View from the US: Britain can't threaten 'crumble-resistant Murdoch empire'
So what if Murdoch shuts all his British papers, and just prints for other people? The News Corp empire will be just fine, says a Washington Post blogger ...
As proof, he points to the company's annual report. One lesson from it, according to Wemple, is that although people in the UK can "harrumph, preach and launch inquiries ... Britain cannot threaten News Corp."
Last year, about a quarter of the company’s $32 billion in revenue came from films — such as Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel. Another 20 percent came from cable and another 13 percent from Fox broadcast television. Wemple says that "among the few dark corners of the document" was the statement that "for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, the U.K. newspapers’ revenues decreased 2% as compared to fiscal 2009, primarily due to lower circulation revenues . . .” He paints the scenario of the British outcry about the News of the World, the Sun and the Times forcing the company to bail from the titles altogether. His comment: "Good! News Corp. dumps money-losing/marginally profitable newspapers. At the same time, it retains its state-of-the-art British presses, printing the titles of any outfit that wants to distribute newsprint. "The Telegraph is already on board. None other than the Guardian has gushed over just how sleek the machines are. As long as newsprint is consumed in Britain, News Corp. will profit." Of News Corp.’s bid for the total takeover of BSkyB, Wemple concedes, "The transaction must undergo a sticky regulatory process" with one M.P. saying in Parliament that it’s “time we sent this non-taxpaying Murdoch [to] whence he came.” Wemple notes in his blog (full version here) that Murdoch already has a controlling stake in British Sky Broadcasting. "But at News Corp., controlling never suffices. One must dominate."