Jul 1, 2011, 5:10 PM EDT
The New York Times has held a minority share in the Boston Red Sox — well, technically its parent company, Fenway Sports Group — for several years. When I first learned this I tried hard to see if their coverage of the Red Sox was at all biased, but I could never find any evidence of it. The sports writing was straight up. The non-sports stuff was all about how fundamental problems facing American society were affecting upwardly mobile Manhattanites, so that was unchanged too.
Anyway, the Times is cashing in on some of the Sox stock. Today it was announced that it has sold 390 units of Fenway Sports Group stock, which represented more than half of its holdings in the company, for $117 million. They will continue to own 7.3% of FSG.
No word on what they’re going to invest their profits in. Might be wise to invest in a better means of protecting people from navigating around their pay wall. I’ve had a harder time making it from my living room to the john than I have getting their premium content for free. No matter the case, the Times will no doubt be ON IT.
- Mike Trout is the best MVP choice, but . . . 2
- Baseball is dying, you guys, because no one would recognize Mike Trout in a bar 40
- And That Happened: Thursday’s scores and highlights 70
- Alex Gordon and the M-V-P chants 42
- Could women play major league baseball? Sure. Right now, though, the deck is stacked against them. 216
- And That Happened: Wednesday’s scores and highlights 63
- David Price surrenders nine consecutive hits to the Yankees in the worst start of his career 29
- Video: Jorge Soler homers in his first major league at-bat 31
- The Cubs grounds crew was short staffed because the Cubs were trying to avoid Obamacare (247)
- Could women play major league baseball? Sure. Right now, though, the deck is stacked against them. (216)
- Forgiveness for Pete Rose? Not in this lifetime (145)
- Albert Pujols plays the “you never played the game!” card (104)
- Great Moments in Drug Testing and Punishment: The NFL Edition (101)