NYT stock plunges to 52 week low ($19.80 stock price back to Jan '97 levels)

YahooFinance ^ | 9/14/07 | YahooFinance

[jimbo123]

Must be all the regular advertisers calling for their MoveOn.org preferential discount...

[clamper1797]

So ... why isn’t Sh$tzburg in the unemployment line ?

[So Cal Rocket]

Five Year chart

[Broker]

Looks like the perfect storm... Let it get cheaper and cheaper. To the point it becomes a steal.

[Shermy]

“Must be all the regular advertisers calling for their MoveOn.org preferential discount..”

could be, or could be

Stockholders realizing it wasn’t a preferential rate, but the customary discount, a practice heretofore undisclosed to investors

[frankjr]

“There were more reasons why August turned out to be a downer for Times. Late in the month, Moody’s Investors Service cut its rating outlook on the company from “stable” to “negative.” The credit rating company cited — no surprises here — increased pressure on Times’ advertising revenue.

As this journalistic institution steadily decays, it’s hard for me to imagine the changes Times will have to make in the next five years to remain viable. I can’t envision a Rupert Murdoch springing forth with an attractive offer for the company, as was the case at Dow Jones (NYSE: DJ).

Obviously, the company needs some sort of tourniquet to stem its bleeding, and soon.”

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2007/09/14/the-gray-ladys-bones-are-showing.aspx

[Steve_Stifler]

At some point, doesn’t it have to become a takeover target a la WSJ even with the multi-class shares/family control?

[The South Texan]

Hopefully on it’s way to becoming a penny stock!!!

Joining Salon.com on that list.

[Recovering_Democrat]

The news just keeps gettin’ better.

[Red Badger]

Because it’s not about money, it’s about socialism and their eventual victory, not profits..........

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

Thats easy.Because commie lovin dirtbags stick together.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

"Obviously, the company needs some sort of tourniquet to stem its bleeding, and soon."

Tied around the publisher's neck, perhaps?

[Pistolshot]

Well, the NYT can always go into the toilet paper business. That’s all their rag is good for in the first place.

[jimbo123]

End-of-year layoffs are coming soon...

[DoughtyOne]

All together now... “Iiiit’s beeeeeginning to look a lot like Christmas...”

[mad puppy]

Still a good stock to short.

[freeangel]

That’s nice—but still not low enough to put them out of business.

[TASMANIANRED]

Couple more full page adds from Move On ought to about finish them.

[clamper1797]

Because it’s not about money, it’s about socialism and their eventual victory, not profits..........

My question was rhetorical and your answer is exactly correct ...

[enough_idiocy]

Look at the 5 yr chart. They’ve been plunging since 2003. That’s when most other stocks and the market in general began to rebound. A very notable drop happened mid-way through 2004 (election year) and then again in 2005. If you view the “max” chart, this trend is even more notable. Perhaps I’m stretching and I realize other factors play into this (the Internet), but I think their clear bias plays a role.