Sun ‘cannot exist and grow’ without funds from JOA, attorneys for Greenspun say
September 4, 2013 - 6:22 pm
Eliminating the agreement that has governed the operation of Las Vegas’ two daily newspapers since 1989 would violate provisions of the Newspaper Preservation Act and have “anticompetitive and monopolistic results,” attorneys for the Las Vegas Sun wrote in court papers filed Wednesday.
Attorneys for Sun Publisher and Editor Brian Greenspun said his printed newspaper and website lasvegasusun.com “cannot exist and grow” without money his company receives through a joint operating agreement with Stephens Media LLC, operators of the Las Vegas Review-Journal.
Greenspun sued owners of the Review-Journal last month in U.S. District Court, claiming the company conspired with his siblings, who are the directors and shareholders in Greenspun Media, to end the joint operating agreement. Stephens Media said in court papers a final agreement is not yet in place but a letter of intent had been drafted.
A hearing on an injunction to block severing the joint operating agreement is scheduled for 10 a.m. Friday in front of U.S. District Judge James Mahan.
Last week, Stephens Media filed a response to Greenspun’s lawsuit, saying an end to the joint operating agreement doesn’t preclude the members of the Greenspun family from mounting a local news venture.
However, in an affidavit filed Wednesday, Greenspun said the Las Vegas Sun “would fail” outside of the joint operating agreement “without a substantial investment in the tens of millions of dollars to put it in a position to publish on its own.”
Under the joint operating agreement, the Review-Journal handles all business aspects of the combined newspaper, including advertising, printing, marketing and distribution.
The Las Vegas Sun operates its newsroom with an annual profits payment from Stephens Media. The Sun is distributed as a six-to-10 page insert in the R-J.
The effects of the recession and the general decline of the newspaper industry reduced the payment from $12 million in 2005 to $1.3 million last year.
Brian Greenspun, who claims to be the only member of his family involved in Sun operations, said his “concern for the well-being of the Sun” caused him to work as the paper’s editor “without any pay since 2011. It has been at great financial and mental hardship to do so but without my doing so, the Sun, its websites and the other print products would most likely not have survived.”
Attorneys denied claims by Stephens Media that the 67-year-old Greenspun lacks standing because he is not a paid subscriber to the Review-Journal. Business records show he receives a free subscription.
“Whether Mr. Greenspun pays for his subscription or receives it complimentary is inconsequential to the issue of standing in a case concerning the (Newspaper Preservation Act) and a JOA where the injury is the loss of competition and editorial voices, not damages,” attorneys wrote.
Attorneys for Greenspun also attempted to answer a question raised by Mahan when he granted a temporary restraining order in the case: Should Greenspun also sue his siblings, sisters Janie Greenspun Gale and Susan Greenspun Fine, and brother Danny Greenspun.
The siblings, who voted to accept Stephens Media’s offer to end the joint operating agreement, are described in the new filing as “necessary parties in conclusory fashion.” Attorneys said in the court filing the siblings had knowledge of their brother’s legal action and could have sought to intervene in the case. However, they could later be added as defendants.
On Aug. 7, the Greenspun siblings, acting as shareholders and directors of the Las Vegas Sun, voted 3-to-1 to accept an agreement in principle with Stephens Media that would end the joint operating agreement and the annual profits payment.