Concordo com o Dvorak (o que nem sempre sucede):
Newspaper publishers in a jam: Many of the pundits say the biggest hurdle the newspapers have is the transition from print to online. In fact, most already have made the transition, and most cannot make the online model work well enough to make up for the downslide in print. They never will.
The reason is simple: In an online world, there are too many bloated newspapers.
What needs to be addressed is the simple concept of redundancy. A search in Google News demonstrates the extent of problem. A hot story of any sort might have 1,000 to 2,000 links from 1,000 to 2,000 news outlets.
As more newspapers make the mistake of eliminating reporting jobs, they [have] nothing special to offer. There are no foreign correspondents anymore.
More often than not, many of the 1,000 to 2,000 stories are the same Associated Press or Reuters reports. In a few rare instances, there will be some additional material contributed by local reporters.
As more newspapers make the mistake of eliminating reporting jobs, they fall into the pit of redundancy with nothing special to offer. There are no foreign correspondents anymore. There are hardly any stringers on the site of a breaking story anymore.
The only papers or news organizations that can expect to survive will be those with lots of original content available only at their individual sites. The operations that rely more on universally available news feeds will be at the mercy of a fickle public -- one that doesn't care where they read a particular story, especially if it is the exact same story with the exact same headline. [...]
There are now plenty of news sites to choose from. I would argue that there are too many newspapers.
[Há é muitos jornais iguais. Eis um exemplo de renovação empresarial, quando o interesse em empresas de media (ou nos seus negócios não-nucleares) está em baixo:]
'WSJ' Combines NY Tech and Media Bureaus: In a nod to the morphing world of media and technology, The Wall Street Journal is combining its New York tech bureau with the Media & Marketing group.
Big media enters the spin zone: Will major media conglomerates soon unload some of their biggest assets? [...]
And it may be fair to suggest that some media companies are too bloated and that pruning some divisions might help boost investors’ returns. But all the spinoff and sale talk seems a just bit odd now since the timing isn’t exactly right.
This summer’s credit crunch has led to a reassessment of risk both among possible acquirers as well as investors. As such, investors may not be willing to buy shares of newly public companies that are considered big media cast-offs. What’s more, sellers may not be as eager to make new deals, especially if they’d have to do so with debt.
“Media companies that may have been exploring deals now are probably waiting to see how the markets settle. The uncertainty has caused many deals to be put on hold. Media firms that may have been considering spin-offs may not get the same price they would have months ago,” said Glover Lawrence, co-founder of McNamee Lawrence & Co, an investment bank based in Boston.
