Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Los Angeles Times Building To Go On Auction Block?

Here are the opening graphs from Peter Villes L.A. LAND blog on the LAT website:

Zell to entertain offers for Tribune Tower, L.A. Times building

Sam Zell, the real estate mogul who runs the Tribune Company, put out this stunner this morning: he's willing entertain offers for the company's prize real estate holdings, which include the Tribune Tower in Chicago and the Times Mirror Square complex here in Los Angeles, which many know as the Los Angeles Times building.

This from an e-mail Sam sent to me personally, as well as every other Tribune employee: "... we are in the process of asking a number of real estate firms to give us their best thinking on how we can generate more value from Tribune Tower in Chicago, and the Times Mirror Square complex in Los Angeles."

More: "We’ll be considering numerous options to maximize the value of these properties. While a near-term transaction is possible, we’ll be focusing on opportunities that allow for some level of ongoing occupancy in both buildings for the mid-term (defined as five years), for farther out (15 years), and beyond.

A RFP will go out to potential buyers today. And while the Times not being in the Times building was once unthinkable, with the quality of local coverage of Los Angeles in the print section having recently deteriorated so dramatically - even while the rest of the paper and the website have continued to improve - the print version of the Times has already ceased to be a credible local institution.


Anonymous said...

Sam Zell is doing to the LA Times what Barry Munitz did to the Getty.

Had to get rid of one of them, have to get rid of the other.

Anonymous said...

I just don't see why the press and bloggers are getting worked up about Zell looking to monetize the real estate holdings. If it reduces expenses without the necessity of the usual headcount culling, the lefties out at Times-Mirror Square should be aggressively behind it.

Zell is a loose cannon, there is no doubt. But he's swung some good barbs about the Times crappy coverage of local matters. The editorial staff Downtown has to stop believing that they are publishing a paper for their own personal satisfaction.