He does have words for his new co-owner
Several years ago, at my father-in-law’s golf and country club swimming pool in Palm Desert, a woman asked what I did for a living.
I’m a newspaperman, I told her proudly.
“Oh,” she said. “Do you own one?”
I do now.
At least that’s the way I understand the deal in which a Chicago real estate mogul named Sam Zell bought the Los Angeles Times and the rest of Tribune Co., a deal that was announced Monday. He’s going to use an Employee Stock Ownership Plan to help finance the $8-billion deal, meaning that employees will own a stake in the company.
The first thing I plan to do as owner, by the way, is fire all the executives who have accepted six- and seven-figure bonuses while plotting layoffs and driving the company into the ground. I won’t name names, but they know who they are.
I’d also like to fire anyone who embraced the plan to have guest editors publish the L.A. Times’ opinion section, and in particular, anyone who endorsed the crackpot idea -- I kid you not -- of handing the job to Donald Rumsfeld.
Oh, wait a minute. What if The Times’ publisher was in on that one? I’m probably already on thin ice for using the terms “wieners” and “hog butchers” when talking about upper management.
But I do think it’s important for Mr. Zell to know that’s the way it’s going to be around here. Zell, who won the months-long billionaire bonanza by beating out local boys Eli Broad and Ron Burkle, has at least one thing in common with Broad and billionaire David Geffen, who, as far as I know, would still like to buy The Times. They all have beach houses in Malibu.
So what choice did I have? On Friday, I made a call to the Coastal Commission to see if Zell, like Geffen, has a history of denying beach access to the hoi polloi. If he does -- I’m awaiting a callback -- you’ll read it here first.
On the other hand, if Zell ever needs a houseboy in Malibu, I’d be happy to summer there and bring a few colleagues along. It’s the least Zell could do after committing our future retirement funds to help pay for his new toy.
I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but I do have a few concerns about Zell. Although he said during the negotiations that he had no interest in interfering with editorial policy, which is good, he also called himself an “opportunist” whose interest is purely financial.
“This could be an attractive investment for us,” said the man known as the “Grave Dancer” for his interest in squeezing profit out of distressed firms.
My advice to my co-owner is that if he truly feels that way, he should clam up about it or sell The Times to one of the other local big shots, who might not be perfect either, but would at least have to take good care of the trust or answer for it at cocktail parties.
Nobody I work with thinks of what we do as just another business. Not to sound high-minded about it, but there might be no more important institution in Southern California than The Times, whose job is to be the glue in this sprawling metropolis, hold officials accountable, entertain, inform, provoke and serve as a community forum.
We’re not perfect, but if business is what Zell is interested in, I can guarantee him that undervaluing or diminishing the mission is bad business.
As co-owner, I feel it’s my duty to speak my mind, Mr. Zell. We’re partners, after all.
And by chance, are you going to be using the beach pad this weekend?
