Word: mobilizing
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
Bernard's selection is central to a strategy by Mobil, which owns Montgomery Ward, to sell the money-losing subsidiary. In naming him, the second largest U.S. oil company (1984 sales: $56 billion) hopes to shape up Montgomery Ward and thereby make it attractive to potential buyers. Mobil officials say that it may be two or three years before the retailer will be strong enough to stand alone financially...
...Mobil's decision came as no surprise to Wall Street. Montgomery Ward has been almost nonstop trouble since the oil company paid $1.7 billion for it in 1974. Since then, Mobil has pumped an additional $609 million into the company in an attempt to make it profitable, but Montgomery Ward has lost a total of $415 million under Mobil's rule...
...first, but then became stagnant. From 1941 to 1957, it did not open a single new store, while Sears moved aggressively into the booming suburbs of postwar America. When recession and high interest rates rocked retailing in the 1970s, Montgomery Ward could no longer hang on alone. After Mobil took it over, the retailer earned $105 million in 1978, but it soon slipped into the red again. The company was too big, too mismanaged, too out of tune with what consumers wanted. In 1981 Stephen Pistner, president of Minneapolis' Dayton- Hudson department store chain and a retailing wizard, was brought...
...recent years, seven out of every ten libel cases lost by the media have been overturned on appeal. However, in an unexpected reversal last week, a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., reinstated a jury verdict against the Washington Post for libeling William Tavoulareas, a former president of Mobil Oil Corp. In so doing, the judges offered a seemingly astonishing definition of what may contribute to actual malice. In the view of many editors and First Amendment experts, the ruling could threaten the future of investigative reporting...
...case involves a 1979 Post story that implied Tavoulareas had improperly "set up" his son in a London shipping company and then channeled millions of dollars in Mobil business to the firm. A jury found that Tavoulareas had been libeled and awarded him $2.05 million. Judge Oliver Gasch, who presided at the trial, threw out the jury's verdict on the ground that there was no proof of actual malice, though he noted that "the article falls far short of being a model of fair, unbiased journalism." In reversing Gasch, the appeals court ruled 2 to 1 that the Post...