Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vice Media: A Company Built on a Bluff

nymag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 78 posts

Re: Vice Media: A Company Built on a Bluff

#41

Post by godzillabrennus »

gringoDan wrote: post #16

> When I asked Dominique Delport, the chief revenue officer, whether the company was profitable, he declined to say and suggested that dollar figures were the wrong way to think about Vice. “The company profit is to everybody who watches Vice, because they feel smarter,” he said. Investors should run away as quickly as possible. If that quote from the Chief Revenue Officer isn't a red flag, I don't know what is.

It took Twitter 10 years to turn a profit: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2018/02/08/twitter-...

To suggest that an investor can't earn a profit by putting cash into a business with a burn rate is as sophomoric as believing you can run a business on investor money without ever turning a profit.

Re: Vice Media: A Company Built on a Bluff

#42

Post by 1337biz »

dillondoyle wrote: post #35
Dirlewanger wrote: post #3

Being one of the few pre-Internet media companies to still be around in some form today, their story is pretty fascinating. It clearly hasn't worked out for the better though. Vice on HBO, while covering a massive breadth of topics, suffer from their presentation; their nasally-voiced mid 20s employees they send on documentaries are mostly boredom-inducing, and their various online news outlets are Buzzfeed-tier clic…

I actually watch Vice News Tonight every night. I'm a well off 29 year old white male for demo info. I find they often cover stories I haven't heard about and their foreign war reporting I think is fairly unique outside of like a dedicated Frontline episode. There are definitely reporters I like more. For instance Ben Anderson always brings a lot of context to the minutiae of the many wars. Elle Reeves (charlottesvil…

Previously they were curiosity driven on unique documentary topics, now they just become an endless left wing guilt channel. Your examples illustrate this really well.

I remember the days when Vice let people freely decide what to think about child soldiers, drug smugglers or donkey lovers. Today their one-sided ideological perspective makes it just cringeworthy to watch.

Re: Vice Media: A Company Built on a Bluff

#43

Post by [deleted] »

creaghpatr wrote: post #6
smacktoward wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IFC's documentary parody series Documentary Now! ( https://www.ifc.com/shows/documentary-now ) did a great episode in its first season called "DRONEZ: The Hunt for El Chingon" that is an hilarious, pitch-perfect sendup of the Vice documentary style. It's on Netflix, if memory serves.

I think that captures the zeitgeist really well. Vice is now just a pale imitation of what used to be true cultural 'edginess'.

[deleted]

Re: Vice Media: A Company Built on a Bluff

#44

Post by geezerjay »

godzillabrennus wrote: post #41
gringoDan wrote: post #16

> When I asked Dominique Delport, the chief revenue officer, whether the company was profitable, he declined to say and suggested that dollar figures were the wrong way to think about Vice. “The company profit is to everybody who watches Vice, because they feel smarter,” he said. Investors should run away as quickly as possible. If that quote from the Chief Revenue Officer isn't a red flag, I don't know what is.

It took Twitter 10 years to turn a profit: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2018/02/08/twitter-... To suggest that an investor can't earn a profit by putting cash into a business with a burn rate is as sophomoric as believing you can run a business on investor money without ever turning a profit.

> It took Twitter 10 years to turn a profit:

So a company took 10 years of burning through cash until a moment it didn't. Is that supposed to mean it was a sound investment?

Re: Vice Media: A Company Built on a Bluff

#45

Post by jjaredsimpson »

1337biz wrote: post #42
dillondoyle wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually watch Vice News Tonight every night. I'm a well off 29 year old white male for demo info. I find they often cover stories I haven't heard about and their foreign war reporting I think is fairly unique outside of like a dedicated Frontline episode. There are definitely reporters I like more. For instance Ben Anderson always brings a lot of context to the minutiae of the many wars. Elle Reeves (charlottesvil…

Previously they were curiosity driven on unique documentary topics, now they just become an endless left wing guilt channel. Your examples illustrate this really well. I remember the days when Vice let people freely decide what to think about child soldiers, drug smugglers or donkey lovers. Today their one-sided ideological perspective makes it just cringeworthy to watch.

In what ways do the left and right differ in view of child soldiers et al?

Re: Vice Media: A Company Built on a Bluff

#46

Post by froasty »

creaghpatr wrote: post #6
smacktoward wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IFC's documentary parody series Documentary Now! ( https://www.ifc.com/shows/documentary-now ) did a great episode in its first season called "DRONEZ: The Hunt for El Chingon" that is an hilarious, pitch-perfect sendup of the Vice documentary style. It's on Netflix, if memory serves.

I think that captures the zeitgeist really well. Vice is now just a pale imitation of what used to be true cultural 'edginess'.

That's the crux of relying upon transgression for value--it ages rapidly and if it obtains mainstream success, dies on the spot. You can see it happen with authors, musicians, writers, essentially any creative output.

In terms of popular media, the early seasons of South Park and the Simpsons look absolutely saccharine compared to where culture's Overton Window is today. "Don't have a cow, man!" is positively benign.

Re: Vice Media: A Company Built on a Bluff

#47

Post by munk-a »

reaperducer wrote: post #31
CalRobert wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vice was a print skateboard magazine before its current incarnation.

I know that, but I don't grok the "few" part of the comment.

I just read an article in NYT about how there were no news media sources before the internet... or did I see that on PBS... I can't remember now.

Re: Vice Media: A Company Built on a Bluff

#48

Post by godzillabrennus »

geezerjay wrote: post #44
godzillabrennus wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It took Twitter 10 years to turn a profit: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2018/02/08/twitter-... To suggest that an investor can't earn a profit by putting cash into a business with a burn rate is as sophomoric as believing you can run a business on investor money without ever turning a profit.

> It took Twitter 10 years to turn a profit: So a company took 10 years of burning through cash until a moment it didn't. Is that supposed to mean it was a sound investment?

http://fortune.com/2013/10/16/twitters-huge-payday-for-early...

Seems like it worked out great for the early investors.

Re: Vice Media: A Company Built on a Bluff

#49

Post by newnewpdro »

froasty wrote: post #46
creaghpatr wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that captures the zeitgeist really well. Vice is now just a pale imitation of what used to be true cultural 'edginess'.

That's the crux of relying upon transgression for value--it ages rapidly and if it obtains mainstream success, dies on the spot. You can see it happen with authors, musicians, writers, essentially any creative output. In terms of popular media, the early seasons of South Park and the Simpsons look absolutely saccharine compared to where culture's Overton Window is today. "Don't have a cow, man!" is positively benign.

> "Don't have a cow, man!" is positively benign.

To think I was once taken to the principal's office for wearing this on a bart simpson t-shirt, which they told me to turn inside out. I of course refused, culminating in a very difficult day for the authority figures involved.

Re: Vice Media: A Company Built on a Bluff

#50

Post by gringoDan »

godzillabrennus wrote: post #41
gringoDan wrote: post #16

> When I asked Dominique Delport, the chief revenue officer, whether the company was profitable, he declined to say and suggested that dollar figures were the wrong way to think about Vice. “The company profit is to everybody who watches Vice, because they feel smarter,” he said. Investors should run away as quickly as possible. If that quote from the Chief Revenue Officer isn't a red flag, I don't know what is.

It took Twitter 10 years to turn a profit: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2018/02/08/twitter-... To suggest that an investor can't earn a profit by putting cash into a business with a burn rate is as sophomoric as believing you can run a business on investor money without ever turning a profit.

I wasn’t suggesting that a business needs to be profitable from day one. I was suggesting that the Chief Revenue Officer should measure revenue & profitability in dollars and cents, rather than in the number of people that “feel smarter”.

He could have talked about revenue growth, investing in expansion, CAC decreasing at scale, etc. There are many ways to approach this question that demonstrate a quantitative grasp of the business and inspire confidence. His answer was not one of them.

Post reply on HN