July 9, 2006

Murdoch Meeting Raises Disclosure Issues
By REUTERS

Filed at 10:15 a.m. ET

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/business/business-column-lifting.html?pagewanted=print


NEW YORK (Reuters) - News Corp. (NWS.N) shareholders learned how much 
revenue a closely watched Internet division would generate -- if they were 
lucky enough to be invited to a meeting in Australia last week with Chief 
Executive Rupert Murdoch.

Owners of the rest of the company's 3.2 billion outstanding shares were 
left in the dark until a day later, when UBS analyst Aryeh Bourkoff 
published a research note about the proceedings that was furnished to 
U.S.-based media.

The disclosure of sales targets for the unit that oversees the popular 
online teen hangout MySpace.com -- responsible for much of Wall Street's 
enthusiasm for the long term prospects of News Corp.'s stock -- has spurred 
experts on U.S. securities law to question whether Murdoch had given 
investors in Australia an advantage over those in the U.S.

While four experts contacted by Reuters stopped short of saying Murdoch had 
broken U.S. selective disclosure laws, they said the incident merited 
further probing, particularly given that News Corp. shifted its domicile 
from Australia to the U.S. in 2004.

``I see a fair amount of smoke -- I wonder how much fire is there,'' said 
James Cox, a securities law professor at Duke University. ``Certainly, if I 
were on the enforcement staff of the SEC, I would want to collect more 
information from News Corp. to (learn) exactly what transpired.''

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) said it does not comment 
on individual companies.

Global companies like News Corp. hold investor meetings around the world 
all the time. When companies disclose significant information at such 
meetings, they typically issue news releases or a regulatory filing 
simultaneously or immediately afterward to inform the public.

``Most people cure these with 8-Ks,'' said Hillary Sale, a corporate law 
and finance professor at the University of Iowa College of Law, referring 
to a type of regulatory filing for the disclosure of information that could 
be ``material'' to a company's prospects.

MATERIAL WORLD

At issue is whether Murdoch's statement -- that Internet revenue in fiscal 
2007 would rise to nearly $500 million -- constitutes ``material'' 
non-public information, experts said.

``If you're talking about MySpace, a hot Internet-based property and you're 
talking about changes in revenue projection that's significantly beyond 
what was in the public domain before, I'm certainly curious whether that 
would be material,'' said Donald Langevoort, a law professor at Georgetown 
University. ``It could be.''

In 2000, the SEC approved a law on fair disclosure, Regulation FD, which 
bars companies from selectively disclosing information that an investor 
would consider significant in determining whether to buy, sell or hold a stock.

Two News Corp. investors said Murdoch's Sydney meeting did little to move 
shares, as the forecast for Internet revenue represent less than 2 percent 
of the $27 billion that analysts expected News Corp. to generate by fiscal 
2007.

``Most people thought it would be somewhere around there,'' said Larry 
Haverty, a portfolio manager at Gamco Investors Inc., which owned 351,000 
Class B shares and 19.3 million Class A shares of News Corp at March 31, 2006.

Another investor, Morris Mark of Mark Asset Management, agreed, but called 
for better disclosure of News Corp.'s Internet financial performance, which 
it does not break out on a consistent basis yet.

But there's little doubt on Wall Street that fast growing MySpace is key 
News Corp.'s future. ``It's very important strategically and yet another 
example of how News Corp and Rupert Murdoch is focused on its vision and 
not what makes shareholders happy in the near term,'' Richard Greenfield, 
an analyst at Pali Research said.

A New York-based spokesman for News Corp. said Murdoch's Internet revenue 
forecast had not previously been disclosed, but the company did not 
consider it materially relevant.

``Fox Interactive Media's revenues are currently a little over 1 percent of 
our total revenues,'' a News Corp. spokesman said. ``By no stretch of the 
imagination could that be regarded as material to a company of our size. 
That was evidenced by the complete lack of reaction in the market.''

Greg Baxter, a spokesman in Australia for News Corp., said about 55 
analysts and investors attended the meeting.New York-based media 
conglomerate had not issued a news release, an SEC filing or any transcript 
of the meeting.

Murdoch's remarks were enough for UBS to raise its revenue forecast for Fox 
Interactive Media to $465 million for fiscal year 2007, from its earlier 
estimate of $370 million.

The law's broad definition of ``material'' makes it hard to enforce, said 
securities experts. Late last year, a Reg FD case the SEC filed against 
software company Siebel Systems Inc. was dismissed by a district court on 
grounds the information in question was not that different to already 
public information.


================================
George Antunes, Political Science Dept
University of Houston; Houston, TX 77204
Voice: 713-743-3923  Fax: 713-743-3927
antunes at uh dot edu



Reply with a "Thank you" if you liked this post.
_____________________________

MEDIANEWS mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to