New York Times Stock Hits Lowest Price Since September 1997

NEW YORK (AP) -- Shares of New York Times Co. touched their lowest point in more than a decade Wednesday, after an analyst cut his price target and predicted shares will weaken over time.

The stock lost 96 cents, or 6.4 percent, to $14.10 in late-afternoon trading. Earlier in the day, shares touched a low of $13.91, their lowest level since September 1997.

Lehman Brothers analyst Craig Huber cut his price target to $8 from $11, implying he expects the stock to drop 47 percent over Tuesday's close. He reiterated an "Underweight" rating, and said the company's dividend is at risk of being cut in coming years.

Due to increasing cyclical and secular pressures, newspaper advertising revenue will likely fall 11.1 percent in 2008, Huber said. He previously had expected a drop of 9.3 percent.

"New York Times shares should follow its weakening fundamentals over time," Huber said in a note to clients.

Potential asset sales -- the company owns newspapers in New England, among other properties -- are not a reason to own shares, he said.

Its new corporate headquarters building in Manhattan and its stake in the Boston Red Sox should be worth "significantly more" in five to 10 years, Huber said, so there likely won't be any "rush to sell these assets."

"Should the company choose to sell any assets of size and the stock move up on the news, we would advise investors sell into the strength," he said.

Huber said the company's 92-cents-per-share dividend is likely to be cut. "We think the company's dividend is at risk of being cut over the next few years and think the company would be much better served using the $133 million annually to instead pay down debt," he wrote.

So far this year, shares have lost 14 percent of their value.

A company representative was not immediately available for comment.

Comments

[iblis]

The NYT should report the news and stop trying to indoctrinate the masses with its biased far left view of the world.

[toocoldout]

They are left on most issues but when it comes to foriegn policy in the middle east, they are as right-wing as it gets.

[WorkingClass]

People dont read newspapers anymore thank god. Now if they would just stop watching tv.

[Amennyc]

Not about being "left" it's about not focusing on what the cast of "Gossip Girl" wears on the first page. If that's the best the NY times can do for a story, then it should tank as a newspaper. Where is the headline stating Bush lied to the world about Iraq. We all know it, why don't they? Instead they bore us with editorials on what Bush or Congress should do. Knowing all along they will do nothing. Why not put that on their front page? That fact that congress does nothing? Caves into the least popular president. Ny Times used to be the paper of choice, its now just another victim to MSM.

[rjean]

who is lower...the ny slimes or dingy harry and botox nanny?????­??????????

[UnbiasView]

Look what happens when you take a massive turn to the left and take the anti-american stance . . . you get the Air America treatment.

[Ides]

I think you mean, "Look what happens when you take a massive turn to the Right and hire William Kristol and his ilk to 'balance' your pages."

[nogimmicks]

NYT needs to add columnists like Dick Cheney and Richard Perle to improve credibility. Also, adding David Addington and John Yoo to write about legal matters, would be a great idea.

Sarcasm aside, nothing can really pull the NYT out of the hall of shame they placed themselves into.

[UnbiasView]

Didn't help when they released a false story on McCain that didn't have any legs . . . MSNBC covered it for a whole night and what a shock, nothing came of it.

With that kind of reporting you lose a lot.

[Ides]

The story was absolutely true. It just didn't say anything.

[sleeperd]

This bloated bastion of liberal drivel is sinking into it's own slime. What a pleasure to watch.

[anastasiabeaverhousen]

Not exactly. Hiring scum like Bill Kristol and Judity Miller are more likely the culprits. When a publication starts to pander to people who think Fox is a new channel, one can expect their stock to tank.

[anastasiabeaverhousen]

Judith,....sorry

[TheRebel82]

Thats what happens when you start pandering to the corporate right-wing noise machine.

[UnbiasView]

The NYT is known as a left wing newspaper and if you think they are right wing . . . you are probably really far left.

[toocoldout]

That explains why they've been doing so much advertising lately. They have to get people to start reading the NYTimes if they hope to survive.

[DesertLight]

Well boys take another hard left turn and keep on scratching your head.