Wed, Jan 07, 2009

User login

Advertisement

Jewcy Book Club

Welcome Authors
Rachel Kramer Bussel
&
Stephanie Klein
who are posting all week.
Coming up:
  • 01/12:
    Bob Morris
  • 01/12:
    Lily Koppel
  • 01/19:
    Peter Manseau
  • 02/09:
    Tania Grossinger

TAG:

Career/Money

DAILY SHVITZ

Whole Foods controls the media

Leah Koenig
Since early spring, the foodie and business worlds have been all a-twitter about Whole Food's proposed takeover of natural foods competitor, Wild Oats (read the back story here).  The story just got even more interesting when the note Whole Foods was passing in class got intercepted by the teacher (aka, The AP).  The New York Times reports:

"The Federal Trade Commission documents revealed that Whole Foods planned to close 30 or more Wild Oats stores, a move that the company believes would nearly double revenue for some Whole Foods stores...

Many of the details in the documents, which F.T.C. lawyers filed electronically, were not meant to be released publicly, but words intended to be inaccessible were actually just electronically shaded black. The words could be searched, copied, pasted and read in versions downloaded from court computer servers.

Court officials realized the mistake and replaced the filing with a version using scanned pages of the edited documents. The Associated Press downloaded the document from the public server before it was replaced by an edited version."

Whole Foods: friend or foe?Whole Foods: friend or foe?According to the document, Whole Foods set rules barring food suppliers from direct sales with Wal-Mart.  Additionally, documents labled "Project Goldmine" predicted that the buy-out will send 80-90 percent of Wild Oats shoppers to Whole Foods.  Shoppers will then be at the mercy of Whole Foods who, without competition, can drive up prices even more than they already have.

 

This information leaves socially conscious shoppers in a bit of a conundrum – what do you do when a “good store” goes bad?  Whole Foods was founded in 1980 in Texas' progressive outpost, Austin.  In many parts of the country, they are a mecca of natural and organic foods amidst supermarkets that sell nothing but heavily processed frozen foods and Wonder Bread (sorry Wonder Bread fans - yeah it's pillowy soft, but you might as well be eating a napkin).  Their flagship store, and many other stores around the country run on wind power, and their CEO, John Mackey, is a vegan.  But Mackey is also a shrewd businessman who follows many of the same rules as his conglomerate competitors.  Of course Whole Foods has every right to grow, as any corporation needs to - but to do it at the expense of customers and the vitality of the larger natural food and organic foods market?  I expect more from a company that charges $9/pound for organic green peppers.

Read Whole Foods' response to the situation here.


DAILY SHVITZ

Harvey Weinstein Ill-Gotten Gains Award: Jerry Yang

Avi Kramer

Jerry Yang, a 5’ 3” 39-year-old native Laotian psychologist who uses his professional training in his card-playing arsenal, won the $8.25 million top prize today at the World Series of Poker.


DAILY SHVITZ

Murdoch Owns Dow Jones?

Michael Weiss

That's the rumor, according to UK magazine The Business (not to be confused with The Bidness, a Rasta triphop zine out of Staines). Purchase price: $5 billion.

According to sources acting for Dow Jones in the negotiations, the deal was delayed until agreement was reached on a legally-binding undertaking by Murdoch to preserve the Wall Street Journal’s editorial independence.

Under the terms of this agreement, News Corporation will have the ability to hire and fire the top editors and publishers (a matter on which Murdoch would not budge); but a nominally independent five-person committee will have the right of veto on these decisions.

Full disclosure: I've written for both the NY Post and The Weekly Standard and I've been to the News Corp. Christmas party (the food in "Australia" last year was tops), so take whatever I say in the vein of corporate obeisance. What sort of difference, hypothetically speaking, would non-independence make on the Journal's editorial page?

Ben Smith at Politico puts it best: “[P]erhaps the China bureau shouldn't be the only ones worrying. What will become of the Clintons' long-time persecutors on the editorial board? Will their anti-Clinton posture go the way of the New York Post's?”

Of course, Dow Jones says it's all untrue, the only agreement that has been struck is the editorial independence one, begging the question of why such a deal is necessary if a sale is not imminent.