Posted on 09/13/2007 6:08:17 AM PDT by presidio9
Damned coffee spray!
Doesn’t this qualify as an undocumented Political contribution?
Of course no charges will be filed, it’s the new york times.
All the BS fit to print
Aren’t there election laws about this kind of contribution to a PAC or is that how moveon.org exists, thru the millions put in by the mad Hungarian?
Even Bob Beckel(you remember him - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1283080/posts) said on Fox that MoveOn had way too much influence on the democratic party.
Same program mentioned that they had raised 50 million plus for the dems. Obviously bought and paid for.
You know why your paper is falling so fast? It's because of your incredible bias that papers aren't supposed to have. You guy's have fallen so far left that you have become unreadable. This ad moveon.org put out about the General was a disgrace and bad enough, but you guys gave them that HUGE discount and the ad only cost $64,000 (normal price $160,000). Are you kidding me? UNBELIEVABLE!!! I am an Independent and I stay in the middle and you guys have just gone way to far left for me. This is why I no longer buy your paper and I assume it is why so many others don't anymore either. You people need to change coarse or your dead in the water. Look at the numbers, they don't lie. It's not because of the Internet either. Thats a terrible excuse. Good riddance.
The Robinson-Patman Act of 1936 (or Anti-Price Discrimination Act, 15 U.S.C. § 13) is a United States federal law that prohibits anticompetitive practices by producers, specifically price discrimination. It grew out of practices in which chain stores were allowed to purchase goods at lower prices than other retailers. The Act provided for criminal penalties, but contained a specific exemption for "cooperative associations". The Act is an amendment to Section 2 of the Clayton Act. In general, the Act prohibits sales that discriminate in price on the sale of goods to equally-situated distributors when the effect of such sales is to reduce competition. Sales to original equipment manufacturers (OEM) are not subject to RPA. Price means net price and includes all compensation paid. The seller may not throw in additional goods or services. Injured parties or the US government may bring an action under the Act. Liability under section 2(a) of the Act (with criminal sanctions) may arise on sales that involve: discrimination in price; on at least 2 consummated sales; from the same seller; to 2 different purchasers; sales must cross state lines; sales must be contemporaneous; of "commodities" of like grade and quality; sold for "use, consumption, or resale" within the United States; and the effect may be "substantially to lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce." "It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, knowingly to induce or receive a discrimination in price which is prohibited by this section." Defenses to the Act include cost justification and matching the price of a competitor. In practice, the "harm to competition" requirement often is the make-or-break point. Sales to Military Exchanges and Commissaries are exempt from the act.
Fox reporting about the discount.
How can anybody be surprised that a newspaper that publishes clasified reports to damage our national security would also support a disgraceful ad targeting a a military officer with a spectacular record. I don’t know how the editors of the Times stay out of jail. If things like this happened in early WWII they would have been shut down.
If I was a stockholder in the New York Times I would have to question the ethics of management considering that the stock price and profitability is in decline.
To me it would be finding out that the managers of a car dealership I had invested in had gave a 65% discount on the normal price of a car. I would have to wonder if I wasn’t being taken by those managers.
Well, maybe it was a ‘nonprofit’ rate. Still, the Slimes has had their share of scandals. Vermin tend to stick together.
I mean does Pinch Sulzberger keep a picture of Marx and Lenin in his study? I bet his liberal pappy wasn’t nearly as nutty as his nitwit kid.
It's the non-contract rate. If you think that Moveon.org didn't use an agent with a contract, then I think you're a sucker who might pay rack rate on a lot of things (like those prices on the back of hotel doors). :-) The Rate Cards are for suckers...there are many, many things to lower the price--often down to less than half price. While 60+% is a lot, it's not unheard of.
Freedom's Watch paid significantly more for their full-page ad, they claim, and recall that the $65K figure came to Jake Tapper from MoveOn.org, not the NYT itself, so it might not be correct. But even if Freedom'sWatch.org paid more, they will have a hard case arguing rate discrimination if they didn't have the same conditions of their advertisement. For example, if they specified location of insertion instead of ROP, then that's a different rate. If they didn't use an agent with a volume discount, then that is a difference. Etc.
I should have pinged you, but I didn’t see your post in time...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1895800/posts?page=54#54
I’m pretty sure it was on the Non-Profit, Advocacy, category, then receiving many discounts, including contract, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.