How a top news executive views risk taking

“If you’re not prepared to occasionally fail,
you’re not trying hard enough.”

Arthur Sulzberger Jr., chairman of the New York Times Co., in a speech yesterday at the WebbyConnect conference.

Advertisements

3 Responses to “How a top news executive views risk taking”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    People should read that article you’ve linked to. *There* is an example of someone who Gets It.

    The traditional Gannett model, which is all about controlling costs and markets and minimizing risk while turning big profits and fat dividends, has no future. It’s led to generic products supported by an advertising and circulation model that no longer can stand. What We Did isn’t good enough any more.

    To be successful, a new Gannett will have to take creative (and thus financial) risks, murder bureaucracy and create exciting new products on the fly in a tough marketplace. Do we have the management in place to do that — or do we have Old Gannett management, inexorably wedded to a philosophy that once worked from a business standpoint but now is failing?

    The market certainly is weighing in these days on how it feels about that question.

  2. Kzandra Says:

    Anonymous at 1:52 PM said…”People should read that article you’ve linked to. *There* is an example of someone who Gets It.

    Pinch is just attempting CYA in response to this report from Reuters, “UPDATE 6-NY Times posts loss from continuing ops; eyes debt cut

    On Thursday, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services cut its rating on the Times to junk after Moody’s Investors Service said it might do the same because of revenue declines and risks associated with paying its debt.

    Anonymous at 1:52 PM finished “The market certainly is weighing in these days on how it feels about that question.

    Credit rating of ‘junk’ is a pretty strong statement.

    The NY Times performance under Pinch just isn’t that good. “Bleeding ‘Times’ Blood” from NY Mag reports,

    A significant portion of the paper’s troubles can be attributed to the general difficulties of a business model based on print advertising in the Internet age. But the younger Sulzberger’s management stumbles have helped to speed the company stock price’s decline to around $15 a share from $45 at the start of the century.

    and

    In the last decade, the Times bought back $3 billion of its own stock—more than the company’s present market value. Now that money is gone, and the company has sunk from surplus to deficit. (Sulzberger himself has acknowledged that the buybacks were “the stupidest thing” he’s done.)

    More,

    Believing that television was the medium of the future, Sulzberger overpaid for the Discovery Times Channel, which failed and was sold. All told, the company’s major newspaper and TV acquisitions since 2000 have lost more than $1.5 billion in value.

    Sulzberger’s all talk, no walk.

  3. Anonymous Says:

    Oh, yes, Arthur, and just how many dollars have you earned on your own in your lifetime? ZERO.
    You’re the problem, not the solution!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: