Pardon my ignorance, but how would NYT directly benefit from a boost in Vanguard popularity? Say this article somehow elicits a bevy of people/companies to invest in Vanguard, raising their mutual fund from $4.2 to a $4.5 trillion. Given that NYT stake in this fund remains constant, it's not clear to me how this helps NYT employees - unless $4.5 trillion is the tipping-point for market manipulation (but isn't this fund simply tracking major indexes?). Or would the biggest benefit come in the form of even lower fund fees (<0.1%)?
It wouldn't. It's utterly insignificant that Vanguard hosts their 401Ks. That's like saying, "Full Disclosure: Many NYT employees have accounts at BOA!"
Vanguard gives discounts to large institutions. If a NY Times story helps Vanguard, Vanguard could cut their rate a bit.
I don't think this is likely, but I think it's clearly possible, and noting this potential conflict of interest seems prudent. This is what the disclosure is for.
> Pardon my ignorance, but how would NYT directly benefit from a boost in Vanguard popularity?
I never said they would. I could imagine they got paid for this article but if I said so I would go out on a limb as I don't know whether that's the case.
All I am really saying is this:
> What I miss is a critical examination of the situation.
