'Bloody Monday at Kansas City Star'

Exactly. 10 percent over years and years is much better than 25 for two.

 

This ongoing contrarian deal you have going, up to the tenses people are using in posts, really makes my head hurt.

 

The McClatchys of this world currently are trapped under debt service, which means no profit is enough profit. What we're going to see over the next few years is the death of many corporate newspaper entities.

What we need to see happen in their wake is a passel of smaller entities (families? individuals? small partnerships?) buy these individual properties for pennies on the dollar and live happily ever after with that 10-percent profit margin that, in any other business on earth, is more than enough to be healthy.

 

I'm hoping it happens quickly. I would like to see local ownership return to newspapers and send the money-grubbing CEOs and their sycophants packing. Same with the shareholders.

 

When I interned there a few years ago he was a wire editor and did "The Daily Deuce" KC's Page 2 during the week.

I'll second what you said about him being a great guy. Kent was always upbeat and was always there when I needed help using CCI, surfing the wire, or had a question. His institutional knowledge of the paper and Kansas City sports will be missed.

I never met David or Jim, but their reputations speak for themselves, and I know the sports desk will miss them. I was honored to intern with and learn from one of the best staffs in the country, and I know those who still have jobs will continue their amazing work, unfortunately with less people.

 

The economy will eventually come back. Newspapers won't.

 

I just don't get the basis of these posts. These people all probably still want to work in the business or some business. To me the posts are acting is if the people are gone forever off the planet. I hope their friends won't rest until they get jobs. And the same goes for the editors who had to let them go.

 

Enjoyed that. Thanks for posting it, sir.

Lugnuts, wherever you are, here is the first sentence from a reader comment that will probably make you nod your head knowingly:

Steele | March 18th, 2009 at 8:56 am [#24]

I don’t subscribe to The Star because it’s on the internet, which I pay several hundred dollars a year for.

He goes on to say nice things about the paper:

I have considered subscribing to The Star just because I hate to see this happening and want to do my part. My wife and I buy the paper on Sundays and she always hands me the sports page, which I end up thumbing through quickly because typically I’ve already read the articles online. I don’t really have a point to my comment, just that it is easy to see why this is happening. I’m really glad to see that Joe has diversified with his blogs, writing for SI, etc. What frightens me is losing Joe and Jason and David and Mechelle and Jim to other areas to where they are focusing on other teams. I love my Royals and part of that is because of Joe. I think I just talked myself into subscribing to The Star. Hopefully others will too.

But, that first sentence hits a certain note for you, eh, Luggies?

I don’t subscribe to The Star because it’s on the internet, which I pay several hundred dollars a year for.

 

Speaking of Joe, looks like he has ANOTHER blog out: http://futureofpapers.blogspot.com/

 

I love the idea, and I wonder why haven't these "talented" execs come up with something like it on a larger scale before now.

 

What jobs? There are no jobs.

 

Headline in 2011:

Blog saves newspapers!