Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Advertising Age)   Time Inc. to spin off from Time Warner, making it an independent magazine publisher. CEO to send personally written letters to all three loyal subscribers   (adage.com) divider line 12
    More: Interesting, Time Inc., Time Warner, CEO, IPC Media, spin-off, special dividend, letters, subscribers  
•       •       •

180 clicks; posted to Business » on 10 May 2014 at 12:24 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



12 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-05-10 10:56:22 AM  
Well, they already spun off AOL from Time Warner.

Now it's time for AOL to split into America and Online.
 
2014-05-10 11:06:35 AM  
We get Time magazine, mostly as a fluke mind you, but our subscription is paid up until some time in 2016 for ~$20.

It balances well with the subscription to National Review that we got at the same time for the same price.
 
2014-05-10 01:03:09 PM  

Snarfangel: Well, they already spun off AOL from Time Warner.

Now it's time for AOL to split into America and Online.


Weird, I was just thinking yesterday about how Time Warner spun off AOL. Now this.

/I funny'd your comment. :-)
 
2014-05-10 01:22:59 PM  
i subscribe to Time for reading material at lunch. that said this looks more like a shiatty corporate move than anything else. make Time Inc buy a subdivision for some inflated price, load them up with other debt then dump them

"After the Spin-Off, we will have substantial indebtedness and the ability to incur significant additional indebtedness, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and result of operations," the filing says.

i fail to see any advantages in that.
 
2014-05-10 01:29:43 PM  
The only thing they make that's worth a damn is Life. Say what you will, but those photos are way better in the original format.
 
2014-05-10 01:40:37 PM  

InterruptingQuirk: We get Time magazine, mostly as a fluke mind you, but our subscription is paid up until some time in 2016 for ~$20.

I just renewed for 3 years for $40.  I can't imagine what they're doing - $13/year barely covers postage. I guess if you can keep your subscriber numbers up, even at a loss, you can still try to get advertising revenue.

Time is not nearly as good as it used to be - only 1/3 to 1/2 the size and mostly Internet-generation fluff, but for 25 cents an issue, it only needs one good article to be worth it. If I can't renew for less than $15 a year, it's gone.
 
2014-05-10 02:28:15 PM  

ImpendingCynic: InterruptingQuirk: We get Time magazine, mostly as a fluke mind you, but our subscription is paid up until some time in 2016 for ~$20.
I just renewed for 3 years for $40.  I can't imagine what they're doing - $13/year barely covers postage. I guess if you can keep your subscriber numbers up, even at a loss, you can still try to get advertising revenue.

Time is not nearly as good as it used to be - only 1/3 to 1/2 the size and mostly Internet-generation fluff, but for 25 cents an issue, it only needs one good article to be worth it. If I can't renew for less than $15 a year, it's gone.


Exactly, it's also a nice mag to leave around the house for my kids to have something with 'current' event type material in it. And so they will at least be able to tell their kids that they remember print magazines.
 
2014-05-10 03:47:32 PM  
Print is dead.
 
2014-05-10 04:36:58 PM  
On one hand, since the Comcast purchase is moving forward, I'm glad they won't have any additional media power like when they bought NBC. on the other hand, this is just a way to get rid of some debt for the merger, and will likely kill Time without it having a massively profitable corporate parent to hide its losses in.
 
2014-05-10 05:43:40 PM  
In business speak, this means somebody thinks TIME magazine is going to fail in the coming years, so they're getting it off their books now to protect future share pricing.
 
2014-05-10 07:32:42 PM  

Alonjar: In business speak, this means somebody thinks TIME magazine is going to fail in the coming years, so they're getting it off their books now to protect future share pricing.


More likely, this is a move meant to sweeten the potential Comcast-Time Warner merger.
 
2014-05-10 07:32:54 PM  

Alonjar: In business speak, this means somebody thinks TIME magazine is going to fail in the coming years, so they're getting it off their books now to protect future share pricing.


Not just "think" - they know that a physical magazine is no longer a survivable business model on its own. They're setting it up to be the write-off...  And probably a spot to dump a few inconvenient mid-level managers who don't have a "place" in the company's "future direction."
 
Displayed 12 of 12 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report