12 ms·
Washington Post to be sold to Jeff Bezos
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- anigbrowl 13y agoGreat. Now it will be delivered in a 6 cubic foot box.
- psbp 13y agoI'm not sure if this is good news. Doesn't this portend further monopolistic control over publishing and distribution? Amazon isn't known to fairly and openly distribute its content.
- photorized 13y agoI am convinced one of his next moves is going to be brick and mortar. He has already tested the concept of free showrooms for Amazon via the likes of Barnes & Noble, Best Buy, etc - so it's only natural to move back to the physical world.
- josh2600 13y agoHow does this mesh with his investment in Business Insider? Is Jeff pursuing a content strategy? Washington Post for investigation and Business Insider for Biz news would be great. Personally I'd rather have Jeff Bezos than Rupert Murdoch, but maybe that's just me...
- RandallBrown 13y agoAmazon is moving towards funding their own TV shows, so it wouldn't be too surprising if Bezos was trying to generate his own content in other mediums as well.
- untog 13y agoWorth noting though, that Bezos, and not Amazon, bought WaPo.
- jharrison 13y agoWhich simply means that he now has a content asset that he can license back to Amazon for distribution if he wishes. It's seems like it could be a lot like a business owner buying a building under a different company name only to lease it back to their primary business for a variety of benefits.
- walid 13y ago@untog Hmm! Didn't notice that, interesting.
- threeseed 13y agoSeriously don't EVER compare Bezos and Murdoch. Murdoch is easily one of the most evil people to have ever walked on this planet. He enabled the Iraq war which has seen a mass loss of life for no real gain. He supported the widespread hacking of UK citizens. His meddling in politics and elections in the UK, US and Australia is unprecedented, brazen and has unquestionably undermined democracy. Even now he flew over an Editor from the NY Post to Australia to influence the election here who already is shocking the political scene here.
- newbie12 13y agoAbsurd to blame Murdoch for a war that had majorities of Congress vote for it. If any media outlet deserves some blame for Iraq, it was the New York Times. In any event, the Iraq war has saved lives compared to the sanctions regime that it replaced.
- 7952 13y agoI think there is enough blame to go around.
- threeseed 13y agoIt is not absurd to blame Murdoch for his role in the war. He didn't take a negative or neutral position. He actively campaigned for it across three continents (UK, US and Australia). And it has been widely reported that Blair was heavily influenced by Murdoch. The NYT didn't officially take a position. It just failed in its duty to check the facts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_the_Iraq_War http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_the_Iraq_War
- jessaustin 13y ago...compared to the sanctions regime that it replaced. Even if I were to believe that, it would be an odd comparison to make.
- jessaustin 13y agoHe supported the widespread hacking of UK citizens. Yeah him and healthy majorities of both houses of Congress. Did Parliament not get the memo?
- minimaxir 13y agoTo put things into perspective, the $250M purchase price is lower than the purchase price of The Huffington Post at $315M. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/07/aol-huffington-post_n_819375.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/07/aol-huffington-post...
- akiselev 13y agoHow long has Huffington Post been around? The Washington Post seems to have an incredible reputation (especially if they really did break the Pentagon Papers and others) and be a fun purchase if you have f-you money.
- tanzam75 13y agoThe Huffington Post does not have pension obligations, and it doesn't pay its reporters six-figure salaries and benefits. (Well, not most of them, anyway.)
- willbill 13y agoIt doesn't do the same investigative reporting either.
- mgaphysics 13y agoSeems like he thought that the price was right for a publication with such a strong legacy, even if he doesn't have a grand plan for the immediate future. This sale was only offered to a very narrow pool of buyers, so I think that it was a very prudent purchase. He is friends with the previous ownership and undoubtedly felt that if he can preserve the publication in some shape or form, there is nothing but upside given the "drop in the bucket" price.
- brown9-2 13y agoI'm curious if Huffington could get the same price today.
- sytelus 13y agoI'm still amazed that as reputed institute as Washington Post where shapes opinion of millions of people could be bought out at 1/4th of the price of Instagram.
- kenshiro_o 13y agoHope Bezos revamps the site's design. It's quite ugly.
- tptacek 13y agoI presume this means he hasn't bought the WaPo company, and thus not other assets like Slate.
- Volscio 13y agoIt looks like it includes "affiliated publications to the Washington Post Co." (see http://www.washpostco.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=62487&p=irol-landing http://www.washpostco.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=62487&p=irol-landi... for a list) (see showherst's comment for accuracy)
- showerst 13y agoYou're looking at the site for the Washington Post Company, not the Washington Post newspaper (confusing, I know). EDIT: Nope, just the newspapers. See the press release - The transaction covers The Washington Post and other publishing businesses, including the Express newspaper, The Gazette Newspapers, Southern Maryland Newspapers, Fairfax County Times, El Tiempo Latino and Greater Washington Publishing. Slate magazine, TheRoot.com and Foreign Policy are not part of the transaction and will remain with The Washington Post Company, as will the WaPo Labs and SocialCode businesses, the Company’s interest in Classified Ventures and certain real estate assets, including the headquarters building in downtown Washington, DC. The Washington Post Company, which also owns Kaplan, Post–Newsweek Stations and Cable ONE, will be changing its name in connection with the transaction; no new name has yet been announced
- Volscio 13y agoNice, thanks!
- epistasis 13y agoNo slate.com, though there are many other assets. Check out page 4: >The deal does not include the company’s headquarters on 15th St. NW in Washington (the building has been for sale since February), or Foreign Policy magazine, Slate.com, the Root.com, the WaPo Labs digital-development operation or Post-owned land along the Potomac River in Alexandria.
- epistasis 13y ago>“There would be change with or without new ownership. But the key thing I hope people will take away from this is that the values of The Post do not need changing. The duty of the paper is to the readers, not the owners.” The Washington Post is an important institution for the USA, and comments like this make it seem that Bezos will be a good steward. I hope, and am fairly certain, that this is a good thing for everyone involved.
- aridiculous 13y agoApart from believing a public statement, do you have any reason to believe he will be a good steward of a journalistic entity? As far as I know, he has no experience in reporting the unbiased truth and a lot of experience in selling stuff.
- bennyg 13y agoAs far as I know, he has expertise in launching innovative technology at scale - something the Post desperately needs to stay afloat. Removing the politics of the business and replacing with innovation would do the whole country some good.
- nfoz 13y agoInnovation is political.
- bennyg 13y agoSure. But a family-run, corporate business is definitely more so.
- smacktoward 13y agoInterestingly, the Post's existing digital experimentation shop, WaPo Labs (http://www.wapolabs.com/ http://www.wapolabs.com/), is specifically mentioned in the Post's official statement as one of the assets that is not included in the sale. Update: Slashdot founder Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda (who was hired by WaPo Labs last year) confirms on Google+ that he and his team aren't going with the paper: https://plus.google.com/+CmdrTaco/posts/1V2ZpbjcgbB https://plus.google.com/+CmdrTaco/posts/1V2ZpbjcgbB
- tcpekin 13y agoIf Bezos integrates this with Amazon, how could this change the newspaper with respect to the Kindle and e-publishing? Could this change daily print media?
- freehunter 13y agoThe article says that Amazon will have no role in the purchase. Time will tell if that's true, though. I'd love to have my Kindle be both my book library and an automatically updated copy of the newspaper every morning. Having tried Kindle newspapers, I've found them to be quite lacking (and pretty expensive). Some Kindle newspapers are even missing entire sections of the print version!
- eurleif 13y agoIn this context, I think "Amazon will have no role in the purchase" just means that Bezos is buying WaPo with his own money, and he will own it personally. I don't think it precludes him from making deals between the two companies.
- DannyBee 13y agoIf he did, such a thing would usually need to be approved by a disinterested majority of a disinterested quorum of directors.
- eurleif 13y agoIn practice, is that likely to be a serious impediment?
- DannyBee 13y agoMaybe? It depends on whether the deal is plausibly good for the company or not. If so, i'd say "no, it's not a serious impediment".
- jessaustin 13y ago
- rurban 13y agoWelcome to micromanagement to its extreme
- aridiculous 13y agoLooks like Bezos has a propaganda arm now. I mean, sorry for the cynicism, but this is an obvious conflict of interest. Retail, distribution, infrastructure, and now politics & media. The man can do what he wants but the public probably shouldn't applaud this.
- toomuchtodo 13y agoI think he cares more about it being on the Kindle and the Fire than using it as his mouthpiece.
- aridiculous 13y agoI agree, in the short run. I suspect it's a power grab for influence in the long-term. Big media shapes the discourse, debate, and policy of the country. He can be a much more effective broker of business and societal matters now that he manages "the truth." I think, at least :/
- toomuchtodo 13y agoVigilance is the price of freedom and liberty.
- wnissen 13y agoIf that was the goal he would have had Amazon buy the company. Instead it's a "personal" acquisition. It's possible this is an elaborate ruse to fool the Graham family into selling their crown jewel (reputationally, at least. The Kaplan test preparation unit is the tail that now wags the profit dog at Washington Post, Inc., as I understand it.). However, that seems like a stretch. I'd much rather have a paper run as a hobby by a man (even a profoundly eccentric one) who can afford it than a board desperate to maximize quarterly earnings.
- bicx 13y agoIt could be that it was a personal acquisition because Amazon isn't making a much of a net profit, and buying the Washington Post would cause Amazon stock prices to tank.
- aaronbrethorst 13y agoI'm kind of surprised, but this seems like the best possible direction for them. Sort of like Chris Hughes buying The New Republic, Bezos has the cash to give the Post breathing room to find a direction that will be profitable. And, ostensibly, he won't want to turn it into Buzzfeed.
- larrys 13y ago"give the Post breathing room to find a direction that will be profitable" Could be but I don't think that's the case. I think there is something else going on here either vanity or some underlying access or asset that provides much greater value to Bezos that has not much to do with Amazon either. I mean if you have that much money you can afford to buy and have it lose money for years just for other valuable benefits and access. WP is a mouthpiece he could swing elections (influence is way beyond their circulation).
- untog 13y agoI mean if you have that much money you can afford to buy and have it lose money for years just for other valuable benefits and access. You can, but you can also believe in journalism and be willing to spend some of your money on keeping it alive. Not sure we can really make an automatic judgement either way.
- larrys 13y agoAnnounced after market close. Expecting NYT stock to rise quite a bit. I was surprised when Jack Welsh (x GE) wanted to buy the Boston Globe (he backed out). He realized the the shine was one of the past. It's interesting that Bezos sees value here but I think the value is in the same sense taking a small part of his billions and buying something that is a legend. (After all rich people buy art and other trinkets because they can so why not a newspaper?).
- adventured 13y agoI agree. Bezos is almost 50 years old now. What's the point of having $28 billion in assets if you can't do some interesting things with it (like Bezos Expeditions, the millennium clock, or retrieve the apollo engines).
- aaronbrethorst 13y agoBezos was probably feeling a bit left out of the 'Seattle Philanthropic Billionaire Boys Club.' Although, to his credit, he and his wife did kick in $2.5mm to the Washington state marriage equality referendum last November: http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/07/27/jeff-bezos-dumps-25-million-dollars-into-wa-states-marriage-equality-campaign http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/07/27/jeff-be...
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- blackaspen 13y agoI don't see anyone majorly naysaying this move, but in case anyone does, remember that Jeff is smart. Very, very smart. I've heard him referenced to as "a hyper-intelligent alien who has only a tangential in human affairs" before. AMZN represents a bit of this. My money's on Jeff - he's got something up his sleeve here.
- aridiculous 13y agoPlease stop with the nauseating idol-worship. He's a businessman trying to control more stuff and make more money.
- adventured 13y agoJust because you don't find businessmen to be worthy of looking up, doesn't mean somebody else doesn't. There's plenty of room on HN for differing beliefs, even if you find it nauseating. I regard earning money in a productive fashion and without the use of force to be one of the greatest things a person can do. That's my belief, and I don't force anybody else to agree with me.
- ForrestN 13y agoJust because he's smart doesn't mean he's benevolent, right? I would never argue that he's stupid but I'd be curious to know if anyone has any insight into the extent to which he's likely to be making this purchase in order to gain influence of some kind.
- adventured 13y agoClearly with a $28 billion net worth (#15 in the world), and the head of Amazon.com, he is not lacking in influence. He already has that in spades. There isn't anybody in Washington that won't take his call. There are radically cheaper ways to have influence. He could set up a PAC, seed it with $50 million, and directly buy whatever influence he needs. The thing about buying one of the few really national papers and slanting its coverage: your competitors will have a field day and it won't be long before your paper is a joke that nobody takes seriously. I don't think he has much room to abuse this for influence.
- squozzer 13y agoI will celebrate by watching "Citizen Kane."
- shawndumas 13y agoone page view http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/washington-post-to-be-sold-to-jeff-bezos/2013/08/05/ca537c9e-fe0c-11e2-9711-3708310f6f4d_print.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/washington-post-to-be...
- badclient 13y agoThe first is the courage to say wait, be sure, slow down, get another source. Real people and their reputations, livelihoods and families are at stake. A 1000 times. At least it won't turn into the next PandoDaily(and its BeachMint fiasco).
- patmcguire 13y agoIs this in the category of buying sports teams, or does he expect to make money off of it?
- adventured 13y agoA little of both I suspect. The Washington Post can generate a very modest profit if it's well run. It's around 1/4th to 1/5th the size of the New York Times. The question would seem to be, whether Bezos intends to run a tight profitable ship, or if he is willing to forgo the profits for a larger staff. I'm hoping he has something creative in mind, a new business model that isn't free+ads or just a copy of what the NYT is doing. WaPo is #8 by its daily circulation in the US, and #4 for its Sunday circulation.
- adamtj 13y agoI bet he puts up a paywall, but offers free access to Prime members. Combined with instant video and other benefits, Prime starts to look pretty attractive, even without the free shipping. But once you've got the free fast shipping, it's much easier to justify buying stuff from Amazon instead.
- miles 13y agoFew people were aware that a sale was in the works for the paper, whose reporters have broken such stories as the Pentagon Papers, the Watergate scandals and disclosures about the National Security Administration’s surveillance program in May. Claiming credit for the NSA story seems disingenuous at best, especially given their antagonism towards Snowden: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/06/how-washington-post-lost-prism-exclusive/66048/ http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/06/how-washingt... http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130702/11474423694/washington-post-stop-us-before-we-do-any-more-real-journalism-like-that-cute-little-guardian-paper.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130702/11474423694/washin... http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/10/washington-post-walter-pincus-correction http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/10/washing... EDIT: While acknowledging the WaPo's significant contributions in the early 70s, it seems like they lost their way somewhere along the line: Washington Post Kills Account of Its Failures in Iraq Reporting and Runs a Defense Instead http://gawker.com/5992158/washington-post-kills-account-of-its-failures-in-iraq-reporting-and-runs-a-defense-instead http://gawker.com/5992158/washington-post-kills-account-of-i...
- untog 13y agoCan we have just one thread in HN that doesn't mention Snowden?
- walid 13y agoBradley Manning!
- anologwintermut 13y agoI'd settle for a top comment that doesn't mention Snowden.
- milsorgen 13y agoYes, it's best we forget the whole affair and move on.
- 13y ago
- adventured 13y agoI'm a bit surprised Buffett didn't make a play for that asset, particularly given his recent expeditions in buying more newspapers. Perhaps he regards Bezos as a better long term steward given the age difference. At the least Buffett had to give his blessing to this deal, and absolutely knew about it and chose not to outbid Bezos.
- prewett 13y agoHe played that asset a long time ago: Berkshire bought about 20% in 1973, and was on the board until 2011. But yes, he absolutely knew about this. He paid $11 million and is getting about $44 million after 40 years of holding it. That's kind of lousy rate of return, and the newspaper business has some question marks. So I can see why he might not be interested in buying it. And if Bezos is buying the paper for civic-minded reasons, I could see Buffet encouraging him.
- jsyedidia 13y agoThe Washington Post is only a small piece of the WPO company, which has a market cap of $4.4 Billion. So by my math Buffett paid $11 million for a 20% share of a company that's now worth $4.4 Billion, or a net return of 80 times over 40 years, which isn't up to Buffett's usual returns, but not too bad.
- zpk 13y agoAnother newspaper owned by a corporation. I'm sure this is going to end well. Can't wait for it to become another CNBC infomercial.
- asmithmd1 13y agoJeff Bezos bought the Post personally - Amazon did not buy it.
- zpk 13y agoAh true, but the underlying effect will be the same.
- superuser2 13y agoWhat did you imagine newspapers were owned by?
- zpk 13y agoNot by massive corporations or their ceos.
- superuser2 13y agoPretty much every newspaper is a corporation... that's the only legal entity that makes sense, given that it has to own a building, pay salaries, sue and be sued, etc. Being owned by a massive non-media-related corporation would be concerning, but this is Bezos personally.
- zpk 13y agoBezos has a halo, but I don't believe in angels. For journalism to be truth, it must remain independent.
- crashoverdrive 13y agoBezos goal may be to force users to more digital media. Amazon has been trying to push its publications by forcing book print companies out of the market, by cornering newspapers as well, Amazon could make it self the centralized location for e-media.
- guard-of-terra 13y ago- Mr. Bezos, we've bought Washington Post as you ordered. - Good. I hope it's a fresh issue? - ...issue!?
- w-m 13y agoIt.. seemed neater.
- Kurtz79 13y agoLots of cynicism around here. Nobody is saying that Bezos will be a steward of good journalism (I can't see him doing much worse as the head of a major news medium than Rupert Murdoch, though) and has reasons to buy the paper that go beyond, ultimately, making more money. But from a technology enthusiast standpoint, it can't be denied that the guy has a amazing track record of innovating the sectors he has been involved in, and personally I'm curious to see how he will tackle this one. The main takeaway from the story, in my opinion, is seeing a steady trend of the "new" technology companies trying to get in a position of influence, like Facebook interested in getting into politics, Google having already plenty of lobbying/funding activities, and now Amazon getting its own paper...
- northwest 13y ago> I can't see him doing much worse as the head of a major news medium than Rupert Murdoch Worst compliment ever.
- pla3rhat3r 13y agoDoes anyone believe or trust in the American propaganda machine (i.e. mainstream media)? We live in a world of stories that seem to be in a perpetual loop. When we eliminate news for the sake of ratings or the number of papers/magazines sold, then we return to a time when the media will resume reporting on things that matter. The "news" in the US is a dumbed down version of TMZ and that's being nice.
- tnuc 13y agoLots of people love the american media. They usually believe it by reading news from one side of the political spectrum and confusing it with fact. Half of what I read is bull and the other half is shit.
- ChuckMcM 13y agoI think this is a bold move by Bezos. One of the interesting data points in the world of Journalism has been the transition of the New York Time from mostly paper to being mostly digital. Something Jeff is profoundly aware of. Every morning while I eat my breakfast I download the Wall Street Journal and times to my iPad, and on the train to work scan them and this weeks Economist for interesting stories of the day, combined with this month's Scientific American, Smithsonian, and Science News. If I could use Evernote with those "publications" on the iPad I could be very efficient in my collection of various inputs on news of the day. For now, I'm constrained to making notes to myself in my notebook. To pull an interesting analogy here, Google sees everything through the lens of "You will be connected 100% of the time to the network." which is their future point that they are building systems around, sometimes today they seem ungainly or even useless when no network is available. Jeff (and Amazon) seems to see everything through the lens of "You will consume all of your media on a tablet like device." and building around the complete media experience there.
- foobarqux 13y agoI think it is a run-of-the-mill acquisition of power by a member of the super rich. How much is it worth to have the WaPo as a mouthpiece?
- nwzpaperman 13y agoIt's $250mm for the WaPo brand. Empowering the ordinary citizen to contribute to the global pool of community information is the future. Blogging was the first attempt in this direction, but it has failed because the distributed nature of blogs doesn't support content discovery. As far as I'm concerned, AMZN already has plenty of brand recognition to talk about any technological innovation they might integrate with the WaPo brand. I look forward to AMZN playing its cards in the space and seeing if they can compete against a truly focused and unencumbered competitor. Production is easy, discovery and profitability are the problems. Best wishes, Bezos!
- ChuckMcM 13y ago"Production is easy, discovery and profitability are the problems." I agree, and that is what makes this so interesting. Lets say you had a 'kindle store' like thing but it was "News for You", and it had a search box kind of like a search engine box, but you could pull up your Kindle, any time something was happening, and type "Boston Bombing" into the search box, And poof you'd get all the stories about the Boston Bombing available to read after downloading them over the cellular network. Can you buy "inches of news" like you buy cellular minutes? With a roll over plan? There are some tremendously disruptive businesses here.
- lifeisstillgood 13y agoThis is not a power grab - this is the natural effect of gravity - the last twenty years saw an almost cataclismlc shift in strategic leverage from non-Internet to Internet businesses, and now all that cash is exerting its pull - and power is sliding over the table. Just watch as the rest of the baby boomer generation die off and hand over their assets.
- foobarqux 13y agoWhat are you saying? That WaPo does not have strategic leverage or that the demographics of the owner-class is changing?
- lifeisstillgood 13y agoThe latter
- ferdo 13y agoI think that this signals that Bezos is going into the fish and chips business.
- serverascode 13y agoFor some reason this blows my mind. Man, it would be so cool to own the paper that paid the guys that broke Watergate. But it seems so...weird that it would be Bezos. I'd love to see the first meeting.
- salemh 13y agoInteresting. Warren Buffet has always gobbled up a large chunk of newspapers (albeit not directly as an individual (ala Bezos), rather, through Berkshire Hathaway): http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-13/buffett-poised-to-add-newspapers-as-publishers-face-slump.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-13/buffett-poised-to-a... Buffett, 81, has been expanding Berkshire’s media operations in the past year as he wagers that publications focused on local communities can withstand the shift of readers and advertisers to the Internet. The billionaire’s firm bought the publisher of his hometown paper, the Omaha World-Herald Co., in December, and acquired 63 daily and weekly newspapers from Media General Inc. (MEG) for $142 million last month. Local papers vs something larger like WaPo. And note: While Buffett’s firm holds the largest stake in Washington Post Co. (WPO) and has shares of Gannett Co., he said Berkshire is less likely to make more stock market investments in the industry.
- saraid216 13y agoI've always understood Buffett's purchases to be meant to reinforce local papers against consolidation.
- joonix 13y agoIt's a trendy thing amongst billionaires lately. Even in Australia they are trying it. I think there may have been a consensus of some sort made at one of the many "billionaire conferences" that happens every year.
- aridiculous 13y agoOr they recognize, as they should, the role that media plays in society. Being in the media oligarchy expands your range of influence.
- rgbrgb 13y agoOf all of the big Tech companies to have deep ties with a national news source, Amazon seems like a decent fit. They were one of the first retailers to allow negative reviews on their site and have a culture that allows employees to make decisions that prioritize long term thinking over short term profits ("willingness to be misunderstood for long periods of time"[1]). This type of thinking is really important in an often buzzy industry that relies on advertising for revenue. [1]: http://blogs.hbr.org/ideacast/2013/01/jeff-bezos-on-leading-for-the.html http://blogs.hbr.org/ideacast/2013/01/jeff-bezos-on-leading-...
- mehmehshoe 13y agoMeanwhile the Koch brothers want to buy the LA times...I will grab my popcorn and wait for the hilarity.
- Eliezer 13y agoLet's all hope that this day we have witnessed the birth of the anti-Murdoch.
- cpr 13y agoThe WaPo is just a prominent member of what Joe Sobran so elegantly called "the Hive"--people who all think pretty much alike ("enlightened liberalism", in their own minds), know only other members of the Hive, and only read each other. (The NYT being the other major member.) And nothing will change.
- augustocallejas 13y agoFrom the article: > Weymouth said the decision to sell The Post sprang from annual budget discussions she had with Graham late last year. “We talked about whether [The Washington Post Co.] was the right place to house The Post,” she said. “If journalism is the mission, given the pressures to cut costs and make profits, maybe [a publicly traded company] is not the best place for The Post.” Does this mean that the future of much of journalism is in the non-profit sector (think NPR)?
- ommunist 13y agoWas it what he negotiated at Bilderberg club this summer in Watford, UK?
- deepblueq 13y agoThere's now a box in the lower-left informing me that I can view 20 articles in a month before they'll put up a paywall. I don't recall ever seeing anything about a paywall before. If that's actually new, Bezos sure didn't waste any time monetizing things.
- rogerchucker 13y agoI think Jeff Bezos will be bigger than Steve Jobs one day.
- MaysonL 13y agoGuess what the next freebie for Amazon Prime subscribers will be.
- jhuckestein 13y agoIt's noteworthy that the Washington Post sells for $250MM, compared to for example OMGPOP which sold for $200MM last year.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- mkr-hn 13y agoI remember reading a story about how he turned Amazon into a platform to make it more nimble and faced a lot of resistance, and it gave me a good impression of his leadership abilities. This purchase is probably a good thing.
- peterwwillis 13y agoI was thinking about this when I heard the announcement, and I thought, what a disruptor! Here are some ways that a newspaper (with "internet content") would be superior than digital media: * Much larger viewing area than an iPad * It's more compact than an iPad * It's cheaper than an iPad * It's disposable * It's recyclable * You can use it in places digital media aren't allowed (security buildings, airplane takeoff/landing, subway, etc) * You don't have to know how to use it * You don't need a data plan or need to use a computer * You don't have to recharge it All you have to do is create targeted content and sell to places that digital media doesn't work as well. Fill with context-specific in-line ads and make it more interesting to the target market audience. (And probably figure out a new way to print it so that makes monetary sense)
- e3pi 13y ago"...The Internet is transforming almost every element of the news business: shortening news cycles, eroding long-reliable revenue sources, and enabling new kinds of competition, some of which bear little or no news-gathering costs. There is no map, and charting a path ahead will not be easy. We will need to invent, which means we will need to experiment. "There is no map" -from a proven visionary worth $25.2B, leaves a whole lot of successful innovations and failures open.
- Tloewald 13y agoI hope the plan involves taking WaPo's news gathering expertise and delivering seamlessly through all possible channels -- don't just fix a newspaper, fix the news.