|
The X-man cometh posted:Didn't Great Hill Partners do the same thing to the Gawker sites? It's what these companies do, buy them and then laden them with their debt, and then bankrupt them. Word to Toys R Us All of these companies are still generally functioning companies, just probably not making the profit that the owners want, so they sell them to hedge funds who load them up with debt, and then cut and slash costs(i.e Employees) until there is no more blood in the stone, then file bankruptcy and get that debt erased and pay pennies on the dollars to the stakeholders, while the employees are hosed. Dexo fucked around with this message at 23:34 on May 26, 2021 |
#
?
May 26, 2021 23:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 12:27 |
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:Didn't Great Hill Partners do the same thing to the Gawker sites? It's pretty standard practice for PE buyouts.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 00:47
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:Didn't Great Hill Partners do the same thing to the Gawker sites? People seem to be mixing up things, but Great Hill Partners still owns Gawker and they haven't loaded them with debt or gone into bankruptcy or anything, they just messed with the editorial staff and cut staff down. Gawker went bankrupt in 2016 after they got sued by Hulk Hogan.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 01:00
|
|
|
Dexo posted:It's what these companies do, buy them and then laden them with their debt, and then bankrupt them. Yeah this is the private equity playbook. These newspapers may not be making as much easy profit as they did in the 1980s and 1990s, but they’re still profitable; it’s just that the PE wants things to perpetually get bigger, and when that doesn’t happen through growth, you sell off the family silver. Which in this case is reducing headcount. It’s gross and should be made illegal, but honestly most major metro newspapers shouldn’t have to be for-profit enterprises either. There’s no money in beat reporters covering the school boards, but it still has to be done.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 04:07
|
|
|
Toys R Us was basically a contrivance to sell the most expensive batteries on Earth well before anyone restructured their debt.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 05:19
|
|
|
Sash! posted:Toys R Us was basically a contrivance to sell the most expensive batteries on Earth well before anyone restructured their debt. Maybe, but like if you looked at TRU(and Baby's R Us)'s books they still sold and did more than well enough as a business entity to survive for a while longer They were still like doing pretty good numbers despite online shopping and everything. But turns out being laden with debt, and then having to pay loans and fees back to the companies that saddled you with the debt kinda fucks over the ability to spend to adapt and adjust to changing market conditions.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 05:36
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Maybe, but like if you looked at TRU(and Baby's R Us)'s books they still sold and did more than well enough as a business entity to survive for a while longer They were still like doing pretty good numbers despite online shopping and everything. The TRU brand in Canada had pretty much the same business model and got sold off and survived. They seem to be doing well enough that none of the locations I know of have shut down even in plague times so there was probably a path to survival that the US arm could have taken if they didn’t get hosed over.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 06:04
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Maybe, but like if you looked at TRU(and Baby's R Us)'s books they still sold and did more than well enough as a business entity to survive for a while longer They were still like doing pretty good numbers despite online shopping and everything. That debt was there own from going private, not external. When they were brought private they took on that money to buy out shareholders. Then the assets they used to secure that debt (mostly large commercial real estate) started to fall. Not to turn this into PE chat, but in this case the Private Equity lost money too, they weren't doing some weird trick, Bain and the other PEs put a billion+ of their own money that they lost. There was definitely looting at the end, but we're talking a couple million with an M when the PE losses were billion with a B. This is less "PEs are evil" (which can definitely be true) but more just normal business bad decisions. It's telling that even through bankruptcy clearing the debt, no one wanted Toys R US. They were still profitable before debt payment but barely and their business was circling the drain before they even got brought private.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 14:25
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Maybe, but like if you looked at TRU(and Baby's R Us)'s books they still sold and did more than well enough as a business entity to survive for a while longer They were still like doing pretty good numbers despite online shopping and everything. Don't forget the millions of dollars in bonuses to the brand new Bain Capital board members who have bravely stepped forward to guide this company through these troubled times
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 14:26
|
|
|
Read "Glass House" by Brian Alexander. It's about the Anchor Hocking glass company but it'll give you all the insight you need into the private equity scam.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 14:35
|
|
|
PE places must be able to successfully run some of these business, otherwise why are banks still loaning them money? I ask this only because I've seen so many PE buyout to bankruptcies that I don't know how they can still pull this game. I would not have a good feeling if I worked for the Trib though. Layoffs are definitely coming. Maybe they can start with John Kass.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 14:45
|
|
|
Kass will somehow become editor and publisher.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 14:49
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:PE places must be able to successfully run some of these business, otherwise why are banks still loaning them money? I ask this only because I've seen so many PE buyout to bankruptcies that I don't know how they can still pull this game. I would not have a good feeling if I worked for the Trib though. Layoffs are definitely coming. Maybe they can start with John Kass. Some PE's are functionally operated in a management sense. Not all of them exist to bleed companies die and strip them for assets. They're all immoral but another big PE play is to take a public company private, build up their valuation and take them public again. In order to do that you actually have to make an attempt to run a business successfully. They're all loving horrible though and they shouldn't be allowed to exist and function in the way that they do. Akileese fucked around with this message at 15:25 on May 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 15:22
|
|
|
Henchman of Santa posted:Kass will somehow become editor and publisher. I hate you for even putting this thought into the world
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 15:25
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/Anthony/status/1397931899293736966
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 16:34
|
|
|
Are they cohosting a show, or taking turns?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 16:34
|
|
|
General Dog posted:Are they cohosting a show, or taking turns? the article says cohosting
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 16:38
|
|
|
It's a shame Limbaugh made ClearChannel promise to bury him with his golden microphone.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 17:02
|
|
|
skaboomizzy posted:It's a shame Limbaugh made ClearChannel promise to bury him with his golden microphone. Hopefully they jammed it in his rear end
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2021 00:46
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/themaxburns/status/1399560569372426240?s=21 You all be shocked to know this take comes from Rob Parker
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 04:04
|
|
|
DJExile posted:https://twitter.com/themaxburns/status/1399560569372426240?s=21 God I loving hate NuSpin.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 06:45
|
|
|
Defectors take wasn't that much better. There haven't been very many good ones.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 09:32
|
|
|
SunshineDanceParty posted:Defectors take wasn't that much better. There haven't been very many good ones. Pier's Morgan's take was about par for the course for him  Because it's *always* about Meghan Markle
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 09:36
|
|
|
SunshineDanceParty posted:Defectors take wasn't that much better. There haven't been very many good ones. Yeah, it was one spot where I was a bit disappointed -- Ratto basically took a weird stance on it, but I'm also guessing the column was filed before she announced she was pulling out of the tournament. The one good take so far is from The Guardian's Jonathan Liew: https://twitter.com/jonathanliew/status/1399460099983347721?s=20 quote:At this point, it’s worth considering exactly what this “danger” consists of. All over the world, the free press is already under unprecedented assault from authoritarian governments, tech giants and online disinformation. In many countries journalists are literally being killed for doing their job. Meanwhile in Paris, tennis journalists are facing the prospect of having to construct an article entirely from their own words. One of these things is not like the others. also pointed out some of the questions women's tennis athletes have been asked in the past which are a bit  when you consider who's asking
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 09:48
|
|
|
Even a number of the Athletic folks who have traditionally been on the correct side of contentious conversations have been showing rear end on this one a bit. Much like the office drone questions of "why do we need to return to the way things were?" I really wish that teams, leagues, players, and the media across sports would evaluate if the press conferences and mandatory availabilities and clubhouse/locker room interviews still make sense. I get that journos have the pattern down and believe that standing in the scrum throwing out questions is a valuable service they provide to fans and players alike but it's also clearly harmful for a number of athletes either directly (as Naomi shared) or indirectly (player-media beefs (or the assignment of "locker room leader" labels to anyone who gives good quote) and the reputational impact on players). Drop mandatory availability for players (gently caress a coach, he can be forced to speak) or at least make it a small number available, rotating throughout the year. I've never seen a quote from a kicker who missed the gamewinning kick or goalie who let in a soft backbreaking goal that left me better informed or glad I spent the time reading it. Also ban video from the locker rooms postgame. Adds fuckall but I think it has to be a constant stress to players even when not being interviewed. Also journos need to selfpolice with vicious mockery and bullying on the "tell me about..." and "please repeat my question back to me so I can quote you in the fourth graf of my gamer that's already writen and in my drafts" questions Eta: A counterview from someone notpress who sees the financial value https://mobile.twitter.com/JonesOnTheNBA/status/1398292572557115393 https://mobile.twitter.com/JonesOnTheNBA/status/1398302450906386442 https://mobile.twitter.com/JonesOnTheNBA/status/1399547291564863489 Paracaidas fucked around with this message at 13:56 on Jun 1, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 13:51
|
|
|
I think it's important for reporters to have some sort of access to the athletes to flesh out their stories and reporting so I sympathize with them there. I don't think any of them particularly like that the access mostly comes in the form of press conferences either. They don't want their only conversations with the athletes to be on camera in an ultra controlled setting, it's just the only thing they're able to get most of the time. The whole televised press conference thing is a creation of the leagues so they can control press access and get extra tv or video content.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 14:36
|
|
|
Naomi Osaka dropping out should absolutely be a perfectly reasonable thing that anyone with half a soul should not criticize. That is not at odds with the idea that vilifying the press is a really bad trend that is happening everywhere and bleeding into sports. Kyrie calling all journalists rats is dehumanizing nonsense. And it's not like dealing with reporters and PR is a lone bastion of athletes. Any job that pays 7-8 figures annually will need to deal with PR. Not to the extent of pro athletes but lots of people manage a balance. I do think Women's Tennis/Pro Sports could do better on finding accommodations for people who have legit concerns but the dichotomy shouldn't be "get rid of journalists".
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 14:44
|
|
|
i wish sports reporters were more antagonistic personally
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 15:22
|
|
|
From what I've read Osaka didn't want to do press conferences because of journalists questioning her poor record on clay giving her a negative mindset. I'm sure some kind of compromise could have been worked out where journalists didn't ask her certain questions out of respect for her psychology. Seems like there was a lack of communication between Osaka and the WTA, which goes both ways. I don't think Osaka will have any issues with the press at the other slams (unless they push her on this particular incident) because she kicks rear end on non-clay courts so wouldn't face the same negativity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 16:02
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:Also ban video from the locker rooms postgame. Adds fuckall but I think it has to be a constant stress to players even when not being interviewed. It may have changed - it’s been a long time since I was involved with sports media - but in the U.S., almost all of those absolutely brain dead questions are coming from TV channels. The beat writers actually need information and insight, the local news just wants its “how’d it go today?” quote.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 16:11
|
|
|
I would have more sympathy for the press (both sports and non-sports) if the press wasn't constantly churning out bad takes and generally being useless at most everything
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 16:20
|
|
|
That’s their job
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 16:22
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:I would have more sympathy for the press (both sports and non-sports) if the press wasn't constantly churning out bad takes and generally being useless at most everything Most of those bad takes are coming from talking heads on TV, not the actual beat reporters. There's a huge difference and while beat reporters can do dumb things for sure the vast majority of the time they're asking absolutely appropriate type questions, they have heavy incentive to keep a relationship going with the team and players. This is the problem, people just paint with these wide brushes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 17:18
|
|
|
On a related note, out of the blue this afternoon I get a message from Deadspin, a spam message inviting me to interview one of their writers. Attached was a link to an Osaka piece. There wasn't much difference between this pitch and the ones I get daily to review books (Harold the Cat also appeared today), talk to sports "experts" I've never heard of about new cleats and the like, boost my Google analytics or the batshit ones from Japan that talk about dragons with tails cut off.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 20:24
|
|
|
Flayer posted:From what I've read Osaka didn't want to do press conferences because of journalists questioning her poor record on clay giving her a negative mindset. I'm sure some kind of compromise could have been worked out where journalists didn't ask her certain questions out of respect for her psychology. Seems like there was a lack of communication between Osaka and the WTA, which goes both ways. I don't think Osaka will have any issues with the press at the other slams (unless they push her on this particular incident) because she kicks rear end on non-clay courts so wouldn't face the same negativity. https://mobile.twitter.com/naomiosaka/status/1399422304854188037 Her own description goes pretty far beyond 'sensitive about her performance on clay' and doesn't seem likely to evaporate at the other slams (though they've made abundantly clear that they're more than willing to tell her to get hosed for standing up for herself). Trivializing it is some straight bullshit. harperdc posted:It may have changed - it’s been a long time since I was involved with sports media - but in the U.S., almost all of those absolutely brain dead questions are coming from TV channels. The beat writers actually need information and insight, the local news just wants its “how’d it go today?” quote. Lockback posted:This is the problem, people just paint with these wide brushes.  The access bit becomes its own issue, but the Cowherd, Travis, and Bayless of the world have no meaningful impact on direct press interactions outside of upping scrutiny on gaffes.RC and Moon Pie posted:On a related note, out of the blue this afternoon I get a message from Deadspin, a spam message inviting me to interview one of their writers. Attached was a link to an Osaka piece.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 20:55
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:I mean, she was pretty clear in her statement withdrawing: That's what her sister said on the matter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 21:05
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:"Tell me about" has become irritatingly universal though. I have never understood why people give a poo poo about this
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 21:06
|
|
|
morestuff posted:I have never understood why people give a poo poo about this I mean it's a very boring question that rarely gets an interesting answer. It usually just means that they've already written like 90% of the story and just need a generic quote from someone to fill it out and make the editor happy so they get them to talk about the aspect of the game they already wrote about. I will say I do think a lot of that is just a function of the press conference being an incredible bad venue for interviewing someone though. You get one question at most usually so you really can't get that in depth and don't want to waste it on something that doesn't help your story. You're on camera so if you ask something too provocative and make the coach or player mad you risk getting blown up at in front of the world and becoming a news item yourself. So you just take the path of least resistance, get the boring quote you need, and call it day.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 21:14
|
|
|
The alternative to "tell me about" is a "when this happened you did" which implies motive already on the action.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 21:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 12:27 |
|
|
MourningView posted:It usually just means that they've already written like 90% of the story and just need a generic quote from someone to fill it out and make the editor happy so they get them to talk about the aspect of the game they already wrote about. That's pretty much all deadline writing, though. I'll take "please discuss X" over rambling go-nowhere questions any day In general it's just always struck me as inside-baseball griping from people who are a little too precious about their craft, and it caught on with non-journalists because it's an easy thing to point out once you see it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2021 21:27
|
|