Does Amazon CEO ownership of Washington Post increase "volatility" of Amazon stock?

So Jeff Bezos owns Washington Post. From what I am reading, Washington Post is critical of Trump. For this reason, Trump threatened Bezs that he will try to destroy Amazon. When there was a business leaders meeting with the president after the election, Jeff looked uncomfortable speaking with Trump. This got me thinking, is it wise for a business leader to buy a newspaper and have a political agenda?

In the stand point of an investor, I feel like Jeff owning a newspaper adds to unnecessary risk to Amazon's business. I think Amazon's stock performance will be better off without Washington Post ownership. I think Amazon will be better off without Bezos owning Washington Post and be associated with any political agenda.
What do you guys think?

Comments (9)

May 11, 2017

$AMZN is up 33% over the last year. Amazon is dominant in eCommerce and is dominant in cloud. Trump isn't going to do anything to them and investors clearly don't give a shit. Bezos can do whatever the hell he wants.

    • 1
May 11, 2017

Of course Amazon is doing well. It's stock price went up I think ten times in 15 years? I don't recall exactly the years.

I am not saying that his political affiliation destroys Amazon.

I am just saying that his political affiliation can be a source of "political discount" thus affecting Amazon's stock price slightly.

Jun 7, 2017

Bezos cares more about maintaining an independent (voice) of reason in this madness called Trump's America. Without Wapo's Bezos' funds, I doubt there would be any record of fact checking in the US. Bezos doesn't care about this discount, since kings may come and kings may go, but Amazon is here to stay. Also Wapo is good for building his legacy image.

As for Bezos looking uncomfortable speaking with Trump, of course he would be uncomfortable. I know I would be surprised and uncomfortable seeing a white-and-blonde-coloured turd talking to me. Dogs and shits are not supposed to speak, ya know.

GoldenCinderblock: "I keep spending all my money on exotic fish so my armor sucks. Is it possible to romance multiple females? I got with the blue chick so far but I am also interested in the electronic chick and the face mask chick."

    • 1
    • 5
Jun 15, 2017

Well I hope Mr. Jeff Bezos is humble enough to realize that his arch enemy "Walmart" is out to destroy Amazon.

Warlmart is quietly preparing for an ambush and war between the two will be nothing but bloody.

I think Mr. Jeff Bezos shoudn't prioritize in any case beating Trump over beating Walmart. Amazon crisis will begin when that happens.

Jun 15, 2017

Excuse me, but Walmart's already being crushed. And so are Sears, Target, etc. Same way as Zara is pushing out all the no-name and big-name designer labels out of retail.
And if Amazon does go away, thanks to any Trump action, so will all those high-paying logistics jobs across states. Of course, they'll be replaced by more inefficient Walmart greeter jobs.

GoldenCinderblock: "I keep spending all my money on exotic fish so my armor sucks. Is it possible to romance multiple females? I got with the blue chick so far but I am also interested in the electronic chick and the face mask chick."

Learn More

Side-by-side comparison of top modeling training courses + exclusive discount through WSO here.

Jun 15, 2017

Underestimating one's enemy is the worst thing one can do.

Walmart will probably not let Amazon dominate retail without a nasty fight.

While Amazon has innovative edge, it is also a two-sided sword because you are making enemies everywhere.

Sure Amazon is the rising Giant in retail and its making everyone's business model look so outdated. I agree and I get goosebumps thinking about their innovations. I also think Amazon has the best shot to be the first company to reach market cap of 1 trillion dollars.

Jun 15, 2017

I'm pretty sure that even though I might be underestimating Walmart, I'm not Jeff Bezos, even though My Name's Jeff. I'm also pretty sure that Jeff isn't underestimating Walmart either.

GoldenCinderblock: "I keep spending all my money on exotic fish so my armor sucks. Is it possible to romance multiple females? I got with the blue chick so far but I am also interested in the electronic chick and the face mask chick."

Best Response
Jun 15, 2017

He really can do whatever he wants. Before Bezos, WaPo was owned by the Graham family. Kay Graham grew the newspaper into a nationally recognized one in the 60s and 70s, and passed the reins to her son in 1979. The paper survived on the Graham name, its affiliation with Warren Buffet, and its reputation for its coverage of Watergate. Graham's successive family members didn't have the magic touch that she did, missed the boat on the rise of digital news, and saw the paper's value decline significantly as time went on. Shareholders owned 85% of WaPo right before it sold and weren't happy with the direction Graham's son and his niece were taking it.

Bezos came in at a good time -- he saw a bargain on a national paper (he bought it for $250M), so of course he took the plunge, leaving the Grahams and their holding company to focus on its for-profit higher ed holdings and smaller media outlets (Slate, Foreign Policy magazine, etc). Compare this to the Post in its heyday, when Buffett invested in it in 1973/74: the paper was selling for $80M (~$440M in today's dollars) -- and he considered that a bargain, valuing its true worth at the time at $400M (~$2.2B today).

For the price he paid for it, Bezos' spend on WaPo is small potatoes, he can influence public opinion to his liking (to be honest, every newspaper tries to cater its reporting to the leanings of its owner), put the Post back into the national limelight and get all the glory. Definitely a sweet deal.

    • 2
Jun 15, 2017
Comment