Comments on: Star Tribune Cuts More Staff; Downward Tailspin Continues

By: New York Times Slams Star Tribune & Avista Capital » Diggings

New York Times Slams Star Tribune & Avista Capital » Diggings — Mon, 14 May 2007 18:53:37 +0000

[...] The New York Times weighed in on the recent layoffs at the Star Tribune in an article on the front page of the business section todayÂ by David Carr. Though centered around the protest rally that the paper’s employees staged on the day the cuts were announced, the piece heavily criticizes publisher Par Ridder and the Star Tribune’s new owners, Avista Capital, for making drastic cuts they promised employees and the community they wouldn’t be making upon assuming control. In commenting on what type of operators Avista and Ridder have been since taking over, Carr writes, “So far, not so good.” One of Avista’s principals, OhSang Kwon is quoted as saying that problems they have encountered at the paper and the near-term and medium-term prospects are, “more negative than what we expected.” I cannot possibly imagine investing over $500 million in a company and being surprised so early in the game by what has occurred. So either they are blatantly lying, or their due diligence on the company and the industry as a whole were sorely lacking. In either case, the turn of events doesn’t bode well for the Twin Cities and the quality of its daily paper. [...]

By: Anon

Anon — Fri, 11 May 2007 18:40:28 +0000

you asked for response to a single post not a series of posts and your post slammed w/o suggesting what the strib should do. now i can go connect dots myself about your previous posts but i suggest placing trackback links in your musings to other related posts to create interconnectivity. most helpful for attracting and keeping new readers not familiar with earlier posts and helps with time management. be happy that someone is actually reading your stuff, agrees with it, and takes time to comment.

By: Gunnar

Gunnar — Fri, 11 May 2007 17:50:05 +0000

To Mr. No Duh

>A no-duh post that OF COURSE POSES NO POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS.

read the diggings blog it is full of them

>Industry in major decline. $670mm loss in valuation over 7-8 years.

i dont have a mba but this probably not good,

>Trying buy time and stem the tide (ie create some interim form of equilibrium)
>until they can figure out what biz model is workable/desirable.

right, the same people who drove the car into the ditch should be able to get
them back out. got it.

*the* defining paradigm for the information age is:

“The best way to predict the future is to invent it.” Alan Kay

please note the massive difference between the above statement and “buying time” their is no time to buy – either

a) know your customers better than anyone else
b) innovate
c) have insanely scalable distribution infrastructure

local papers had the industrial age equivalent of C, so they never worried about a or b. now it is too late. time to ctrl-alt-del.

>From the inside, the recent cuts are focusing on Features/Source portion of
>paper rather than News (eds consider F/S fluff but it is voice of paper and
>draws big readership – so bad judgement).

they need to look at what wapo (hyper localization previously reported on diggings) is doing. the strib HAS NO NEWS TO BEGIN WITH. if you don’t believe try and find how many times it took toby more than 10 minutes to read the paper.

“you don’t have to change, survival is not mandatory” -edwards deming

you can be in the crm business, the innovation business or infrastructure
business. currently the strib is world class in none of these.

>And they obviously can’t compete against CraigList for ad rev.

why not?

>Hey maybe they should buy JobDigg?

that would be a start except they would likely run it into the ground. job dig
is in the crm business. tjob dig has been growing for the last
several years while the strib whithers. coincedence??????????????????

>Where are Ideas, solutions for keeping newspapers afloat – Bueller, bueller,
>bueller???

1) figure out what business you are in – customer, innovation, infrastructure
2) whack everyone and everything that does not align with #1
3) get good at whatever your answer to #1 is for my money it is hyper
localization. the guy at wapo’s vision is summed up as “we want to cover little
league games like they are the ny yankees”

so just STOP with yet another uninformed, liberal arts grad-esque take on
baghdad, and INSTEAD use tech to your advantage(!), put digicameras everywhere,
broadcast cretin derham hall baseball, heck solve a local crime case, find out
what is going on around the corner and publish it, tag content THAT YOU DON”T
OWN AND DIDNT CREATE (see steve johnson’s stuff), give everyone in the tc
blogging software, link britt robson’s wolves reports off your sports home
page, tear down the walls, read the cluetrain manifesto, create networked
content, i could go on. enter the 21st century or go bye bye.

when local paper asked dave winer (inventor of rss the stuff that enables blogs) how to get involved with blogging – the paper wanted to give all their reporters blogs. winer said no instead give free blogging software to anyone who wants it. this is the kind of inside out thinking that papers are ill positioned to do.

By: Toby Dayton

Toby Dayton — Fri, 11 May 2007 17:26:59 +0000

Over the course of many posts throughout the past year, and in a month-long, concerted effort earlier this year, I have written extensively about what the daily newspaper industry could and should do to try to stem their losses. Not all the ideas were original, not all the ideas were earth-shattering, and not all of them were good by any stretch. But rather than simply lob a constant stream of critiques, which takes virtually no thought or creativity, I thought it would be more instructive and worthwhile to actually offer some suggestions, ideas, and strategies that might help the dailies strengthen their business. For over a month, I actually ended each post with a ‘Daily Recommendation for the Dailies.’ They ranged from small to large, good to dumb, free to costly, and realistic to impractical, but they represented some tangible ideas and solutions that could potentially add value to the business model rather than detract from it which is what most dailies have done in the recent past. While I do not have any illusions that I have the definitive answer or answers for daily papers, I have tried to balance my criticisms with ideas and solutions. Before you comment anonymously and slam a single post, take a little time and read through the relevant categories like ‘Daily Papers,’ go back to previous posts, and see if your critiques are justified or unfounded. As you’d discover in this case, I have offered a plethora of ideas, solutions, and recommendations. You may not believe them to hold much merit, but they are there.

By: Anon

Anon — Fri, 11 May 2007 15:42:02 +0000

A no-duh post that OF COURSE POSES NO POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS.
Industry in major decline. $670mm loss in valuation over 7-8 years.
Trying buy time and stem the tide (ie create some interim form of equilibrium) until they can figure out what biz model is workable/desirable.
From the inside, the recent cuts are focusing on Features/Source portion of paper rather than News (eds consider F/S fluff but it is voice of paper and draws big readership – so bad judgement).
There is no obvious panacea for this situation. Infotech outpaces printing easily.
And they obviously can’t compete against CraigList for ad rev.
Hey maybe they should buy JobDig?
Are metro papers like metro sports teams – perhaps public subsidy is in order?
Maybe the Strib should finance the new Twins stadium – hahahaha.
Where are Ideas, solutions for keeping newspapers afloat – Bueller, bueller, bueller???