Yes. Family legacy is part of it, but its the first bit that is more relevant and the reason why he is selling most of his empire to Disney. As Murdoch put it himself in a Sky News interview a few months ago, he was the disrupter once shaking up old media with his new Sky and Star satellite platforms, then Netflix came along...
Amazon and Apple are trillion dollar companies. Microsoft, Google and the other tech players won't be far behind. Netflix is spending several billion dollars on new content each and every year. Murdoch couldn't compete with that and so sold out to Disney to make that company a much stronger competitor to the tech companies. So, rather rather than owning 100% of something which will ultimately be worthless, he will become the largest shareholder in Disney. Who knows, in time that may even turn into a controlling share.
Murdoch believes his new "Fox" company which will retain ownership of America's Fox Network and Fox News channel, is the future and he will concentrate on news (his roots) and sports. Problem with that theory is that Amazon has already started to show sports and if it so chooses, can outbid anyone, except Apple, for sporting rights. Also, the tv production and film production units are being sold to Disney, so Murdoch will be left with a network channel which does not have its own programming arm. A recipe for disaster, but it does help the legacy issue as son Lachlan controls this bit while son James concentrates on his outside interests like Tesla and eventually may become the next Disney CEO.
True, but as I just said in answer to Rob, I don't think Murdoch's new "Fox" company has much of a future, but being a large shareholder in Disney, is another matter entirely.
Thank you. That is really interesting. I'm glad that Rupert M is "still in there pitching". There are so many aspects to him which I greatly admire: his relatively hands-off editorial freedom, which is rare for a newspaper proprietor, the way his Times newspaper holed up in Wapping and single-handedly defied the print trade union and arranged his own national distribution (using TNT - an Australian company!), his genuine apology and remorse over the telephone hacking scandal (by stark and refreshing contrast to James Murdoch who babbled away in management-speak trying to offer mitigating excuses). From what you say, in spite of him being dwarfed by the titans, he's still looking for ways to punch above his weight, with a renowned well resourced news channel, which is one heck of a big niche. Not bad for an 87 year old! As for having a big share in Disney, I've never quite got my head around what routes are open for Disney to expand or credibly diversify - I feel there is a limit to how much one can expand within the constraint of family entertainment. It's a big niche but I don't see that it has much image degrees of freedom to venture beyond its target audience.