Jill Abramson Firing Immaterial to Analysts

NEW YORK (TheStreet) - The abrupt firing of Jill Abramson, the first female Executive Editor of the New York Times (NYT), may have created a media sensation. Equity analysts, however, could care less.

>> Read More: New York Times Tumbles As Abramson Is Abruptly Fired

No analyst covering the New York Times stock changed their ratings on the newspaper company's shares on Thursday, according to Bloomberg data. Morningstar analyst Liang Feng said in a telephone interview Thursday that an abrupt CEO or CFO change would be material, however, there is little to be made from Abramson's firing in the near-term.

"It is really hard to draw any conclusions," Feng said.

Wall Street's muted reaction to Abramson's firing indicates that it hardly matters who is managing America's largest newsroom, and the de facto paper of record, in the eyes of analysts. Whether it's Jill Abramson, or incoming Executive Editor Dean Baquet, the first black man appointed to run the Times' newsroom, it just doesn't appear to matter.

Shares in the New York Times haven't fallen much more than the broader market since the firing was made public on Wednesday afternoon. The Times was down less than 1% at $15.02 in late Thursday afternoon trading.

Wall Street may be wrong to dismiss the Abramson firing as an immaterial event.

Yes, it is people like CEO Mark Thompson and CFO Michael Golden who are responsible for devising the Times strategy and managing the company's purse strings. Recently, the Times decided to reinstate a quarterly dividend, something that might have been hard to imagine just a few years ago when the paper teetered on the brink of bankruptcy.

If you liked this article you might like

Rolling Stone Stake Could Fetch as Much as $80 Million

Can an iTunes for News Succeed? Chartbeat Founder Thinks So

Tronc Has Another Makeover Project With Daily News

Judge Tosses Sarah Palin's Defamation Lawsuit Against the New York Times

Who is Uber CEO Front-Runner Dara Khosrowshahi?