Comments on: My Last “I AM SO RIGHT” Post http://shankman.com/my-last-i-am-so-right-post/ CEO. Angel Investor. Entrepreneur. Adventurist. Wed, 16 May 2012 14:54:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Greg Hoffman http://shankman.com/my-last-i-am-so-right-post/comment-page-1/#comment-146 Greg Hoffman Wed, 09 Nov 2005 17:18:34 +0000 http://shankman.com/my-last-i-am-so-right-post/#comment-146 <a href="http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/47221.html?u=akagorilla&p=ENNSS_6871b913da12c997ff84af484af87be8" rel="nofollow">http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/47221.html?u=akagorilla&p=ENNSS_6871b913da12c997ff84af484af87be8</a> http://www.ecommercetimes.com/.....484af87be8

]]> By: Josh Friedlander http://shankman.com/my-last-i-am-so-right-post/comment-page-1/#comment-145 Josh Friedlander Mon, 07 Nov 2005 18:22:56 +0000 http://shankman.com/my-last-i-am-so-right-post/#comment-145 It's impossible at this point to think newspapers aren't being bested in several permanent ways. Certainly the classified ad game is done. The NYTimes Job Market section this weekend was 1/2 a page of text and about 7 more of classified ads. Does anyone posting one of those ads really believe I am going to read any of them? I suppose if I didn't own a computer, but then why are Wall Street firms posting in these venues? Inneffective habit? The pages will continue to dwindle. It's far easier to search craigslist, monster.com, etc. for jobs, real estate, and all manner of services and products, than to bother with the Times. What's worse for The Times is that their attempt (now more than five years old) to place their jobs ads online is a failure...it's a terrible site (difficult to use). Could they turn this around? Maybe. But small papers, like the Village Voice and NYPress, have already suffered mightily and permantently. Expect close-downs, rollups and re-targetting of core audiences. The Voice real estate site is nice, actually, but's it's no match for its competitors. It’s impossible at this point to think newspapers aren’t being bested in several permanent ways.

Certainly the classified ad game is done. The NYTimes Job Market section this weekend was 1/2 a page of text and about 7 more of classified ads. Does anyone posting one of those ads really believe I am going to read any of them? I suppose if I didn’t own a computer, but then why are Wall Street firms posting in these venues? Inneffective habit? The pages will continue to dwindle.

It’s far easier to search craigslist, monster.com, etc. for jobs, real estate, and all manner of services and products, than to bother with the Times.

What’s worse for The Times is that their attempt (now more than five years old) to place their jobs ads online is a failure…it’s a terrible site (difficult to use). Could they turn this around? Maybe. But small papers, like the Village Voice and NYPress, have already suffered mightily and permantently. Expect close-downs, rollups and re-targetting of core audiences. The Voice real estate site is nice, actually, but’s it’s no match for its competitors.

]]> By: Josh Friedlander http://shankman.com/my-last-i-am-so-right-post/comment-page-1/#comment-144 Josh Friedlander Mon, 07 Nov 2005 18:22:28 +0000 http://shankman.com/my-last-i-am-so-right-post/#comment-144 It's impossible at this point to think newspapers aren't being bested in several permanent ways. Certainly the classified ad game is done. The NYTimes Job Market section this weekend was 1/2 a page of text and about 7 more of classified ads. Does anyone posting one of those ads really believe I am going to read any of them? I suppose if I didn't own a computer, but then why are Wall Street firms posting in these venues? Inneffective habit? The pages will continue to dwindle. It's far easier to search craigslist, monster.com, etc. for jobs, real estate, and all manner of services and products, than to bother with the Times. What's worse for The Times is that their attempt (now more than five years old) to place their jobs ads online is a failure...it's a terrible site (difficult to use). Could they turn this around? Maybe. But small papers, like the Village Voice and NYPress, have already suffered mightily and permantently. Expect close-downs, rollups and re-targetting of core audiences. The Voice real estate site is nice, actually, but's it's no match for its competitors. It’s impossible at this point to think newspapers aren’t being bested in several permanent ways.

Certainly the classified ad game is done. The NYTimes Job Market section this weekend was 1/2 a page of text and about 7 more of classified ads. Does anyone posting one of those ads really believe I am going to read any of them? I suppose if I didn’t own a computer, but then why are Wall Street firms posting in these venues? Inneffective habit? The pages will continue to dwindle.

It’s far easier to search craigslist, monster.com, etc. for jobs, real estate, and all manner of services and products, than to bother with the Times.

What’s worse for The Times is that their attempt (now more than five years old) to place their jobs ads online is a failure…it’s a terrible site (difficult to use). Could they turn this around? Maybe. But small papers, like the Village Voice and NYPress, have already suffered mightily and permantently. Expect close-downs, rollups and re-targetting of core audiences. The Voice real estate site is nice, actually, but’s it’s no match for its competitors.

]]> By: Andrew Graham http://shankman.com/my-last-i-am-so-right-post/comment-page-1/#comment-143 Andrew Graham Wed, 02 Nov 2005 15:24:50 +0000 http://shankman.com/my-last-i-am-so-right-post/#comment-143 Not saying I don't agree with you, but for every financial analyst who's bearish on the newspaper industry (like Peter Appert, the Goldman analyst cited in the article), there are analysts who are more optimistic (like Bill Drewry from Credit Suisse or Lauren Fine from Merrill Lynch). The question is, has there been a long-term secular shift in the publishing industry; more simply, is there something that has dramatically changed the business of making money from newspapers, and changed it for good? I would point to the amount of cash advertisers are pouring into new media -- online advertising, SEO, viral campaigns, et al... -- as a shift that has changed substantially that business, and its up to the executives to respond accordingly (which some are doing better than others). In my view, newspaper companies should be given another fiscal year to demonstrate whether or not they can profit long-term from new media's entrenchment. Not saying I don’t agree with you, but for every financial analyst who’s bearish on the newspaper industry (like Peter Appert, the Goldman analyst cited in the article), there are analysts who are more optimistic (like Bill Drewry from Credit Suisse or Lauren Fine from Merrill Lynch). The question is, has there been a long-term secular shift in the publishing industry; more simply, is there something that has dramatically changed the business of making money from newspapers, and changed it for good? I would point to the amount of cash advertisers are pouring into new media — online advertising, SEO, viral campaigns, et al… — as a shift that has changed substantially that business, and its up to the executives to respond accordingly (which some are doing better than others). In my view, newspaper companies should be given another fiscal year to demonstrate whether or not they can profit long-term from new media’s entrenchment.

]]>