Translation: "The economy sucks for everyone, but we're still here, so fuck you New York Magazine. But! Things will get suckier and we're going to have to make some changes, i.i. firing most of you. This is painful and it will hurt me more than you. Kidding! This will be a considerable and complicated task, convincing Old Man Newhouse that it's not the fucking '90s anymore. To make this remarkably uncomfortable situation a little easier on my mind and soul, we've contracted with a company that's very name is a slightly warped synonym for fucking people. Take comfort knowing that all of your colleagues have a shot at being fucked in this deal. Well, not Si. Or me, God, no. Take comfort also in knowing that Conde Nast will survive because we are awesome, with or without you. Best, Chuck."
If you work in the tech field, replace "McKinsey" with "Bricker Associates". And then run run run for the doors! Last one out is stuck cleaning out desks!
Oof. As a consultant, albeit not one in the "restructuring" business, I feel truly sorry for both McK and Condy Nasty. How in god's name do you assess the incremental value of "title chosen from a bag" media worker?
For example, if it was the NYT, Maureen Dowd's PA probably writes her articles, so that would be an easy decision. But if you're dealing with one of Conde's random-ass properties, how do you roll up who brings the readers?
I'm not a magazine person, but my wife was for a while. She told me about a Paris photo shoot where the mag packed up crates and crates of clothes and photo equipment, sent them to Paris, flew over photogs and models, shot for three days, flew everything and everyone back to New York, and scrapped the shots.
This is probably why they're finding it hard to pay for stuff now.
The speed with which this was delivered makes me suspect that most of the Conde Nastees spend their days hitting refresh, which is something McKinsey will quickly put an end to.
Feelings about McKinsey aside, most big corporations /are/ greatly overstaffed. Most media companies need to have fewer managers, more content producers in the new world where you get paid for actual quality / volume of content and not just delivering a big glossy phonebook of ads onto readers' doorsteps once a month.
This sounds like a triumph of the business side of Conde Nast. They've been telling people privately that the company has to change how it does business: that the lavish advertising of recent years is never coming back and the costs need to fall commensurately.
But is 81-year-old owner Si Newhouse -- famous for indulging his editors -- really going to confront the editors he's coddled for so long? I bet the hiring of McKinsey is a device by Townsend and Carey and co to force the old man into the decisions he's so reluctant to make. When presented by some report saying 30% of the positions at Conde Nast are unnecessary, it will be impossible to withstand the pressure for further economies.
@Nick Denton: My guess is that McKinsey is going to give them the ammo. they need to confront Newhouse, and that he's going to (out of necessity) give the go-ahead for widespread staff cuts while simultaneously assuring the editors that nothing will personally change for them -- just that they'll have less people to bark those indulgent orders at.
@Nick Denton: I don't think Si Newhouse has any interest in owning a magazine publisher unless it can also be the most glamorous one. The force he's protected his free-spending star editors from is the marketplace, not his business team. If Condé is now going to become a business, it's a sign that Si simply doesn't care anymore.
@Nick Denton: Newhouse will embrace death's sweet release, or garlic in his food, before he ever accepts the death of print, and the migration of his titles to digital distribution.
@Gabriel Snyder: Could it be a sign that he no longer wants to hemorrhage money, since the newspaper side (which historically subsidized the mags) is no longer a cash cow? My initial thought was that he knows he has to make big layoffs, but didn't want to be the one who suggests them. This way he can still be the Big Picture/Magazines Are My Life guy while letting McKinsey do all that piddling execution (pun intended) stuff.
@FormerEnglishMajor: Didn't Geithner, while doing the photo shoot for his cover story for the final issue of Portfolio, give Conde Nast some advice on how to dispose of its toxic assets? At Conde's current burn rate, how long would the launch cost of Portfolio have lasted them?
Can't the owner of Wired magazine figure out the web yet? I'd pay for some New Yorker articles that I currently get for free. At least Malcolm Gladwell is doing scathing reviews of Chris Anderson's "Free."
A cousin of mine is a McKinsey consultant whose first job was looking for "efficiencies" at a company by interviewing people to find out what their jobs entailed. After a few days, his partner turns to him and says: "You know what we are? We're the Bobs."
@Astigmatism: If it took him a few days to realize that, he's slow enough to be a McKinsey consultant. I think I would have figured that out by lunch on the first day at the latest.
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
2. this will not end well
07/20/09
07/20/09
For example, if it was the NYT, Maureen Dowd's PA probably writes her articles, so that would be an easy decision. But if you're dealing with one of Conde's random-ass properties, how do you roll up who brings the readers?
07/20/09
Oh, and yes, hiring the firm almost certainly augurs layoffs. Although I find it hard to believe there's any fat to trim at Conde Nasty.
07/20/09
07/21/09
07/20/09
This is probably why they're finding it hard to pay for stuff now.
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
Layoffs are not a terribly original plan, but here's a newsflash: "lean and mean" is no longer merely about making money, it's about survival.
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
But is 81-year-old owner Si Newhouse -- famous for indulging his editors -- really going to confront the editors he's coddled for so long? I bet the hiring of McKinsey is a device by Townsend and Carey and co to force the old man into the decisions he's so reluctant to make. When presented by some report saying 30% of the positions at Conde Nast are unnecessary, it will be impossible to withstand the pressure for further economies.
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
i suspect that many of his star editors will actually cotton to the idea of occasional car service and a smaller expense account than none at all.
i admire the way Si ran things, but it's over now.
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/22/09
Can't the owner of Wired magazine figure out the web yet? I'd pay for some New Yorker articles that I currently get for free. At least Malcolm Gladwell is doing scathing reviews of Chris Anderson's "Free."
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
Just to get it out of the way up front, you know?