% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Journal Communications Inc Message Board

  • Angelmountains Angelmountains May 28, 2005 9:47 AM Flag

    Local Control

    We keep hearing from Journal Management that "Local Control" is so important to the culture of the company. That was the reason given for Class B shares to have 10 times the voting power of Class A shares. Yet, the naming of Hugh McGarry as circulation manager of Journal/Sentinel brings another outsider into the executive ranks. In fact, how many Milwaukee-area people are left in the executive ranks? Steve Smith is from The Highlands in Wauwatosa but, after Steve, who else is local. I just don't understand the relevance of "Local Control." If someone is competent, I don't care where they're from. In addition, touting the concept of "Local (Milwaukee) Control" is insulting to employees who work at JCI divisions outside Wisconsin. Now that employee ownership is dead, let's not cling to an outdated concept of "Local Control" that simply does not exist. Since the current management has demosnstrated over the past 15 years its inability to produce growth numbers in-line with other media companies, it's clear the best way for stock holders to get a decent return on their investment is for the company to be sold. The old argument against a sale--that somehow "Local Control" should be protected--is totally invalid.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • How does hiring one non-local executive cede local control? I don't understand why you hold stock in a company that you have no confidence in. Eventually the company will be sold. In the meantime, bashing the company on a message board isn't going to speed up the process.

      • 2 Replies to terryklotz
      • Terry,

        A generic answer that applies to many of us:

        I hold stock in this company because I have been an employee since the very early 70s. I bought all the units I could, every time it was offered, until the malaise of the late 80s hit. Somehow that seems to me to coincide with the Steve and Doug regime taking over, but that is another story. Me, like many long term employees stopped buying units when the return went in the dumper.

        Now comes the ramp-up�you would have to be a fool not to jump all over that guaranteed return. So many of us did!

        But now, here we sit with our remaining B shares that we won�t sell at $16, because we think its worth more, yet the prospects for growth seem very limited.

        I have no confidence in the leadership of this company, yet I think the company is worth more than the current valuation. That is why I, and many others, still own stock in a company that we bash the leadership on.

        Loyalty to the company is a wonderful thing. As is believing in the management team that is running the Co. For many of us, we have major doubts about their ability to run a publicly owned company and they have showed nothing so far to prove us wrong.

        Here�s a scary thought� what if the $18.50 secondary buyout was it and this stock never sees that price again.

        Not a Terry basher, just think you should remember there are other reasons stockholders might not be happy.

      • Terry,My Goodness girl.Its almost 6 on a Saturday night of a long weekend and your on a Message board.Dam get out there and find some LOVE for a night.Theres more to life then hitting on a joint and sucking Beer with the UNCK.Still havnt answered my question how many B Shares have you bought?

13.120.00(0.00%)Mar 13 4:08 PMEDT