Live data from Hacker News

How Condé Nast bought and destroyed Pitchfork

semafor.com

11–20 of 213 posts

Re: How Condé Nast bought and destroyed Pitchfork

#11
> But she also faced pressure to cut costs as traffic from social media platforms declined and Spotify’s algorithms siphoned off more casual fans who’d used Pitchfork for music discovery.

This is pretty much it. There’s no need for arbitrary tastemakers now. What’s good can emerge from what similar listeners happen to like right now. It takes even less effort for users as well and probably gives better results.

Re: How Condé Nast bought and destroyed Pitchfork

#12
This reminds me of Google under Marissa Mayer buying Zagat. Remember them?

Big company buys small company, dismembers it into little pieces controlled by managers who weren't fans of the acquisition and don't respect it -- it's an old story. The founder of the acquiree quits in frustration, etc. etc.

Re: How Condé Nast bought and destroyed Pitchfork

#15
post #8

Condé Nast is where awesome goes to die.

Even Ars Technica is getting stale.

They still have a couple of decent writers. But CN’s business model is buy publications with lots of eyeballs and increase the revenue per eyeball while decreasing the total number of eyeballs per publication but firm-wide across all properties eyeballs are on an upward trajectory. It’ll last as long as it does then there will be nothing but crap. Like SciFi turning into the wrestling channel at scale.

Re: How Condé Nast bought and destroyed Pitchfork

#16
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Ars Technica is getting stale.

Hrm, acquired in 2008. I thought it was earlier. For an alleged $25m per crunchvase, if they are to be trusted (probably not).

Probably correct. The top contributors were some internet.nerds that were top notch on the tech side and rose on merit and the trust they built with their audience. Splitting $25m among the 5-7 of them probably seemed like winning the lottery.

Re: How Condé Nast bought and destroyed Pitchfork

#17

This reminds me of Google under Marissa Mayer buying Zagat. Remember them? Big company buys small company, dismembers it into little pieces controlled by managers who weren't fans of the acquisition and don't respect it -- it's an old story. The founder of the acquiree quits in frustration, etc. etc.

The Zagats were paid $150M for their business. Whatever frustration they may have is cushioned by that payout.

Re: How Condé Nast bought and destroyed Pitchfork

#19

This is like blaming the stock market going up or down on the president. Conde Nast may have simply been the last one holding the "hot potato". In the face of social media platforms sucking the userbase away from blogs and traditional websites, can you really blame them? Does Chrome even have a way to follow RSS feeds, or do you need to install a shady plugin?

Partially, but can't go back in time and prove otherwise. When Conde Nast started buying up specialty like Bicycling, Outdoors, and Wired they transformed them into generic "lifestyle" magazines (10-15 years ago). I remember flipping through Bicycling and seeing 3 car advertisements before getting to the first that had anything to do with cycling and all the columns and editorials contained product pitches for person…

Conde Nast has never bought specialty mags, and doesn't own Outdoors or Bicycling.

It bought Wired mag (but not the online site) in like 1998.

The closest Conde Nast has now to a specialist site is Ars Technica, which it bought almost 20 years ago

Re: How Condé Nast bought and destroyed Pitchfork

#20

This reminds me of Google under Marissa Mayer buying Zagat. Remember them? Big company buys small company, dismembers it into little pieces controlled by managers who weren't fans of the acquisition and don't respect it -- it's an old story. The founder of the acquiree quits in frustration, etc. etc.

There's a difference between buying a media property to try to sell more content(/advertising) into its subscriberbase(/userbase), vs keeping it as a going concern. Or sometimes, companies acquire into newer markets to try to boost their valuations based on P/E ratio.

AOL-Time-Warner (1998) and then AOL-Time-Warner-Netscape (2001) spring to mind. Although those were all pre-Enron, pre-SarbOx valuations.

Post reply on HN