Highly profitable About.com contributes nearly half as much operating cash flow to the Times Company as the news operations, so it would be tough to lose. But that profitability, plus decent growth prospects, also makes it an easier sell. Newspapers like the Boston Globe or the Times Company's regional newspaper chain seem unlikely to fetch much given the state of the industry.

Though online advertising has come in for its share of trouble recently, About.com features, along with conventional banner ads, the sort of contextual text advertising expected to fare better in the downturn than banners.

And cash from a sale could be used to take the Times private, which we heard last week was under discussion, to be funded by the sale of assets like About.com.

The Times in January shot down rumors it was looking to offload About.com. But the company now finds itself in a very different environment. And it would be in keeping with the company's character to face new choices by conserving the hard core of its journalism franchise, even at the expense of more profitable units.

The big unknown, assuming sale rumors are true, is whether the company will be able to find a buyer. If not, it may well have to abandon its sunny forecast regarding job reductions.

(Click the video at top to listen to the original audio. The About.com comment comes around the 00:45 remaining mark.)

I think the Times sees About as an ATM, and isn't willing to necessarily invest in securing talent.

Translation: The New York Times has no long-term vision for About.com, seeing it for what it is — professionally organized search-engine spam that'll make money no matter's who's "running" it.

First, that the Times is having trouble recruiting a short-timer replacement to run the site until a sale. Second, that buyers for the site are scarce, and the Times realizes it. Nisenholtz's job responsibilities were greatly reduced when the Times merged its print and online newsrooms three years ago. Running About.com, especially if the company plans to keep it, would give him something to do besides speak at conferences.

"Google stressed to me that what's shown in the screenshots it provided might change and that the service might not launch at all," Danny Sullivan writes on Search Engine Land. So breathe easier, Jason. Google should soon discover that Mahalo clones are just as bad an idea as the original.