# FXJ - Fairfax Media



## tulasi74 (28 April 2008)

I own a lot of shares in fairfax and notice that the SP has been going down despite a good report in Feb.  Does anyone know why its going down?


----------



## son of baglimit (28 April 2008)

some reasons........

2 years ago during the media takeover frenzy they were seen as the most likely takeover target, and so the SP surged accordingly. once these rumours dried up the SP has slowly dropped. and then the market downturn, and expectant drop in advertising, plus the growing use of internet ads, has seen many abandon newspapers as an investment.

also consider that with the high A$, no takeover is likely from overseas, and of course, funding for any such takeover is impossible presently.

i sold out at $4.80 about 12 months ago.

they remain a sound business, but i will be waiting a bit longer for re-entry.


----------



## julius (28 April 2008)

yes... it was pushed heavily by the major brokers last year as potential takeover target on the back of changes in the media environment


----------



## dan-o (15 July 2008)

Charlie Aitken is recommending this one as deep contrarian value. Yielding over 7%...
is a sound business operating against only 1 real competitor


----------



## son of baglimit (15 July 2008)

yielding over 7% on last years divs. i fear what they will be this year. like most companies, i see them hanging on to divs this year, just so they have some cash handy. yields may well plummet as companies hold that cash.

as for fxj, they have hit the level they had their big cap raising for the NZ media buy up.

and their 1 real competitor - i assume you mean www.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (15 July 2008)

tulasi74 said:


> I own a lot of shares in fairfax and notice that the SP has been going down despite a good report in Feb.  Does anyone know why its going down?




One reason is that its two main mastheads, the Age and the SMH are losing circulation rapidly because their journalists are a crowd of no hope lefties who couldn't get a job in a union free publication. They publish socialist drivel for the latte set who now use the internet rather than buying a newspaper and they have pissed off traditional working readers who now buy newspapers published by News Ltd.

gg


----------



## Calliope (29 August 2008)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> One reason is that its two main mastheads, the Age and the SMH are losing circulation rapidly because their journalists are a crowd of no hope lefties who couldn't get a job in a union free publication. They publish socialist drivel for the latte set who now use the internet rather than buying a newspaper and they have pissed off traditional working readers who now buy newspapers published by News Ltd.
> 
> gg




Here's a scary thought. We are going to have 500 virtually unemployable Fairfax newspaper hacks on the market. Perhaps all the leftist politicians these people have been propping up for years will double their numbers of media advisers.


----------



## finnsk (1 November 2008)

In my area "northern beaches Sydney" it is very difficult to buy a newspaper (SMH) at the news agencies Saturday & Sunday lately "before 8.30am" they don`t have any, spoke to one of my neighbors who gets it delivered, today he got his paper very late,  I was wondering if any of you has experienced something similar, think it maybe because of the layoff earlier this year?


----------



## pacestick (5 December 2008)

The changes at fairfax continued today with the ceo resigning????? or was he pushed  one day after the editor of the sydney morning herald  wa s axed.. the directors are obviously unjappy with the sp and so they should


----------



## dan-o (22 January 2009)

Does anyone know why this one is on a down trend the past couple weeks?
Anything to do with their debt levels? or the sale of southern star?


----------



## wonderrman (22 January 2009)

dan-o said:


> Does anyone know why this one is on a down trend the past couple weeks?
> Anything to do with their debt levels? or the sale of southern star?




Yeah they were a sitting duck and rightly so. They operate in an industry with crappy dimensions and have a **** load of debt. They've added the debt in return for the nothing really, no value adding acq. at all. Fairfax has had no strategy for the past 10 years and now it's catching up to them. 

Everyone is going online and they've not going to make any money there off readers. Look how much of a failure AFR online has been regarding paid subscribers. People won't pay for something when they can get it somewhere else for free. Assets of $8b with intangibles of $6b doesn't look good when you're $2b in debt.Scary stuff really, they've gone under before and I wouldn't be surprised if they do again with the right set of circumstanced.


----------



## MrBurns (22 January 2009)

wonderrman said:


> Yeah they were a sitting duck and rightly so. They operate in an industry with crappy dimensions and have a **** load of debt. They've added the debt in return for the nothing really, no value adding acq. at all. Fairfax has had no strategy for the past 10 years and now it's catching up to them.
> 
> Everyone is going online and they've not going to make any money there off readers. Look how much of a failure AFR online has been regarding paid subscribers. People won't pay for something when they can get it somewhere else for free. Assets of $8b with intangibles of $6b doesn't look good when you're $2b in debt.Scary stuff really, they've gone under before and I wouldn't be surprised if they do again with the right set of circumstanced.




I agree, management are just our of their depth and have been for a long while, the print ads were covering their tracks but now thats faltering it could be all over rover.
Apart from printing a newspaper they really are very ordinary with everything else.
Watch Ron Walker run for cover when it does hit the fan.


----------



## Mitsimonsta (30 March 2009)

Waiting for the rights-issue results to come in.....  FXJ is so slow on the releases to market that it is not funny.

I had some when previously working for RUP - employee exempt share scheme.

Had an average of about $4.80 until the stock really started plumbing the depths - bought more at $1.36 and $1.13 to cost average, Currently have it at $3.16.

Applied for another $1400 worth in the rights issue, will bring the average cost down to $1.80ish if I get them all.

Unfortunately I have not been in the market for long, or I would have sold them ages ago and gotten a reasonable price for them. They were transferred to my Commsec account in November 08 by which time their value was crap and I wasn't going to sell them.


----------



## Bhenn (4 May 2009)

They'll come good. Picked up a small slice of these at $1e. Media sector is somewhat behind the rest of the market rally at the moment I think.


----------



## skc (4 May 2009)

Mr all-you-can-eat said something bad about the media sector recently...

http://business.smh.com.au/business...-have-lost-their-relevance-20090503-areh.html


----------



## MrBurns (6 May 2009)

I 've often wonderd why are there always so many Fairfax shares traded  in any one day ? the company is a basket case, even Buffett rang the bell on printed media the other day.


----------



## wonderrman (6 May 2009)

> They'll come good.




But what happens if it doesn't? Fairfax is a debt-laden piece of crap in an industry that is falling to pieces. I doubt we have seen the worst in advertising drop offs as well due to the economy. I would hate to be in this as a "long-term investment".

W.


----------



## matty2.0 (6 May 2009)

Yeah print world is tough these days. 
Everything going online. 
Add to that ad market recession ... a severe one too.

Journo's get paid too much with their unions and all, and digital media economics are far superior to print ... lot's of flux and uncertainty.


----------



## MrBurns (6 May 2009)

Fairfax has now merged print with online so thats the writing on the wall, too bad they're not as good online as they are with print, if it were the other way around they might be ok but afraid not.


----------



## matty2.0 (6 May 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Fairfax has now merged print with online so thats the writing on the wall, too bad they're not as good online as they are with print, if it were the other way around they might be ok but afraid not.




yeah but to cross the "bridge" from print to online is not so straightforward ... different culture and processes required. 

e.g. in the print world the way you negotiate ad contracts is to have ad managers and bus-development people go out and negotiate ... whereas online it's about clicks and links and automating the ad partner network process ... all metrics are measured differently ... thus requires a different skillset. Add to that there are heaps of online activities that are totally foreign to the print world; social networking, viral marketing, twitter etc ...


----------



## MrBurns (6 May 2009)

matty2.0 said:


> yeah but to cross the "bridge" from print to online is not so straightforward ... different culture and processes required.
> 
> e.g. in the print world the way you negotiate ad contracts is to have ad managers and bus-development people go out and negotiate ... whereas online it's about clicks and links and automating the ad partner network process ... all metrics are measured differently ... thus requires a different skillset. Add to that there are heaps of online activities that are totally foreign to the print world; social networking, twitter etc ...




They know all this but I dont think they're very good at it, newspapers were their speciallty if that goes it's good night.


----------



## Bhenn (9 May 2009)

wonderrman said:


> But what happens if it doesn't?




I'll lose some money then I guess! Agree Farifax and the media sector have issues but I've thankfully I've only for a small exposure to these which I saw as an attractive price.


----------



## Mitsimonsta (3 June 2009)

Been alot happier with the SP performance of late, the MTN buyback has certainly stabilised things a bit.

I have come back to -32% now, from hovering about -42%. Going to continue to hold for the time being. Depending on how it gets back to my Average buy price of $1.84 will determine when I sell. Obviously if it is going forward in leaps and bounds, then I will try to ride it all the way up and let it stop/loss me out of it when the price falls back.

Until such time as the dividends are restored to former levels, then I cannot see the SP breaking the $1.30 barrier. The returns are just too small.


----------



## Mitsimonsta (21 July 2009)

Well I was wrong.... up 8c today to $1.35 at one point.

No ASX release, no speeding ticket. Volumes seem a bit better than normal.


----------



## Mitsimonsta (31 July 2009)

We've hit $1.45 in intraday trade now......

I'd love a chartist's opinion on the current position of Fairfax.

I hold ~3600 units at $1.66 average. Hoping to hold until they hit $1.80.


----------



## airpoe (1 August 2009)

its looking up!!

I would hold if I were you, its resistance is @ 1.48 & 1.73

I hold 7790 @ 1.05 per pop & will not sell until it hit $2.10


----------



## Paragon1 (7 August 2009)

Anyone have info Fairfax SPS (Interest rate security). It has a 30% YTM though probably for good reason. Anyone see any any value there?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (7 August 2009)

I held these for years and sold last year.

They seem to have been kissed by the devil.

Media are not saleable at present. They are not making a profit. Advertisements are falling. AFR online is a joke., so no profit there.

Their mastheads are alienating their readers. All their columnists with a few exceptions seem to live in the cold war era , anti US, anti Israeli, anti family values. In a city like Melbourne with a large Jewish diaspora they are anti Jewish. The loons run the asylum.

I can read Age, SMH for free on the net and google past articles.

Shorting them is a good option.

gg


----------



## Mitsimonsta (24 August 2009)

Bit of a nasty loss today, all driven by impairments on the mastheads really. I would have hoped for a <$300M figure though.

I think the decks have now been cleared and they are ready to move forward. Debt repayment was a big highlight for me, although I would have liked to have seen a small dividend paid - maybe 0.5c per unit?

Interesting course of sales today also, I think a few people got a little too excited early on. I'd love to get rid of these, but really need to get it above $1.70 before I do so. I will be damned if I take a loss on the shares I have held for so long.


----------



## blanker (10 September 2009)

Mitsimonsta said:


> I'd love to get rid of these, but really need to get it above $1.70 before I do so.




If you're still holding it looks good for you. $1.665 today. I jumped on this one back in March for $1 & think there good for $2 by the end of 09. Stocks been good to me so far.


----------



## Mitsimonsta (10 September 2009)

Ha, should have updated.

I got rid of these about 2 weeks go under $1.50. 

Still, glad to be rid of them. Took a Capital Loss which will offset my CGT issues with the profits I took off BEPPA.

Still, kind of amazed to see the run these have had.


----------



## MrBurns (23 September 2009)

I see Walkers leaving and there's pressure to do something about the share price, I think Corbett will pull something out of the hat and diversify, might be a good time to get in.


----------



## blanker (23 September 2009)

I entered at $1 back in march & am happy to hold. 

There’s been lots of talk about the decline in advertising dollars & how to monetise web content but at the end of the day these guys have great online real-estate that attracts many eyeballs. The eyeball factor is massive in online because the best revenue module, advertising strategy & even content offering don’t amount to much if you can’t attract eyeballs.


----------



## MrBurns (23 September 2009)

Will Roger Corbett make any difference, I mean he's already on the board isnt he ?
They need someone new perhaps ?


----------



## blanker (25 September 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Will Roger Corbett make any difference, I mean he's already on the board isnt he ?
> They need someone new perhaps ?




It's possible. But the industry needs to wake to the fact that online is not going away & infact its overtaken their existing business models & is leaving them behind. News media has the same realisation to come to as does the music & movie industry. A good artical below:

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...x-Media-pd20090925-W7SX5?OpenDocument&src=sph


----------



## MrBurns (13 October 2009)

They've put Roger Corbett in as the new Chairman.
A mate of Walkers with the same ideas.
What a joke.

Think I'll dump my shares.


----------



## ricee007 (14 October 2009)

i am very happy to hold the fxjpb from 85.52. I don't see fxj as too much of a risk, but with a great expected yield on fxjpb. i expect them to recover past the pre-exdv prices in the short term.

Even if you dump fxj, do you have any thoughts on fxjpb? It seems like a great opportunity from where i stand?

Cheers.


----------



## ricee007 (8 December 2009)

Howdi,

I wrote an article, http://ozbankers.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=29 , in which I discussed FXJPB a bit (well, 3 paragraphs)...

For those that don't understand FXJPB and hybrids, it may be useful?


----------



## Banana Boy (18 January 2010)

Fairfax up 8c today, following on from strong rise on Friday. No annoucements from Fairfax. Has anyone heard any news that may explain this run?


----------



## Space Invader101 (23 March 2010)

Wouldn't it make sense if Seven's Kerry Stokes bought FXJ and linked it's online sites to the Yahoo7 web page?  It seems like the most obvious takeover target considering James Packer is in the way of him controlling Consolidated media.


----------



## notting (2 February 2012)

Gina Rinehart - picked up 10% and the market loved it!
It's a positive sign - stupidity is back with avengence! :silly::bloated:


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (2 February 2012)

notting said:


> Gina Rinehart - picked up 10% and the market loved it!
> It's a positive sign - stupidity is back with avengence! :silly::bloated:




Hopefully for Fairfax holders the quality of independent journalism will improve with the share price following Gina's tilt at the stock.

Presently The Age, for example, is a poor daily imitation of Green Left Weekly and needs a strong owner to restore credibility, professional journalism and readership.

FXJ holders may then be joined by other investors interested in making a quid from the stock.  

gg


----------



## Calliope (2 February 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Hopefully for Fairfax holders the quality of independent journalism will improve with the share price following Gina's tilt at the stock.
> 
> Presently The Age, for example, is a poor daily imitation of Green Left Weekly and needs a strong owner to restore credibility, professional journalism and readership.
> 
> ...






> It's a terrifying prospect for some . . . a capitalist wants to put her money into newspapers!




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-into-newspapers/story-fn72xczz-1226260003588


----------



## Julia (2 February 2012)

Gina might be a bit disappointed if she thinks buying a large chunk of Fairfax will allow her to swing editorial  slant her way.  Could be an interesting battle ahead.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (29 March 2012)

Primed for a small run, so long as it can break 75 and it would probably need to make that break today or tomorrow otherwise back to form a triple bottom at 69.  If it breaks, target 79-85.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (14 June 2012)

There are rumours about that Gina Reinhart may be ready to increase her stake in FXJ.

I have no proof of this and no charting confirmation.

FXJ languishes at 60c.

I will watch price and volume at the open tomorrow and decide accordingly whether to follow any move up,  or watch the present inexorable slide.

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (14 June 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> There are rumours about that Gina Reinhart may be ready to increase her stake in FXJ.
> 
> I have no proof of this and no charting confirmation.
> 
> ...




Oops , I've just noticed its in in the Australian.



> INVESTORS are betting Gina Rinehart has upped her stake in Fairfax Media after a $25 million line of shares was traded.
> 
> Just after midday, 42 million shares changed hands at 60c a share worth $25.2 million, with sources tipping Ms Rinehart as the buyer. Another 7 million shares went through at 62c a share just after 3pm (AEST) today.
> 
> ...




I may put a few kopeks in to FXJ in the am.

gg


----------



## Julia (14 June 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Oops , I've just noticed its in in the Australian.
> I may put a few kopeks in to FXJ in the am.
> 
> gg



Roger Corbett is very opposed to her, so if it were me, I'd be waiting to see how her attempt comes out before sinking any money in that direction.
Plus the fact that conventional media is imo on a downward slide, especially Fairfax with its woeful staff morale.


----------



## ROE (14 June 2012)

Julia said:


> Roger Corbett is very opposed to her, so if it were me, I'd be waiting to see how her attempt comes out before sinking any money in that direction.
> Plus the fact that conventional media is imo on a downward slide, especially Fairfax with its woeful staff morale.




I found it ridiculous someone who has 13% cant get a seat... She OWNS 13% of the business she entitle to a seat

Whether she is independent or against the government or what ever is another story...as a capitalist economy
someone with that much interest in a business entitle to a seat and voice how she want the company run

there are other people on there to agree and disagree with her....

I have high regard for Roger Corbett but I disagree he wont allow her a seat ....


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (14 June 2012)

Julia said:


> Roger Corbett is very opposed to her, so if it were me, I'd be waiting to see how her attempt comes out before sinking any money in that direction.
> Plus the fact that conventional media is imo on a downward slide, especially Fairfax with its woeful staff morale.






ROE said:


> I found it ridiculous someone who has 13% cant get a seat... She OWNS 13% of the business she entitle to a seat
> 
> Whether she is independent or against the government or what ever is another story...as a capitalist economy
> someone with that much interest in a business entitle to a seat and voice how she want the company run
> ...




Corbett and Co. are old money, and we are in the new age of Aquarius.

I bet Londinium to a brick he will be gone within 2 months.

I will buy tomorrow, and as the bard said 



> This day is called the Feast of Crispian.
> He that outlives this day and comes safe home
> Will stand a-tiptoe when this day is named
> And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
> ...




St.Crispins Day is October 25th, and it will end by then.

These FXJ muppets including Corbett have overseen a decimation of the share price.

I have never been attracted to it because of the old and leftist money associated with Fairfax.

I will buy, not at the open but shortly after, tomorrow.

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (15 June 2012)

I did not buy today. There was not much to the bar, although it was up, as I post at 3.13pm 

Volume is good, but I feel Gina will let these guys broil, she will do them slowly and the price may retreat further.

Fibonacci levels may be useful. I will examine over the w/e.

However if in the next 46 minutes volume and price go ballistic I will be in like Flynn.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (18 June 2012)

Well Rinehart isnt stupid is she, almost looks like insider trading, did she know Fairfax were going the make such big changes ?


----------



## McLovin (18 June 2012)

Talk is cheap. They can say they will do all these things but so far management has shown itself to be woefully ill equipped to handle the internet and how it affects their business. I'll believe it when I see it for myself. I don't think a mining magnate or a grocer are what the board of FXJ needs.


----------



## MrBurns (18 June 2012)

McLovin said:


> Talk is cheap. They can say they will do all these things but so far management has shown itself to be woefully ill equipped to handle the internet and how it affects their business. I'll believe it when I see it for myself. I don't think a mining magnate or a grocer are what the board of FXJ needs.




Agreed, they are too busy in there covering their own backs, they'll never bring the right people in to do the job properly.


----------



## McLovin (18 June 2012)

MrBurns said:


> Agreed, they are too busy in there covering their own backs, they'll never bring the right people in to do the job properly.




It was always going to happen. You had a 150 year old company that had relied on its rivers of gold (classified advertising) and didn't need to really worry about much else. Those sort of companies generally do the worst when the goal posts shift. They're just not used to change or adapting.


----------



## skc (18 June 2012)

MrBurns said:


> Well Rinehart isnt stupid is she




The jury is still out on this one imho.


----------



## basilio (18 June 2012)

Great power play by Gina Rinehart. Getting editorial control of the Fairfax Press would destroy any semblance of non right wing commercial press in Oz.,

It would guarantee the next election would be a Tony Abott cakewalk with Gina Rinehart making absolutely sure the interests of the mining sector were attended to. Thats something for the Liberal party to look forward to -  dealing with Ms Rineharts perception of what is good for Australia..


----------



## MrBurns (18 June 2012)

basilio said:


> Great power play by Gina Rinehart. Getting editorial control of the Fairfax Press would destroy any semblance of non right wing commercial press in Oz.,
> 
> It would guarantee the next election would be a Tony Abott cakewalk with Gina Rinehart making absolutely sure the interests of the mining sector were attended to. Thats something for the Liberal party to look forward to -  dealing with Ms Rineharts perception of what is good for Australia..




I think she might be more about making sure Fairfax is neutral , if she bent it toward her own interests it would be too obvious and EVERYONE will be looking for her to do exactly that.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (18 June 2012)

This is bad news for many workers and families in Melbourne and Sydney, due to a derelict board and left wing journalists using two great newspapers, the SMH and the Age as a glorified cookie jar and a Twitter.

The board will be sacked with executives, the print workers will be hung out to dry, and the leaders of the left wing cabal at the SMH and the Age will slink off to work on the public purse. The other journalists will go on the dole.

FXJ is still a tenuous buy for an investor.

Gina Rinehart can only be good for the company.

Vale the SMH and the Age.

Howard's battlers will regroup for the next election.

gg


----------



## Julia (18 June 2012)

McLovin said:


> I don't think a mining magnate or a grocer are what the board of FXJ needs.



No?  Despite the proven business experience which contrasts pretty strongly with Fairfax's stuffup?

What do you think is in fact what Fairfax needs to lift it out of the mire?


basilio said:


> Great power play by Gina Rinehart. Getting editorial control of the Fairfax Press would destroy any semblance of non right wing commercial press in Oz.,



Of it might just turn a left wing organ into something representing centrist objectivity.


----------



## McLovin (19 June 2012)

Julia said:


> No?  Despite the proven business experience which contrasts pretty strongly with Fairfax's stuffup?
> 
> What do you think is in fact what Fairfax needs to lift it out of the mire?




Someone with experience in digitial media and how to monetise it. Until recently FXJ was a place for ageing directors to go and retire. Obviously Gina doesn't fit that mold, but at the same time what does she know about running a media company in the 21st century?


----------



## Logique (19 June 2012)

It's go Gina as far as I'm concerned. On balance, Fairfax organs perceive the world through a left wing lens. Gina at best might drag them back towards the centre. 

They're going to start charging for online news access according to this mornings news. Bloated  advertisement laden, slow loading websites anyway.


----------



## notting (19 June 2012)

Logique said:


> .
> They're going to start charging for online news access




Which will take them from being less relevant to irrelevant.


----------



## waimate01 (19 June 2012)

Gina Rinehart buying Fairfax is a highly creative and strategic move.

It has been speculated that her interest is not in media per se, but in purchasing influence to pursue the interests of her mining companies.

But I think she's smarter than that. I think it's actually a masterstroke move to keep her inheritance away from her children. She'll do anything to keep the money out of their hands, and while she cannot practically turn it into hundred dollar bills and tear it up, buying a newspaper produces the same outcome. Without the toxic emissions that come from burning polymer notes.


----------



## Calliope (19 June 2012)

The Labor government is starting to panic over the prospect of Rinehart gaining a controlling interest in Fairfax.

Conroy (the Minister for Censorship) is making veiled threats.



> Senator Conroy stopped short of flagging further media laws, but noted the Finkelstein and Convergence reviews into the media had considered media standards and new media ownership models.
> 
> The government is yet to announce its response to either review.






> Senator Conroy said Ms Rinehart wanted to turn the company into the "mining gazette".
> 
> "She is entitled to representation but what she is not entitled to do is *trash the brand* for all the other shareholders," he told ABC radio.
> 
> ...




By "*trashing the brand"* Conroy means changing it's left wing orientation.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...ial-independence/story-e6frg996-1226400804787


----------



## MrBurns (19 June 2012)

Conroy is an idiot.

How dare he speak about Rinehart or anyone else in those terms, just like that dufus Swan saying Palmer was a threat to democracy.:bad:


----------



## JTLP (19 June 2012)

Perhaps Rinehart will inject some business nous (after all she is pretty ) and put some pretty smart cookies on the board. Doubt she's in this to keep money from the kids - rather sees this as a savvy investment/a way to fire back at Labor.

Groan at Conroy/Swan etc. If Gina went to say one bad thing about the Labor gov't she'd be censured to the point that her lips would be zipped


----------



## Julia (19 June 2012)

McLovin said:


> Someone with experience in digitial media and how to monetise it. Until recently FXJ was a place for ageing directors to go and retire. Obviously Gina doesn't fit that mold, but at the same time what does she know about running a media company in the 21st century?



So what names can you come up with who can offer expertise in digital media with the level of business nous and success that Ms Rinehart can claim?

To suggest that because she lacks thus far digital media experience she is unqualified doesn't do your usual level of intelligence and objectivity justice, McLovin.  She would sure as hell have the capacity to quickly learn anything she needed to.

People with sound business skills can fairly easily transfer those skills to various types of businesses.

At least she knows how to make money work for her, something that has apparently thus far escaped the Fairfax board.


----------



## Ves (19 June 2012)

Julia said:


> At least she knows how to make money work for her, something that has apparently thus far escaped the Fairfax board.



I'm surprised you haven't picked up on the fact that she's most likely sitting on a massive capital loss in her Fairfax Holding as it stands.

What makes you think that the skills used in navigating the biggest mining boom in Australia's history is going to help her navigate the biggest media headwinds that the industry has ever seen?



> So what names can you come up with who can offer expertise in digital media with the level of business nous and success that Ms Rinehart can claim?



There are lots of listed online businesses on the ASX that have been successful in the last decade, all of them obviously had to monetise web traffic.  Digital media, sure try: SEK, CRZ, REA for starters.  Hasn't REA's share price grown at an average of 59% for the last decade or something similar since the lows of 2003?


----------



## Julia (19 June 2012)

Ves said:


> I'm surprised you haven't picked up on the fact that she's most likely sitting on a massive capital loss in her Fairfax Holding as it stands.



It's your assumption that I'm not aware of a capital loss at this stage which is a bit silly.  Of course I'm aware of that.
You could presumably liken her to your value investor who loves the idea of buying something that's - according to them - undervalued, and using their skills to improve the business.



> What makes you think that the skills used in navigating the biggest mining boom in Australia's history is going to help her navigate the biggest media headwinds that the industry has ever seen?



What makes me think she's more capable than most people of this is the way she has so enhanced her inheritance.  The woman has a long history of being successful in business.  If you don't think business skills are at least partly generic, I don't suppose I can explain it to you.

Look, this thread is all about inbuilt bias one way or the other.
If you and others dislike Ms Rinehart and don't want to see her extend her influence into diverse parts of the Australian business landscape, you will doubtless find heaps of 'reasons' to object to her.

I can't be bothered trying to defend what I have said over and over again.

If you disagree with me, that's quite fine with me.
We'll see what happens.

I'm just a bit sick of entrenched, failed people rejecting the opportunity to have their businesses improved by someone who knows what they're doing.


----------



## McLovin (19 June 2012)

Julia said:


> Look, this thread is all about inbuilt bias one way or the other.
> If you and others dislike Ms Rinehart and don't want to see her extend her influence into diverse parts of the Australian business landscape, you will doubtless find heaps of 'reasons' to object to her.




Just to be clear, Julia, I wasn't actually saying she is not entitled to a board position. Anyone with 20% of a company deserves a seat at the board table. I just don't think she will bring all that much to FXJ. I guess on this we will have to agree to disagree. As Vespuria pointed out, there are companies that have been eating FXJ's lunch for the last ten years, so clearly there are people in the industry who understand the industry very well and what works. If I was an FXJ shareholder, then I'd like to see some of them brought onto the board.


----------



## notting (19 June 2012)

If you consider the popularity of the Labor party at present as reflected in the QLD elections, you'd think she could name it 'Rineharts Rag' make Clive Palmer editor in chief and headhunt Andrew Bolt to do the front page every day and the thing would go through the roof. 
It would be a hard decision at the news stand - hmmmmm this or MAD Magazine today?


----------



## Logique (20 June 2012)

The Wall Street Journal :   *Sydney Morning Herald, The Age Newspapers Worthless: Deutsche*  - http://blogs.wsj.com/dealjournalaus...herald-the-age-newspapers-worthless-deutsche/
As reported in Tim Blair's blog : http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/ (my bolds under)



> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/
> 
> And from the accompanying article:
> 
> ...



Never fear luvvies, the balanced David Marr has taken up the baton, the editorial stance will be protected from the satanic influence of industrialists like the RinehartRinehartRinehart.


----------



## McLovin (20 June 2012)

That's the valuation for the print business, it excludes smh.com.au and theage.com.au

There's no doubt, in my mind at least, that newspapers will probably be gone within the next 10 years.


----------



## prawn_86 (20 June 2012)

McLovin said:


> There's no doubt, in my mind at least, that newspapers will probably be gone within the next 10 years.




It's amazing to me the similarities between newspaper co's and record companies. Both old, slow, monoliths that would rather try to litigate, complain and sack thier way out of any trouble, which obviously doesnt work. Rather than try and develop new opportunities.

Talk about living in the past


----------



## McLovin (20 June 2012)

prawn_86 said:


> It's amazing to me the similarities between newspaper co's and record companies. Both old, slow, monoliths that would rather try to litigate, complain and sack thier way out of any trouble, which obviously doesnt work. Rather than try and develop new opportunities.
> 
> Talk about living in the past




This is from Lateline last night and shows pretty well the point I've been making about the lack of real media experience on the FXJ board...

Aplogies for the length of the quotes but Beecher raised some pretty good points. I've tried to keep as much of the political debate about Rinehart owning FXJ out of the quoted pieces because I think they don't belong in a stock chat thread.



> EMMA ALBERICI: Gentlemen, thank you very much for joining us, tonight.
> 
> 
> If I can start with you, Eric Beecher, because it's now legend that eight years ago the then-chairman of Fairfax, Dean Wills, asked you to provide an analysis of the future of the broadsheets The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald.
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3528963.htm

ETA: Is there a word/character limit on posts? I had a few quotes to put in there but it kept "reseting the connection" until I trimmed it


----------



## prawn_86 (20 June 2012)

My last post on the issue, as its not specifically related to FXJ, but I personally think it is due to the short-termism and materialism imposed by the market, and Western society in general. Very few people at the top (politicians, execs etc) have long term vision anymore.

Why do the execs _*really*_ care as long as they are pulling in fat pay cheques every year? I know i probably wouldn't... Just look back on it and think "oh well, we tried and made plenty of money along the way"


----------



## Julia (20 June 2012)

McLovin said:


> ETA: Is there a word/character limit on posts? I had a few quotes to put in there but it kept "reseting the connection" until I trimmed it



Maybe refer this to Joe.  I have repeatedly had the same problem and it's annoying.
I thought Joe said he has recently increased the character limit, but your post suggests not.


----------



## Ves (20 June 2012)

Julia said:


> What makes me think she's more capable than most people of this is the way she has so enhanced her inheritance.  The woman has a long history of being successful in business.  If you don't think business skills are at least partly generic, I don't suppose I can explain it to you.



I will ignore the parts of your post that are under what I have quoted, because it is full of strawman / ad hominem fallacies.

I will say however that I do not really have an opinion either way about Rinehart. I also do not have a vested interest or extensive opinion about Fairfax. This discussion to me is more about business people and recipes for success than anything else. It may or may not be relevant to current or future holders.

Prior success in business / investment and business experience and skillsets is definitely an advantage. But it is not a guarantee of success or even a measurement of capability.

I will add two points to support what I mean by this:

1)   History is littered with businesses / business people who attempted to diversify into or enter markets that they had no previous experience in. Many of these were unsuccessful and a lot destroyed their previous wealth.

I am sure that you can provide examples that disprove this (and you probably will) but I am certain that there are just as many, if not more, that prove the generalisation.


2)  Most successful businesses and their owners / managers are successful not only because they have the relevant wealth building skills and mindset, but because they have developed a circle of competence or expertise in what they do.  I think without this, it is more likely that a person or business will end up as yet another example of point 1.

Rinehart is successful in her resources businesses, because most likely, she has been exposed to the business her whole life, knows it inside out and basically lives and breathes it.  She was, to my knowledge, very reclusive with the media until 2010 when she joined in the anti-MRRT campaign. Perhaps something has changed, I don't know.


----------



## Julia (20 June 2012)

Leaving aside your first paragraph, that's a sensible and logical post.
Great points.  I agree.
Still think she could bring considerable expertise and skill to the ailing Fairfax, but hell, I don't really care.
I'm not a reader of their products and am not a shareholder.


----------



## Ves (20 June 2012)

Julia said:


> Leaving aside your first paragraph, that's a sensible and logical post.
> Great points.  I agree.
> Still think she could bring considerable expertise and skill to the ailing Fairfax, but hell, I don't really care.
> I'm not a reader of their products and am not a shareholder.



You are probably interested, like me, on a human interest level. I don't mind seeing personalities of all sorts trying to overcome new challenges.  Good on her for having a go, whatever her motives, I am sure the ride will be an interesting one to watch. I am sure she knows at least what a great challenge it will be, I agree with you that she isn't stupid enough to not realise that much.

Good luck to all holders, especially those who picked it up on the back of recent events.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 June 2012)

I'm still considering investing some lazy money in FXJ, it is up and down like the proverbial bride's nightie.

Could we possibly have some comment from our senior chartists.

Even when I invert the chart y axis, I still cannot see a technical reason to buy, but it is a compelling action play by Gina.

Could tech/a possibly comment or one of our other senior or not so senior chartists.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (23 June 2012)

If Rinehart gets her way it will improve, if she dumps the shares it's finished.

The people in there arent good enough by a long shot.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 June 2012)

MrBurns said:


> If Rinehart gets her way it will improve, if she dumps the shares it's finished.
> 
> The people in there arent good enough by a long shot.




Thanks Burnsie,

That is my main fundamental worry.

If she dumped now, FXJ would be just one week away from administration.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (23 June 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> If she dumped now, FXJ would be just one week away from administration.
> 
> gg




And she could do just that, my information is that things arent exactly on the level in there.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 June 2012)

MrBurns said:


> And she could do just that, my information is that things arent exactly on the level in there.




Jeez Burnsie,

I don't need to hear this, I have a provisional order in on Monday open for 20

Please expand.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (23 June 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Jeez Burnsie,
> 
> I don't need to hear this, I have a provisional order in on Monday open for 20
> 
> ...




Cant really go into detail gg but she will have a hell of a job straightening it out.

Too many people in there on the gravy train using the company to their own benefit.

On the other hand the restructure can only be a good thing and improve profitability, I'm suprised the market didnt react more positively.

The restructure and the presence of Gina made me think I should buy in now, but I rarely get it right, if I stay out you'll be ok.

I think it's a fair punt gg.


----------



## numbercruncher (23 June 2012)

I dont get how Gina purchasing Fairfax can automatically change its fortunes as it seems some predict ? Her quest to control fairfax is possibly about power or reach not money as she makes money from mining and obvioulsy she has a personal political leaning agenda.

I guess you could take some solace from corporations law that a board member must act in the best interests of all shareholders.

It matters not who owns fairfax it wont all of a sudden inspire people to buy printed text - the board screwed up by not embracing digital media over a decade ago - all that being said Fairfax has potential as a punt perhaps ? And if they started charging for digital papers would many buy considering the enormous amount of free content available ?

Certainly the board has realised the monumental errors of judgement in the past and must be working on strategies for the future I just cant put my finger on how Ginas foray into this industry can be measurably more positive.


----------



## McLovin (23 June 2012)

numbercruncher said:


> I dont get how Gina purchasing Fairfax can automatically change its fortunes as it seems some predict ? Her quest to control fairfax is possibly about power or reach not money as she makes money from mining and obvioulsy she has a personal political leaning agenda.
> 
> I guess you could take some solace from corporations law that a board member must act in the best interests of all shareholders.
> 
> It matters not who owns fairfax it wont all of a sudden inspire people to buy printed text - the board screwed up by not embracing digital media over a decade ago - all that being said Fairfax has potential as a punt perhaps ? And if they started charging for digital papers would many buy considering the enormous amount of free content available ?




+1

Rinehart's investment in FXJ is less than 1% of her net worth. I imagine the time she devotes to FXJ will be commensurate with that, except when she wants to play her hand in editorial matters. I have more faith in the remaining instos, especially Allen Gray, getting some shake-up in the business than I do Rinehart. I have as much confidence in Rinehart's ability to oversee a media company as I do Rupert Murdoch's ability to run a mining company.



numbercruncher said:


> Certainly the board has realised the monumental errors of judgement in the past and must be working on strategies for the future I just cant put my finger on how Ginas foray into this industry can be measurably more positive.




I think the board to this point has been useless and while Corbett is chairman, will remain that way.


----------



## MrBurns (26 June 2012)

Rinehart has shown her intentions now and may dump her Fairfax shares, gg if you're observing I would get out now if it isn't too late, even if she succeeds I cant see her doing anything for Fairfax other than destroying it.

She has also bumped her share in Ch10 I think , after watching 4 corners last night that she is a bit out of touch and thinks her money will buy her anything, well it might have if she was clever about how she used it but the way she's going about this will mean she will fail and take those she's involved (FXJ) with her.

Now after having said all that it's just my opinion which is not based on anything but gut feel, dont rely on my opinion, I have learned to view it with caution


----------



## notting (26 June 2012)

She is not someone who likes to lose.  
Dumping her shares would give her that taste and she will battle hammer and tong to keep her winning image. 
She has so many people blowing smoke up her @rse because of all those billions she is far more likely to be bluffing and will take out the company not thinking the brand would be harmed.  
Her battles with Rose Porteous and now her own children are legendary.
She will buy the whole thing!


----------



## PinguPingu (27 June 2012)

What would actually happen if Gina dumped her ~19% stake in Fairfax? Obviously a huge over supply and a marked drop, but would it spike up again as buyers come back in at 'discount' prices?

Her reasoning in dumping would also play a part, if its known it was for political reasons rather than business would that inspire more confidence?


----------



## Calliope (27 June 2012)

PinguPingu said:


> What would actually happen if Gina dumped her ~19% stake in Fairfax? Obviously a huge over supply and a marked drop, but would it spike up again as buyers come back in at 'discount' prices?
> 
> Her reasoning in dumping would also play a part, if its known it was for political reasons rather than business would that inspire more confidence?




Follow Gina;


----------



## MrBurns (29 June 2012)

And the latest knee jerk reaction is.........might be time to buy, Gina is cracking the whip and this might be just what Fairfax needs - 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-29/rinehart-takes-on-fairfax-chairman/4101256



> Mining billionaire Gina Rinehart has asked the chairman of Fairfax Media to resign if he cannot reverse falling circulation and revenue at the company's newspapers.
> 
> In an open letter to Roger Corbett, Ms Rinehart asked him to step down by November if a number of performance milestones had not been met.
> 
> ...


----------



## notting (29 June 2012)

> Mining billionaire Gina Rinehart has asked the chairman of Fairfax Media to resign if he cannot reverse falling circulation and revenue at the company's newspapers.



I think she's trying to be Packer!
It worked for him, it'll work for me!
Lunatic.


----------



## Logique (30 June 2012)

I wonder if has occurred to the _illuminati_ at Fairfax, that their hysteria over Gina Rinehart's supposed hijacking of editorial policy is tantamount to an admission that editorial bias is possible.

Where is the evidence of their claims against her? They are in effect calling her a liar.

It's an unprofitable, unaccountable, sheltered workshop, patrolled by thought police. Go Gina.


----------



## Logique (30 June 2012)

_Bon mots_ from Bolt. Even with a (hypothetically) balanced Fairfax, the Left are still way ahead. 


> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/
> [Martin] Flanagan [The Age] trembles:
> Any national media reflects the national mind. Within a few years, we could have a national mind dominated by Rupert Murdoch, Gina Rinehart, talkback radio hosts and tabloid newspaper columnists..
> 
> ..But trust me: with *the Left still dominant in* the ABC, SBS, Australia Council, universities, Fairfax, publically-funded think-tanks, journalist union, Canberra press gallery, Anglican bishops’ conventions, writers festivals and, indeed, even the newrooms of most of the papers and TV stations owned by wicked Right-wing oligarchs, you’ve got such a head start, that you’d have to be pretty bad to lose it from here....



Not to mention the Teachers, when they're not on strike.


----------



## Superb Parrot (30 June 2012)

Logique said:


> It's an unprofitable, unaccountable, sheltered workshop, patrolled by thought police. Go Gina.




Well said. It amuses me to see that the letters (in the SMH) are selected to reinforce the bias of the journalists. I just wonder how representative the letters are, it would be very interesting to sit in on the selection process.


----------



## Julia (30 June 2012)

Logique said:


> I wonder if has occurred to the _illuminati_ at Fairfax, that their hysteria over Gina Rinehart's supposed hijacking of editorial policy is tantamount to an admission that editorial bias is possible.
> 
> Where is the evidence of their claims against her? They are in effect calling her a liar.
> 
> It's an unprofitable, unaccountable, sheltered workshop, patrolled by thought police. Go Gina.






Logique said:


> _Bon mots_ from Bolt. Even with a (hypothetically) balanced Fairfax, the Left are still way ahead.
> Not to mention the Teachers, when they're not on strike.



+1 to both above.


----------



## Calliope (30 June 2012)

Roger Corbett says;



> "If Mrs Rinehart wants control of Fairfax Media she must make a bid," the letter said. "Mrs Rinehart's letter today has once and for all unmasked her motives for her continual attacks on the company and its board.
> 
> "Our readers are telling us that if Mrs Rinehart succeeds in this personal crusade they will abandon us. We have tens of thousands of letters and emails of support."




Where would the poor things go. :shake:


----------



## skc (24 August 2012)

Tipping competition... which share will reach zero first?





And where did the money go?

Turn the charts around and you get the chart of CRZ, REA and SEK.

FXJ+TEN+APN = $1.9B market cap.
CRZ+REA+SEK = $6.1B.


----------



## notting (24 August 2012)

She tries to sell a big steak at 1c below market.  Yeah right!


----------



## skc (24 August 2012)

notting said:


> She tries to sell a big steak at 1c below market.  Yeah right!




It is suspected that she priced her steak (sic) before the cow was slaughtered.. I mean before the last profit result.

But what she forgot is that when you hold 18.7% then sell only 5%, people are going to wonder what you plan to do with the rest of it.


----------



## prawn_86 (24 August 2012)

Perhaps it was all a ply anyway hoping that she wouldn't get the order filled. Trying to flex her stake to show the FXJ board what she can do with such a big holding


----------



## notting (24 August 2012)

prawn_86 said:


> Perhaps it was all a ply anyway hoping that she wouldn't get the order filled. Trying to flex her stake to show the FXJ board what she can do with such a big holding




Perhaps, but they'd be pretty dumb to have not realized that without her having to do that.  
It would hardly make a stronger argument for her to sit on the board since she is trashing out of the company.


----------



## Huskar (13 September 2012)

Any thoughts on large uptick at yesterday's close? A demerger or t/o in the air?...


----------



## Joules MM1 (16 September 2012)

related indirectly, the printed word is an old technology in the same way barges on canals were superceded by trains..... :

http://www.businessinsider.com/news...twbutton&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=media

*And Now Let Us Gasp In Astonishment At What Just Happened To The Newspaper Busines*s
Henry Blodget	| Sep. 15, 2012, 9:03 PM


----------



## ROE (20 October 2012)

dead to this business many may say 

I like fishing at the bottum where the upside is greater than the down side...

I'm in at 36c ...the sum of all part is greater than the share price.
fundies are stacking in, a break up scenario is likely to unlock value at least 60c a pop.


----------



## prawn_86 (23 October 2012)

ROE said:


> dead to this business many may say
> 
> I like fishing at the bottum where the upside is greater than the down side...
> 
> ...




First time i have seen you make a short term trade ROE. That chart does not look healthy at all!

I can see what you are saying about the sum of the parts, but seems fairly risky. Do you have a stop loss for this one?


----------



## ROE (23 October 2012)

prawn_86 said:


> First time i have seen you make a short term trade ROE. That chart does not look healthy at all!
> 
> I can see what you are saying about the sum of the parts, but seems fairly risky. Do you have a stop loss for this one?




oh I trade but I still have most of my money in core stock holding 

I made a deliberation decision to contribute on business side and long term holding only..

My trades are very well research and opportunistic I don't trade every day...
some weeks I have 2 positions, sometimes I can go for months without a position...

it all depend when opportunities that pop up that align with my reasoning...
my trades are cream on top of my return, overall I never lose money on trading
always end the years with decent gain...

I carefully follow stocks that get my attention and ONLY when I think upside is on
my side I come in.....FXJ I followed it for 8 months but only came in last week 

when I do I take large position like 25K plus I have around 20% of the capital for trading...
the way I trades is very unconventional, I purely process information and statistics

I don't use charts, I know a little bit about it I know enough buzz to know what people
are on about when they talk about technical charts.

the knowledge I accumulate over the years let me process information very quickly
and I have various source that feeds me rumors and facts and I process it whether its credible
or not...

I never commit more than the allocated capital, no exception and I usually don't hold more
than 2 position at a time...that way I can process information as it come and take 
control of it much quicker..

Stock I trades doesn't need to stand up to the rigorous process I use for investing long term
but it does have to past a certain hurdle, some business I don't like holding for long term
but I still trades it...

you can say my trading is an extension of my research into my long term investing stocks
using exact same techniques but broaden it...

I'm of a mind set, find something you good at it, stick with it, broaden it you will become an expert over time.

blah blah anyway not really related to FXJ so I leave it at that...


----------



## Klogg (23 October 2012)

I've never made any sort of Asset plays, and given FXJ was the first one I've considered, I'm going to ask this:

How do you know that even though the assets are clearly worth more than what the company is selling for, that you'll actually get that value returned to you as a shareholder?

Has there ever been a time where a company is selling cheaper than its net assets, but management are somehow able to destroy that value over time? (Not suggesting it'll happen in this case BTW)

I know I'm sort of side-tracking, but given FXJ's current state, I'd say it's fair to post here.


----------



## herzy (23 October 2012)

May be of interest to ROE:

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...t-an-option-Hywood-ZC65E?OpenDocument&src=hp6


----------



## ROE (23 October 2012)

read on the age today

He doesn't have the final say the big shareholders does and the fundies keep 
stacking up their position..

their performance is judge on the share price, they cant sit there forever
sooner or later if fortune doesn't improve, big shareholder will get vocal and
old guards need to be let go for new blood that will carry out what need to be
done


----------



## MrBurns (23 October 2012)

ROE said:


> read on the age today
> 
> He doesn't have the final say the big shareholders does and the fundies keep
> stacking up their position..
> ...




Or the whole thing will go into liquidation n disappear from sight.


----------



## ROE (23 October 2012)

Klogg said:


> I've never made any sort of Asset plays, and given FXJ was the first one I've considered, I'm going to ask this:
> 
> How do you know that even though the assets are clearly worth more than what the company is selling for, that you'll actually get that value returned to you as a shareholder?
> 
> ...




Trademe listed on NZ they have 51%, trademe market cap is around 1.3Bn
They have 250m of properties book at cost..market value probably in 300m-400m
AFR is a very profitable business that can fetch a 100m - 200m easy, look at news pay for eureka etc...
Radio another 50-100m?
rsvp domain.com all profitable

the drag on the business is the metro paper.....work out how to contain this bleeders
you have a business worth so much more than current price...

they already trying to make it less costly to run so over time they can make it a
bit cheaper to run and make transition to online....

they wipe out the old media asset value last FY so they now can move forward.

there are solutions, just need good doers.

There is no certainty I just have to go with my research and analysis
and if I made a wrong call that is fine I'm acting with full knowledge 
and made an informed choice, that is the best I can do and move on


----------



## ROE (23 October 2012)

MrBurns said:


> Or the whole thing will go into liquidation n disappear from sight.




highly unlike scenario as worse case they can wipe debt clean with asset sale plus
their cash flow is pretty good so no need for that ...

stop dividend and they can wipe debt clean in 3 years 

at 35-36c you pretty much written off all the stuffed up they made up to this point
there isn't much more down side to go...upside is FAR FAR better....

and if they pay even 2c dividend a year 35-36c look bloody good, beat old cash in the bank by a fair margin 

forgot to mention it is one of the most shorted stock on the ASX if not the top few.

sooner or later these guys need to buy back and if fundies keep stacking up and accumulate more shares
say Allen Gray 19% .. Lazard 19% ..Gina 14% other could come in you can have a decent shot at squeeze
the shorters and watch the stock rally ...

the up side do look brighter than down side


----------



## skc (23 October 2012)

ROE said:


> the drag on the business is the metro paper.....work out how to contain this bleeders
> you have a business worth so much more than current price...
> 
> they already trying to make it less costly to run so over time they can make it a
> ...




I read somewhere that the easiest solution is to simply and literally stop the press.

Stop printing (and distributing) paper version of the paper and it is a collection of semi-reasonable media assets.


----------



## MrBurns (24 October 2012)

If you listen to Stephen Mayne it looks fairly hopeless - 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-24/fairfax-says-hard-to-predict-future-revenue/4331330


----------



## ROE (24 October 2012)

That what makes the market, many opinions and expert analyst 
I pitch my analysis against the experts that how I make my money.

Make no mistake FXJ got headwinds in their path but the question to ask is
has all that been price in and More  and that how money is made or destroyed


----------



## McLovin (24 October 2012)

MrBurns said:


> If you listen to Stephen Mayne it looks fairly hopeless -
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-24/fairfax-says-hard-to-predict-future-revenue/4331330




I reckon Stephen Mayne is fairly hopeless. He seems to spend his days whinging and whining about everything.

I bought FXJ a couple of months ago, FWIW.


----------



## MrBurns (25 October 2012)

McLovin said:


> I reckon Stephen Mayne is fairly hopeless. He seems to spend his days whinging and whining about everything.
> 
> I bought FXJ a couple of months ago, FWIW.




I feel inclined to jump in also, they are without doubt hopeless but perhaps that has driven the price lower than it should be.
Question is who would wade in to take it over and why ?
Print has had it so what is Fairfax really worth ??????


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (17 January 2013)

Worth watching FXJ today. 

The UK Guardian plan to enter the Australian market in the next 3 months, just as FXJ decide to start charging for online content.

Marais and other insto bosses will be putting some fire to the Board's misguided policies.

The UK Guardian has the same paying demographic as The Age and SMH, rich lefties, mid to upper echelon public servants and the richer basketweavers.

The Crusties and Greens will probably switch to an Australian Guardian as well.

Gina may get her chance to get on the board, this week.

Someone needs to rescue this company.

A rise in price today may signify significant board change and editorial change in the mastheads.

gg


----------



## notting (11 September 2013)

Is this news?

So how much money is lost putting a free Apple add like this on the top of the front page?





They are obviously doing something right -


----------



## notting (11 September 2013)

Not to be out done by stupidity.




Gee that looks familiar.


----------



## piggybank (23 January 2014)

It should have read:-

*"Shorten Leads Labor To The Wilderness"*

​


----------



## pacestick (21 February 2014)

Is this a short squeeze  started yesterday and perhaps continuing today


----------



## Gringotts Bank (17 March 2016)

120 jobs to go.


----------



## notting (4 July 2017)

Lachlan Murdoch and Packer join forces and look to lose again as they did with One tel


----------



## Roller_1 (16 November 2017)

Can someone enlighten me on what is going on with FXJ today and what it means as a holder?


----------



## greggles (16 November 2017)

Roller_1 said:


> Can someone enlighten me on what is going on with FXJ today and what it means as a holder?



Domain Holdings is listing today, so FXJ has lost some market cap because of the spinoff. Will be interesting to see how DHG performs when it hits the boards at midday.


----------



## Choochoozz (16 November 2017)

very keen to see how this plays out.


----------



## Roller_1 (16 November 2017)

greggles said:


> Domain Holdings is listing today, so FXJ has lost some market cap because of the spinoff. Will be interesting to see how DHG performs when it hits the boards at midday.



So as a holder of FXJ i receive the amount of DHG that has been split from FXJ?


----------



## greggles (26 July 2018)

*Fairfax and Nine announce merger plan*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-26/fairfax-and-nine-announce-merger/10037712


----------



## System (13 December 2018)

On December 7th, 2018, Fairfax Media Limited (FXJ) was removed from the ASX's Official List in accordance with Listing Rule 17.11, following implementation of the scheme of arrangement between FXJ and its shareholders in connection with the acquisition of all the issued capital in FXJ by Nine Entertainment Co. Holdings Limited.


----------

