"We have created a number of efficiencies this year particularly in our publishing operations. And we are always focused on opportunities to improve our efficiency. The carry over affect of actions already taken this year has an impact on our headcount comparison for next year."
-- Chief Operating Officer Gracia Martore, speaking Wednesday to Wall Street stock analysts at the annual UBS Global Media and Communications Conference. (Martore's prepared remarks.)
Related: remarks by CEO Craig Dubow and all the executives
Earlier: exclusive Gannett Blog spreadsheet shows the estimated 253 layoffs and other job cuts at 63 U.S. newspapers in November
[A]ffect," oe "effect" - is there a typo in there?
ReplyDeleteProbably. But that's exactly how it appears in her prepared text.
ReplyDeleteThe assumption at the Reno site, I am told, is that resumed furloughs and more layoffs of its already decimated staff are a done deal after January.
ReplyDeleteHow much will newsprint shoot up next year? Appleton was told 22 percent.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if Gracia put the same touchy feely spin on her donations ($105,000 in Foundation money) to her alma mater.
ReplyDeleteWhen was the last time Gracia walked through USA Today. Ever?
5:02; If Gracia ever walked through USA Today, she'd see MANY MANY more ways to create greater efficiency through headcount reductions.
ReplyDelete4:20 Martore told the analysts the following about newsprint in the U.S.:
ReplyDelete"We have budgeted conservatively for 2011 in keeping with the year-over-year comparisons noted. We estimate the percentage increase in newsprint expense will be in the mid to high teens range and comparisons in the first quarter will be the most challenging of the year."
Don't let that seemingly blithe language fool you: An increase in the mid to high teens is an ENORMOUS increase in operating costs. Newsprint and labor are the company's biggest cost of doing business.
Gannett can deal with this through lower consumption: i.e., shrinking the new hole by publishing smaller newspapers. But that can only go so far.
Gracia shouldn't have canned her copy editor.
ReplyDeleteAt least she didn't cane 'em.
ReplyDeleteCreate efficiencies? You reduce your workforce dramatically, overwork those who are left, turn the art of page design into a paint by numbers formula and then have gall to talk about "creating efficiences?" Her antiseptic language is obscene.
ReplyDelete0: Number of employees Jim has supervised.
ReplyDelete0: Number of budgets Jim has created for any company.
Weirdly enough, where is any media covering this? No other media "brand" is, and this stinks to high heaven. Everyone's cowed. Over what Gannett has become, which is nothing of any value on the street or on Wall Street.
ReplyDeleteI feel bad for my friends in Reno. Having to live in constant fear of furloughs and layoffs over the last 2 years only to find out you still need to thin out more, is no way to live. Trust me when i say the grass is most certainly greener on the other side. Leave while you can, on your terms and not ones dictated by a spreadsheet. I did, and it felt great...
ReplyDelete6:21 P.M.
ReplyDeleteJim is a twenty year veteran. I also see the inside of a Gannett operation. I can tell you, the product is being diminished. It's like selling people crappier cars during a recession. It won't inspire more sales.
6:41. To clarify, here's my history at Gannett newspapers:
ReplyDelete* In Little Rock, I supervised a staff of 13, including two assistant business news editors
* In Boise, I eventually became assistant managing editor, which for a short time made me the third-ranking supervisor in a 65-employee newsroom
* At USA Today, I supervised 6-7 reporters on the technology team
Prior to my newspaper career, I started and ran a small pre-press graphics business with one employee. With regret, I laid off that employee when I sold the company's assets to finish my college degree.
So who are you 6;35? It's always refreshing to link a name to a success story.Gannett can't hurt you so share
ReplyDelete6:21 -- And he's better for it. The Gannett brass have supervised and budgeted plenty and all they have to show for it is money. No respect. No dignity. They're just pigs at the trough fighting to have more apples than the next pig. If those are the sort of people you respect, well, you know what that means.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete10:23: Even if Gannett can't "hurt you" anymore, there's still a reluctance to come out in public after you've left GCI and had great success. You still don't want to burn bridges, after all, with a name-attached anti-GCI public posting.
ReplyDeleteI can say I've had the same experience as 6:35. I was downsized. I ran my own business fulltime. I got more well-paying work than I could handle. After nearly a year, I got very good (as in far better than my GCI salary) competing offers to go back to fulltime work as a result of my solo business and GCI work. I'm back at work fulltime, but am still allowed to maintain some of my solo business work.
So it can happen. But not if you wait for good things to happen. Or, worse yet, if you sit and wait and hope for bad things NOT to happen at GCI. If you have a job with GCI, best to set up your fallback plan now, not later. Because later will come sooner and if you have nothing going on, that's when panic and desperation set in, and that alone will hurt your ability to bounce back.
10:50 mot buying it. If you truly started a business and made more money than your previous salary then please yell us all about it. Plus if you are running your own business why go back to work for someone else! See I think folks like you like to brag about your great success on the blog but there are never any details. Never. As journalists we'd never write this kind of story. No details just hot air.
ReplyDeleteBelieve what you want to believe, 11:38, if it makes you feel better about being miserable, ok? I don't need to give you every detail because this is not the reporting of a story. It's a blog.
ReplyDeleteI chose to go back to a well-paying fulltime job because it's a good job and I can still keep parts of my business running at the same time. So why the heck wouldn't I do that? You get fulltime bennies and you still can generate income from multiple source points -- including one that's a steady, guaranteed paycheck. Sounded like a win-win to me.
If you're a journalist, you have marketable, transferable talent. Unless you prefer to not think about these things and slog away for GCI and hope that the inevitable 'bad thing' won't happen to you. I preferred to be realistic and set the table for my exit plan BEFORE that inevitable 'bad thing' happened. Damn glad I did. No regrets at all. And being with another good company that values employees now makes you realize all the more what a horrible place GCI is.
11:38 -- I'm not the initial poster, but I ran a small business in the past. You need to understand that even small business owners are working for someone else. In fact, you're working for many other people -- your clients.
ReplyDeleteEspecially if you are a one-person show, it often makes sense to go back to work full-time. Essentially, you're taking on one big client ... only that client pays not only a fee for your work, but full-time medical benefits. And, as the initial poster said, you can continue to cultivate your best-paying individual clients on the side. And you may just have people waiting in the wings to give you more work if you get laid off.
You can believe what you want, but what this person is saying makes perfect sense to me.
11:58 what is the name of that company that pays more money and loves it's employees so much more than Gannett. Tell us so some readers don't think you are blowing Ike. You're a journalist so give us some facts.
ReplyDeletethe rumors says there is more lay-offs before Christmas?
ReplyDeleteselected layoffs,but in upper management this time.
ReplyDelete8:42 -- I'm not the initial poster, but there are many companies that pay more than Gannett. I don't believe any corporation can "love" it's employees. Corporations are not people. That said, there are certainly companies that offer better job stability, better pay and better benefits. A couple that pop into mind ...
ReplyDeleteGoogle (just offered across the board pay increases)
Apple
Granted, these are technology companies, but it's not unheard of for journalists to go to work for them. They do so many things that they employ a lot of people with various skill sets.
Newspaper companies that would be better to work for than Gannett ...
McClatchy
The New York Times Company
These companies don't offer any more job security than Gannett, but the products that they put out are better overall. That alone makes the working conditions a little more manageable. Are they good long-term solutions? Probably not. Do they make going to work each day less miserable? Absolutely.
On top of this, there are many, many smaller businesses and government agencies that offer employees better benefits and better working conditions than Gannett. If you haven't encountered these over the years, I have to think your either very young or that you've spent your entire career with one or two companies.
It's foolish trying to discredit 11:58 just because you don't like what he/she is saying. What he/she said is true. That doesn't mean great opportunities are going to lay down at your feet. You're going to have to work hard to find them ... maybe even retrain to learn additional skills.
It's not his/her job to tell you where to apply. With just a little bit of research you can easily find hundreds of companies offering you more opportunities than Gannett. They aren't newspaper companies, but they exist and they pay their employees every month.
12:13 and 12:24 -- I don't have any insider connections, but I wouldn't expect mass layoffs before Christmas. We just had a round, and Christmas is just nine business days away. Considering that many management sorts will probably take vacation the week before the holiday, a mass layoff is unlikely.
ReplyDeleteNow, January and February is another story. I think we all need to be prepared because the company is clearly in full-on downsizing mode. All we can do is save what we can and start preparations for a new career. If the cuts don't come, it'll be gravy.
From an accounting stand point wouldn't it benefit Gannett to layoff before year end. Take the expense in 2010 and see the savings in 2011. another way of making the future P&L look good,
ReplyDelete11:58 here. All I asked was the name of the companies the posters started and the companies they went to that paid so muchore and loved their employees so much. They didn't do it choosing instead to pontificate. Google is one of the most successful companies in the world but none of the posters said they went there.I don't think it is rude to ask a poster a clarifying question
ReplyDeleteI hate it when these insulated corporate people talk about "head counts."
ReplyDeleteMaybe it makes Martore feel better if the "head counts" aren't people suffering for the debt that she and Craigy Boy racked up for the company.
10:23..... You first
ReplyDelete