That's the most important point of this Globe business update. If Connors is telling the truth, then the Financial Times got it wrong.
The second most important point is Herald publisher Pat Purcell's statement that he, too, is uninterested in the Globe.
Please note that multiple versions of the FT story have appeared in the past few days. In the one I read and posted on, Connors (as I noted at the time) wasn't mentioned by name as a possible future buyer; Pat Purcell didn't seem to be one either. But in two other versions--one of which apparently preceded the piece I read, according to the FT web site, and one of which apparently was published at exactly the same time--Connors and Purcell are far more significant. Confused? Me too.
Finally, Dan Kennedy has the actual Barclays report that put the Globe's estimated value at a stunningly low $20 million, tops.