The McKinsey consultants, with the aid of the Reaper, have made their recommendations. Conde Nast will experience the kind of shrinkage in 2009 that George Costanza could not replicate.
In one fell swoop, there's going to be a lot of extra office space at 4 Times Square.
In three cases, it was the absurd redundancy of trying to corner the market, and ending up cannibalizing itself in the new era of magazine mortality. These were not exactly decisions on the level of Sophie's Choice. No need to have both Gourmet and Bon Appetit, so dump the one staggering the most. Out goes Gourmet with last night's fish dinner!
Are three bridal magazines necessary under one roof? Conde Nast already owned Brides for years when it bought rivals Modern Bride and Elegant Bride. This was a no-brainer. Modern Bride has been around for centuries and Elegant Bride took advantage of the wedding spending boom of the 90's. Both are now mortis.
Cookie is another in a long line of cursed "Best Launch" titles (if you get one of those awards, send out your resume immediately!). Joining the Child and Wondertime conga lines of dead "upscale" parenting magazines, there just weren't enough affluent advertisers to hold this baby in its rickety crib.
It's an empty tower in Times Square, my friends. The lines in the cafeteria are about to get much shorter.
Man, there are going to be a lot of coke dealers in Manhattan today who'll no longer be able to send their grandkids to Harvard.
Posted by: Paul Riddell | October 05, 2009 at 11:05 AM
When I married a couple of years ago, I bought an issue of "Brides" and possibly "Modern Bride." Bridal magazines are useless. They go on and on about dresses, centerpieces, and other junk you can buy, while ignoring important stuff like etiquette and marriage law.
Okay, maybe they touch on etiquette a little, but Miss Manners' "On Weddings" -- a used copy on Amazon is cheaper than a magazine -- does it in detail. Or if you're really cheap, peruse http://etiquettehell.com/ . While "Brides" makes you feel like a cheapskate for not buying $100 centerpieces, Etiquette Hell just provides a good laugh for nervous brides-to-be.
Posted by: skyblacker | October 05, 2009 at 07:16 PM
Skyblacker, one of my best friends used to work for "Dallas Bride", and she related that this was one of the most brain-damaging positions she'd ever had. Never mind that the articles are all written to hype up advertisers and that they pretty much repeated every year, as previous readers would quit and new ones would come aboard. The best part of quitting, she said, was never, ever needing to type "your special day" ever again.
Posted by: Paul Riddell | October 06, 2009 at 10:20 AM
Just want to remind you of what you wrote on your July 24th post:
"If you were a McKinsey consultant, which Conde Nast magazine would you fold?
NOTE: I purposefully left off Vogue, GQ and Cookie since the odds of them folding compared to the others is much slimmer."
Posted by: Jon Mmc | October 19, 2009 at 06:02 PM