The US media is understandably fascinated by News Corporation's bid for Dow Jones, the owner of the Wall Street Journal. If there is a consensus amid the tantalising details and speculation, it is that this battle is far from over.
Most analysts take their cue from the fact that the Dow Jones share price has stayed high, indicating the company is "in play".
Rupert Murdoch's New York Post reports that Wall Street is urging the all-important Bancroft family to "take a hard look" at the $5bn (£2.5bn) offer. It also notes that in just two days, professional traders - basically hedge funds - have taken control of "almost all" of the company's available common stock.
The Journal itself informs us that the Bancroft family is "large and far-flung" - one family member, a powerboat racer, confessed he "wasn't really that involved".
The family, which has four representatives on Dow Jones's 16-strong board, is said to have three branches, within which there are sub-branches and a number of trusts. Unlike other newspaper dynasties, the 35 Bancrofts are not obliged or necessarily predisposed to vote the same way, as has already been seen. Around 80% of the family's shares are currently pitched against Murdoch, equating to a 52% majority of the company's voting stock. The younger members are thought to be more amenable to a sale.
The Boston Globe has some information about the Bancrofts' origins as New England patricians and notes that a Boston law firm will play a central role as the family's "gatekeepers".
There is also another family to be reckoned with - the Ottaways, who acquired a 6.2% stake in Dow Jones's voting shares when it sold its stable of community newspapers in 1970. They are in the anti-Murdoch camp, according to the Journal, taking overall known opposition to a formidable 58%.
However, a number of analysts are drawing attention to the less than adamantine opposition so far shown by both the company and the Bancrofts. Rather than rejecting the offer outright, the company said it would "take no action", while the Bancrofts did not specify why a majority of them was against a deal.
The LA Times reports an interesting range of viewpoints, including one unnamed executives who paraphrases Churchill:
"If they were positively not going to sell, wouldn't they be using Churchillian language. You know: 'We will fight them in the skies and on the beaches?' "
The New York Times also highlights this "wiggle room" for Murdoch and quotes a letter from him proposing a summit between his family and the Bancrofts.
