Good news: Newsweek sold — for a dollar
posted at 5:47 pm on August 2, 2010 by Allahpundit
Technically it’s a dollar plus an agreement to assume their huge financial liabilities, but if you throw me an opportunity for a headline that sweet, I’m going to take it every time.
Hopefully, in a few years and with a few trillion more tacked onto the national debt, the U.S. can get a deal like this from China.
According to several people who have been briefed on the process, Mr. Harman’s bid appealed to Mr. Graham and the Post Company because Mr. Harman has said he would retain a significant number of the magazine’s 325 employees. The financial details of the sale were not known, though one person with knowledge of Mr. Harman’s bid said last week that he would pay $1 in exchange for absorbing Newsweek’s considerable financial liabilities.
Newsweek has struggled through the recession more than most weekly news magazines, losing nearly $30 million last year alone. It was earning that much a year as recently as 2007.
And the longer it remained on the market, the less tenable its financial situation became. It has been an expensive product for the Post Company to produce, with its various international editions and separate back-office positions that were specific to the magazine. Instead of sharing a general counsel and accounting staff with the Post Company, for example, Newsweek has its own employees in those positions.
Business types will, I hope, correct me in the comments, but the fact that the Post is willing to give the mag away in exchange for wiping its hands of the debt means they’re not real optimistic about Newsweek turning a profit in the future, yes? Meanwhile, another intriguing wrinkle: Jon Meacham, the magazine’s editor and a guy known for praising it in odd, quasi-lyrical terms, will not be among those staying on.
Jon Meacham will announce his departure as editor of Newsweek magazine Monday, at the same time that The Washington Post Co. declares Dr. Sidney Harman, husband of Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), winner of a bidding war for the 77-year-old newsweekly, according to sources inside the company.
Meacham, 41, had been planning to leave no matter who bought the magazine, the sources said…
Harman, 91, a wealthy industrialist-turned-philanthropist, is interested in enhancing his legacy by buying a symbol of Washington and global influence, the sources said. In Washington, he was the benefactor of the Shakespeare Theatre Company’s Harman Center for the Arts.
So unless I’m missing something, what happened here is that Harman wanted a trophy to attest to his own Beltway influence, and since he’s already in the habit of charity, he realized he could buy one on the cheap and keep a few hundred people employed in a tough economy. No wonder, then, according to Politico, that he plans to keep the “serious-minded, essentially New-Democratic tone Meacham set for the magazine.” If he’s not interested in the actual content of the magazine or even turning a profit, why would he change things? As for Meacham’s departure, I’ll give you three theories. One: As noted at the link above, he’s super busy at the moment writing two presidential biographies and really was planning to leave. Two: He wanted to continue with the magazine — that much seems clear to me per the aforementioned lyricism — but was miffed when he couldn’t put together a winning purchase bid like he had hoped to do. Three: Whoever will now be running the magazine for Harman (he’s 91) actually does want to change Newsweek’s editorial direction and figured that having Meacham there would simply be an obstacle to that. I hope theory three’s the correct one, as it would open the door to my fondest wish for the magazine: A tabloid reboot.
All goofs aside, they do still churn out stuff occasionally that I find interesting, particularly on foreign-policy subjects where their leftish tilt isn’t quite as acute. This piece over the weekend interviewing Taliban commanders about who really runs the Afghan insurgency — hint: the initials are I-S-I — is useful information, and has enough sexy details (some Taliban think Mullah Omar might be in Pakistani custody, a rumor we’ve heard before) to keep things moving. More of this and less of Fareed Zakaria writing love letters to higher taxes and they’ll be back on track.
Update: “A national treasure”?
“NEWSWEEK is a national treasure,” Harman said in the news release. “I am enormously pleased to be succeeding The Washington Post Company and the Graham family and look forward to this great journalistic, business, and technological challenge.”
Harman also said, “I’ll consider it a victory when it breaks even.” Onward to victory!









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
They wuz robbed.
Scott P on August 2, 2010 at 5:48 PM
I raised this over on the headlines comments:
Does this open the Post to a shareholders suit?
SaintGeorgeGentile on August 2, 2010 at 5:51 PM
I am sure people waiting in dentists offices everywhere are breathing a sigh or relief… nobody else cares.
tetriskid on August 2, 2010 at 5:53 PM
Too much.
Good Lt on August 2, 2010 at 5:53 PM
Dollar too much!
Don’t read the rags if i want to be lied to I’ll just turn on TV and watch Dear Reader the lying Pinnochio Presidente.
dhunter on August 2, 2010 at 5:54 PM
I don’t read Newsweek.
LET’S BOYCOTT!!!
Aquateen Hungerforce on August 2, 2010 at 5:55 PM
Nothing says internet-age like a printed weekly.
Inanemergencydial on August 2, 2010 at 5:55 PM
1) If I were a stockholder, $1 was the best deal? Sounds like this was just the best deal for the union employees and the maintenance of their political slant.
2) If I am an employee, a 91 year old is not the one I would count on for LONG TERM maintenance of my job.
3) When he passes (which I hope is many years in the future) it would only take one kid to not want 33cents for their ownership, but force it to be sold to the highest FINANCIAL bidder, not the one best for unions and liberals.
barnone on August 2, 2010 at 5:58 PM
So then,thats about 80 or 90 cents Canadian!!
canopfor on August 2, 2010 at 5:58 PM
Fair Price Fail.
CynicalOptimist on August 2, 2010 at 5:58 PM
I love it. Newswreck is a publication that uses Gawker.com as a hiring pool. Yeah, Ravi Somaiya, I’m talking about you.
cynccook on August 2, 2010 at 5:59 PM
Over priced.
rbj on August 2, 2010 at 5:59 PM
Isn’t this the idiot publication that declared Obummer to be “above it all, like God or something”?
If so, I consider it Divine Providence that they’re sinking and sinking and fast.
Good riddance.
Grace_is_sufficient on August 2, 2010 at 6:00 PM
BWAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA….
aquaviva on August 2, 2010 at 6:00 PM
I’m not a lawyer, but my understanding of business contract law says “probably”.
A sale in which something of significant value is sold for $1 is considered to be a sham contract, which makes it voidable if someone sues.
Considering that Newsmax made an offer recently that was publicly rejected, Newsmax and/or the WaPo shareholders could potentially sue the decision-makers at the WaPo who sold the magazine to Harman in order to invalidate the contract, as Newsmax made a bid believed to be superior at least in cash value compared to that of Harman.
The big question, though, is whether Harman’s agreement to take on all of Newsweek’s debt in addition to paying $1 keeps the deal from being treated as a sham contract.
teke184 on August 2, 2010 at 6:00 PM
You gotta love a bidding war that results in a dollar changing hands. How much did Harman spend to arrive at a buck bid?
ICBM on August 2, 2010 at 6:01 PM
The same attitude I had when it came to my grades in high school. :)
ThePrez on August 2, 2010 at 6:01 PM
They overpaid.
novaculus on August 2, 2010 at 6:01 PM
When do they get their bailout?
They’re part of the media supporting the Neo-progressive Democrats they should just make it official.
Chip on August 2, 2010 at 6:01 PM
Please. What you have is a rich Leftist, married to a Leftist politician, supporter of Leftist foundations, openly buying a propaganda organ of the Left to enable it to continue pumping out propaganda of the Left.
That’s all.
SunSword on August 2, 2010 at 6:02 PM
I’d (not) buy that for a dollar!
GnuBreed on August 2, 2010 at 6:03 PM
Slop from the federal PORK trough in the form of a bailout in 5,4,3,2,….
locomotivebreath1901 on August 2, 2010 at 6:04 PM
So they sold it to the husband of a Dem congresswoman, so there’s no mystery as to it changing it bias.
blue13326 on August 2, 2010 at 6:04 PM
Maybe this deal was the result of a bet — “Turn those machines back on!”
GnuBreed on August 2, 2010 at 6:06 PM
That’s a full $4.95 off the regular cover price!
Emperor Norton on August 2, 2010 at 6:07 PM
What’s that Austrian word for feeling good about the miserable failure of others?
Ted Torgerson on August 2, 2010 at 6:07 PM
This Herman ? Look who else is on the board
( hint=stupidly professor)
macncheez on August 2, 2010 at 6:07 PM
Schwarzenegger.
Emperor Norton on August 2, 2010 at 6:08 PM
I’ll take Lyin propaganda magazines for a dollar, Alex!
Who is the wife of the Newsqueek propaganda rags owner?
dhunter on August 2, 2010 at 6:10 PM
I’d buy that for a dollar!
mrt721 on August 2, 2010 at 6:10 PM
Bring the sucka down…….the 325 employees can get govt jobs working at the National Journalism Renewal Commission (headed up by some lackey for the DOTUS).
PappyD61 on August 2, 2010 at 6:11 PM
Holy batpoo, is it still open for bidding? I’ll put up a buck & a half. My first & only act, shut er down NOW!
Any clown group of investors and business stupid enough to believe a liberal rag could pay it’s bills deserves getting stiffed, like the bond holders of GM…
drfredc on August 2, 2010 at 6:12 PM
I wonder if they never printed the mag with the US flag in a garbage can if it would have been worth $2.
clement on August 2, 2010 at 6:12 PM
How do you have a “bidding war” for an asset that sold for $1?
Outlander on August 2, 2010 at 6:13 PM
The posting by Chip is right on. Notice how all the publications who print their liberal venom have circulation problems. It really irks the so called Media that Fox News has the highest ratings. Whenever the Left complains about a publication.or news network or talk show host- that is who you want to read and listen to. This will also drive the lib’s bonkers- Rush Limbaugh was named by Talkers Magazine as the most important radio talk show hosts in history. The buyer of Newsweek paid 98 cents too much for that rag.
flintstone on August 2, 2010 at 6:16 PM
If Breitman had been allowed to buy it, I would have signed up for a subscription immediately.
Blake on August 2, 2010 at 6:16 PM
The new cover.
BKeyser on August 2, 2010 at 6:18 PM
National treasures are indignant.
Schadenfreude on August 2, 2010 at 6:19 PM
There’s not a very big market for TRASH. Harman evidently wants a tax write-off.
GarandFan on August 2, 2010 at 6:19 PM
So those “Subscribe and get 75% off the newsstand price” cards applied to the same of the company too?
portlandon on August 2, 2010 at 6:20 PM
Harman the wife, Harman the husband…Wash. DC and the media, in bed, literally and figuratively. What can go wrong? Nothing more, really. They’er all a clusterfark already.
Schadenfreude on August 2, 2010 at 6:20 PM
325 employees used to make a profit of $30M?
I’m always finding out I’m in the wrong line of work.
TexasDan on August 2, 2010 at 6:21 PM
Meacham is now in charge of Journolist 2…?
d1carter on August 2, 2010 at 6:21 PM
I love the “won the bidding war” line.
TexasDan on August 2, 2010 at 6:22 PM
P.T. Barnum: “A fool and his money are soon parted.” And the sooner the better.
Idiots.
BigAlSouth on August 2, 2010 at 6:23 PM
I know, Meacham could take Weigel’s old job…
d1carter on August 2, 2010 at 6:24 PM
It started at $1.25?
dhunter on August 2, 2010 at 6:25 PM
Randolph? Mortimer?
trubble on August 2, 2010 at 6:26 PM
Transcript:
10, do I hear 10, yes 10 cents.
Will someone bid 25 cents? 25, 25, 25, yes 25.
Do I hear 50 cents? 50 cents over in the corner, do I hear 75?
75 cents? 75, 75, 75, yes 75 in the front.
Will someone bid one dollar? Dollar, dollar, dollar.
Yes, one dollar. Any more?
SOLD SOLD SOLD to the tottering old fart in the front row for one shiny dollar.
faraway on August 2, 2010 at 6:26 PM
You mean schadenfreude?
bandarlog on August 2, 2010 at 6:33 PM
2 bits, 4 bits,
6 bits, a dollar,
all for Newsweek, stand up and …
…….[crickets]………
dissent555 on August 2, 2010 at 6:36 PM
To paraphrase their gloating cover story after Obama’s election, “We Are All
SocialistsExpendable Now.”VastRightWingConspirator on August 2, 2010 at 6:38 PM
My bird was getting tired of the same old NW trash on the bottom of his birdcage. He has already expressed displeasure at my choice of the NYT and WaPo, so it looks like I will be using LAT next. Hope it works out alright….
DL13 on August 2, 2010 at 6:41 PM
So we’ve got the Carlos Slim Times and the Harman Newsweak.
My guess is Old Man Harman wanted to make his wife Katie Graham or something.
JEM on August 2, 2010 at 6:48 PM
Wouldn’t waste a dime on a loss like that, hope the buyer got a cup of coffee with that.
abobo on August 2, 2010 at 6:48 PM
If Harman intends to keep it as is, I hope he can write it off, because what it is, is what tanked it in the first place. Doesn’t seem to business savvy to me.
Also…why hasn’t this Harman given all his money up in taxes? I thought business was a big no no among liberals, and excessive, and in this case…wasteful wealth was like the scarlett A on an adulterous?
capejasmine on August 2, 2010 at 6:51 PM
Saved or created a victory.
But no profit. HaHa. What a loser.
fogw on August 2, 2010 at 6:54 PM
I just had another thought here. Harman purchased this piece of junk for one dollar, and will settle it’s debt. Anyone else smelling a tax payer paid for bail out on this? Especially since his wife has *ahem* connections?
capejasmine on August 2, 2010 at 6:56 PM
A fair price would have been 2 cents and not assuming any of the debts. They took advantage of an old man with Alzheimer’s disease.
bayview on August 2, 2010 at 6:58 PM
This Harman guys a pretty astute investor a buck for the rag mag and what? fifty cent for the Congress hag?
dhunter on August 2, 2010 at 6:58 PM
Classic example of a sweetheart deal for the politically well connected, and an example of the incestuous relationship between politicians and the news media.
Skandia Recluse on August 2, 2010 at 6:58 PM
They overpaid…
Khun Joe on August 2, 2010 at 7:03 PM
Ever since this administration started, The Onion is struggling for new material. They sure got competition.
Now fetch me Jeff Foxworthy for a “You’re A Redneck If …”
ProudPalinFan on August 2, 2010 at 7:14 PM
National treasures are not what they used to be.
GardenGnome on August 2, 2010 at 7:23 PM
This is the publication whose international cover after the 2004 election had the US flag in a trash can. I can safely assume that the rag did not like the outcome of that election.
I will continue to refer to it as NewsTweak. What a waste of our forests.
onlineanalyst on August 2, 2010 at 7:25 PM
Newsweek? Oh yeah, they were relevant 40 years ago. A buck, eh? Sucker!
simkeith on August 2, 2010 at 7:25 PM
What if Old Harman decided to jump into the magazine business just before the Demrats stimulate the economy some more by propping up the dinosaur media with bailouts for losing publications like Newsweek!
These clowns don’t make money the old fashioned way they have figured out its’ easier to steal it especially if the Federal Gov’t helps you, ala Feinstein D-Rat CA, Maxine Waters D-Rat CA! They’ve got a Govt supplier to the military and a bank. This guy gets a Newsrag to turn into NPR of magazines!
Of course hes’ got to hope the Rats hold onto power for this stealth theft to work. I don’t think even Juan McCain or Lindsay Grahamnasty are dumb enough to go along with a dinosaur media bailout! Are They?
dhunter on August 2, 2010 at 7:30 PM
Yeah, but they got change back, right? Right?
Midas on August 2, 2010 at 7:33 PM
May this publication have all the success that AirAmerica enjoyed.
onlineanalyst on August 2, 2010 at 7:34 PM
I hope they get their money’s worth
faraway on August 2, 2010 at 7:37 PM
I’ll buy that for a dollar! Hey, just wait until King Obama bails you out. Newsweek is too big to fail.
Mojave Mark on August 2, 2010 at 7:45 PM
That’s like spending a dollar for a real nice house, that has a mortgage about 100x the property’s actual fair market value.
ray on August 2, 2010 at 7:52 PM
wasnt this in that movie called Trading Places w/ Akroyd and Murphy??
moonbatkiller on August 2, 2010 at 8:18 PM
I have not read the comments. I’m sure someone has already said this but, come one, we all know that the recession isn’t to blame for Newsweek’s downfall.
sammypants on August 2, 2010 at 8:21 PM
Dang!
I thought my 2 cent bid was more than fair.
profitsbeard on August 2, 2010 at 8:30 PM
Is the sale being financed through Maxine Waters’ husband’s bank?
At least the Democratic Party is keeping Newsweek in the family,
so to speakliterally.malclave on August 2, 2010 at 8:34 PM
$1?
Too much to pay for bird cage liner.
PackerBronco on August 2, 2010 at 8:38 PM
What did the old geezer do? Shuffle up to the Newsstand and say:
“I like Newswwek, but I just have a dolloar.”
“Well, that won’t buy a copy of it, but you can buy the company with that dollar.”
“Well, I don’t know… I guess I’ll take it.”
michaelo on August 2, 2010 at 8:41 PM
Don’t underestimate the value of assuming the liabilities. Allow me to try to put it in terms people can actually understand…
Let’s say you have a 2009 Chevrolet Cobalt LS sedan you bought for $15,000, and you still owe about $11,300 on the loan. Somebody comes up and offers you $10,000 (a bit more than what Edmunds says the car is worth on the private market), but tells you that he won’t assume responsibility for the $11,300 loan you still have, leaving you to deal with the $1,300 difference. Somebody else comes up and says he’ll give you $1 and then assume the $11,300 loan. Which offer would you say is more financially responsible?
steveegg on August 2, 2010 at 8:57 PM
Who won, and what was the bet?
ya2daup on August 2, 2010 at 8:59 PM
dhunter on August 2, 2010 at 7:30 PM
Give yourselves cigars. Unlike the Compost, Harman is able to throw cash into Newsweak until his wife and her ilk deliver the Presstitute Bailout.
steveegg on August 2, 2010 at 9:02 PM
Enough said. I hope my red crystal ball is accurate.
Popcorn? I prefer kettle by the kernel.
seesalrun on August 2, 2010 at 9:02 PM
The rag is being renamed Obama’s Newspeak.
bayview on August 2, 2010 at 9:36 PM
Well, maybe!
What this means, at a minimum, is that someone has a way to offset their losses in a manner that pleases them. This may be as simple as someone throwing away a few million dollars. More likely it is someone with a large tax burden looking for some losses to help cover them. In other words, someone that made a lot of money and instead of giving it to the government, decided to use it to buy something that was going to show them an offsetting loss.
Of course, just because the ‘white knight’ is taking a loss does not mean that the current ownership did not stuff their pockets before selling this turkey.
At the end of the day, all that is really left is the name. I suspect it will require an entirely new management and poroduct focus for this name to survive for very long.
Remember, there is a market for some mag’s at the corner barber shop!
Freddy on August 2, 2010 at 10:37 PM
Let me put it in even simpler terms. You take pictures of all the PCs and put them for sale on ebay. When they are all sold you pay yourself a consulting fee for that amount and then declare the whole thing bankrupt.
pedestrian on August 2, 2010 at 11:17 PM
My first thought is, is this a tax loop?
Will the former owners of Newsweek have to pay taxes on the money spent on their debt?
I can’t pull the old “Sell a car for $1″ trick anymore, but they can do it with a million dollar company?
Wouldn’t be surprised if those on the left try to do anything possible to sneak away from paying the taxes they expect everyone else to pay.
Rbastid on August 3, 2010 at 1:31 AM
The liabilities Harman is inheriting are probably the severence and other closedown costs in case he is unsuccessful. They are noramally considered contingent liablities.
Meacham is going because Harman wants his own editor and doesn’t want divided loyalties from the staff. He probably has his own guy/gal picked out already, there are plenty of unemployed/underemployed editors littering the landscape.
Howell Raines anyone?
Corky Boyd on August 3, 2010 at 2:01 AM
Don’t go away mad… Just go away.
elifino on August 3, 2010 at 4:27 AM
A sucker born every day.
RalphyBoy on August 3, 2010 at 10:10 AM
If Newsmax had bought Newsweek, you could bet Harman’s bottom dollar that Newsweek’s editorial tone would suddenly become CONSERVATIVE.
Oh, horrors! The “national treasure” magazine suddenly telling the truth about liberals? Stop the presses! Harman was willing to take on millions in debt to save the POLITICAL hide of his wife and her allies in Congress. But what’s a few million in debt when you can bilk taxpayers for trillions? SHHHhhhh…they must NEVER know!
Steve Z on August 3, 2010 at 10:18 AM
These people are a joke.
mmcnamer1 on August 3, 2010 at 10:36 AM
Newsweek is a national treasure? Wow, that term has been dumbed down a bit!
Newsweek is a national treasure, but the former WTC can’t be called a national historic park because it’s history isn’t significant enough?
Another down the rabbit hole example of our times.
petunia on August 3, 2010 at 12:10 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »