Boy are you wrong. The Tribune Company is so far ahead of ailing McClatchy in every area from publishing to technology it isn't even close. But then again being wrong is pretty much your forte. While Zell can at least partially unwind his debt nightmare by selling Tribune Co. assets including the Cubs and Wrigley without destroying the core, as well as other assets bought decades ago, McClatchy's downward spiral is outpacing the industry and every time they sell something it's almost assured to be at 50% or less of what they bought it for. McClatchy bought high, paid Knight-Ridder top money, now they're forced to sell low with revenues eroding every quarter.

 

None of which is to say either is in good shape but Tribune's other media assets ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_asset...Tribune_Company ) dwarf McClatchy. Even if things go from bad to worse for Tribune they will jettison everything print they can except New York, Chicago, LA and South Florida, giving them the illusion of a "national" presence, and still have all that broadcast media. For McClatchy, they are sinking deeper and deeper into a bottomless pit.

 

I'm not talking about the monolithic conglomerations that run the papers, and neither were you. The Sun Sentinel has a far smaller reader ship and they've been forced to cut jobs left and right recently

 

Boy are you wrong. The Tribune Company is so far ahead of ailing McClatchy in every area from publishing to technology it isn't even close. But then again being wrong is pretty much your forte.

 

You talk a lot of sh*t on the internet, man. Do you really need the e-validation that much? What's the f***ing point of putting something like this in?

 

I guess the truth hurts huh bobby? As for talking sh*t, when you grow up you can lecture anyone you want, but not me, not now.

 

There are a lot of things I don't know, newspapering (and the industry) isn't one of them. Like if I needed advice on a pimple cream I'd probably ask you, the publishing industry not so much. And besides as often as you are wrong, you can never ever admit it your fallibility and absolutely have to have the last word so go ahead and rant, it won't change the fact you don't know what you're talking about on this subject. And that's "for the record".

 

And please, show me how the Herald itself, and not the company that owns it, is in more trouble than the Sentinel. You said, yourself, that the company that owns the Sentinel is more likely to jettison it's print format in Miami, doesn't that prove what I'm saying? I'm talking about the specific papers, just like you were originally. You're rant about the Herald's iminent demise because they attack the Marlins had nothing to do with multinational conglomerations, you've turned this debate into that because it's easier for you, but that's not what the original discussion was about. You may be right in that way, but I don't see any way the Herald BY ITSELF is in more trouble than the Sentinel. This is coming from people I know who work for both (Most of my coworkers work within the newspaper industry).

 

 

Wow.

 

I mean, wow.

 

You're going to try to call me immature (or whatever the f*** it is you are going for here) and then talk like that. You are a f***ing piece of work, man. How old are you, exactly, to be talking down to me like this? You want to talk immature, you're puffed out chest posturing on the internet is the f***ing definition of immature. I'm sure you don't talk like this in the real world.

 

I'm perfectly willing to have an adult conversation on this, you're the one who starts throwing sh*t around.

 

You won't be having any adult conversations with anyone for years bobby. Don't kid yourself.

 

And "for the record" (a favorite expression of yours) I didn't say tribune would be jettisoning south florida, exactly the opposite. I said it would be one of the last to go (as in many many years from now when the paradigm shift is complete) along with NYC, LA, CHI. And as for proving the Miami Herald is better off or not than the Sun-Sentinel you don't seem to grasp the notion they exist for purposes other than just publishing newspapers, and their destinies depend on the financial success or failure of their parent companies more than what they do as free-standing entities, which they are not. A number of national services are done at the local level. The herald does, or did a lot of buying for the group not too long ago for example, over and above what they do for themselves. These newspapers are integrated units operating within a corporate framework, each interdependent with the rest. In the case of McClatchy there is virtually no broadcast or electronic media to leverage, while Tribune is already more broadcast/electronic media than anything else. Even you should be able to figure out what that means for the future.

 

I'll give you a good example. Take a look at MetroMix.com, a tribune sub built around their important market newspapers. What's so important about having a website? Well, what this is is the first step for tribune to morph each website into a TV channel that is market specific, and the herald is so far behind and without the resources to ever catch up. At the herald it's cut cut cut. at tribune it's cut, cut spend some money on the future.

 

I believe in the end Tribune will wind up with one regional paper covering PBC, Broward and M-D even though right now McClatchy is propping up the PBP.

You won't be having any adult conversations with anyone for years bobby. Don't kid yourself.

 

2003, you gotta be kidding me, does EVERYTHING you say have to include an insulting, condescending jab?

 

By the looks of it you can't have any adult conversations either, if you can't "be the bigger person" and resist the urge to take shots at people... :blink:

And "for the record" (a favorite expression of yours) I didn't say tribune would be jettisoning south florida, exactly the opposite. I said it would be one of the last to go (as in many many years from now when the paradigm shift is complete) along with NYC, LA, CHI. And as for proving the Miami Herald is better off or not than the Sun-Sentinel you don't seem to grasp the notion they exist for purposes other than just publishing newspapers, and their destinies depend on the financial success or failure of their parent companies more than what they do as free-standing entities, which they are not. A number of national services are done at the local level. The herald does, or did a lot of buying for the group not too long ago for example, over and above what they do for themselves. These newspapers are integrated units operating within a corporate framework, each interdependent with the rest. In the case of McClatchy there is virtually no broadcast or electronic media to leverage, while Tribune is already more broadcast/electronic media than anything else. Even you should be able to figure out what that means for the future.

 

I'll give you a good example. Take a look at MetroMix.com, a tribune sub built around their important market newspapers. What's so important about having a website? Well, what this is is the first step for tribune to morph each website into a TV channel that is market specific, and the herald is so far behind and without the resources to ever catch up. At the herald it's cut cut cut. at tribune it's cut, cut spend some money on the future.

 

I believe in the end Tribune will wind up with one regional paper covering PBC, Broward and M-D even though right now McClatchy is propping up the PBP.

 

Getting rid of the bit in the beginning that is still totally unecessary and immature for someone who does a lot of talking down, this is actually the type of post I was hoping for.

 

I still don't agree that all of that means specifically that the Herald is going under before the Sentinel (And I still don't think any of this has to do with your original point that Linda Robertson will singlehandedly be responsible for it going under), but I do think neither of them will be recognizable within 10 years, whether that means a dramatic overhaul of the entire look of the paper, or going entirely electronic.

 

And with that, I'm done.

 

And, for the record, the names not bobby, and I've told you that before.

:lol :lol :lol

 

I love it.

 

2003 exposes more of those who can't seem to understand that simple, rational argument isn't "talking down" to them or anyone else. Here's a clue: If you think you are being "talked down to" because someone pointed out a fact then maybe you should re-examine your "argument." Perhaps there are things which you failed to consider.

 

Of course, to do that would involve escaping a juvenile mentality, always a good thing for any board.

Way to destroy a thread