Dealbreaker vs NYT

One of the key questions in the DealBook vs Dealbreaker debate

is whether the New York Times will link to bloggy rumours or not. If Elizabeth

Spiers wants link love from the NYT, my general feeling was that she would have

to bring her A game. But then as soon as I wrote that, DealBook linked

to random nonsense. And now, reading the NYT’s own intraday coverage of

the AT&T/BellSouth merger, the more I feel that the bar for Spiers is actually

pretty low.

The headline on the NYT

story is "Wall St. Cheers Huge Phone Deal; Others Seem Likely".

Business reporter Vikas Bajaj doesn’t hedge his lead: "AT&T’s proposed

$67 billion purchase of BellSouth was received warmly by Wall Street today,"

he writes.

What do words like "cheers" and "received warmly" mean

in your book? Evidently in the world of the NYT, they are broad enough to cover

a world where Wall Street marked down the value of AT&T by 1.4%, wiping

about $1.5 billion from the company’s market capitalisation. Yes, BellSouth

shares rose, but that’s a simple arbitrage play, not a cheer or warm reception.

AT&T is offering a certain amount for BellSouth’s shares, so those shares

rose to more or less what AT&T is going to pay for them.

It’s perfectly normal, of course, when a big acquisition is announced, for

the stock of the acquirer to fall. What’s weird is when that reaction is then

spun as a Wall Street cheer. I’m sure that Dealbreaker can do better, if it

ever gets around to caring about intraday stock movements.

Oh, and one other thing: "The shares of potential telecommunications acquisitions

like Qwest and Alltel were up about 4 percent each, and shares of the would-be

acquirers Verizon and Comcast fell early in the day but appeared to

recover most of their losses by midday." Huh? Is Mr Bajaj unsure that the

prices he sees on his screen are the actual prices of the stocks in question?

What is the difference between a stock recovering most of its losses, and a

stock appearing to recover most of its losses? Maybe Dealbreaker will

enlighten us.

(Previously: The NYT buggers

up a Murdoch story. Come on, BizDay, you can do better!)

UPDATE: The article has now been updated with closing prices. Wall Street is still cheering in the headline, and is still receiving the deal warmly in the lede, despite the fact that AT&T closed down 3.5%, corresponding to a loss in value of almost $3.7 billion.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Dealbreaker vs NYT

  1. Roberto says:

    Hi Felix, just a brief note to let you know that a few days ago a 17 month old epileptic toddler called Tommaso was abducted from his family home not far from Parma, Northern Italy. His parents are not particularly wealthy but, since his father works at the local post office and denied a loan to a couple of people, detectives believe this abduction was conducted in retaliation. If you and your readers want to send Tommy’s family your support and love, just click on my name, and you will log on to a blog that was especially created on the kid’s behalf.

Comments are closed.