Originally Posted by Skip Wiley
Ad revenue was actually up close to 9 percent this year ... commercially unsustainable, huh?
Well something sure as hell went wrong. Even if you are a complete and utter crook you do not close down a profitable business in that manner. Did the new owners (NOs) bleed the company dry living the high life and squandering the companies assets ? From what I've read thus far the piggy bank was pretty much empty to begin with, dare I say it because of BBs drive to build the new boat. Now maybe he thought that the magazine could pay for that dream, my guess is largely through contra deals, but whatever the reason the place was not up to producing that kind of revenue.
Now again, I am guessing. Nothing more because I have no insider information but to an outsider it looks to me as if the NOs took this on thinking that it was more profitable than it really was and having realised that was not the case they cut and ran. A very poor way of dealing with the situation yes indeed and they should be condemned for their actions but I'm sticking with my theory that they simply realised the business model was unsustainable. Remember of course, that even if revenue was up by 9% costs would also have undoubtedly risen and the NOs would have also had to factor in whatever they would need to pay BB and J plus the costs associated with leasing back the old boat.