Well, this doesn't look good.
Star parent's losses, debt put its stock exchange listing at risk
...
McClatchy (AMEX: MNI) shares had fallen 57 cents, or 18.2%, to $2.57 on Friday, before the company disclosed the warning it received from NYSE American LLC. The disclosure was released after the close of U.S. stock markets. McClatchy shares have fallen 64% in the past year.
NYSE American warned McClatchy on Sept. 9 that it was out of compliance with standards because it was running a “stockholders' deficit of $372.5 million as of June 30, 2019 and net losses in each of the four most recent fiscal years ended Dec. 30, 2018.”
A stockholders' deficit is the difference between a company's liabilities and assets when its liabilities are greater than assets. At the end of the second quarter, McClatchy reported assets of $1.28 billion and liabilities of $1.65 billion.
The company posted a loss last year of $79.8 million, an improvement from its 2017 loss of $332.4 million, after reducing expenses with multiple rounds of layoffs, among other measures. McClatchy's revenue declined by 11% last year to $807.2 million as its newspapers lost advertisers and subscribers.
...
Well, this doesn't look good.
Star parent's losses, debt put its stock exchange listing at risk
...
McClatchy (AMEX: MNI) shares had fallen 57 cents, or 18.2%, to $2.57 on Friday, before the company disclosed the warning it received from NYSE American LLC. The disclosure was released after the close of U.S. stock markets. McClatchy shares have fallen 64% in the past year.
NYSE American warned McClatchy on Sept. 9 that it was out of compliance with standards because it was running a “stockholders' deficit of $372.5 million as of June 30, 2019 and net losses in each of the four most recent fiscal years ended Dec. 30, 2018.”
A stockholders' deficit is the difference between a company's liabilities and assets when its liabilities are greater than assets. At the end of the second quarter, McClatchy reported assets of $1.28 billion and liabilities of $1.65 billion.
The company posted a loss last year of $79.8 million, an improvement from its 2017 loss of $332.4 million, after reducing expenses with multiple rounds of layoffs, among other measures. McClatchy's revenue declined by 11% last year to $807.2 million as its newspapers lost advertisers and subscribers.
...
Is it just me or has the Star become nearly unreadable over the last few months? It seems like every article is geared towards generating whatever controversy they can to sell more papers. Even the most innocuous stuff is being turned into weird conspiracies (the closing of restaurants in Lawrence owned by friends of Kobach??). The writers don't necessarily have any particular political stance, just create controversy. It actually reads a bit like a college newspaper. Maybe that's the marching orders they are getting from the parent company given the losses reported in the article quoted above.
You're not alone. As an aside, while most stories in the Star hang around for days (or weeks in the case of business news), I can't find that story this morning. Maybe it came to light that the charges of left wing harassment turned out to be as bogus as they sounded - charges of feces distribution often float to the surface in conservatives' accusations of liberals' brutality - and it was removed.
I may be wrong about this, but it seems to me that the Star went downhill because they got rid of so many of the long-time news people who have reported on the Metro for decades and really understand it. Instead, they have replaced those with new people who don't seem to really even understand the City they report.
It went downhill because McClatchy is struggling and focused on larger markets but not really investing much in those papers either. The better reporters likely left because McClatchy couldn't keep or afford them.
Is it just me or has the Star become nearly unreadable over the last few months? It seems like every article is geared towards generating whatever controversy they can to sell more papers. Even the most innocuous stuff is being turned into weird conspiracies (the closing of restaurants in Lawrence owned by friends of Kobach??). The writers don't necessarily have any particular political stance, just create controversy. It actually reads a bit like a college newspaper. Maybe that's the marching orders they are getting from the parent company given the losses reported in the article quoted above.
The list of who was writing or on the ed board there 5 years ago and is no longer there is shocking. The comparison to a college paper is apt and I suspect that the new hires from the Pitch and to some extent the KCBJ have contributed to the change in tone. Vockrodt should really consider taking a break from Twitter.
Granted, the old editorial board could be frustratingly circumspect, but the new one is an aggressive, reactionary mess. Dave Helling has not been a stabilizing influence.
They've lost classifieds to other sites, sports to the athletic, development to cityscene, and the editorial section has no credibility. People have Twitter and Facebook, and boomers will turn to the TV for their...stuff. lots of people listen to podcasts now.
If you think back to all your favorite star journalists, they're all still around. Just working for modern companies that aren't McClatchy.
Agreed, the announcment really doesn't promise any additional content, just basically that they can't remain a going concern based off pure ads. I wonder if they evaluated the Patreon route?
I have been toying for a Bloomberg subscription which is available at a discounted $10/mo.
I will subscribe to CityScene. I may pay for it by dropping my subscription to the Star. Local business news is all I'm interested in and the Star's business section doesn't change for days on end.
I agree that $6/mo seems a bit much for the amount of coverage he was providing. I may do it just to help subsidize and support the model though.
He should really consider joining forces with the Shawnee Mission Post folks and any other independent news bloggers in the area. They could potentially rival the Star in their coverage.
I agree that $6/mo seems a bit much for the amount of coverage he was providing. I may do it just to help subsidize and support the model though.
He should really consider joining forces with the Shawnee Mission Post folks and any other independent news bloggers in the area. They could potentially rival the Star in their coverage.
Didn't he work with SM Post for a hot second? I think there was a difference of opinion on coverage or something.
Cityscene needs to figure out how to responsive design correctly. I practically have to sit on the opposite side of the office to read his articles on an actual computer screen.
Last edited by scooterj on Mon Nov 18, 2019 4:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
