Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

News Corp Australia Doesn't Want You To Look Closely At Their Financials

Posted by timothy on from the but-they're-australian-dollars dept.

Presto Vivace writes with news of an embarrassing discovery for Rupert Murdoch's News Corp about the company's financial state, which might draw less attention if News Corp hadn't tried to prevent people from using the information: "The existential crisis that has gripped Rupert Murdoch's Australian arm began with a rude discovery just after 2pm on Wednesday afternoon. The Crikey news website had stumbled across some of News Corp's most intimate lingerie, and had just put it all up on the the net. ... The 276-page document is called the Blue Book, a weekly and year-to-date rundown of results at June 30, 2013 for every News Corp business in the country. ... The great newspaper engine which was Rupert Murdoch's original springboard to take over the world was already under stress. In 2013, 70 per cent of its earnings disappeared, leaving operating income precariously balanced at $87.6 million. As Crikey pointed out, trying hard not to gloat, another year even half as bad as 2013 could put News Australia into the red." Crikey took the documents off line after legal threats, but it seems not before business reporters all over the world had a chance to download them."

37 of 132 comments (clear)

  1. Rupert Murdoch Streisand by Dutchmaan · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Don't look at my financials... nothing to see here!!!! seriously go away!"

    1. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 4, Interesting

      News Corp is a corrupt corporation.

    2. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by QRDeNameland · · Score: 3, Funny

      Personally, I would have gone with "Put another shrimp on the barbie Streisand, mate."

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    3. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by QRDeNameland · · Score: 3, Funny

      I dunno, ask Paul Hogan and the Australian Tourism Commission.

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    4. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      News Corp is a corrupt corporation.

      It is also a public company (Nasdaq:NWS) and, as such, is required to publicly disclose financials. Hiding financial information, and misleading investors, is illegal.

    5. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Insightful

      News Corp is a corrupt corporation.

      It is also a public company (Nasdaq:NWS) and, as such, is required to publicly disclose financials. Hiding financial information, and misleading investors, is illegal.

      There are very specific rules they have to follow and simply claiming they need to reveal all financial information to the public is pretty much false. I'm not going to disagree with the idea that news corp isn't really news... they're an entertainment company that tells a certain group of people what they want to hear... and makes a lot of money doing it. But this whole notion that they're some sort of evil empire secretly controlling peoples minds? It's a joke... they don't need to convince their viewers of what they're showing them... that's how those viewers already saw the world and Newscorp is playing to that crowd.

      All people, everywhere, no matter what political view they have, will search out information that re-enforces their own world view. And make no mistake, we are all wrong. Every single one of us. I've heard just as much ridiculous misguided nonsense come out of left as I've heard come out of the right.

    6. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by mjwx · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Put another shrimp on the barbie Streisand, mate."

      Sorry mate, but what the bloody hell you mean by a "shrimp?"

      It's an Americanism that no Australian would use.

      We call them prawns, we also dont barbecue them.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    7. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by crafty.munchkin · · Score: 4, Informative

      You clearly aren't aware that in Australia, News Corpse has about 70% market share.

      --
      ... wait, what?
    8. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      claiming they need to reveal all financial information to the public is pretty much false.

      Nobody claimed that. They do need to disclose basic financial information, and hiding a 70% drop in earnings from public shareholders is almost certainly illegal.

      All people, everywhere, no matter what political view they have, will search out information that re-enforces their own world view.

      Not true. I make a specific effort to listen to news sources that conflict with my world view. I know others that do the same. I tend to lean libertarian, but get most of my news from PBS and NPR which tend to view government and collective social action as the solution to most problems.

    9. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by DeathElk · · Score: 3, Informative

      Don't barbecue them?! Speak for yourself. Soak green king prawns in lemon juice and garlic until the lemon begins to cook them slightly, then throw on the barbecue. Fuckin' unreal.

    10. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by MobSwatter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they have nothing to hide, then they have nothing to fear...

    11. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sure, some will cook them this way (certainly not unheard of), but as the parent post was indicating it is not the typical way to cook prawns here in Australia.

      When we have a barbecue we'll stick anything on them, but typically, prawns are cooked in the kitchen and not on the barbecue.

      I like mine pan fried in butter and garlic.

      Shrimp is something we use for fish bait.

    12. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by rtb61 · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is exactly why News Corporation got the Liberal Party and Tony Abbott elected on the basis that they would kill the NBN because broadband is killing News Corporation and you need look no further than MySpace to see what kind of internet fuckups they are, bought for $580 million and sold for $35 million. With the 70% dominance in news and a months long propaganda campaign the got corrupt politicians elected who immediately set out to kill broadband in Australia and the news competition it provides. However that blatant propaganda killed the trust of Australian public for Newscorp and Fox not-News et al and they are losing market share all over the place.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    13. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by vivian · · Score: 2

      Shrimp and prawns are infact two different and distinct beasties, though easily confused, because they look superficially similar.
      This handy guude might help:
      http://museumvictoria.com.au/discoverycentre/infosheets/what-is-the-difference-between-prawns-and-shrimp/

      Since the adds were run in the US, where shrimp was the delicious type of crustaceon ready to throw onto afore mentioned cooking surface, that was the right word to use.
      No doubt, when back here in his native Oz, Hoges reverts back to the more locally appropriate 'prawn' nomenclature.

    14. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by cryptolemur · · Score: 3, Funny

      In a free market society they would have to disclose all information, of course. Otherwise the market would not work properly, because the consumers could not make well informed decision...

    15. Re:Rupert Murdoch Streisand by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 3, Informative
      From the first google hit for 'shrimp vs prawn':

      Prawns are larger in size, and have larger legs with claws on three pairs. They have branching gills. Shrimp are smaller, have shorter legs and have claws only on two pairs. Their gills are lamellar, i.e. plate-like.

      Prawns and shrimp are both decapod crustaceans i.e. that they have exoskeletons and 10 legs. They can be found in salt water and fresh water all over the world, typically swimming in search of food. Both shrimp and prawns tend to stay near the ocean floor. They also have similar flavors, and come in a wide range of sizes from minuscule to quite large.

      In commercial farming and fisheries, the terms shrimp and prawn are often used interchangeably. But of late, the term "prawn" only signifies freshwater forms of palaemonids and "shrimp" for the marine penaeids.

      In the United Kingdom, the word “prawn” is more common on menus than “shrimp”; while it’s the opposite in North America. The term “prawn” is also loosely used to describe any large shrimp, especially those that come 15 (or fewer) to the pound (such as “king prawns”, yet sometimes known as “jumbo shrimp”).

      Australia and some other Commonwealth nations follow this British usage to an even greater extent, using the word “prawn” almost exclusively. When Australian comedian Paul Hogan used the phrase, “I'll slip an extra shrimp on the barbie for you” in an American television advertisement, it was intended to make what he was saying easier for his American audience to understand, and was thus a deliberate distortion of what an Australian would typically say.

      In Britain very small crustaceans with a brownish shell are called shrimp, and are used to make potted shrimp. They are also used in dishes where they are not the primary ingredient.

      Prawns and shrimp are two different things. From another source:

      Shrimp have branching gills, a side plate that overlays segments in front and behind, and carry their eggs outside of their bodies beneath their tails.

      Prawns have lameller gills, side plates that overlap tile-like from front to back, and carry their eggs inside their bodies near their tails.

      So indeed, we've established that Australian English is less expressive than American English, at least when it comes to these crustaceans.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
  2. Not Unexpected by TranquilVoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's hardly surprising for a company to hold its financial results close to its chest, but this is made more delicious given how much time they spend pointing out the downsizing of rival Fairfax Media.

    Fairfax papers, especially, have suffered from the internet while News Corp has soldiered on, but it was only a matter of time. Being more left-wing, Fairfax's demographic is younger and more inclined to embrace new technology. As they age, and likely become more conservative, they will still consume news online rather than return to dead tree papers.

  3. Good! by GrahamCox · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of cunts. The sooner they go down the toilet the better for the country.

    1. Re:Good! by drfred79 · · Score: 2

      People who are angry live shorter lives. This with clean consciouses live longer.

    2. Re:Good! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People who are angry live shorter lives. This with clean consciouses live longer.

      If he is a sociopath, he does have a clean conscience.

    3. Re:Good! by Sasayaki · · Score: 2

      The problem is, if he's a sociopath he sleeps like a baby every night.

      --
      Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
  4. Re:Odd... by viperidaenz · · Score: 5, Informative

    You don't buy companies with cash, you use stock.

    That way it's all just funny money.

  5. Re:New for Nerds? by WillKemp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not nothing. It's a glimmer of hope for us here in Australia, that that piece of shit Murdoch could eventually lose his near monopoly in Australian newspapers - and, therefore, a significant part of his ability to manipulate the government. And not before time.

  6. What about Foxtel? by jonwil · · Score: 2

    Does this stuff say anything about the performance (good or otherwise) of Rupert's other big Australian media asset, Foxtel?

  7. Re:New for Nerds? by godel_56 · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's not nothing. It's a glimmer of hope for us here in Australia, that that piece of shit Murdoch could eventually lose his near monopoly in Australian newspapers - and, therefore, a significant part of his ability to manipulate the government. And not before time.

    With our luck, he'd probably sell the papers to Gina Rinehart. :-(

  8. Never look back. by westlake · · Score: 2

    Successful entrepreneurs are notoriously unsentimental.

    To put things in perspective:

    On May 2, 2014, News Corp acquired romance novel publisher Harlequin Enterprises from Torstar for $415 million. The deal closed On August 1 2014.

    News Corp

    Harlequin Enterprises Limited engages in the publishing and sale of books for women worldwide. The company publishes printed and electronic books in various languages in the areas of romance, fiction, nonfiction, young adult novels, erotic literature, and fantasy. The company was founded in 1949 and is based in Don Mills, Canada with additional offices in Toronto, New York, London, Tokyo, Milan, Sydney, Paris, Madrid, Stockholm, Amsterdam, Hamburg, Athens, Budapest, Granges-Paccot*, Warsaw, Rio de Janeiro, Mumbai, and Istanbul.

    Company Overview of Harlequin Enterprises Limited

    Harlequin will become part of News Corp's HarperCollins group.

    -----
    * - Granges-Paccot is a municipality in the district of Sarine in the canton of Fribourg in Switzerland. [I just had to look this up,]

    1. Re:Never look back. by grcumb · · Score: 2

      Harlequin Enterprises Limited engages in the publishing and sale of books for women worldwide. The company publishes printed and electronic books in various languages in the areas of romance, fiction, nonfiction, young adult novels, erotic literature, and fantasy. The company was founded in 1949 and is based in Don Mills, Canada with additional offices in Toronto, New York, London, Tokyo, Milan, Sydney, Paris, Madrid, Stockholm, Amsterdam, Hamburg, Athens, Budapest, Granges-Paccot*, Warsaw, Rio de Janeiro, Mumbai, and Istanbul.

      Company Overview of Harlequin Enterprises Limited....

      -----
      * - Granges-Paccot is a municipality in the district of Sarine in the canton of Fribourg in Switzerland. [I just had to look this up,]

      I'm going to take a wild guess and speculate that the Swiss arm of the business is curiously profitable. Swiss people just LOVE romance novels. Profitable ones especially.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
  9. Re:New for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A good percent of the reason why there are repulsive idiots in power in Western democracies is due to Murdoch.

    It's stuff that matters.

  10. Somebody 'esplain this to me by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Pretty much every comment on this story is troll-worthy flamebait. Shouldn't the story itself be modded down accordingly?

  11. This is an effect of the News Corp restructure by Harlequin80 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is neither really news or particularly surprising. The News behemoth went through a restructure recently which pushed all its low performing assets into a different vehicle. Basically Rupert is in love with newspapers and he continues to support them even though the ROI is not there. When he leaves expect the papers to disappear as well.

  12. Re: It would be really nice.... by rossdee · · Score: 2

    "It wouldn't be that obvious. What would happen is It wouldn't be that obvious. What would happen is dome government department

    is this dome government department located near Chesters Mill ?

  13. Re:New for Nerds? by WillKemp · · Score: 4, Informative

    News Ltd owns the only national daily paper, as well as the only daily paper in four state capitals, one territory capital, and a number of large regional centres - of the capitals, only Melbourne, Sydney, and Canberra have competing daily papers. Admittedly, that covers nearly half the population - but that leaves a massive proportion of Australia dominated by Murdoch.

  14. Re:Odd... by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 2

    News Corp by its fingertips: Rupert Murdoch’s Australian newspapers eye the abyss

  15. Bad news is good news! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

    Any news that is bad for Rupert Murdoch is good news for the world.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  16. Advertisers dont want to be associated with... by BeCre8iv · · Score: 4, Informative

    Journos that would hack the voicemail of a child murder victim.

    --
    This perpetual motion machine Lisa made is a joke, it just keeps getting faster and faster. - Homer
  17. Paywalls by Zarath · · Score: 2

    I'm surprised no one else pointed out, but this coincides directly with the timing of their paywalls. The paywalls on Murdoch's sites went up early 2013. TFA says that it's primarily a drop in advertising revenue, so is this proof that paywalls result in a loss of money, due to a loss of advertising incoming. I know personally I have stopped visiting the Courier Mail website due to the paywall.

  18. Re:New for Nerds? by jfengel · · Score: 2

    Does anybody read them?

    In the US, the newspaper industry has been flailing for decades. TV was eating their lunch even before the Internet did. The national "newspapers of record" still have some sway, but they no longer swing elections. They are still the last best hope of serious journalism as the fourth estate, but there's just not much left of it.

    In the US, it's not even fishwrap; people just don't buy them. They do get it online, but what little actual news is in that stream is mostly thinly rewritten (or not) wire reports.

    Is it any better in Australia?