Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Hannan / Media News Flash: Dying Newspapers Still Make Money
Posted by Caleb Hannan on Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 2:48 PM
Comments (19)
Showing 1-19 of 19
Gannett has to create "shareholder value" so that Ellen Leifeld can pay cash for installing that gold-plated jacuzzi.
like
dislike
The Tennessean has always made money,at least since the late 1930s; it's just no longer earning the huge margins of the 1990's when the paper was one of Gannett's most profitable papers.
....Another media-related post on Pith, but still not a word, here on in the print edition, about the publisher of the City Paper trying to put together a group of investors to buy the Scene from VVM. (Unlike the Tennessean, the Scene currently appears to be losing money--based on the reduced page count--and is likely being subsidized, ironically, by the profits from NFocus.) I don't think the publisher is likely to raise the money (or that VVM would want to sell) but come on, guys, man up. You're talking about it among yourselves; how about letting the readers know?
Be careful with your terms. Cash flow isn't the same as profit. Their release says their operating revenues are down $300 million from the same quarter last year, and their US advertising revenues are down 27%. It looks like one reason that their earnings per share didn't take a bigger hit is because they did a lot of debt restructuring (along with the layoffs).
Well, of course! Because newspapers aren't dying, they simply aren't making gobs of profits for their investors/shareholders. Duh.
Just another greedy corporation behaving badly. Surely we aren't surprised?
The Tennessean will lose one of its best subscribers when my annual seven-day paid-in-advance subscription expires in August. I was willing to continue to pay more money for less paper had Ellen Leifeld and Jay Winkler allowed me to renew at the current rate and under the same terms of my present home delivery.
They refused and I'm unwilling to pay any more money than I've already shelled out for less paper when I've already done more than my part to keep my fellow scribes employed.
As for The SCENE's efforts to stay afloat, it's just not the same paper without Henry Walker's media column and Willie Stern's groundbreaking investigations.
The recent anniversary issue ignored the contributions of Bruce Honick and I to the paper's predecessor and my contribution to whatever success the Bruce Dobie regime had in the short run.
The resulting revisionist history ignored the fact that my cover story graced the first issue of the Dobie era. Because of some ridiculous edits that changed or otherwise omitted facts in my original manuscript and produced published for which Dobie held Brian Mansfield (who hadn't been on board when I submitted the piece) responsible, Brian's future at the SCENE went the way of my own. (Note, as evidenced by Dobie's own reminiscence, the lack of female bylines prior to Kay West's being hired, despite the fact that there were plenty of us from which to choose whose editorial experience exceeded Bruce Dobie's own and surely threatened the ol' male ego.)
These bits of full disclosure, as well as several other more those of who were a part of the SCENE's early years but who were not acknowledged, let alone contacted, would have been appreciated.
Stacy Harris
Publisher/Executive Editor
Stacy's Music Row Report
http://www.geocities.com/stacy.harris/
Pith should probably stay out of commenting about other newspapers' issues for the time being.
When you fail to do any reporting on the McNair story or acknowledge your own paper's financial issues, you might want to suspend the media criticism bit for a while.
"(Unlike the Tennessean, the Scene currently appears to be losing money--based on the reduced page count--and is likely being subsidized, ironically, by the profits from NFocus.)".
Henry,
You make no mention of the Scene's increase in DIGITAL page count.
And what's so ironic about Nfocus profits?
Pancho
Pancho,
1.unless the Scene has figured out something that no one else in the business has been able to do, the advertising money (probably 80% or more) comes from the print edition,not the digital pages.
2. I presume from your question that you have not read NFocus. Pick up a copy; you will understand.
But my main point, to echo ESP, is that if the Scene is going to comment on other media, the paper should be honest enough to report on itself when the occasion warrants.
First of all, Henry, you don't know squat about the Scene's finances or anything else regarding this matter. But I get your point. Let's hear some gossip about your law firm first. Go ahead.
Jeff, how nice of you to join us. It seems so, er, out of character to hear you defending the Boss. But you neednt worry. Liz tells me she will keep you on.
Henry,
The Scene has figured out something that no one else in the business has been able to do: monetize the digital side. VVM has launched the Voice Local Network among other things; Urban Spoon, Wolfgang's Vault, Daytrotter, LikeMe.net etc are all website partners that serve as extensions of our various audience verticals. And this is just the beginning. The Village Voice Media business model features the editorial talent and LOCAL advertising relationships that are the envy of all media.
While everyone else changes their name and their format (and their printer), the "Scene" (including its monthly and digital channels) gets down to business.
Pancho
Pancho:
I don't understand "audience verticals" but commend you for the effort to explain VVM's corporate strategy. A longer version, written in layspeak and not quite so self-congratulatory, would be widely read by those of us who care about the future of newspapers. And as long as VVM is willing to talk about itself, perhaps Pith could also post the news about a local group wanting to buy the Scene (see my comment near the top) which started this discussion.
Henry,
I know nothing; the Kool-Aid flavor I drank was labeled "shut up and sell stuff".
Pancho
What's to talk about, Henry Walker? Last I heard, the potential buyer couldn't pony up the cash. Money talks, bullshit walks.
Hey, I wanna buy the Scene, too. Let's all speculate. Oh, wait, I don't have the money, either.
Hey, Guys,
I'm pleased that my often discordant opinions are posted here, but when I hit "send" prematurely and resubmit, sans typos, is it asking too much to delete the "first draft?" rather than the one that makes me appear illiterate?
It would be nice to be able to preview before posting here, as is possible on some sites.
Stacy Harris
Publisher/Managing Editor
Stacy's Music Row Report
http://www.geocities.com/stacy.harris/
Without casting aspersions on any individual's work, I think it worth noting for the record that the Nashville Scene as published prior to June 1989 was a shopper with less real journalism than today's Green Hills News or Westview.
Background, just for anyone's future reference: In 1988 and early 1989, Bruce and Albie circulated an offering document to potential investors in Nashville, one of whom later showed me a copy. (The guy who shared it with me was appalled to see that they would pay themselves initial annual salaries of $30,000 each, considering that figure profligate. He declined to invest.)
Their venture was going to be called Nashville CityPress. It was meant to fill the unmet need in Nashville for an alternative weekly like the Chicago Reader or L.A. Weekly, not to mention the Village Voice, which was on a higher plane.
My understanding is that the old Scene came on the market at a cheap enough price that it was worth buying an existing brand and totally changing it rather than creating a new one. The $$ difference between buying its assets and starting from scratch cannot have been much.
It's a public matter that several local investors such as Ed Nelson and the late Hugh Entrekin bought equity in the original CityPress/ Scene venture (and that Bruce and Albie took them out at some point in the mid-'90s).
As one of the freelancers published in the first "new" Scene issues -- actually beginning with a Summer Lights special in late May '89, as I recall -- I can state definitely that there was a concerted effort to break with and improve upon the editorial product that had existed under the previous owners. My impression is that it was ultimately a highly successful effort.
I do wish the early years of the Scene were available online. It had a fetching swagger.
-Tom
