; new york times</title>
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone</link>
	<description>Behind the deals and deal-makers</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 21:54:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Is CNET losing the war?</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/03/22/is-cnet-losing-the-war/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/03/22/is-cnet-losing-the-war/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 01:29:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Anupreeta Das</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[DealZone]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[cnet]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[delaware court]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[jana partners]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[new york times]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[proxy battle]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/03/22/is-cnet-losing-the-war/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the war of words between CNET and its biggest shareholder, a group led by hedge fund Jana Partners, the two sides might as well be speaking in different tongues.
Jana proclaims that its motives are driven by a desire to rescue CNET &#8212; best known for tech-news site News.com, which has been hit by stiff [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/files/2008/03/cnet.jpg" title="cnet.jpg"></a><a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/files/2008/03/dictionary2.jpg" title="dictionary2.jpg"><img src="http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/files/2008/03/dictionary2.jpg" alt="dictionary2.jpg" class="imageframe" align="left" height="173" width="258" /></a>In the war of words between CNET and its biggest shareholder, a group led by hedge fund Jana Partners, the two sides might as well be speaking in different tongues.</p>
<p>Jana <a href="http://www.pr-inside.com/jana-partners-calls-on-cnet-networks-r491493.htm">proclaims</a> that its motives are driven by a desire to rescue CNET &#8212; best known for tech-news site News.com, which has been hit by stiff competition from blogs &#8212; from irrelevance.</p>
<p>CNET prefers to speak the language of corporate bylaws that it believes will protect the company from unwanted attention, despite a recent <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNews/idUSN1331204420080313">legal setback</a> that it plans to <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNews/idUSBNG17241820080317">appeal</a>.</p>
<p>But Jana seems to have understood perfectly CNET chief Neil Ashe&#8217;s recent <a href="http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1015577/000119312508056386/ddefa14a.htm">letter</a> to employees, where he called the dissidents &#8220;opportunistic shareholders&#8221; and labeled the proxy fight a chess match. As blogger Michael Arrington &#8212; whose TechCrunch is a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/07/technology/07shareholders.html?ex=1357448400&amp;en=334b45c7fd66acd5&amp;ei=5090&amp;partner=rssuserland&amp;emc=rss">big thorn </a>in CNET&#8217;s side, according to Dealbook &#8212; <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/19/cnet-soap-opera-continues-ceo-neil-ashe-may-be-fighting-for-his-job/">reported</a>, Jana would rather get rid of Ashe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/03/22/is-cnet-losing-the-war/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Stockholder activism: just a game of chess</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/03/14/stockholder-activism-just-a-game-of-chess/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/03/14/stockholder-activism-just-a-game-of-chess/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:53:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Anupreeta Das</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[DealZone]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[chess]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[cnet]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[delaware court]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[harbinger capital]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[jana partners]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[liberty media]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[new york times]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[proxy battle]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/03/14/stockholder-activism-just-a-game-of-chess/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Delaware court ruled in favor of Jana Partners, allowing the hedge fund and its partners to nominate directors to CNET Networks&#8217; board, come the next shareholder meeting.
But that decision is &#8220;just another move on the chess board,&#8221; according to CNET&#8217;s CEO Neil Ashe. In an e-mail to employees, Ashe compared fights between activist shareholders and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/files/2008/03/chess.jpg" title="chess.jpg"><img align="left" width="137" src="http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/files/2008/03/chess.jpg" alt="chess.jpg" height="200" /></a>The Delaware court ruled <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNews/idUSN1331204420080313">in favor </a>of Jana Partners, allowing the hedge fund and its partners to nominate directors to CNET Networks&#8217; board, come the next shareholder meeting.</p>
<p>But that decision is &#8220;just another move on the chess board,&#8221; according to CNET&#8217;s CEO Neil Ashe. In an <a href="http://pro.edgar-online.com/EFX_dll/CNET_NETWORKS_INC_DEFA14A_20080314.rtf?EDGARPro.dll?FetchFilingRTF1?ID=5798683&amp;SessionID=blYBWWEGWDsc2-h">e-mail </a>to employees, Ashe compared fights between activist shareholders and managements for board control to chess matches.</p>
<p>&#8220;Remember, stockholder activism is more common place today,&#8221; Ashe wrote. &#8220;We are not alone. The New York Times and IAC are both addressing similar situations. As I&#8217;ve said since the beginning, this is like a chess match.&#8221;</p>
<p>The Times is <a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2008/02/29/new-york-times-fight-play-by-play-harbinger-edition/">fighting</a> a proxy battle with hedge fund Harbinger Capital, and IAC and its controlling shareholder Liberty Media have <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/ousivMolt/idUSWEN448320080313">sued</a> each other.</p>
<p>CNET said it is reviewing the court&#8217;s decision and may appeal. We&#8217;re waiting for the next move.</p>
<p> <em>Photo: Reuters file</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/03/14/stockholder-activism-just-a-game-of-chess/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
