This blog is mainly about the spectacular train wreck at The Sacramento Bee and its parent company, the McClatchy Company. But I also post about current events, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, politics, anything else that grabs my attention. Take a look around this blog, hope you enjoy it.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
All time low!... McClatchy falls to lowest price since MNI was first publicly traded
A momentous day -- McClatchy (MNI) hit $1.30 a share at 11:20 EST Thursday, the lowest price since McClatchy joined the big board 20 years ago.
UPDATED 2:15 PM -- updated info on Thursday's collapse is here. . .
MNI $1.27 last time I checked. We have some excellent posters here that know their stuff when it comes to stocks. I am wondering when stocks are actually worthless?
You'd probably get 10 different answers from 10 different people on that. The literal types would tell you when the price hits zero, but it is effectively long before that.
When a company has a market cap of 125 million with over 2 billion in debt, with their entire net going to pay interest is a good measure. Then again, others would say that even in liquidation the company still retains value. Kind of like an old ford sitting in a junk yard. It might still have a knob or a bolt worth something to someone.
Bid is now one dollar. If it closes below, they will get a warning from the NYSE, however this means nothing anymore as they don't halt the trading.
The damage below 1.00 is the stock becomes much more expensive to purchase and harder to get as most will drop their shares from the brokerage pool.
I was going to pick up some shares down here, but it looks as though they are just going to let it go. I'm guessing that they have expended the cash they were using to prop it up.
Once dropped from the exchange, it goes to pink sheet heaven, along with gold mining stocks and other "penny" stocks that are essentially value-less and forgotten
I believe two things have contributed to the demise of most of our papers, a constant liberal slant (which turns off the majority or readers), and the internet.
Im assuming your generation are 20-30 somethings. Theyre usually getting the majority of their news in an electronic format, internet, TV/Cable, cell phone, etc. And because of that, advertising isnt what it used to be in the printed format.
The question I have is why did they turn to those formats? Is it the lack of expediency by a newspaper? Is it the alternative views via the internet that they wont get with a newspaper (TV is liberal as well)? Or is it a combination of both?
If you can get the real answers to those questions youll have this beat and come out on the other side in a better position
Industry consolidation, like Tribune absorbing the Times Mirror Company Bankruptcies are on the rise the most recent being the Chicago Tribune. The Miami Herald (owned by the McClatchy Company), with its 105 years of journalism richness and countless Pulitzer's, is up
You've read recently that Chicago's Tribune Company, which a year ago was privatized by real estate magnate Sam Zell with the aid of an employee stock ownership plan, has filed for bankruptcy protection. No surprise there. I told Fools when the deal was being done that you can't logically layer $13 billion in debt atop an atrophying industry and expect solid results.
And then there's the vaunted New York Times (NYSE: NYT), which is trying to monetize its still-new headquarters building and may sell some assets, including perhaps its Boston Globe and New England properties. Beyond that, no newspaper property is shooting the lights out, including McClatchy (NYSE: MNI), A.H. Belo (NYSE: AHC), and Lee Enterprises (NYSE: LEE). In short, you'll likely see more than a few newspapers fold in the not-too-distant future
19 comments:
hehe 11:47 @ 1.25. Covering.
MNI $1.27 last time I checked. We have some excellent posters here that know their stuff when it comes to stocks. I am wondering when stocks are actually worthless?
You'd probably get 10 different answers from 10 different people on that. The literal types would tell you when the price hits zero, but it is effectively long before that.
When a company has a market cap of 125 million with over 2 billion in debt, with their entire net going to pay interest is a good measure. Then again, others would say that even in liquidation the company still retains value. Kind of like an old ford sitting in a junk yard. It might still have a knob or a bolt worth something to someone.
It's down even more now, to $1.17 a share. Very scary.
1.11 Major institution unloading and taking the loss as a write off.
$1.07 2:08
It is now $1.03 what happens if it goes below 1.00
Bid is now one dollar. If it closes below, they will get a warning from the NYSE, however this means nothing anymore as they don't halt the trading.
The damage below 1.00 is the stock becomes much more expensive to purchase and harder to get as most will drop their shares from the brokerage pool.
I was going to pick up some shares down here, but it looks as though they are just going to let it go. I'm guessing that they have expended the cash they were using to prop it up.
Once dropped from the exchange, it goes to pink sheet heaven, along with gold mining stocks and other "penny" stocks that are essentially value-less and forgotten
In the words of Nelson Muntz :
"hah - HAAAHHHH!!!"
How do you follow, online, a stock that's listed on the "pink sheets"?
http://www.pinksheets.com/pink/otcguide/investors_market_tiers.jsp
I don't trade in unlisted equities so I have no idea how these people work, but another trader said that this is the NYSE of the OTCBB world.
Am I reading this right that there were 1.4 million shares traded today? Three times the norm. Who dumped?
Q. "Am I reading this right that there were 1.4 million shares traded today? Three times the norm. Who dumped?"
A. Well, Gary does have Christmas shopping to take care of
I believe two things have contributed to the demise of most of our
papers, a constant liberal slant (which turns off the majority or
readers), and the internet.
Im assuming your generation are 20-30 somethings. Theyre usually
getting the majority of their news in an electronic format, internet,
TV/Cable, cell phone, etc. And because of that, advertising isnt what
it used to be in the printed format.
The question I have is why did they turn to those formats? Is it the
lack of expediency by a newspaper? Is it the alternative views via the
internet that they wont get with a newspaper (TV is liberal as well)?
Or is it a combination of both?
If you can get the real answers to those questions youll have this
beat and come out on the other side in a better position
Industry consolidation, like Tribune absorbing the Times Mirror Company Bankruptcies are on the rise the most recent being the Chicago Tribune. The Miami Herald (owned by the McClatchy Company), with its 105 years of journalism richness and countless Pulitzer's, is up
Final numbers on Thursday's collapse are here.
Don't you mean 19 Pulitzers and Countless Plagiarisms, Nick? I mean, in the name of accuracy and impartiality.
You've read recently that Chicago's Tribune Company, which a year ago was privatized by real estate magnate Sam Zell with the aid of an employee stock ownership plan, has filed for bankruptcy protection. No surprise there. I told Fools when the deal was being done that you can't logically layer $13 billion in debt atop an atrophying industry and expect solid results.
And then there's the vaunted New York Times (NYSE: NYT), which is trying to monetize its still-new headquarters building and may sell some assets, including perhaps its Boston Globe and New England properties. Beyond that, no newspaper property is shooting the lights out, including McClatchy (NYSE: MNI), A.H. Belo (NYSE: AHC), and Lee Enterprises (NYSE: LEE). In short, you'll likely see more than a few newspapers fold in the not-too-distant future
Post a Comment