So, 8020 Media had to shutter JPG Magazine; a print media magazine that utilized readers for their content such as photographs. They couldn’t find buyers, but now that they are shuttered, there appears to be a feeding frenzy. With various well-backed companies and well-established companies looking on as JPG Magazine thrashes about in the water hoping to make it to shore [which is apparently can't], there is a problem with the ethics of acquiring a business that you see value in, but only after it has lost the value that made it attractive to others. So, JPG Magazine and 8020 Media are looking at the value of their portfolio slowly lose its impact, and they hold out for more capital recovery. Was it more ethical for companies to acquire JPG Magazine before it became a dead pool acquisition? In essence, companies looking at JPG Magazine are acquiring just the parts in an inverse Gordon Gekko fashion of purchasing the liquidated assets. They’ll get nearly 200,000 photo enthusiasts according to jpgmag.com and I would estimate an average of 20 times that in the number of photographs available (just a guess). The acquisition before it has given up the ghost would have saved jobs, or at least a lot of heart ache if jobs are still saved, and in this economy… well, we all need jobs even if they are at a lower-than-expected wage.
This is of particular interest because I have domains and projects associated with photography and if the Print world is dead in relation to photography, will the online side suffer as well as the advertising model continues to retract. Business models will need updating.
via: TechCrunch & Engadget