Restructuring coming to the Strib, according to publisher’s memo
Tuesday, January 22, 2008 at 5:50 pm
Big changes are coming at the Star Tribune — more big changes, that is — according to a memo publisher Chris Harte sent out to employees Tuesday afternoon. “I don’t mean to be gloomy, because I’m basically an optimist,” he wrote in the nearly 1,300-word memo, which outlined “a pattern of steep declines” throughout 2007 and “revenue performance that was well below the median average for the industry.”
After a long, 10-paragraph windup, Harte got to the point: The paper has signed on a consulting firm that specializes in restructuring to “get our business on the right track to meet the significant challenges we face.” Washington, D.C.-based Restructuring Associates, Inc. helps “unions and management work together to improve performance,” Harte writes.
The memo is striking for several reasons. While it has its rah-rah moments — Harte praises the intellectual capabilities of employees, hails technology and systems changes already made, and ends on an optimistic “our future is bright” note — the tone is decidely, well, gloomy — gloomy enough for employees to worry that “restructuring” will mean more job cuts. He admits that the paper’s challenges are “huge and obvious” and, citing both industry trends and the economy, states, “The fundamental change we are facing is not temporary.”
And Harte uses some form of the word “collaborate” several times, which raises the question: How cooperative will the Minnesota Newspaper Guild want to be following a year when hundreds of employees were let go through firings and voluntary buyouts? And how resonant will some of Harte’s claims of financial woe — many comparing revenue and expense figures from 2000 — be when the union and employees recall the bargain-basement deal Avista got when it bought the paper for $530 million, less than half the $1.2 billion McClatchy paid for it in 1998, just a year ago?
Here’s the entire memo:
Taking Charge of Our Future
By Chris Harte, Publisher and ChairmanLast fall I told you I would write about our overall situation toward the end of the year. I waited before writing because November ad revenue was slightly better than recent months, and I hoped it was the start of a modestly better trend. But December was right back to the pattern of steep revenue declines that we’d seen since early in the year.
We have budgeted for another large revenue reduction in 2008, and we hope we won’t be under budget again. What I’m hearing from other newspapers are similar expectations about further revenue declines.
I don’t mean to be gloomy, because I’m basically an optimist. I believe strongly in newspapers and their Internet sites. I believe in the importance of what we do. I believe that we will not just survive but prosper. I believe in the power of the Star Tribune’s people to make the business and cultural changes that will be necessary to right our ship and give our company a vigorous and successful future.
The current business realities are incredibly difficult, however, and I don’t want to pretend they aren’t. 2007 was far and away the worst year this industry has seen in anyone’s memory, and it was also the worst for the Star Tribune. We were not the hardest hit large metropolitan paper in the country, but our overall revenue performance was well below the median for the industry.
A few numbers tell the story well, I think. Total revenue (print and internet advertising and circulation) is down almost $75 million in the last two years. Classified revenue has been the hardest hit part of our business, and our 2007 classified revenue was down over 50 percent from what it was at the start of the decade.
While our Internet revenue has risen substantially almost every year over the past decade, and is three times what it was at the start of the decade, it’s not growing nearly fast enough to offset the declines in print advertising.
We reduced our costs substantially last year, some of it in easy ways but much of it with painful cuts. And we’re already reducing 2008 costs several million dollars below our original 2008 budget.
Despite all the cost-cutting, our payroll and benefits in 2007 were actually $10 million higher than they were in 2000, while total revenue had declined over $90 million in the same period. Payroll and benefits are well over half of all our cash operating expenses; the remaining cash costs are newsprint and everything else. Newsprint is the only one of the three major categories where we’ve had a meaningful drop in expenses, and that’s mostly because of a substantial drop in the price we pay per ton. Unfortunately, that price is going way up in 2008. All other cash expenses combined (utilities, office supplies, all the other things it takes to keep us operating) are at almost exactly the same level today as they were in 2000.
As a result of rapidly declining revenue – and expenses that haven’t been cut anywhere nearly as fast – our operating cash flow has declined dramatically since 2000. Operating cash flow, which is the cash we have left after paying cash expenses, and which we then use to invest in everything from new equipment and computers to new products, and to pay our debt, has declined 50 percent in just the past two years and more than that since 2000.
Obviously, we cannot continue on this course. We need to deal with these challenges quickly and collaboratively, working together all across the company to find the best solutions.
As a first step toward finding these solutions, we have retained Restructuring Associates (RAI), a consulting firm headquartered in Washington, DC to help us work collaboratively throughout the Star Tribune to get our business on the right track to meet the significant challenges we face. RAI specializes in helping unions and management work together to improve performance.
Starting this week, representatives of RAI will begin interviewing Star Tribune managers and soon will interview others involved with the business to get a better understanding of what we are up against and how to frame our approach to finding solutions.
RAI expresses its basic philosophy this way: “We help our clients become high performance organizations and better places to work by engaging employees in solving organization problems and implementing their solutions. By involving people, we build internal commitment to change, generate real solutions, and facilitate implementation.” I encourage you to visit their website at www.restructuringassociates.com for more information on how they work with companies to build high performance.
We selected RAI precisely because of its focus on a collaborative approach with strong involvement of employees and union leadership. We have been especially impressed that the firm doesn’t have canned solutions or preconceived notions. But it does have an outstanding track record of successfully dealing with complex challenges at many companies across many industries.
Despite all our challenges – and they are huge and obvious – we still have some great competitive advantages and the ability to leverage them. We have a century and a half of powerful brand equity with our readers and advertisers. We are still by far the strongest media
company in the market. We have many more journalists than any of our direct competitors – and probably more than all our local competitors combined. We also have more ad sales people and a stronger support
infrastructure.In the past year, we have invested strategically to make our business stronger. Some of these investments have been in new technology – like a state-of-the-art web order entry system, a single copy returns-management system, a predictive dialing system for our call center, and a new sales management and reporting system. Plus we have also invested in our core business, spending significant dollars rebuilding our circulation, adding additional sales reps and instituting a new sales training program. You may have seen my note a few days ago about what we were able to achieve in just a few months with our new Cars website. That’s just the most recent example of our incredible capabilities, our competitive spirit and our ability to change quickly.
The fundamental change we are facing is not temporary. Yes, we will try to, and should, regain a portion of our lost revenue when the economy improves. But we don’t know how much, and we don’t know when that will be. What we do know for sure is that the competitive world has changed permanently and we will fail if we don’t change much more than we have already. In today’s jargon, we are going to have to reinvent our business.
And this is a matter more of attitude than of resources. Our intellectual capital is huge, and we need to draw upon it to find new ways of operating.
I am absolutely confident we can do that.
I believe our future is bright, and I invested a substantial amount of my own money in the Star Tribune on that belief. I believe passionately in what we do, and I know a huge number of you do, too.
We absolutely have the passion, knowledge and resources to continue as the leading information company in the Twin Cities. But we won’t do it by wishing we could go back to the way our business used to be. We must harness the passion that brought us all to the Star Tribune and point our efforts toward reinvention. We are all in this together.
Thank you for helping move us forward.
10 Comments
Comment posted February 8, 2008 @ 12:20 pm
Re: Restructuring coming to the Strib John,
may be there is truth to your comment, maybe Minnesota is largely a conservative state and readership is turned off by the Star Tribune being too liberal. I don’t know, but I only have my own personal experience to go on.
My personal reason for not refusing to subscribe to the Star Tribune is actually because I am a progressive and I find the paper to be too anti-progressive for my taste. Note that I am not saying the Strib is conservative, just anti-progressive. The distinction that I make comes from my sense that the Strib staff in (generally) very sloppy in reporting and editing, lack critical thinking in their presentation, and often are outwardly hostile to urban progressives in their editorializing.
I actually believe there are some great conservative journalists working today. A skillful journalist will be able to report the news without filtering bias into their arguments. Likewise, a skillful opinion writer can present an opinion column that is reasoned and employs critical argument skills in such a manner that intelligent people from all political leanings can enjoy reading it.
I feel that the Star Tribune has a dearth of quality journalists, period. Liberal or conservative, I find the writing in the Strib is often inflammatory, poorly researched, lacking in substance, and at times even hateful. I draw as examples the writings Dennis Anderson and Katherine Kersten, two columnists that appear to be the Strib’s attempt to keep a rural and suburban core readership. When I see the front page of the paper showing OPINION articles on gun ownership and making Minneapolis feel safer to suburbanites, I feel that the paper has failed both to inform and represent me as a reader. As an urban dweller and a liberal, when I see deer carcasses and craft fairs making front page news while real issues in my city go untouched, I feel that the Star Tribune no longer serves the people of Minneapolis (which, by the way, is still the city named on the masthead). I learned recently that the front page editor of the Strib lives in Woodbury and that the paper is trying to push suburban and rural readership. Personally, I have no problem with this goal save for the fact that they are doing so by “dumbing down” the paper – an unfortunate course that hurts the entire metro community be leaving us all less informed.
Perhaps the Star Tribune should just have a special “idiot edition” that they provide to any subscriber who can’t handle knowing what happens beyond their cul-de-sac. Then they could go back to reporting real news for the rest of us.
Comment posted January 22, 2008 @ 8:42 pm
Restructuring coming to the Strib Is it just a coincidence that the newspapers that seem to be having the most trouble are all liberal newspapers, e.g., NY Times, LA Times, etc? Could the declining readership be due to bias and loss objectivity? The only thing the watchdogs of democracy seem to be watching these days is their own declining readership. For once, tell us something we don’t already know.
Comment posted January 23, 2008 @ 11:34 am
Hmmm…. Could be.
Um, no. I’m kidding. Read anything about the struggles of the print news media and you’ll know that everything from Craigslist ads (and the mass exodus of ads from print to online) to the high cost of paper pulp, fuel and employee benefits — not to mention shareholders in media companies looking out for their profits — is blamed for what really is a downturn in just about every corner of the industry. Although if you can find a credible source that says biased liberal editors are killing the print news industry, I’d love to read it.
Comment posted January 24, 2008 @ 11:19 am
Liberal News Media http://www.minnpost….
Strib revenue bombshell — the day after
No doubt about it, print media is undergoing a dramatic transformation. The MSM in general suffers from delusions of elitism, holding bloggers in disdain. The value of bloggers is in diversity of opinion. The MSM can no loner control or make the news. Liberal Dan Rather suffered the consequence of this reality when he produced his bogus memo in an attempt to destroy President Bush. It was bloggers and not the elite news media who exposed the fraud.
Comment posted February 8, 2008 @ 12:22 pm
correction in my post above I wrote:
“My personal reason for not refusing to subscribe to the Star Tribune…”
it should have said:
“My personal reason for refusing to subscribe to the Star Tribune…”
Sorry!
Comment posted January 22, 2008 @ 2:42 pm
Restructuring coming to the Strib Is it just a coincidence that the newspapers that seem to be having the most trouble are all liberal newspapers, e.g., NY Times, LA Times, etc? Could the declining readership be due to bias and loss objectivity? The only thing the watchdogs of democracy seem to be watching these days is their own declining readership. For once, tell us something we don't already know.
Comment posted January 23, 2008 @ 5:34 am
Hmmm…. Could be.
Um, no. I'm kidding. Read anything about the struggles of the print news media and you'll know that everything from Craigslist ads (and the mass exodus of ads from print to online) to the high cost of paper pulp, fuel and employee benefits — not to mention shareholders in media companies looking out for their profits — is blamed for what really is a downturn in just about every corner of the industry. Although if you can find a credible source that says biased liberal editors are killing the print news industry, I'd love to read it.
Comment posted January 24, 2008 @ 5:19 am
Liberal News Media http://www.minnpost….
Strib revenue bombshell — the day after
No doubt about it, print media is undergoing a dramatic transformation. The MSM in general suffers from delusions of elitism, holding bloggers in disdain. The value of bloggers is in diversity of opinion. The MSM can no loner control or make the news. Liberal Dan Rather suffered the consequence of this reality when he produced his bogus memo in an attempt to destroy President Bush. It was bloggers and not the elite news media who exposed the fraud.
Comment posted February 8, 2008 @ 6:20 am
Re: Restructuring coming to the Strib John,
may be there is truth to your comment, maybe Minnesota is largely a conservative state and readership is turned off by the Star Tribune being too liberal. I don't know, but I only have my own personal experience to go on.
My personal reason for not refusing to subscribe to the Star Tribune is actually because I am a progressive and I find the paper to be too anti-progressive for my taste. Note that I am not saying the Strib is conservative, just anti-progressive. The distinction that I make comes from my sense that the Strib staff in (generally) very sloppy in reporting and editing, lack critical thinking in their presentation, and often are outwardly hostile to urban progressives in their editorializing.
I actually believe there are some great conservative journalists working today. A skillful journalist will be able to report the news without filtering bias into their arguments. Likewise, a skillful opinion writer can present an opinion column that is reasoned and employs critical argument skills in such a manner that intelligent people from all political leanings can enjoy reading it.
I feel that the Star Tribune has a dearth of quality journalists, period. Liberal or conservative, I find the writing in the Strib is often inflammatory, poorly researched, lacking in substance, and at times even hateful. I draw as examples the writings Dennis Anderson and Katherine Kersten, two columnists that appear to be the Strib's attempt to keep a rural and suburban core readership. When I see the front page of the paper showing OPINION articles on gun ownership and making Minneapolis feel safer to suburbanites, I feel that the paper has failed both to inform and represent me as a reader. As an urban dweller and a liberal, when I see deer carcasses and craft fairs making front page news while real issues in my city go untouched, I feel that the Star Tribune no longer serves the people of Minneapolis (which, by the way, is still the city named on the masthead). I learned recently that the front page editor of the Strib lives in Woodbury and that the paper is trying to push suburban and rural readership. Personally, I have no problem with this goal save for the fact that they are doing so by “dumbing down” the paper – an unfortunate course that hurts the entire metro community be leaving us all less informed.
Perhaps the Star Tribune should just have a special “idiot edition” that they provide to any subscriber who can't handle knowing what happens beyond their cul-de-sac. Then they could go back to reporting real news for the rest of us.
Comment posted February 8, 2008 @ 6:22 am
correction in my post above I wrote:
“My personal reason for not refusing to subscribe to the Star Tribune…”
it should have said:
“My personal reason for refusing to subscribe to the Star Tribune…”
Sorry!
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.






