Daily Mail owner buys New Scientist magazine in £70m deal

[editor]

Ho hum:

The publisher of the Daily Mail has acquired the renowned weekly science and technology magazine New Scientist in a £70m cash deal – the latest round of consolidation in the publishing sector.

The 65-year-old title, which is owned by a group of investors led by Sir Bernard Gray, is based in London, with offices in the US and Australia.

It is understood that Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT), which made an unsolicited approach to buy New Scientist and sealed the deal in just three weeks, has guaranteed the magazine’s editorial independence, ruling out staff cuts as well as the sharing of editorial content.

“This was totally unplanned,” said Gray. “Three weeks ago I was planning the strategic future of New Scientist. “This morning I’ve been for a walk around the village, grabbed a coffee, fielded a few calls congratulating me on the deal, and now I’m unemployed.”

Daily Mail owner buys New Scientist magazine in £70m deal

The 65-year-old title is forecast to make £7m in profits this year

www.theguardian.com

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Urgh.

 

[Pickman's model]

Ho hum:

Daily Mail owner buys New Scientist magazine in £70m deal

The 65-year-old title is forecast to make £7m in profits this year

www.theguardian.com

one for the guardian shit thread, given the way it says the magazine which has just been sold is owned by the people who have just sold it

 

[two sheds]

Start submitting articles on "Why foreigners are scary - the science".

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Low house prices cause cancer.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I hate euphemisms like 'consolidation'. What does that even mean in this context. An established magazine that makes a profit has been absorbed by a big monster. There's no consolidation.

 

[nogojones]

Newton's laws of motion, rapid deceleration and it's role in Mercedes cars in Paris tunnels.

 

[editor]

I hate euphemisms like 'consolidation'. What does that even mean in this context. An established magazine that makes a profit has been absorbed by a big monster. There's no consolidation.

This kind of business gibberish always gets my back up:

“The acquisition of New Scientist marks an exciting new addition to the DMGT portfolio and reflects our disciplined approach to acquisitions,” said Paul Zwillenberg, the chief executive of DMGT, which also owns the Metro and i newspaper titles. “It is a natural step in our consumer strategy to improve the quality of our revenues through building up subscriptions and digital capabilities.”

 

[littlebabyjesus]

70 million quid for a title that currently makes 7 million quid profit a year. There's no need to look any further than that for the motivation.

The owner wants to retire and be really rich. He could have sold to somebody else for a bit less and still been really rich if he had wanted to. This wasn't an act needed to save a struggling publication.

Subscription to be cancelled, I think.

 

[Pickman's model]

I hate euphemisms like 'consolidation'. What does that even mean in this context. An established magazine that makes a profit has been absorbed by a big monster. There's no consolidation.

yeh >>> guardian shit thread

 

[Yossarian]

"New study confirms Remoaners have no backbones."

 

[FridgeMagnet]

DMGT owns a whole load of things, including the i.

Daily Mail owner buys the i newspaper for £49.6m

DMGT will integrate some operations but appears to rule out editorial job cuts

www.theguardian.com

 

[StoneRoad]

I was just thinking about another subscription ... maybe not.

Very disappointed.