6 ms·

It was a Vanity project until the jurnos Unionized, and he did not want to put with that. Also, he may have other interests who would take his tolerance of his

It was a Vanity project until the jurnos Unionized, and he did not want to put with that. Also, he may have other interests who would take his tolerance of his "media" unions as a sign and unionize. To just assigning it to "spite" is narrative bias, in my opinion.

pwtweet 9y ago
A rational business person would attempt to sell it. They would also keep the websites and content online with advertising systems intact as to allow for some residual revenue. This guy didn't attempt to sell the business and had the websites and archives deleted.
- fellellor 9y ago
  Though I agree that it is spite, the article states that the archives are back up as of now.
markdown 9y ago
> To just assigning it to "spite" is narrative bias, in my opinion. If a capitalist no longer wants to have anything to do with something he built, the logical thing to do would be to sell it and get some of his $ back. This would also keep the people who helped him build his vanity project employed. I can't think of a reason to shut it down other than to hurt people.
- Digory 9y ago
  Given the NLRB issue, I suspect this was already heavily lawyered and gamed out. Not that he's not angry, but he'd already decided the vote would make it a total loss or close enough. The change in union status may have made it difficult to sell anything ongoing. The biggest asset would be Gothamist's domain name and anyone with that domain was going to have to wade into the labor mess. "Here's an organization running in the red, obligated to negotiate an uncertain new contract with all its employees under NLRB rules! What are my bids?" Might as well save the auction and lawyer fees and take the loss in 2017.
jonathankoren 9y ago
Spite seems pretty plausible. There’s no evidence that he was going to shutdown the companies prior to the unionization. In fact, he was more than happy to keep it afloat right up until the unionization vote. To say that the two aren’t related, it’s to stretch credulity past the breaking point.

pwtweet 9y ago

A rational business person would attempt to sell it. They would also keep the websites and content online with advertising systems intact as to allow for some residual revenue. This guy didn't attempt to sell the business and had the websites and archives deleted.

fellellor 9y ago
Though I agree that it is spite, the article states that the archives are back up as of now.

markdown 9y ago

> To just assigning it to "spite" is narrative bias, in my opinion. If a capitalist no longer wants to have anything to do with something he built, the logical thing to do would be to sell it and get some of his $ back. This would also keep the people who helped him build his vanity project employed. I can't think of a reason to shut it down other than to hurt people.

Digory 9y ago
Given the NLRB issue, I suspect this was already heavily lawyered and gamed out. Not that he's not angry, but he'd already decided the vote would make it a total loss or close enough. The change in union status may have made it difficult to sell anything ongoing. The biggest asset would be Gothamist's domain name and anyone with that domain was going to have to wade into the labor mess. "Here's an organization running in the red, obligated to negotiate an uncertain new contract with all its employees under NLRB rules! What are my bids?" Might as well save the auction and lawyer fees and take the loss in 2017.

jonathankoren 9y ago

Spite seems pretty plausible. There’s no evidence that he was going to shutdown the companies prior to the unionization. In fact, he was more than happy to keep it afloat right up until the unionization vote. To say that the two aren’t related, it’s to stretch credulity past the breaking point.