Don Surber (by way of Forbes) is speculating the New York Times, much like the Wall Street Journal only a short time ago this year, might be on the market--and if it isn't, it's merely a matter of time:

I was told a long time ago what the purpose of a newspaper is by Adam Kelly, who once was the only conservative columnist in West Virginia.

The purpose of a newspaper is to make money for its publisher.

For a while their, Pinch Sulzberger understood this. He was nicknamed Pinch because that’s what he did with pennies. Then I guess he attended too many cocktail parties or whatever they have in Upper Manhattan — gallery openings? — and decided to use his newspaper to educated us dummies in America.

NYT had to sell off its TV stations to keep the newspaper going. I used this analogy before, but it is like tossing the life jackets overboard to keep the Titanic afloat.

Reported Elizabeth Corcoran of Forbes: “Beverly Hills, CA -
Dow Jones changed hands faster than anyone might have imagined. Could The New York Times be next on the takeover list?

“Forbes editor Matt Miller asked the four investors on the private equity panel at Forbes 2nd annual MEET conference whether they felt that The New York Times Co. was ripe for a takeover. Three out of four said yes.”

Knight-Ridder wasted the 1980s and 1990s chasing Pulitzers. It is now out of the newspaper business.

Someone will buy the NYT and preach local, local, local, which is the mantra of the newspaper consultants in this decade. It may work.

I doubt it.

Oh--and note whom Forbes is suggesting as a possible buyer. Name ring a bell?

(For much more on the Times' woes, tune in here.)