Monday, February 27, 2012

Stock | For 5th year in a row, GCI lags industry

Gannett's shares underperformed their industry peers last year -- the fifth consecutive year GCI has lagged based on two yardsticks chosen by Corporate, according to the new annual 10-K report to U.S. securities regulators.

The report shows that $100 invested in GCI in 2006 would be worth just $27.03 at the end of 2011.

In contrast, that same $100 invested in a group of 13 other companies in newspaper publishing and digital media would have been worth $71.35, according to the report.

Those companies comprise a new 2011 Peer Group selected by Corporate last year to better reflect the industries where GCI now competes, according to the report.

They are A.H. Belo Corp., Belo Corp., Discovery Communications, E.W. Scripps, Journal Communications, McClatchy, Media General, Meredith, Monster Worldwide, News Corp., the New York Times Co, the Washington Post Co., and Yahoo.

New measure adopted
Corporate had previously used a different peer group composed solely of newspaper publishers. That 2010 Peer Group also outperformed GCI last year and in each of the previous four years.

The best investment between 2006-2011, according to Corporate's criteria, would have been companies that make up the S&P 500 index, a much broader group than those in the two peer groups. Indeed, $100 invested in the S&P 500 in 2006 would have been worth $98.76 last year.

The years covered by Corporate's report include those after Craig Dubow became CEO in 2005. Last October, Dubow resigned as chairman and CEO for medical reasons, taking with him a retirement and disability package estimated at $37.1 million. Under that package, he is due a $5.9 million cash payment in April.

GCI closed today at $15.22 a share, flat for the day.

Corporate's figures start on Page 28 of the 10-K.

The following table shows the line-up. (Here's a bigger, easier-to-read view.)


  1. In last week's meeting with Wall Street media stock analysts, Martore essentially said she would maintain the strategic plan set by her predecessor, Dubow.

    Given the performance of GCI's shares since 2006, it's more than reasonable to question why the board of directors thinks this is a winning strategy.

  2. Well Jim, I guess that beats blaming it on Bush.
    Although that worked pretty well for Obama.

  3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  4. Best of class. Not!

  5. So Gannett's board picked a tougher group of peers that makes them look worse by comparison and we're criticizing them for it?

    I am glad that they are holding themselves to a higher standard. Perhaps that will be the nudge needed to get them on a better path.


Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.