Salon Media Announces $5 Million Sale, 'Bankruptcy and Liquidation' Threatened If Deal Fails
Salon Media says they have reached an 11th hour deal to sell the company and its flagship property Salon.com for $5 million. In an SEC filing, Salon also revealed its position was dire and that it would face imminent "bankruptcy and liquidation" if the deal should fall through.
[...] The company buying Salon was named only as Salon.com LLC and appeared to be getting an even better deal than the top line figures first suggest. To complete the sale, the buyer need only pay $550,000 at closing, with an additional $100,000 left in an escrow account. The filing also showed that a deposit of $500,000 had already been paid.
[...] Though it was once a powerful force in the early days of internet blogging and a prominent incubator of talent, the website has fallen on hard times in recent years. On May 3, the filing revealed, CEO Jordan Hoffner departed the company. Salon's longtime chief financial officer, Elizabeth Hambrecht, also jumped ship last October.
[...] The company's troubles, however began long before and were documented in detail in a 2016 Politico Magazine story, which revealed that for years Salon — deeply unprofitable — had been kept afloat by elderly benefactors, John Warnock, a co-founder of Adobe, and Bill Hambrecht a venture capitalist. The two are now 78 and 84 respectively.
"Because Salon has run deficits for almost every quarter since it was founded, the company has relied on regular interest-free cash advances from Warnock, chairman of Salon's board, and Hambrecht, a board member," Politico wrote at the time. "From Salon's founding until the end of 2015, the most recent data available, Warnock and Hambrecht have given the company nearly $20 million in cash advances, and Warnock also personally guaranteed a $1 million line of credit."
(Score: 5, Informative) by c0lo on Thursday May 16 2019, @02:12AM (2 children)
Pot/kettle.
Which makes "It is all fake" irrelevant to the discussion - Salon is not the first, not the last to act as PA for individual interests (as opposed to and opposing [wikipedia.org] public interest).
---
How is the above relevant, you ask? Well, your:
is a regurgitation [washingtonexaminer.com] (read "vomit") of what seems like your (now dead) hero:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Thursday May 16 2019, @04:39AM (1 child)
No, it makes it spot on. My point is they are -all- fake, tiny little tails wagging the dog. Brietbart post Andrew is just another example. With Andrew it was something more, purely on the power of that one man's personalty. You cite newsweek, the magazine that sold for $1 plus assume debt. When you look more widely, all of the 'content' game is like this, the small part of the industry that wags the whole society. The entire film industry grossed how much? Compare to the pure profit just one of Google, Apple, Microsoft, etc. throw off in a single quarter. Nobody in the news game appears to have made a profit in the 20th Century absent dodgy bookkeeping, most of the bigger ones openly, proudly, lose money. It is curious. Something ain't right.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Thursday May 16 2019, @07:02AM
Yeah, right; maybe it was... for the connoisseurs with a palate attuned to bullshit flavors.
(just in case you object to newsweek) it's not like it's the only source that confirms Robert Mercer as sugardaddy for Breitbart News
Did you know that the world neither starts nor ends with USA, much less with its press?
Many countries have news agencies, TV and radio stations paid from taxes - as such they can afford to actually inform the tax payers and, at least from time to time, uncover shit about both the political class and the top end of the business town.
I'll tell you what's not right: the 0.01%-ers (your dead hero included) declared war to the political systems of power; they don't care if they kill democracy as a collateral damage in the war on who has "The Power" - the politicos or the stinky rich.
While the governments aren't necessary the friend of (all) the citizens, the 0.01% Richie Rich have almost opposite interests to the ones of the Joe Average.
because, as sure as death and taxes, the people aren't gonna vote the Richie Rich out from his money, but they'll could vote out a politico from his office if they want to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford