Comments on: The Gold Rush for Financial Information http://www.radioopensource.org/the-gold-rush-for-financial-information/ Christopher Lydon in conversation on arts, ideas and politics Sun, 12 Feb 2012 19:09:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Brian Dunbar http://www.radioopensource.org/the-gold-rush-for-financial-information/#comment-89140 Brian Dunbar Mon, 14 May 2007 01:26:17 +0000 http://www.radioopensource.org/?p=1073#comment-89140 <i>He wants to start the #1 financial network, and why not start with the #1 name. If print media is in decline, then why buy a newspaper now, when you can buy it for less in a year or two?</i> If you wait a year the property might not be for sale; if Murdoch can make WSJ work as a business then so can someone else. He wants to start the #1 financial network, and why not start with the #1 name. If print media is in decline, then why buy a newspaper now, when you can buy it for less in a year or two?

If you wait a year the property might not be for sale; if Murdoch can make WSJ work as a business then so can someone else.

]]> By: Marc McElroy http://www.radioopensource.org/the-gold-rush-for-financial-information/#comment-89139 Marc McElroy Sun, 13 May 2007 06:22:32 +0000 http://www.radioopensource.org/?p=1073#comment-89139 Murdock's conservative agenda and his ability to peddle smut on the side is what make him so scary. It shows his only allegiance is to the dollar. NPR's topic du jour a month ago was how newspapers are unable to make money, and are scaling back. Now a media mogel/monster shows some serious interest in a paper, why? I think he just wants the name. I'm sure of it; it's for branding the new network. He wants to start the #1 financial network, and why not start with the #1 name. If print media is in decline, then why buy a newspaper now, when you can buy it for less in a year or two? timing. Murdock’s conservative agenda and his ability to peddle smut on the side is what make him so scary. It shows his only allegiance is to the dollar.

NPR’s topic du jour a month ago was how newspapers are unable to make money, and are scaling back. Now a media mogel/monster shows some serious interest in a paper, why? I think he just wants the name. I’m sure of it; it’s for branding the new network. He wants to start the #1 financial network, and why not start with the #1 name. If print media is in decline, then why buy a newspaper now, when you can buy it for less in a year or two?

timing.

]]> By: tbrucia http://www.radioopensource.org/the-gold-rush-for-financial-information/#comment-89138 tbrucia Sat, 12 May 2007 15:00:29 +0000 http://www.radioopensource.org/?p=1073#comment-89138 An aside: For those who have difficulty distinguishing BILLIONS from MILLIONS from THOUSANDS... If an anthill (about an inch high) represents $100,000, and (therefore) a book (about 10 inches tall) represents one million dollars, how high would a billion be? [Pause]. It would be the height of an 84-story building. And here's a photo of such a building http://www.arrakeen.ch/malaysiafeb02/466%20%20Petronas%20Towers.JPG . If you make $100,000 a year, don't even try to imagine Bill Gates net worth of $53 billion as a building... in fact, flying over the Pacific to Japan next week I won't be that high (about 44,000 feet). If it makes anyone here feel more significant than an ant, Rupert Murdoch's net worth is about $6.7 billion. That's only a bit more than a mile high. Everyone happier now? :-) An aside: For those who have difficulty distinguishing BILLIONS from MILLIONS from THOUSANDS… If an anthill (about an inch high) represents $100,000, and (therefore) a book (about 10 inches tall) represents one million dollars, how high would a billion be? [Pause]. It would be the height of an 84-story building. And here’s a photo of such a building http://www.arrakeen.ch/malaysiafeb02/466%20%20Petronas%20Towers.JPG . If you make $100,000 a year, don’t even try to imagine Bill Gates net worth of $53 billion as a building… in fact, flying over the Pacific to Japan next week I won’t be that high (about 44,000 feet). If it makes anyone here feel more significant than an ant, Rupert Murdoch’s net worth is about $6.7 billion. That’s only a bit more than a mile high. Everyone happier now? :-)

]]> By: Premium Audio at Praxis Language | Learning on Your Terms http://www.radioopensource.org/the-gold-rush-for-financial-information/#comment-89137 Premium Audio at Praxis Language | Learning on Your Terms Sat, 12 May 2007 06:13:52 +0000 http://www.radioopensource.org/?p=1073#comment-89137 [...] in New Media Economics. An interesting Open Source podcast discussion from Steven Pearlstein of the Washington P [...] [...] in New Media Economics. An interesting Open Source podcast discussion from Steven Pearlstein of the Washington P [...]

]]> By: Premium Audio at Praxis Language | Learning on Your Terms http://www.radioopensource.org/the-gold-rush-for-financial-information/#comment-89763 Premium Audio at Praxis Language | Learning on Your Terms Sat, 12 May 2007 06:13:52 +0000 http://www.radioopensource.org/?p=1073#comment-89763 [...] in New Media Economics. An interesting Open Source podcast discussion from Steven Pearlstein of the Washington P [...] [...] in New Media Economics. An interesting Open Source podcast discussion from Steven Pearlstein of the Washington P [...]

]]> By: sidewalker http://www.radioopensource.org/the-gold-rush-for-financial-information/#comment-89136 sidewalker Sat, 12 May 2007 00:32:29 +0000 http://www.radioopensource.org/?p=1073#comment-89136 <b>hbobrien</b>, your point is a good one about the business of media companies, but there is another way they and companies that track consumer profiles and decision make money these days. Not only do they deliver the eyes to advertisers but they deliver information about the values, beliefs, behavoural tendencies, etc. of those viewers (consumers) to whomever will buy this. Information about the consumers of investment/business products is the Rhodium in the data mine. Any sensible media mogul would want this. Who really cares whether Murdoch did it for strictly capitalist motivations or to show up the Yankees. I don't know why ROS cares and why there had to be a show on this. Rather, why not a show on how we are being data mined, where this information is going, how it is being used, etc. This would be far more informative and useful. My guess is it had to do with time pressures to get a show on the air. Oh well, even the BoSox deliver a stinker from time to time.... hbobrien, your point is a good one about the business of media companies, but there is another way they and companies that track consumer profiles and decision make money these days. Not only do they deliver the eyes to advertisers but they deliver information about the values, beliefs, behavoural tendencies, etc. of those viewers (consumers) to whomever will buy this. Information about the consumers of investment/business products is the Rhodium in the data mine. Any sensible media mogul would want this.

Who really cares whether Murdoch did it for strictly capitalist motivations or to show up the Yankees. I don’t know why ROS cares and why there had to be a show on this. Rather, why not a show on how we are being data mined, where this information is going, how it is being used, etc. This would be far more informative and useful. My guess is it had to do with time pressures to get a show on the air.

Oh well, even the BoSox deliver a stinker from time to time….

]]> By: hbobrien http://www.radioopensource.org/the-gold-rush-for-financial-information/#comment-89135 hbobrien Fri, 11 May 2007 21:42:59 +0000 http://www.radioopensource.org/?p=1073#comment-89135 Oh, and it's Bloomberg's *lack* of advertising that makes those machines so expensive, not the quality of the information per se. Well... That, and Bloomberg's limiting of its audience by raising the price so high only businesses that can write it off as an expense can afford it. Oh, and it’s Bloomberg’s *lack* of advertising that makes those machines so expensive, not the quality of the information per se.

Well… That, and Bloomberg’s limiting of its audience by raising the price so high only businesses that can write it off as an expense can afford it.

]]> By: hbobrien http://www.radioopensource.org/the-gold-rush-for-financial-information/#comment-89134 hbobrien Fri, 11 May 2007 21:41:29 +0000 http://www.radioopensource.org/?p=1073#comment-89134 Listening to this last night, I was amazed to find yet another journalist who doesn't appear to understand how newspapers make money. That is, he kept saying that he didn't want his writing to be valued at "nothing" by having it given away for free on the internet (I believe this was Pearlstein). Trouble is, the pair of quarters you give these days to the honor box at your local cafe have almost nothing to do with the bottom line of a newspaper -- they pay for the delivery man, at best. What *pays* for the newspaper are advertisers. What a newspaper sells is not the news. What it sells -- its product -- is its readers, to the advertisers. So unless the Post has decided to go without advertising, both in print and online, Pearlstein's writing is very expensive indeed. Some "Business Columnist," if he doesn't even understand how his own employer does its business. Listening to this last night, I was amazed to find yet another journalist who doesn’t appear to understand how newspapers make money. That is, he kept saying that he didn’t want his writing to be valued at “nothing” by having it given away for free on the internet (I believe this was Pearlstein).

Trouble is, the pair of quarters you give these days to the honor box at your local cafe have almost nothing to do with the bottom line of a newspaper — they pay for the delivery man, at best.

What *pays* for the newspaper are advertisers. What a newspaper sells is not the news. What it sells — its product — is its readers, to the advertisers.

So unless the Post has decided to go without advertising, both in print and online, Pearlstein’s writing is very expensive indeed.

Some “Business Columnist,” if he doesn’t even understand how his own employer does its business.

]]> By: Brian Dunbar http://www.radioopensource.org/the-gold-rush-for-financial-information/#comment-89133 Brian Dunbar Fri, 11 May 2007 20:08:44 +0000 http://www.radioopensource.org/?p=1073#comment-89133 After listening to the program my take is - and I'll admit this is based on more impression than any deep thought on the matter - this; the news professionals who are again' Rupert Murdoch are worried more about their own turf than serving their readers and the stockholders of the companies who employ them. If you're just a consumer and not 'in the biz' .. it's not really such a big deal. Get some perspective. Life is change. This is generally a good thing but railing against it .. well might as well go down to the shore and tell the waves to stop smashing against the beach. So Rupert buys WSJ. He's a biz guy, not out on a crusade to change the world. In the end the consumers will be served as will the stockholders of the companies he's dealing with. After listening to the program my take is – and I’ll admit this is based on more impression than any deep thought on the matter – this; the news professionals who are again’ Rupert Murdoch are worried more about their own turf than serving their readers and the stockholders of the companies who employ them.

If you’re just a consumer and not ‘in the biz’ .. it’s not really such a big deal. Get some perspective.

Life is change. This is generally a good thing but railing against it .. well might as well go down to the shore and tell the waves to stop smashing against the beach.

So Rupert buys WSJ. He’s a biz guy, not out on a crusade to change the world. In the end the consumers will be served as will the stockholders of the companies he’s dealing with.

]]> By: katemcshane http://www.radioopensource.org/the-gold-rush-for-financial-information/#comment-89132 katemcshane Fri, 11 May 2007 17:47:56 +0000 http://www.radioopensource.org/?p=1073#comment-89132 sidewalker -- I meant to thank you for the laugh. sidewalker — I meant to thank you for the laugh.

]]>