Tag Archives: Union-Tribune

San Diego News Website Launched

The recent sale of San Diego’s Union-Tribune to the Beverley Hills based private equity firm Platinum Equity has left many in the area wondering what the future will bring. Will the paper, which has seen several rounds downsizing of its news staff in recent years, be even less of a source for local news as its new owners seek to shore up their investment?  The answers to their questions will play out over the next year as Platinum partner Black Press, Ltd. takes a hand in shaping the publication once the sale is completed later this year.

Although it may seem serendipitous with its timing, San Diegans woke up Monday morning with yet another source for news.  The San Diego News Network (SDNN.com) launched a beta version this week, with a staff of over fifty reporters, correspondents and editors and twenty eight “partnering” media organizations.  Whether this new media outlet can command enough readership or provide real in-depth local coverage remains to be seen.

In an opening communiqué, CEO Neil Senturia promises over 30 sections will be initiated in coming months, encompassing local politics, sports, movies, restaurants and other topics. With former Sign On San Diego honcho Ron James as Publisher/Executive Editor, the SDNN initial offerings included:

**Associated Press Coverage on the Banking Crisis. And three different AP stories about the drug dealers that threw cash out of their vehicle while tooling up I-15 with the law in hot pursuit. Their reliance on the AP for national coverage suggests that it will mirror the generally conservative slant that news organization has exhibited in recent months.

**A feature by Joseph Pena profiling SD City Councilmember Carl Demaio. Political consultant Larry Remer is quoted as calling DeMaio a political “bomb-thrower”. Others interviewed for the piece  aren’t willing to pass judgment yet, including Remer’s long-ago consulting partner (and now partisan opponent) Tom Sheppard.  Bottom line:  meh?

**Reflections on the sale of the Union-Tribune by SDNN deputy editor Eric Yates in which he poses the question: “why would a private equity company, with no prior history of owning a major news publication, suddenly pounce to acquire a daily metro that has had a 40 percent reduction in ad revenue since 2006?”

**A lengthy article on the urban farming by Eric Glass.  The most “new media” of all the initial offerings, complete with a video and background story links.  While informative and well written, it falls short when it comes to placing the story in the context of the national and local interest in locavorism.

**Coverage of the local prostitution business by Political Editor Hua Quach. The price of oral sex has fallen along with property values, we’re told.  And I guarantee that his story will generate the most hits on the site, since anything mentioning s.e.x. on blogs and news websites always generates huge traffic.

A screenshot displayed on the SDNN website promises that the limited offerings on the beta release will significantly increase in the future.

SDNN appears to understand the collaborative future of web-based news reporting by virtue of their partnerships with other organizations, including radio stations, community newspapers and San Diego Magazine.  What remains to be seen is whether they can wield that collaboration into an actual point of view.  The issue here is not partisanship or even necessarily agenda.  But if you try to be all things to all people, you end up being nothing to nobody.  

San Diego’s Daily Fishwrap Changes Hands

Beverley Hills based private equity firm Platinum Equity has reached an agreement to purchase San Diego’s daily newspaper, the San Diego Union-Tribune for an estimated $15 million dollars.  The paper, once the flagship of the far-flung and politically conservative Copley media empire, has been a distressed property in recent years.  Last summer the heirs to the Copley fortune decided to cut their losses and put the paper on the market.

The family’s angst over the paper’s plight has been obvious over the past few years. Anxious for a solution, the Copley organization launched so many quick fixes, re-designs, re-launches, re-positions, cutbacks, flip-flops and fire sales that they began to resemble a losing political campaign more that the grand cartel with a license to print money that they once were.

The Union-Tribune has been losing circulation at an astonishing rate. Advertising dollars were disappearing faster than free food samples at Whole Foods. And, most importantly, the credibility and influence that the paper once wielded in the San Diego market had evaporated.  While it was all fine and wonderful that the Copley newspapers were once profitable, making profits was only part of the deal. The real reason for all this hand wringing had to do with influence.  If they could have found a way to maintain what they call their “market share” or “penetration”, they’d printed the paper on toilet paper, or switch to CB radio.  But those days are over.

San Diego is the eighth largest city in the United States.  It used to be a reliably Republican bastion, a Navy town, where dissent and dissenters simply weren’t tolerated.  Richard Nixon called it his lucky city.  The Union-Tribune was the face that the City showed the world.  Changing demographics and a shift in the regions’ economic base away from the military towards high tech industries have altered things.  Democratic majorities are emergent in most parts of the region, with the exception of the County Government. Given that the Union Tribune’s circulation was reaching just 8% of the households, the family wisely decided to trade their remaining hard assets for cold cash.

The San Diego newspaper was hardly alone in its troubles.  Three dailies have closed up shop since the first of the year, and the clock is ticking in a half-dozen more metropolitan areas.  What makes this sale noteworthy is that they found a willing buyer.  Why would a private equity firm invest in such an obviously doomed venture that had already shed its tenured employees?  The answer isn’t immediately obvious.

Private equity operators like Platinum Equity are often portrayed as slick, heartless financial manipulators that squeeze the remaining life from their acquisitions at the expense of the people unfortunate enough to be working there.  That doesn’t seem to be the case here.  In fact, it all seems too good to be true.

The U-T’s buyer says that its focus is operations, not financial manipulation, and it has a history of making long-term investments in the industries where it is active.  Platinum calls itself an M&A&O company-mergers, acquisitions and operations-and, in fact, it often acts more like a strategic buyer of its companies than a financial one. It invests, sometimes heavily, after the acquisition in additional businesses, equipment, people and facilities that give its holdings a stronger position for the long haul.

They certainly have been a buying streak.  Over the last 14 years, they’ve acquired nearly 100 companies with more than $27.5 billion in combined annual revenue at the time of acquisition.  What’s hard to believe are the rates of return.  Private Equity Intelligence Ltd., the British analyst of private equity fund performance, says investors in Platinum’s Equity Capital Partners Fund I of 2004, have seen a multiple of 2.68 (that’s $2.68 for every dollar invested) on their money, compared with 1.28 for all U.S.-based buyout funds originated in that year.  As the company is privately held, all such claims are completely unverifiable.

Platinum has an operating partner in their acquisition of the Union Tribune-Black Press Ltd., a Canadian company with extensive newspaper and internet holdings in North America.  Only two of their newspaper holdings are dailies: the Honolulu Star Bulletin and the Akron (Ohio) Beacon Journal.  Standard & Poor’s’ Rating Services downgraded Black’s Corporate credit rating into junk bond territory based on debt acquired in its last US purchase-the Akron paper-predicting that the company would remain fiscally challenged at least through 2010.  It would appear that, for the moment, Platinum has the money and Black is providing the muscle.

Black Press Ltd.’s track record with their holdings in Canada and the Northwestern States is pretty solid, and, if past performance is a reliable indicator, the San Diego daily won’t be the only paper changing hands in southern California.  The company has been able to deliver decent returns with their publishing concerns (most of which are weekly papers) via regional grouping of advertising and operational personnel.

For San Diegans, it’s wait and see time.  Will their daily paper shed its longstanding reputation as a reactionary mouthpiece with a particular distaste for anything associated with a trade union?  (Both of the Black Press’ dailies endorsed Obama last fall.) Or will this sale be just another boondoggle in a City seeking to shed its past reputation as Enron-by-the-Sea?  

other links about the sale: The family’s angst over the paper’s plight has been obvious over the past few years. Anxious for a solution, the Copley organization launched so many quick fixes, re-designs, re-launches, re-positions, cutbacks, flip-flops and fire sales that they began to resemble a losing political campaign more that the grand cartel with a license to print money that they once were.

The Union-Tribune has been losing circulation at an astonishing rate. Advertising dollars were disappearing faster than free food samples at Whole Foods. And, most importantly, the credibility and influence that the paper once wielded in the San Diego market had evaporated.  While it was all fine and wonderful that the Copley newspapers were once profitable, making profits was only part of the deal. The real reason for all this hand wringing had to do with influence.  If they could have found a way to maintain what they call their “market share” or “penetration”, they’d printed the paper on toilet paper, or switch to CB radio.  But those days are over.

San Diego is the eighth largest city in the United States.  It used to be a reliably Republican bastion, a Navy town, where dissent and dissenters simply weren’t tolerated.  Richard Nixon called it his lucky city.  The Union-Tribune was the face that the City showed the world.  Changing demographics and a shift in the regions’ economic base away from the military towards high tech industries have altered things.  Democratic majorities are emergent in most parts of the region, with the exception of the County Government. Given that the Union Tribune’s circulation was reaching just 8% of the households, the family wisely decided to trade their remaining hard assets for cold cash.

The San Diego newspaper was hardly alone in its troubles.  Three dailies have closed up shop since the first of the year, and the clock is ticking in a half-dozen more metropolitan areas.  What makes this sale noteworthy is that they found a willing buyer.  Why would a private equity firm invest in such an obviously doomed venture that had already shed its tenured employees?  The answer isn’t immediately obvious.

Private equity operators like Platinum Equity are often portrayed as slick, heartless financial manipulators that squeeze the remaining life from their acquisitions at the expense of the people unfortunate enough to be working there.  That doesn’t seem to be the case here.  In fact, it all seems too good to be true.

The U-T’s buyer says that its focus is operations, not financial manipulation, and it has a history of making long-term investments in the industries where it is active.  Platinum calls itself an M&A&O company-mergers, acquisitions and operations-and, in fact, it often acts more like a strategic buyer of its companies than a financial one. It invests, sometimes heavily, after the acquisition in additional businesses, equipment, people and facilities that give its holdings a stronger position for the long haul.

They certainly have been a buying streak.  Over the last 14 years, they’ve acquired nearly 100 companies with more than $27.5 billion in combined annual revenue at the time of acquisition.  What’s hard to believe are the rates of return.  Private Equity Intelligence Ltd., the British analyst of private equity fund performance, says investors in Platinum’s Equity Capital Partners Fund I of 2004, have seen a multiple of 2.68 (that’s $2.68 for every dollar invested) on their money, compared with 1.28 for all U.S.-based buyout funds originated in that year.  As the company is privately held, all such claims are completely unverifiable.

Platinum has an operating partner in their acquisition of the Union Tribune-Black Press Ltd., a Canadian company with extensive newspaper and internet holdings in North America.  Only two of their newspaper holdings are dailies: the Honolulu Star Bulletin and the Akron (Ohio) Beacon Journal.  Standard & Poor’s’ Rating Services downgraded Black’s Corporate credit rating into junk bond territory based on debt acquired in its last US purchase-the Akron paper-predicting that the company would remain fiscally challenged at least through 2010.  It would appear that, for the moment, Platinum has the money and Black is providing the muscle.

Black Press Ltd.’s track record with their holdings in Canada and the Northwestern States is pretty solid, and, if past performance is a reliable indicator, the San Diego daily won’t be the only paper changing hands in southern California.  The company has been able to deliver decent returns with their publishing concerns (most of which are weekly papers) via regional grouping of advertising and operational personnel.

For San Diegans, it’s wait and see time.  Will their daily paper shed its longstanding reputation as a reactionary mouthpiece with a particular distaste for anything associated with a trade union?  (Both of the Black Press’ dailies endorsed Obama last fall.) Or will this sale be just another boondoggle in a City seeking to shed its past reputation as Enron-by-the-Sea?  (cross posted at daily kos)

other links about the sale:

http://obrag.org/?p=1333   http://lastblogonearth.com/200…  http://www.voiceofsandiego.org…

Open Thread

And we’re back with a hip hop revival.

In your news roundup, San Diego women’s prison Las Colinas will close by order of a grand jury which found the overcrowding to have reached “barely humane” levels, whatever that means. 

Pre-trial hearings began today for Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, the commanding officer of the Marines involved in the Haditha killings.  On the menu: violation of an order and dereliction of duty.  Contrary to what I’m sure many on the Right wish was popular opinion, nobody wins in this.

And finally, our good friend Ruben Navarrette has a perplexing analysis of low-skill jobs and immigration.  He spends the first half of his op-ed establishing that Americans don’t want low wage jobs, and that they indeed look down on such jobs.  Then he dives right into the notion that maybe low-skilled workers would be better off if they got more skills.  Huh? Didn’t you just tell us that the problem was that America’s home-grown workforce was overskilled?  So your conclusion is, people need more skills?  He falls into the classic trap of “they’re stealing our jobs” blowhards while seemingly trying to refute it.  Nobody actually knows of large numbers of people who can’t get jobs because of immigrants, they just hear tell of them.  Yet they must be real, and I guess they need to call Lincoln Tech.

15 years after their last sighting, X-Clan is putting weak MCs on notice.  Now dance to the rhythm of the evolved drum.  X-Clan – Weapon X.
“You can be a strange fruit and be straight innocent.”

Open Thread

A couple of one offs because I’m just not feeling particularly brilliant tonight.

Chris Reed, shockingly, is still stupid.  The only way to react to growing traffic is to build more roads.  Not create new transportation mechanisms.  Not to reconsider growth patterns.  Nope.  Build roads.  He likens this to taking medicine even if a condition is chronic.  I liken it to eating candy after being diagnosed with diabetes.  Hell, it makes you feel good and it’s easier right?

A judge ruled today that California can start shipping inmates out of state again.  Clearly, this will solve the problem.  This is why, when I get an assignment at work that I don’t like, I just stuff it in a drawer.

Ruben Navarrette Jr. still hates basic humanity.

Incredibly, even that is too much effort for some on the radical left who refuse to acknowledge that these people broke the law and need to make restitution, and that step one is acknowledging the wrongdoing. For many Americans, though, this is all they want — some humility and remorse by those who wiped their feet on our laws on their way in the door and then demanded rights once inside.

Presumably, those asshole slaves that kept escaping should have had to apologize for breaking the law before the 13th Amendment as well.

Thousands of Iraqis are being held in detention camps off the record..  Get angry with stop action.  Metric – Succexy.

“Invasion’s so succexy.”

Union Tribune: Edwards Hates Success and Richardson Said So

It’s also Blue and Orange.

In an editorial today, The San Diego Union Tribune takes issue with John Edwards for being willing to consider an “excess-profits, excess-income tax.”  The editorial complains of Edwards “hawking class warfare” and complains that a rich person has no business being concerned about class issues.  In closing, it does us all the service of “call[ing] this toxic idea by its proper name. It’s a tax on performance. It’s a way to punish the high-achievers in our economy in the hopes that we might be able to discourage them from trying so hard and achieving so much.”

I’ll refute this nonsense on the flip, but first the kicker:

The good news is that at least one of Edwards’ competitors, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, had the good sense to shoot down the idea, promote himself as a taxpayer, and chide Democrats for proposing taxes as the solution to every societal problem – and non-problem.

Let’s clear out the low-hanging fruit right out of the gate.  This narrative of the self-loathing rich man who hates success is absurd.  It sets up John Edwards as ineligible to be concerned about the poor because he isn’t poor, noting his large house and his haircuts (we of course don’t have actual policy to discuss, natch).  Continuing to channel some bizarro, bastardized spirit of Horatio Alger, the UT suggests that, since increased taxes on increased success is a stand against ambition, taxes are inherently some sort of penalty for success.  One wonders whether the opposite is true, and the editorial page would drool over a proposal to impose an extra tax on poor people for not trying hard enough to be rich and successful.  Hey, if Carnegie can make it, then why can’t you (Except for that philanthropy part. Social responsibility is for Stalinists)?  Don’t tread on my bootstraps John; I need to lift myself up by them or else.

What’s particularly distressing here though is that the editorial can get away with all this crap without even once referring to any Republican politician, idea, proposal, or existing policy.  Why? Because Bill Richardson provides all the cover needed to paint John Edwards as some sort of nefarious enemy of the American Dream.

In short, Bill Richardson is killin us on taxes.  It would be one thing if Bill Richardson simply had a different outlook on how to spur economic growth.  We could talk about that.  But he’s painting the rest of the Democratic field as traditional tax and spend liberals and, in the process, serving up ammunition on a silver platter for Republicans who have absolutely no other substance to bring to the debate.  This has been a particularly frustrating burr in the sides of bloggers for a while now, and here’s still more evidence of the damage done by the perpetuation of these right-wing talking points.  Letting the right jump up and down screaming “See! Even other Democrats know Democrats are wrong!” is anathema to party building and every aspect of progress that the Democratic Party has been pursuing over the past several years.  And so Bill Richardson, please, take a few notes to heart.

First, particularly for California Democrats, you do NOT want to do the opposition work on behalf of Republicans.  We’ve been through this, and all it got us was four more years of Schwarzenegger.  Do you want to be a part of that? No, you do not.

Second, tax-and-spend is a Republican talking point that is ridiculous on its face and shouldn’t be a part of your world for two broad reasons: One, the Republican alternative, which you’re giving credence to, is spend without taxing and that’s bad.  Two, you are going to spend the taxes you collect, so you tax and spend as well.  To suggest this is bad, well…convince me why I want to pay taxes that do nothing and we can talk.

Third, this is a party-and-infrastructure election.  You’re going to be talking about Iraq and alternative energy and universal health care and immigration, but all of these issues have to be addressed through the prism of engaging people in politics.  The people you’re talking to about these issues are people who are extra-ordinarily excited about politics right now and we want to keep them involved.  Ripping down your fellow Democrats does not accomplish this and leaves a bad taste in the mouths of many who are trying to do something lasting in and with this party.

By all means, compete in the primary and make your case for being the best Democrat in the field.  Talk about how you have a different view when it comes to how best to inspire economic growth that suits the 21st century.  But for the love of all things good in the world, do not do it by saying of your fellow Democratic candidates “See? The Republicans were right about you.”  If you do this, you will lose.  And I can pretty much guarantee that I’m right about that.