Worth of a Business Week(ly)? $1.00 U.S. to take it off McGraw-Hill's hands

Is there a print link so we don't have to register?

Random stab at why this might be the case:

If a company has really nasty books and more liabilities than assets, someone who can assume all those can get it almost for free. I'll give a baseball analogy for illustrative purposes (the business of sports is a really interesting place to analyze business because it's a closed system - every win comes at the expense of another team, and it's a zero sum game. So it's far more ruthless than other forms of business). Baseball:

Currently, baseball teams are hurting in this economy. Many teams signed overpriced player contracts during the boom, and now they're in trouble. One such team with some bad deals who aren't really in contention for the playoffs is the Toronto Blue Jays. They play in the same division as the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox, so they've got a very hard time of competing. Their team is just nowhere near good enough.

So right now, they're thinking of trading some of their good, expensive, older players for younger, cheaper players who still have to grow and improve to really be good. Since they're not going anywhere right now, they'd save money and be better in the future. A team with more resources who wants to win now could think it gets them over the top.

Toronto's got one of the top 5 pitches in baseball: Roy Halladay. He's really amazing. He's due about 8 million dollars this year, 15 million next year, and then he's a free agent - gone from Toronto. Toronto won't contend this year or next year, so if they can save that $23 million and get a few young, good players for him, they'd love to trade him.

They've also got some really bad deals. The worst is Vernon Wells, who is due $102 million from 2010 to 2014. They signed his deal after the best year of his career, and he promptly got hit with an injury. He plays bad defense now, and is a mediocre hitter. His deal is arguably the worst in baseball. He's not worth even half of what he's going to be paid over the next five years.

For a team to trade for Halladay alone, they'd have to pay a hell of a lot. You'd be looking at trading 4-6 good young prospects, that a team would have for 6 years at short money. You'd expect 2-3 of them to become regular players for very cheap, and maybe one star out of the deal. All for 1.5 years of Halladay. (But he is that good - trading for him greatly increases the chance of a team winning the championship)

But if a team was willing to take Vernon Wells' terrible deal with Halladay, they might only have to give up 1 good prospect and another so-so prospect. Toronto might even kick in $20 million into the deal to offset some of Wells' bloated salary.

The lesson? You can get good assets (Halladay) at a huge, huge discount if you take toxic liabilities (Wells' contract) with them. Toronto's got a couple other bad deals too - if a team was willing to take two bad deals plus Halladay, they wouldn't have to send very much back at all. If a team or company thinks it can get a bit more valuable out of the liabilities and potential problems, or get more out of the assets than the current owner, you can really get a steal in a deal like this. But it really is a risky proposition.