Jump to content

Buffett's Berkshire Purchases a Kiewit Legacy Newspaper


Guest ValueCarl
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest ValueCarl

You would think that Buffett would endorse Sarah Palin in some capacity, especially with her wise views of making politics as well as business "LOCAL."

 

 

Berkshire Hathaway to Acquire Omaha World-Herald Company      11/30 07:07 AM

 

 

 

OMAHA, Neb.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A:$115,600.00,00$2,600.00,002.30%) Chairman and CEO Warren Buffett and Terry Kroeger, CEO of the Omaha World-Herald Company, owner of The World-Herald, six other daily newspapers and several weekly newspapers across Nebraska and Southwest Iowa announced that Berkshire will acquire the Omaha World-Herald Company. The transaction is expected to close in late December, pending approval of the Omaha World-Herald’s shareholders, comprised of active employees, retired employees and the Peter Kiewit Foundation and is also subject to customary other closing conditions, including regulatory approvals.

“The World-Herald delivers solid profits and is one of the best-run newspapers in America, and we are pleased to have Terry Kroeger and his team join Berkshire Hathaway,” said Warren Buffett, Berkshire’s chief executive officer. “We are also delighted to report that the editorial independence that Nebraskans and Iowans have come to expect from the World-Herald will continue.”

In addition to the Omaha World-Herald, the purchase includes daily newspapers in Council Bluffs, Ia., Grand Island, York, Kearney, North Platte and Scottsbluff in Nebraska, in addition to many weeklies and shoppers in the two states. The Company also owns World Marketing, Inc., a direct marketing firm with operations in Omaha, Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas and Los Angeles.

Buffett added that the purchase is consistent with Peter Kiewit’s vision for local ownership of the Omaha World-Herald, which led to Mr. Kiewit’s purchase of the newspaper in 1962 from the Hitchcock Family.

“Warren Buffett’s offer to purchase our Company presented a unique opportunity to address our long-term capital needs and continue local ownership of the Omaha World-Herald, which is consistent with the legacy left to us by Mr. Kiewit,” said Terry Kroeger, the World-Herald’s CEO.

Kroeger explained that the Company’s employee-ownership structure was restrictive and limited the ability to raise capital from non-employees, in addition to the ongoing need to repurchase stock from exiting employees. “We have repurchased the Company about seven times since the employee ownership plan was put in place,” Kroeger said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ValueCarl

We should look deeper with an open mind, and stop casting such harsh judgment on women leaders who are courageous enough to speak their minds in the face of adversity.

 

Mr. Buffett has rocked the worlds of his disciples many times in recent years.

 

1) Buying railroads which he despised when analyzing them during his Graham years.

 

2) Bailing out banking competitors "too big to fail" according to his "definition" including GS and BAC.

 

3)  Investing in technology which he never understood, until an IBM epiphany occurred long after Iscar and BYD.

 

4) Believing in America while he aids and abets foreign enterprises wreaking havoc on U.S. labor costs.

 

 

If he doesn't endorse Sarah in some capacity, then maybe he will surprise you by hiring Alice Schroeder into becoming the CEO of one of his insurance ops!

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/10/us/10iht-currents10.html?_r=2&src=tp&smid=

 

 

Her second point, about money in politics, helped to explain the first. The permanent class stays in power because it positions itself between two deep troughs: the money spent by the government and the money spent by big companies to secure decisions from government that help them make more money.

 

“Do you want to know why nothing ever really gets done?” she said, referring to politicians. “It’s because there’s nothing in it for them. They’ve got a lot of mouths to feed — a lot of corporate lobbyists and a lot of special interests that are counting on them to keep the good times and the money rolling along.”

 

Because her party has agitated for the wholesale deregulation of money in politics and the unshackling of lobbyists, these will be heard in some quarters as sacrilegious words.

 

Ms. Palin’s third point was more striking still: in contrast to the sweeping paeans to capitalism and the free market delivered by the Republican presidential candidates whose ranks she has yet to join, she sought to make a distinction between good capitalists and bad ones. The good ones, in her telling, are those small businesses that take risks and sink and swim in the churning market; the bad ones are well-connected megacorporations that live off bailouts, dodge taxes and profit terrifically while creating no jobs.

 

Strangely, she was saying things that liberals might like, if not for Ms. Palin’s having said them.

 

“This is not the capitalism of free men and free markets, of innovation and hard work and ethics, of sacrifice and of risk,” she said of the crony variety. She added: “It’s the collusion of big government and big business and big finance to the detriment of all the rest — to the little guys. It’s a slap in the face to our small business owners — the true entrepreneurs, the job creators accounting for 70 percent of the jobs in America.”

 

Is there a hint of a political breakthrough hiding in there?

 

The political conversation in the United States is paralyzed by a simplistic division of labor. Democrats protect that portion of human flourishing that is threatened by big money and enhanced by government action. Republicans protect that portion of human flourishing that is threatened by big government and enhanced by the free market.

 

What is seldom said is that human flourishing is a complex and delicate thing, and that we needn’t choose whether government or the market jeopardizes it more, because both can threaten it at the same time.

 

Ms. Palin may be hinting at a new political alignment that would pit a vigorous localism against a kind of national-global institutionalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apart from the fact that Buffett has already endorsed Obama multiple times, he wouldn't endorse Palin because their political, social, economic, scientific, etc, views are so different, and because Palin lowers the level of political discourse and makes it more adversarial, which is the opposite of what Buffett wants to see happen. It doesn't have to do with the number of X chromosomes or whatever.

 

In any case, now seems like a good time to leave this thread and never come back, because nothing good can come of it. Sorry I even asked for clarification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3)  Investing in technology which he never understood, until an IBM epiphany occurred long after Iscar and BYD.

 

How is "Iscar Metalworking" which makes cutting tools a technology company again? Because they use robots to make those cutting tools?

 

We should look deeper with an open mind, and stop casting such harsh judgment on women leaders who are courageous enough to speak their minds in the face of adversity.

 

Amen to this.

 

With that being said I refuse to believe that Sarah Palin contributes anything to anything and it has nothing to do with her being a woman. It just has to do with me having ears and a brain to process information that my ears deliver to it. You can fault my parents for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ValueCarl

I apologize for your inabilities to comprehend the various oxymorons which are being delivered by The Oracle himself. Without a doubt, I applaud the old man for his ability to change and evolve right in front of our very eyes. 

 

Buffett seems to like supporting the "idea" for the people and businesses in Nebraska, especially Omaha, to remain in local hands. He is very territorial including plenty of puffed up pride in this regard. He strays wildly after that-see four points above-of course. Palin sees things the same way when relating to business and politics according to the article I supplied.

 

It makes perfect sense for local regions across the globe to manage their resources by focusing intelligently on their strengths along with opportunities while outsourcing their weaknesses. Charity begins at home and "locally."

 

Maybe you don't like Sarah, but that's just a matter of opinion relative to finding out what she does or does not stand for. But how about Alice Schroeder for CEO of a BRK insurance entity? Warren could do a lot worse, when examining recent disappointments from his home town.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As  an Alaskan who supported Ms. Palin in her run for governor, be careful in believing anything she says.  She could have been one of the best governors we have had, but she quit when the going got tough.  She rails against government, but her only employment has been in government.  Believe me she will disappoint you.

I will say no more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ValueCarl

Gentlemen and Ladies,

 

Herein lies the key to what I have been attempting to state while being attacked for daring to criticize one of the known, "publicized," richest men across the globe, a ONE PERCENTER to be sure, who is full of contradictions!

 

<It makes perfect sense for local regions across the globe to manage their resources by focusing intelligently on their strengths along with opportunities while outsourcing their weaknesses. Charity begins at home and "locally."> 

 

Chew on it, munch on it, digest it, and see what doesn't come out after you're done!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How fitting that Buffett acquires the Omaha World-Herald.  After years of reading it, watching copies of it distributed to his shareholders on AGM day, and numerous articles of his successes documented in it, who else would make sense to buy and preserve the paper than the greatest investor of all time...a hometown boy who built his fortune delivering it!  Buffett's life comes full circle.  Extraordinary...simply extraordinary.  Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ValueCarl

I was going to ask Parsad this question yesterday except I didn't want to trump the board master's last comment. This being said, I let the media beat me to it today, although it is not a very intuitive answer by the author.

 

Since according to this board, Warren doesn't do anything for charity, nor will he 'bail out' anyone unless there are unadulterated, upscene PROFITS to be gleaned, why would he be buying a newspaper from the old world, or non digital one where the internet is displacing the old guards by his and Charlie's own admissions?

 

First and foremost, we know damn well that he knows all the numbers like the back of his hand, along with the NPV of that cash into perpetuity. Besides that, he is armed with high caliber super geeks sitting on his board who know the trends and can advise in the transitions taking place from brick and mortar to digital subscriptions.

 

After that, I'll bet that annoying "DIRECT MARKETING" company embedded inside the newspaper excites Buffett in having salespeople calling outside to titillate consumer demand in what's normally a discomforting experience.

 

Parsad, you're UP!  ;D 

 

 

<What has changed, then?

I think I have the answer to the question of why Buffett, who has dabbled in such dailies as the Buffalo News and the Washington Post (XNYS:WPO - News) is now taking the helm of his hometown gazette. It can’t be as satisfying as being the big kahuna at your hometown paper.

Maybe, he has seen “Citizen Kane” one too many times and he believes, like Orson Welles’ fabled Charles Foster Kane: “I think it would be fun to run a newspaper.”>

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/citizen-buffett-smart-loyal-crazy-050128338.html

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since according to this board, Warren doesn't do anything for charity, nor will he 'bail out' anyone unless there are unadulterated, upscene PROFITS to be gleaned, why would he be buying a newspaper from the old world, or non digital one where the internet is displacing the old guards by his and Charlie's own admissions?

 

So what is the upside for him to donate nearly his entire fortune to the Gates Foundation?  What profits are to be garnered by that? 

 

I think Buffett bought the Omaha World-Herald so as to preserve his hometown paper, a source of knowledge and joy when he began delivering it 70 years ago.  At the same time, it is a business that is somewhat of a monopoly in Omaha, and while it won't garner him huge returns, it should be able to deliver reasonable cash flows as long as it is in existence. 

 

Other than that, I don't try to, nor require the need to wonder why Buffett is buying something.  I only wonder about why I'm buying something!  ;D  Cheers! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ValueCarl

So Buffett does respond to emotion, and is not exclusively logical with an aggressive Capitalist's bent like you implied he was with BAC at just six percent? I once saw him exhibit tears while talking about his father, and I knew he was human then, also. It's good to know that he will stand for something more than just MONEY in his LIFETIME, assuming you're correct this time. 

 

<I think Buffett bought the Omaha World-Herald so as to preserve his hometown paper, a source of knowledge and joy when he began delivering it 70 years ago. >

 

 

As for Gates Giving or Gates Escape--Estate Tax Avoidance like other mere mortals who pay him insurance premiums for their heirs to pay for it later--what's better than having your life's work directed to someone who you believe will allocate it intelligently for the benefit of global citizens without taxes, as opposed to giving it to government representatives with a long history of mismanagement, mostly as a result of their dubious banking advisers in The Fraudulent Reserve, a PRIVATE BANK that advises them wrongly on money policies!

 

What's my proof for the above statement? Since those scoundrels were officially at the helm since 1913, one U.S. dollar inflation adjusted is worth about FOUR CENTS! That's a 96 percent capital depreciation or decimation in barely one hundred years!

 

Warren knows it's all just a game, and he intimately understands "birthing lottos" with a focus on the globe, even the universe for that matter. 

 

<So what is the upside for him to donate nearly his entire fortune to the Gates Foundation?  What profits are to be garnered by that?>

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...