Saturday, September 11, 2010

Milestones | What he said three years ago today

"This is the hard part. This is where transformation gets really difficult. I want to begin talking with you more about this process and what it means. I can't take away all the pain and doubt, but I can help lead you through it."

-- CEO Craig Dubow, in a Sept. 11, 2007, memo to employees, giving the clearest signal yet that Gannett was about to be turned upside down. GCI's stock closed that day at $45.57 a share; it closed yesterday at $13.30. I wrote about Dubow's memo that same day, and for the first time, started publishing Gannett Blog.

Earlier: Since 2007, Gannett has eliminated more than 11,000 jobs -- nearly one out of every four -- mostly through layoffs

11 comments:

  1. Dubow got paid a combined $15.4 million in 2007, 2008 and 2009, according to regulatory filings; some of that is in now-worthless stock options. This table shows payments to top five executives for each of those years.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, it looks like the same old story: the rich get richer. The "pain" certainly isn't felt at the top.

    And Craig, what a great job you're doing as our leader! How many more people do you plan to send packing in the upcoming year?

    Oh, and thanks for transforming our newspaper company into a dispenser of ad-driven drivel!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yup, and Hunke made almost $2 million. And what has he done in the past year, besides screw up USAT even more?

    ReplyDelete
  4. What a perfect example of how mediocre people are rewarded in Gannett. Where is the innovation, the richly innovative corporate culture? Where is the leadership, the managers who are paid to know when to anticipate shifts in economic cycles and industrial sea changes? Where is the flattened workplace hierarchy that permits highly educated, professional workers to participate in company decision-making? And how can it not be obvious to institutional investors who hold the real leverage over the board and management that this is a company that rewards butt-kissing, corporate babble and constant ineptitude instead of creating essential products and building shareholder value?

    ReplyDelete
  5. It could be worse. They could have lifetime contracts like Al's and keep getting paid long after they're done destroying the company.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dubow is an easy target -- heck I partially blame him for my job being eliminated a couple years ago -- but it can probably be argued that his actions refocused the newspaper world on the web. Has he been the leader of Gannett when it has made a lot of inane decisions -- YES.

    I'm in no way, shape or form a GMC or Dubow lover, but ...

    Newspapers could have been on the cutting edge of emerging technologies today if they would have embraced the internet portion of the technical revolution a bit sooner. A lot of these growing pains could probably have been avoided if Gannett had gotten serious about the internet in 1996. HTML is not exactly rocket science. But who would have imagined in 1996 that two of the most popular trends on 2010 would be FaceBook and Twitter? Anyone who could have imagined those things back then or had a crystal ball would be amazingly wealthy right now.

    ReplyDelete
  7. As 9:30 am said, it looks like the same old story. From you, Jim. No news you can collect from the masses so you pull up and recycle the old stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yeah, what a 'leader.' Within his first weeks of being in his position -- knowing full well that he had a ton of major priorities, all crucial to the company's survival -- he literally walked through our offices three times with his lackeys, giving our entire department the hairy eyeball. No greeting. Not even an attempt to say "Hi folks! Just passing through! Keep up the great work!" Just a stern, wordless walk-through, pointing fingers to various parts of our department while his enablers feverishly took notes.

    Turns out he wanted us to clear out from our needed space so he could have more room for his fiefdom. He apparently wanted us to move to a relative closet so his executive staff could move in. Keep in mind that would mean the same space would be used for one-third of the people. (Was that 'maximizing efficiencies,' Craig?)

    Fortunately, this 'critical initiative' was shot down. I guess our 'leader' then turned his attention to more productive tasks, like cannibalizing his products so no sane consumer would want to buy them. Or whining to his board about having to take so much of his bonus in that crummy GCI stock.

    Yep, there's a leader for you ...

    ReplyDelete
  9. What amazes me is how after only three years, the whole newspaper industry is looking at Gannett in hopes of copying the innovatuon and creativity Dubow unleashed with his radical transformation plan.
    Hardly a week passes that I don't read somewhere about how GCI is showing the industry where it needs to go as newspapers address the problems of plummeting circulation, waning advertising and changing technology. It just shows how much ahead of the curve Dubow is, compared to other newspaper executives.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Re 8:32 p.m.....This all goes back to the appointment of McCorkindale to the stop spot. It marked the first time that a news guy was not in charge, when a finance guy who cared only about numbers was put in the driver's seat.

    And then what does 'ol Corky do? Annoint another bean counter as his replacement.

    There are places in business for finance guys, for bean counters. But don't expect them to be creative beyond their spreadsheets.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Same old drivel, same old B.S. from Craig. He is wealthier, the stock is lower and I am about to start UI extensions here in NJ. Thanks Craig, You Corporate Troll!

    ReplyDelete

Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.