Any thoughts on TR layoffs (not refinitiv)? Any insight into the longer term plans? Are they setting up to make it easy to sell the remaining parts (Legal, Corp, Tax) and get back to where it all started in news?
11 replies (most recent on top)
Do you mean this Woodbridge?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Woodbridge_Company
They're already our controlling shareholder.
I heard that the next big sale will be Reuters to Woodbridge, possibly starting in February. Anyone else hear similarly?
This is true, TRTA is mostly USA. Very little business in EMEA, and even less in South America and APAC. It’s now combining with Legal and being branded as Corporates. The Polish TR lifer as the head of Corp? Lol it’s obvious from townhalls and webcasts he has no fresh ideas or has a clue of the business. Cross selling and higher retention are his ideas of growing revenue. That’s been emphasized for a long time. And then of course you have all the TR lifers at the top of the chain after the re-org. No fresh faces. All those lifers got on The Hub to post how excited they are about the new structure. It’s quite obvious all these people were at a table to make sure their messaging was in line.
Also the layoff king/ cost-cutting expert, aka master son, is now co-COO and overlooking things in these orgs just like he did at F&R. The plan I believe is to cut costs then sell. A lot of change management people at the top or moving to the US. Be aware
I totally left Reuters out of the discussion, but I guess it is a possibility that Woodbridge remain in the media publishing business as they do own the Globe & Mail still, but doubtful. To the point about Legal & TRTA being global, that is not really the case. They are far more North American based and there is barely any TRTA in Canada or outside the US. Yes there are pockets of Legal globally (Carswell, Sweet & Maxwell, Westlaw China) but minimal footprint. But understandably they are both mature businesses and solid making them attractive to a buyer, TRTA has been experiencing double digit growth for years despite the markets. Yes, the Trust principles, lol. They changed that Reuters ownership rule toots sweet to get that deal done.
@VEBvMXU-xus, impressive message. thanks.
They fudged it somehow after the "merger" (takeover)
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-reuters-thomson-founders-idUSL1545956420070515
Media control via Reuters News ?
But no one owns a majority of Reuters News inc. Thomson family.
I thought it was designed that way so no majority shareholder or owner could influence reporting ?
Legal, and Tax & Accounting are still successful (financially) and big players, across the globe. The question is of course whether the Thomson family want to be a part of it. Yes they paid more for Reuter’s than it technically was worth, but let’s not forget the brand is basically priceless in the new era of news, fake news, biased news, and how easily influenced people are.
So now we have Reuter’s, with revenues of $70m and basically not turning a profit, but now with 30 years of funding to the tune of $325m, to rebuild itself as the de facto source of news, which puts them in an ideal place of media control.
Meanwhile they also own a significant portion of Refinitiv, as an investment.
So, maybe my theory is based on watching too much James Bond, but if Thomson can sell off parts of the business they can buy up ailing news companies and start world domination of media.
After all, that’s where they started their business, and they now want to “focus on the core business”.
That about sums up the whole Thomson to Thomson Reuters journey. I came from the Reuters world, and yes it was a purchase, not a merger. We (Reuters) were on the ropes, and darn near bankruptcy. Why do you think the "15% ownership rule" was waived for the Thomson Family. If Reuters was a health company, there is no way that clause would have been waived. Glocer put lipstick on a pig, and swindled the trust-fund babies into pay WAY to much for a name, and made $20M in doing so.
Fast forward 10 years and it is clear the Thomson Family is getting out. They started with TR IP, and now F&R. Tax or legal will be next, I am leaning toward legal going next. The F & R business was dropped right into BS lap, because the Thomson Family was done dealing with it, and didn't feel like doing the dirt work or hard work to sell F & R in pieces.
Well said.
Long term TR employee, now Refinitiv. I can say that from what we have seen from historical divestitures going back to the higher education business, the medical & scientific business, eventually becoming ip & science then sold off, it is a plausible route. They would not get back into newspapers. That business is still bleeding advertising revenue because of digital strategies. All those prior sell-offs funded the premium price TR paid for Reuters, which frankly, if Geoff Beattie hadn't drilled the idea of having a global name like Reuters into David Thomson and subsequently Woodbridge's head, we wouldn't be here today.
The cultures never jived, operated in silos and sorry to say, most Reuters managers had this air of superiority about them and its like hey guys, we saved your asses from bankruptcy. Though, their not all to blame. Reuters = Analysis Paralysis, horrible execution and TR = Ready, Shoot, Aim. The writing was on the wall when in 2011 three years after TR bought Reuters (no it wasn't a merger, despite what ex-Reuters employees want to think) we took a $3 billion write off essentially saying we overpaid for Reuters. Yes, the market crash did not help, which is why the propped up finance side of the business by merging it with Risk. That is the only reason otherwise GRC could have remained a viable business unit on its own, instead of left to wither and die, because no one could understand or focus on the smaller assets in the portfolio when you are lumping it in with PRS or WorldCheck at the ExCom level, Marion Leslie...lol Phil Cotter...please.
TR had 10 years of F&R and finally said nope. I'd link to think Peccarelli & Masterson being named Co-COO's...(remember the triumvirate of Tom, Jim & Devin 2008-2011? oh gosh). One of them in my opinion, Masterson becomes CEO in next 1-3 years. Can he or Brian save it? Both are capable operators. I hope they do. Though someone very high up once said to me a few years ago, don't plan on retiring at TR.
That being said the two main businesses of Tax & Legal are located in Texas & Minnesota respectively, yet main HQ is in Toronto. Thomson Family (Woodbridge) could simply say, enough of this let's get really high valuations (and they will) for both and put them on the block and walk away to pursue our own interests or simply live off their numerous other investments. Corporate would simply dissolve as each business has its own management. At that point Kenneth Thomson would roll over in his grave. Simply put, sometimes the apple does fall very far from the tree.