May 9, 2024

Comcast Said to Be in Talks Over G4 Cable Channel

It is unclear how close the parties are to a deal, but representatives of the Ultimate Fighting Championship and Comcast’s NBCUniversal division were said to have met in New York on Wednesday, according to three people with knowledge of the talks. The people insisted on anonymity because they were not authorized by their employers to comment.

The talks were first reported by the Web site of The Wall Street Journal.

Ultimate Fighting Championship, which produces popular but sometimes controversial mixed martial arts matches, is known to be seeking an expansion of its television footprint. It is in talks with several different potential distributors, one of the people said.

Last fall, the president of Ultimate Fighting Championship, Dana White, predicted in an interview that the league would start its own network “within the next couple years.” At the time he also expressed an eagerness to bring Ultimate Fighting Championship fights to broadcast television in the United States for the first time. Presumably a deal with Comcast could also include specials on the NBC broadcast network, which Comcast also controls.

Representatives for Comcast, G4 and Ultimate Fighting Championship declined to comment Wednesday. Two of the people with knowledge of the NBC-Universal talks said that Ultimate Fighting Championship, which is privately held, could take ownership of 60 percent or more of G4, which is one of the lowest-rated cable channels in Comcast’s portfolio. Its intended audience of men ages 18 to 34 overlaps well with Ultimate Fighting Championship’s audience on Spike, a unit of Viacom, which has carried a fighting reality show for the last six years.

Spike’s deal with U.F.C. for the show, “The Ultimate Fighter,” expires in six months. Negotiations between Spike and Ultimate Fighting Championship for a new deal started almost a year ago, one of the people said, but broke down after Ultimate Fighting Championship proposed a dramatic increase in Spike’s annual payment.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=6b572a08ed8c576de88bf36dcf3f8e00

News Corp. Will Disclose Its Political Donations

The move comes after the company was highlighted for donating $1.25 million to the Republican Governors Association and $1 million to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce ahead of the midterm elections last year.

Critics of the company seized on the donations — which were made public only in news reports — as evidence of bias on the part of the News Corporation, which owns the Fox News Channel and The Wall Street Journal, and Mr. Murdoch, who has long been a supporter of conservative causes.

The News Corporation said at the time that the company’s corporate side had made the donations with no involvement by its news operation, and that the gifts would not have any impact on newsgathering operations. Still, the Democratic Governors Association argued that during the election season, Fox’s coverage of governors and campaigns should include disclaimers about the donations.

After the controversy over those donations, the News Corporation’s board of directors decided to revisit its policies about disclosure, and on April 12 it adopted a policy “to publicly disclose corporate political contributions annually on News Corporation’s corporate Web site.”

The first such statement will be published by July 15, and later statements will be published each January. A News Corporation spokeswoman declined to comment further.

The decision may have stemmed from shareholders who raised questions about the donations at an annual meeting last October. “Our concern was not only that shareholders found out not through the standard decision-making process but through media reports, but more importantly that this was shareholder money that was being used — but it was not being used for a clear rationale for furthering shareholder value,” Laura Shaffer Campos, the director of shareholder activities for the Nathan Cummings Foundation, told The Associated Press.

At the annual meeting, Mr. Murdoch said the donations were “unusual” and were “in the interest of our shareholders and the country,” according to the liberal monitoring organization Media Matters, which posted audio clips of his comments. The interest, Mr. Murdoch suggested, was in bringing “change” to Washington.

The policy statement appears to bring the News Corporation in line with media companies like Time Warner that disclose donations.

The decision was announced on the News Corporation’s Web site toward the end of April, and was noticed by Media Matters on May 4. It gained more attention when The A.P. reported on it recently.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=655e6a4fda92d91f7feaf48c40d7271f

DealBook: Microsoft in Talks to Acquire Skype for $8.5 Billion

12:20 a.m. | Updated

Microsoft is in advanced talks to acquire Skype, which revolutionized telephone calls over the Internet, for $8.5 billion, including the assumption of debt, according to people involved in the negotiations.

A deal is expected to be announced Tuesday morning, these people said, although they cautioned that the talks could still fall apart. A spokesman for Skype declined to comment, and calls to Microsoft were not returned.

The acquisition would be Microsoft’s largest ever and it is the software giant’s effort to gain a foothold in the world of voice and video communications. Microsoft would be able leverage Skype’s more than 600 million registered users into using its other products. For example, it could be connected to Microsoft’s Xbox 360 and Kinect systems,  and integrated into the company’s flagship product, Office, as a way for business users to better collaborate.

It could also help Bing, its search engine, which competes with Google. It may also help bolster Microsoft’s fledging mobile telephone offering, which lags far behind Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android operating systems. The deal would end months of speculation in Silicon Valley about Skype’s future. The company had been planning an initial public offering but delayed those plans last year, leading to persistent rumors that it would be sold to another technology giant like Facebook, Google or Cisco Systems.

News of the deal and Microsoft’s interest in Skype was first reported by The Wall Street Journal online and the technology site GigaOM.

Skype has some 663 million registered users, the company said in a recent filing. Although most of its services are free, Skype makes the bulk of its profits from a small fraction of its users who pay for long distance calls to telephone numbers. Despite its popularity, the service has struggled to maintain profitability; in 2010, Skype made $859.8 million in revenue but recorded a net loss of $7 million, according to its filing.

Skype burst onto the scene in 2003 and has long been seen as a challenger to the telephone companies because it can route phone calls — and video calls — over the Internet free or for a nominal fee. Most telephone carriers have come to accept Skype, but still see it as a potential threat. It is unclear how the wireless carriers that support handsets with Microsoft’s operating system would view the deal and how tightly Microsoft would seek to integrate Skype into mobile.

Microsoft, analysts say, is making a move to block Google from gaining greater ground in Internet communications.

“This is part of the strategic fight between Microsoft and Google,” said Rob Enderle, an independent technology analyst.

Facebook, Mr. Enderle said, has a large market value, but not the cash to do deals as Microsoft does. “Microsoft is backing Facebook’s play, and to some degree entering this fight on Facebook’s side of this strategic confrontation with Google,” he said.

Microsoft, analysts say, has often been an astute acquirer of start-ups and smaller companies, picking off technical teams that are then folded into products likes Windows, Office and Internet Explorer. But during Steve Ballmer’s tenure as chief executive, beginning in 2000, the company has also made far larger, riskier bids, mostly unsuccessful.

In 2004, Microsoft entered into talks to buy the big business software company SAP, for about $50 billion, according to testimony that came out in a court case.

In 2007, Microsoft acquired aQuantive, an online advertising company, for roughly $6 billion, a sizable premium, and some suggested it overpaid.

Nearly three years ago, the company made a surprise $48 billion offer for Yahoo. Talks then broke off, and Microsoft withdrew its bid, but later reached a partnership to take over Yahoo’s search business.

If a deal for Skype is reached, it would be the second time a technology giant has acquired the company. EBay bought Skype in 2005 for $2.6 billion with hopes of tightly integrating the service as a sales tool.

But the deal never lived up to its promise and eBay took a $1.4 billion write-down on its investment. Skype was sold in 2007 to a consortium of investors led by Silver Lake Partners, Index Ventures, Andreessen Horowitz and the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board. Marc Andreessen of Andreessen Horowitz, who co-founded Netscape Communications, was seen as a pivotal matchmaker for Skype, at one point trying to put it together with Facebook, another company for which he is on the board, according to people involved in the discussions.

JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs are advising Skype.

Evelyn M. Rusli and Verne Kopytoff contributed reporting.

Article source: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/05/09/microsoft-in-talks-to-acquire-skype-for-8-5-billion/?partner=rss&emc=rss

European Ventures Seek to Fill a Void in World News

As a result, readers seeking international news are increasingly spoiled for choice — especially if they read English, the common second language of many Europeans and the favored tongue for many of the new outlets.

Worldcrunch, a Web-based start-up in Paris, offers English translations of newspaper articles from around the world. Presseurop, another new site edited from Paris, does something similar for European newspapers, translating articles into 10 languages, including English.

The Huffington Post, one of the most popular American news aggregators on the Web, has Europe in its sights, saying it plans to introduce a British edition soon. In Brussels, a site called Europe Today aggregates news from across the region, gathering snippets from a variety of European sources and translating them into English. Its founders want to start a pan-European newspaper — in print, no less.

Why the flurry of activity? European readers seeking international news in English could already choose from a variety of sources, including The Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal Europe and The International Herald Tribune, which is the global edition of The New York Times. British newspapers and their Web sites are available across the Continent. Other publications, like the German magazine Der Spiegel, long ago introduced Web sites in English.

“I’m not so sure there is such a big market that needs to know what is happening in Berlin or Athens or Paris, all at the same time, and those that do already have several choices,” said Piet Bakker, a journalism professor at Hogeschool Utrecht in the Netherlands and author of a blog called Newspaper Innovation. “If you ask people in Europe what kind of information they want in a newspaper, local information almost always comes out on top.”

But the people behind the ventures say there is room for new entrants, as they aim to fill underserved journalistic niches or to replace coverage that has disappeared. They also want to develop new business models or tap financing from new sources.

English-speaking media have thought “they can do it all themselves,” said Jeff Israely, editor of Worldcrunch. “Now it’s becoming clear they cannot. Professional journalists are being brought home from foreign bureaus, and that is not going to be reversed.”

Mr. Israely, a former correspondent for Time magazine in Rome and Paris, had no job last year after Time closed much of its European operation.

He founded Worldcrunch with Irene Toporkoff, a former chief executive of the French unit of Ask.com, and investments from three French Internet entrepreneurs. The site, which set up a beta version last year, made its official debut last week.

Using freelance journalists, Worldcrunch plans to publish several dozen English translations of articles from newspapers like Le Monde, Die Welt and La Stampa every week. While most of the papers are European, Hurriyet in Turkey and The Economic Observer in China are included, and Mr. Israely said he was seeking more global partners.

Some of the partner publications, like the French business daily Les Échos, have English-language sections on their sites where they post the articles Worldcrunch has translated.

Worldcrunch is exploring revenue-generating ideas, including selling the translated articles via syndication networks, Mr. Israely said. The income would be shared with originating papers.

“We don’t want to kill traditional media,” he said. “We are a start-up that relies on them.”

Revenue is not something that Presseurop has to worry about, for now. The site was set up in 2009 with financing from the European Commission in Brussels, which was worried by reports of growing skepticism about the European Union in member states.

While Presseurop compiles its contents from some of the same newspapers as Worldcrunch, its mission is more focused — to “bring the European Union to life,” as its Web site puts it.

“Europeans are interested in what happens in their close neighbors almost as much as what happens in their own country,” said Gian Paolo Accardo, deputy editor of Presseurop. “There is also growing interest in what happens at the European level. Yet the media tend to cover national topics more.”

Christofer Berg, co-founder of Europe Today, said young European expatriates, who move among European capitals with an ease that their parents never felt and communicate with one another in English, were poorly served by news outlets. Mr. Berg, a Swede, said he got the idea for Europe Today while he and a friend were studying in Paris. He now lives in Brussels and is an assistant to a member of the European Parliament.

These readers find the American- and British-owned papers that are available in Europe not Continental enough, he said.

“We just want to give that mobile, educated European individual something to read, because it’s not out there,” he said.

Mr. Berg said he and his friend, Johan Malmsten, a management consultant, have invested “tens of thousands of euros” of their money in the project, which was set up in 2008. They are looking for substantial additional investment to finance their vision of creating an ink-on-paper publication with its own journalists.

In anticipation of moving into print, they plan to change the name of their Web site to The European Daily.

For would-be publishers with a pan-European vision, there is a cautionary tale: the story of The European, a London-based newspaper created by the Fleet Street baron Robert Maxwell in 1990. Under new owners, the paper was closed in 1998, seven years after his death at sea, as sales dwindled and losses piled up.

Still, the name of Mr. Maxwell’s creation has retained its allure. A German journalist, Alexander Görlach, created a Web site two years ago under that name, offering news analyses and opinion. The site, originally published in German, recently added an English version.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/09/business/media/09englishnews.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Bucks: Troubled Employers and Your Company Charge Card

Buried near the end of a lengthy New York magazine profile of voluptuous financier Lynn Tilton was a nugget that caught our eye here at Bucks.

The story describes how an employee at Stila Cosmetics, a company that Tilton’s firm, Patriarch Partners, bought in a distress sale 2009, complained to Ms. Tilton that some workers “had found themselves personally saddled with the bill for their corporate AmEx.”

(Stila previously was owned by Sun Capital Partners, but ended up in the hands of its lenders after Stila defaulted on a loan, according to an account of the sale in The Wall Street Journal that is posted on Patriarch’s Web site.)

That didn’t seem fair — and in fact the scenario appears to conflict with information provided by American Express as to how such situations are usually handled.

Molly Faust, a spokeswoman for Amex’s global commercial card business, said she is unfamiliar with the specifics of the Stila situation. But there are two ways that companies can handle corporate Amex accounts. In the first option, companies are liable for card balances, whether or not their workers follow the company’s expense policy.

In the second option, employees can be on the hook — but only if they break the rules, like buying personal items on the card. Ms. Faust said both setups are common.

In general, she said, whether they work for a company in a distressed sale scenario or not, “corporate card members,” as American Express calls them, aren’t liable for the balance as they have met their responsibilities in managing the account. Those include following their employer’s expense policy, filing timely expense reports and submitting any reimbursements promptly to American Express (in some cases, companies pay the employee, who then uses the funds to pay the Amex balance).

American Express generally works with the company and the employee to sort things out. If a situation arises in which the card holder has paid their balance but hasn’t been reimbursed when the company runs into financial woes, “we would work with the card member,” she said. “If they have fulfilled their responsibilities, they are not held liable.”

In other words, as long as you didn’t treat your family to dinner at The Palm and charge it to the company plastic, and you have filed your legitimate expenses on time, you’re off the hook.

Or you should be, at least. The story attributes the anecdote to Emil Gioliotti, Patriarch’s managing director. He didn’t respond to an e-mail seeking more details of what happened with Stila’s corporate card holders. A spokesman for Patriarch, Steven Goldberg, declined to comment and referred an inquiry to Sun Capital, Stila’s previous owner. A Sun Capital spokeswoman said that no one was available to comment.

If nothing else, you may want to be extra careful about saving receipts and filing expense reports quickly if you’re worried about your company’s health.

Meanwhile, have any of you ever had trouble getting reimbursed for work expenses, or for money you fronted to a corporate card provider when you worked at a troubled company? If so we’d like to hear about it.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=699635f437e4603642f8f3e95a870f86

DealBook: Johnson & Johnson Holds Deal Talks With Synthes

Johnson Johnson is in talks to buy Synthes, a Swiss medical equipment maker, for a deal potentially worth $20 billion, a person briefed on the matter told DealBook.

A sale would be among the biggest health care mergers in recent years and the largest ever by Johnson Johnson.

Discussions are continuing and may still fall apart, this person cautioned.

Shares in Synthes closed up 6.2 percent on Friday at 138.70 Swiss francs, amid speculation that the company was in talks for a potential transaction.

Synthes, which is based in West Chester, Pa. but is listed on the Swiss stock exchange, is a big manufacturer of implants to repair bone fractures, as well as surgical power tools. North America accounts for roughly 60 percent of the company’s revenue.

Its largest shareholder is its chairman, Hansjörg Wyss, who with his family owns about 47.8 percent of the company.

A 1965 graduate of Harvard Business School who joined Synthes in 1977, Mr. Wyss is the second-wealthiest person in Switzerland, with Forbes estimating his net worth at about $6 billion. He donated $125 million to Harvard University in 2008, the biggest single gift in the history of the school.

Representatives for Johnson Johnson and Synthes were not immediately available for comment.

News of the talks was first reported by The Wall Street Journal online.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=2dd9a5015997cb0f42d2741382a4dffb

Room For Debate: The Sorry Lot of the Risk-Averse Saver

Introduction

retirees Srdjan Srdjanov/Dreamstime.com

The Federal Reserve’s policy of keeping interest rates at rock bottom is meant to stimulate the economy and encourage people to invest and borrow. But as a recent Wall Street Journal article notes, it also means that people who simply want to save money — especially those who are older or those who cannot manage the complexities of a financial portfolio — continue to be caught in a bind. They either lose ground, because interest rate returns are low while food and energy costs are going up, or they have to consider making investments that are relatively risky and require longer term commitment.

What does this mean for the financial security of cautious small savers? If they are going to lose ground, what incentive do they have to save in the first place?

 Read the Discussion »

<!–

Topics: Economy, Federal Reserve, inflation, interest rates, savings

–>

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=615f47b8800b1d419d198865f3de85f6

S.E.C. to Study Easing Rules on Shares of Private Companies

WASHINGTON — The chairwoman of the Securities and Exchange Commission has ordered a staff review of the regulations that guide how small companies raise money from investors, as it considers relaxing the rules.

The review opens the door to changes that supporters say could make it attractive for more new technology companies like Facebook and Twitter to consider selling shares to the public.

S.E.C. staff members will study whether changes should be made in rules that prohibit a company from making a broad solicitation for investment from the public without providing basic financial information or other disclosures, according to a letter from the S.E.C. chairwoman, Mary L. Schapiro, to a Congressional committee.

In addition, the agency will look at whether to raise, from 499, the maximum number of shareholders that a company can have and still remain exempt from public-company filing requirements, the letter said. And it will examine the restrictions on communications by companies that are preparing to undertake initial public offerings.

Also under consideration are what rules should apply to new capital-raising strategies and modern communications methods, given the rapid changes in business and financing models spurred by the Internet and the role that social media can play in spreading company news.

Ms. Schapiro outlined the areas of review in a 25-page letter, which contained 82 footnotes. The letter, dated April 6, was addressed to Representative Darrell E. Issa, the California Republican who is the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The letter’s contents were first reported Friday by The Wall Street Journal.

The letter was a response to Mr. Issa’s March 22 letter to the S.E.C., in which he asked for answers to 32 multiple-part questions about how small companies raise financing and why the American markets had suffered a decline in initial offerings.

The review, Ms. Schapiro said, is intended to give the agency “a fresh look at our rules to develop ideas for the commission about ways to reduce the regulatory burdens on small business capital formation in a manner consistent with investor protection.”

Mr. Issa, in a statement Friday, said he was pleased with some aspects of the response.

“The S.E.C.’s apparent agreement on the need to examine the 499-shareholder cap on private companies is encouraging,” Mr. Issa said. “Lifting or refining this rule could significantly improve the ability of companies to raise capital without creating risks that the S.E.C. should be concerned with.”

Mr. Issa said he remained concerned, however, “that many other unneeded barriers to gathering capital created by the S.E.C. over the years aren’t being addressed and my efforts to get explanations still haven’t received answers.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=02eaf362e201287fb55c937d8d73411b