Digital First pursuing Gannett

[DanOregon]

From my experiences, Gannett rarely cuts to the point it needs to. They tend to kick the can way, way down the road.

If revenues are down 9 percent, they won't be cutting 9 percent, only to find itself in the same spot in another 3 months or 6 months and offer buyouts and lay people off again. They'd be more likely to cut 15 percent, at minimum, so they can say they don't expect to have more buyouts and layoffs for the rest of 2019.

At this point, the only way Gannett turns a profit on declining revenues is to cut well ahead of the decline. You anticipate a decline in revenue of 10 percent, you better cut expenses 16 percent if you want to keep shareholders happy.

 

[LanceyHoward]

If this goes through, I could see Salinas getting absorbed into the Monterey Herald, which is already covering the whole county. But it's the usual DFM problem (as in Santa Cruz), the print product is almost secondary. Both print in the Bay area and deadlines are early, so at least in the dead tree edition, Tuesday's preps don't get in until Thursday. Forget late city council or other breaking news as well.

Does anyone know if the the Monterrey Herald offers home delivery inside the City of Salinas? Salinas has a population of about 156,000. I was surprised the paper in a city this size would have a circulation of less than 5,000, especially since subscriptions seem to be $12 a month. That would mean that the paper circulates to less than 10% of the homes in Salinas. Is the small circulation due to a competitive market or just that people do not want to subscribe to the paper. I know a lot of big city dailies are circulating in less than 10% of homes in the market but I thought smaller papers were doing better.

Because if small papers are seeing circulation drop below 10% then any daily in a market smaller than Salinas must be getting close to becoming a weekly. But perhaps Salinas is just a competitive market.

 

[BTExpress]

I'm not an age elitist but I'd have thought some of these folks would go with the hopes of saving some of their younger colleagues.

The old person goes . . . he's finished. The young person goes . . . he starts his second career, doing whatever. And the earlier the better, frankly.

Often, the thinking is "take the buyout now or stay and take the risk of getting laid off and getting nothing but a small severance later."

With only one exception (in 2007, when my shop's first buyout offer was a year's salary), there has been zero difference in the "buyout" and the "severance" at the places I've worked (at least among the buyout figures made public to everyone). So there was never a risk by not taking the buyout.

 

[Jake from State Farm]

With only one exception (in 2007, when my shop's first buyout offer was a year's salary), there has been zero difference in the "buyout" and the "severance" at the places I've worked (at least among the buyout figures made public to everyone). So there was never a risk by not taking the buyout.

The first offer at The News and Free Press was one year's pay and benefits
By the time I took it 11 years later, it was 26 weeks and no benefits
I was able to take it because of the retiree health benefits the Guild negotiated

 

[Readallover]

There's a heavy buzz this week that a re-alignment of some sort is about to hit Gannett's NJ dailies.

 

[Human_Paraquat]

Hearing of layoffs this morning at at least one Gannett location.

 

[BTExpress]

The first offer at The News and Free Press was one year's pay and benefits
By the time I took it 11 years later, it was 26 weeks and no benefits
I was able to take it because of the retiree health benefits the Guild negotiated

I'm talking about buyouts/layoffs at the same time, though. It's not Let's Make a Deal, where you're "risking" missing out on some big buyout (Door No. 1) if you don't take it and get laid off instead (Door No. 2).

 

[Mwilliams685]

There have been some people talking about layoffs this week, possibly in Indy.

 

[BurnsWhenIPee]

I'm talking about buyouts/layoffs at the same time, though. It's not Let's Make a Deal, where you're "risking" missing out on some big buyout (Door No. 1) if you don't take it and get laid off instead (Door No. 2).

That's the way Gannett typically presents it, though, and it is almost never at the same time

They present the buyout offers first, with the ominous warning that if enough people don't take the buyout, there is the possibility of layoffs down the line, at which point the "generous" severance package will be off the table.

 

[ChrisLong]

When I left 4-1/2 years ago, the choice was to take a buyout with 20 weeks of pay or risk a layoff with 6 weeks of pay. It was really no choice at all.
We were told the company would not contest unemployment claims. They lied. I told a judge the company said they would not contest unemployment. He said, "Well, they did."
I had to do a phone interview and was denied. I had to appeal and appear before a judge and was denied. Finally, there was a written appeal, which was accepted. The person who wrote the decision really understood the situation. The forking judge did not.

 

[playthrough]

Tim's a great voice in Indy. One of the other layoffs at the Star today is a neighbor and good friend. fork it all.

 

[Mwilliams685]

Two layoffs and two columns axed.