Talk:Thomson Reuters/Archives/2013

Bias
"the preeminent purveyor of legal research and solutions including Westlaw." Could maybe be changed to "a purveyor."--Mlprater (talk) 21:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

No Merger
Thomson Corporation acquired Reuters Group PLC it was not a merge. When people talk about merging they refer to the Thomson Financials division together with Reuters Sales&Trading Enterprise and Research&AssetManagement divisions. I think it should be clearly stated in the first paragraph.
 * Technically, its both. While Thomson is providing cash, The boards and a lot of the operations such as the IT provisioning are merging in a big way. With a lot of recent mergers, things have been absorbed into one company's way of doing things. In this case, the common elements are looking like they are going to take elements from both companies. It is certainly true the lines are very fuzzy. (POV: I am a thomson-reuters Employee (Originally from the Thomson legal side, so cant and wont modify the article).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.86.246.117 (talk) 17:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

No hyphen in name
The correct name for company is Thomson Reuters. It is not hyphenated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.165.213.18 (talk) 13:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed. FTSE Group has released the listing details of the new company, and there appears to be no hyphen in the name. Gr1st (talk) 11:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Move completed. No renaming was required in the text of this article, although I have updated some links into the page. Sparky132 (talk) 22:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect information
I recently reverted this edit as the locations are invalid (Thomson is also spelled incorrectly as Thompson) and the company name has been incorrectly modified. However it was soon reverted back. I fear that if I revert back again to the correct version this will result in an edit war with an anonymous user, which I am not interested in being a part of. Any suggestions on how to resolve this? fifty quid ( talk ) 17:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

From the Thomson Reuters web site:


 * Thomson Reuters has two parent companies, both of which are publicly listed.


 * Thomson Reuters Corporation is a Canadian company that has common shares listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) and New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). Thomson Reuters Corporation is a reporting issuer (or has equivalent status) in each of the Canadian provinces. Given its common shares are also listed on the NYSE, Thomson Reuters Corporation files reports and other information with the SEC as a “foreign private issuer”.


 * Thomson Reuters PLC is a UK company that has its primary listing of ordinary shares on the Official List of the UKLA and it has American Depositary Shares (ADSs) listed on Nasdaq. Thomson Reuters PLC is subject to the Listing Rules and the Disclosure Rules and Transparency Rules applicable to companies with a primary listing on the London Stock Exchange (LSE). Given its ADSs are listed on Nasdaq, Thomson Reuters PLC also files reports and other information with the SEC as a “foreign private issuer”.

--from.

Yahoo Finance lists the New York Stock Exchange symbol for a "Thomson Reuters Corp" as being "TRI". See.

Also from Yahoo Finance:


 * "Thomson Reuters Corporation
 * 3 Times Square
 * New York, NY 10036
 * United States


 * [ . . . ]


 * It was formerly known as The Thomson Corporation and changed its name to Thomson Reuters Corporation in April 2008. The company is headquartered in New York, New York."

--from.

Obviously, the spelling "Thompson" is incorrect. As far as the rest of the issues, stay tuned. Famspear (talk) 18:42, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

PS: I've corrected the spelling. It looks like both this article and the article on The Thomson Corporation need a thorough going-over for accuracy, due to the name change(s), etc. I don't have the time to get to this now, so someone else may beat me to it. Famspear (talk) 18:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Inconsistent dates of founding
The date listed in the infobox for the founding of West Publishing is listed on this page as 1792. However, on the linked page for West Publishing, the date of founding is indicated as 1872. Since the state of Minnesota wasn't founded until 1858, i'd lean towards the latter, but that doesn't mean that it isn't incorrect either. 200.41.2.220 (talk) 08:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Definitely wrong, as per . Fixed now. Dstumme (talk) 15:42, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

acquired means took over, thompson took over reuters.forbes lists it as a Canadian company
the article doesn't reflect that. what is being merged is irrelevant since thompson is the company acquiring reuters. the thompson corporation has been considered canadian for decades. Grmike (talk) 11:29, 9 October 2009 (UTC)grmike

no competitor information
There is no information on competitors whcih makes the entry appear to be an advertisement. Can we add some baalnce? Rgnewbury (talk) 09:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Why do we need to add information about competitors? The article is about Thomson Reuters, not information providers in general. Gr1st (talk) 18:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Because a business is shaped by its market and its competitors. Businesses often live or die based on their competition. The top management of Thomson Reuters (and every business) is quite concerned about its competitors. Every financial report, including analyst reports and regulatory filings like 10-Ks or equivalent, has a section on competition. This Wall Street Journal story names Bloomberg and Dow Jones itself as competitors. --Nbauman (talk) 18:26, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Factual Errors
There are a number of factual errors on this page that I wish to raise. In the interests of transparency, and in full recognition of Wikipedia’s COI guidelines, I should make clear that I am a current employee of Thomson Reuters.

However, for the purposes of ensuring that this Wikipedia page is a helpful resource for users, and to avoid incorrect information, I submit the following edits for consideration:

1.	The summary box and main article cite that Thomson Reuters Revenue for 2012 was US$ 50 billion. The Thomson Reuters Fact Book 2012 states 2011 revenues as $12.7 billion (from ongoing businesses).

2.	The Woodbridge Company is recorded in the summary box and article as having a 53% share in the company, but this is in fact 55%.

3.	The summary box and article states that Thomson Reuters has 100,000 as at 2012. This figure should be given as approximately 60,000 employees.

JCB TR (talk) 20:05, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Factual Errors
Thank you for updating the page so that the employee and revenue figures are now accurate. However, I note that the The Woodbridge Company Limited share is still stated as 53%, rather than 55%.

Is there a reason why this has not been updated? If not, I would be grateful if the summary box and main article could be corrected accordingly.

JCB TR (talk) 21:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC)