What is happening now on a certain segment of the press in Moldova has old analogies in the financial-banking sector. If a bank starts to offer much higher interest rates than the average on the market, this is a clear sign that it is on the verge of bankruptcy or is already bankrupt. It is bluffing a certain category of naïve depositors who still think that they can find free cheese outside the trap. As a rule, such methods end in serious shakes inside the banking system and in the society in general. The financial pyramids work according to the same mechanisms and produce the same results. Analogous events show that an important segment of the press is on the verge of collapse. Intentionally or not, this process is caused from inside and involves the press which had been mistakenly called the Opposition press until recently. It is rather a pluralistic press that accepts to cover also/or mainly nongovernmental viewpoints. This press has contributed to the change of the political regime in Moldova by providing information pluralistically, permanently and continuously. Moldova’s ‘Chinese drop’. Paradoxically, in the new political conditions a large part of these pluralistic media outlets cause the collapse of pluralism in Moldova and, respectively, the return of the political forces that recognized the media pluralism as manifestation of the social pluralism. In general, the concentration of the media resources in media trusts, media holdings, press groups and other organizations should be welcomed. Only a powerful press, especially economically, can resist the attacks of the governments or other groups of interests. This is said about the media trust “Jurnal”, involving German capital, that has recently appeared on the market, and the press bodies launched in Chisinau by Realitatea TV, involving Romanian capital. The details yet point to interests and, especially, destructive effects. There are several types of arguments in favor of this conclusion. [Professional arguments] The stiff competition initiated by the two media groups turned into a ‘hunt for people’ tempted by very high salaries. Usually, they recruit journalists from the media organizations with a similar, pluralistic message, which run the risk of disappearing as they remain without personnel. Until recently, these media outlets fought jointly against the adversaries of the press pluralism and argued that they need foreign financing to support pluralism in the Moldovan press. The present and future of the personnel and economic policies of the ‘partner’ media organizations are at risk. The new media groups tempt any good professional that appeared or developed in an editorial staff. This is a method for prejudicing the existing real pluralism given that it is now known if the rivalry between the two “great media powers’ will end with a more advanced level of pluralism. Media holding or media trust means many press bodies, but one editorial message. The media holding affiliated to the former ruling party of the Communists proved this. In the countries with democratic traditions that are richer than Moldova, the real pluralism is ensured not by the multitude of press bodies a trust, but by several media trusts. It is not known if and when the economic conditions in Moldova will provide for the existence of at least two media groups on the pluralistic segment. A personage of O'Henry said: “Bolivar cannot carry double” when he was preparing to shoot at a former partner. Bolivar was the tired horse of two fugitives, who is very much like Moldova’s economy of today and tomorrow. [Economic arguments] The two groups recruit employees, offering them salaries that are 2-3-4-5 times higher than the average salary in the economy, which is lower than 3,000 lei. These are certainly ‘promotional’ salaries for the initial period that are covered by the foreign investors. They invest, but they want to recoup their investments and make profit and the salaries are the only source on which they can save money, compared with their market of origin. In the near future yet, the salaries will have to be covered from the local sales. However, in Moldova there is not mass media products market, market of mass media products consumers, traditions of consuming mass media products. There is no veritable publicity market and adequate circulation that could yield profit to the press groups that are costly, especially at the initial phase when they acquire technology, equipment, human resources, etc. Most of the Moldovan people and economic entities are poor. Very few people have access to the Internet, to periodical publications and radio and TV channels concomitantly, compared with the European counties. Moldova’s economy is in decline and nobody can say when the situation will be better for the press. These findings are taken from the experience of the existent pluralistic press. The channel of Romania’s PRO TV in Moldova, which provides products of a good quality, has not extended much during a rather long period of time, including because of the inadequate development of the national market, while the Romanian owners did not consider it rational to invest money in a market that does not enable to recover the costs at least. Most probably, the investors will soon stop sending money for salaries in Moldova and this is normal from economic viewpoint. If the money continues to come from abroad in several months, they will come according to other criteria than economic and then the declarations of the new groups that they want to deliver a pluralistic message could be from the Evil One. Now, fewer people remember about declarations made by broadcasters that appeared overnight during the Communist government, with the legal address in offshore zones, which were ready to buy helicopters in order to broadcast news round the clock in Moldova as fast as possible. This is not obligatorily a comparison. It is an argument that the money for the salaries will stop coming from abroad. [Political arguments] The Communists Party also created a powerful media holding during its eight years in power. But it did not lose the sentiment of self-conservation in this process. On its segment, the PCRM created and strengthened press institutions and attracted many professionals from the pluralistic media, called also democratic, with larger salaries. However, it contributed to the destruction of a number of pluralistic media outlasts and kept other media organizations at bay. The current process of forming media holdings affects mainly the pluralistic press. These conditions that offer the PCRM’s holding more free space favor the return of the former governors in Moldova, where most of the people are nostalgic. [Moral reasons] During eight years, the pluralism in the Moldovan press survived the Communists and ‘frontists’ even in very difficult conditions. Therefore, it would be a pity and immoral to diminish or liquidate it under better political conditions. [Social prospects] By offering larger salaries, the two press groups tempted a lot of people, including from each other. Presumably, they used the ‘trawl’ tactic so as to select only the ‘big fish’. The small fish that will keep in mind the promised pay conditions will be thrown back into the ‘sea’. Meanwhile, some of the pluralistic media outlets will disappear, while the others will have the moral right not to accept back the employees that left. In both cases there will be affected the pluralism and the quality of the press in Moldova. Some of the media organizations can turn out to be strong, but the newspaper “Pravda” and the union television channel had also been once very powerful, because they were one of the kind.