More Layoffs at Entrepreneur

So 2 out of 3 copy editors are gone? What does that mean? The magazine's grammar, spelling and editing will be as great as the Entrepreneur web site? That is sad.

Apparently, Austin Ventures' deal to buy Entrepreneur Media, Inc. collapsed because AV's lawyers and accountants confirmed or uncovered serious problems with EMI during the due diligence phase. No wonder AV has repeatedly refused to publicly support Peter Shea's statements that all is good at EMI and that AV's deal to buy EMI fell apart solely because of a tight credit market. Not only is EMI suddenly shedding an alarmingly high percentage of its editors, EMI's new editors (including their top editor) have little if any background in entrepreneurship. Could you imagine Rolling Stone hiring editors with no track record in music?! A magazine that purports itself to be for and about entrepreneurs, should obviously have the desire and ability to only hire editors who know and love entrepreneurs. What kind of editorial leadership can editors with no background in entrepreneurship, bring to EMI? Then again, EMI's previous top editor often jokes that she had to look entrepreneur up in a dictionary before she first interviewed to work at EMI.

And after laying off 2 of 3 copyeditors and the creative director, during the production cycle of 2 magazines, it suddently occurs to the editor that they need help putting out the Oct issue (and their other newsstand magazine) So they asked the copy editors to freelance for them to "help get October out" and offered a below-market rate. Also in a meeting to the remaining staff the editor told them that the layoffs were due to "financial reasons" (mag ad sales have plummeted for the fall issues) and that the "magazine is shrinking--it's all going online." SOnd like good news for Inc. magazine.

Of course ad sales have plummeted. Advertisers are surely spooked by why so many long-term senior staffers would suddenly jump ship or be laid off – I've been told about half of their editors are being laid off – at the same time Shea has been unsuccessfully trying to unload the company. Hopefully, someone with a lot of money, patience and entrepreneurial vision, will eventually buy and save Entrepreneur magazine (and end Shea's hypocritical obsession with monopolizing the word entrepreneur). It's surprising how so many reporters who have recently covered Entrepreneur magazine didn't see this coming, despite all the obvious signs. Orange County-based reporters seem particularly determined to not covering Entrepreneur magazine's growing legal and business woes. No wonder traditional media is losing so much of its audience. So much of what they report is based on their personal agendas, as opposed to simply reporting the news. The small business reporters for the Orange County Register and the Orange County Business Journal should obviously be covering Entrepreneur magazine's efforts to monopolize the word entrepreneur, and their numerous lawsuits against small entrepreneurs over use of the word entrepreneur. But I guess a story that's worthy of coverage in publications such as the Wall Street Journal, Forbes magazine and the New York Times isn't necessarily worthy of coverage by Orange County publications.

Last year, Entrepreneur supposedly "owned" the SMB market. This year, they tried to sell themselves to Austin Ventures, a company that obviously did their homework and pulled out of the deal to buy the company. Now, EMI is shedding staff like a snake sheds its skin. This is not a healthy situation. All you have to do is look at the masthead from January, 2007 and compare it to the next issue that comes out (one that shows the recent layoffs). How many people are gone? People who worked there 10-15-20+ years. This is not simply about changing direction for the company or bringing in new faces and fresh ideas. This is about the catastrophic mistake made when the owner of the company thought it was ok to hand over control to his son. Ever since that fateful moment, EMI has been in a nosedive. My guess...they crash and burn before pulling out of it. Good luck to everyone still there.

The current owner's and execs' arrogance and poor judgment is what is bringing down this company. Asking for $200 million in today's market, pushing out critical employees (starting with those who left earlier this year), bringing on editorial staff with no business journalism background ... the list goes on. Sadly, those left who are just trying to do their jobs are the ones getting hurt -- and the readers who have relied on Entrepreneur for so many years.

It's sad to see what was once a top notch quality publication face such a horrible demise. More should have been done in the beginning to keep the top talent from leaving and, in the very least, make extra efforts to take care of the remaining employees. After all, these employees have devoted years of their lives to the company. They are the true asset of the company, yet they are the ones let go so ruthlessly. It's truly ironic that a magazine that seemingly upholds entrepreneurship and writes about what others should do to build a better company should be so blind when it comes to their own operations. Entrepreneur's management should have read their own magazine. Best wishes to those who got laid off, but it truly might have been a blessing in disguise. Don't know how much longer the publication can operate with much of its top talent gone. I'm sure the last of the good ones still standing are wondering if they should even stay.

This is indeed sad because many talented people have lost their jobs and the startup community is losing a valuable resource as Entrepreneur declines. It's even sadder to me, though, that Scott uses this opportunity to once again publicize his long-standing gripes with the magazine. This isn't about you and your legal battles with Peter Shea, Scott, this is about the staffers who got laid off last week and the remaining staffers who find themselves employed by a magazine with a very uncertain future.

I agree with the comment above. This is not the place to air unrelated legal grievances.

Apparently, some of Emag's employees are still clueless about how misdirected and damaging Emag's efforts to monopolize the word entrepreneur have been. Emag's attacks against small entrepreneurs are directly related to Emag's growing woes. When a business attacks or eats its young, there are going to be severe consequences. Isn't that how it should be? If Hispanic magazine acted as arrogantly and tried to monopolize such a similarly ubiquitous and generic word, they too would have been chastised (especially if they centered their attacks on much smaller companies). Ironically for Emag, the "goodwill" they argued they were trying to protect was significantly harmed by such vicious acts against small entrepreneurs, the very people Emag wants people to think they support. As many people now believe, Emag is far more concerned with its advertisers than small entrepreneurs. Which is why Emag won't sue any of its advertisers for using the word entrepreneur in their ads or names (i.e. the Entrepreneur's Source). Most of Emag's employees have never genuinely researched Emag's trademark battles or trademark law, or actually spoken with any of the numerous small entrepreneurs (not just Scott Smith) that Emag has attacked for using the word entrepreneur – a word neither created by nor exclusive to Emag. Austin Ventures and others surely focused much of their research on Emag's extensive and controversial trademark problems, and decided to pass because they were so troubled by what they discovered. Many now believe that Emag should be renamed Anti-Entrepreneur. Would any of Emag's employees criticize someone if they fought to keep Journalist magazine from hijacking journalist from the English language? And if Emag's employees truly understood or believed in small entrepreneurs, they would support those who fight to protect the word entrepreneur and small entrepreneurs from Emag's tyranny on the word entrepreneur. While Emag's remaining employees unfortunately face an uncertain future, why aren't they expressing any sympathy for the many small entrepreneurs victimized by Emag's trademark attacks? If they read their own magazine they know that it is far easier to get a new job than it is to start a new business. And Emag's future probably wouldn't be so bleak if its employees hadn't been so accepting / supportive of Emag's vicious and egregious acts against small entrepreneurs, the very people Emag purports to support. It's difficult to feel highly sympathetic for those who do so little to stop their company from doing what they should know is terribly unethical and so damaging to the co's future. Do you feel sorry for Enron employees who knew Enron was cooking the books but did nothing? And do you feel hatred for those who did but spoke up against it?

Obviously some of you with "inside information" are bitter. Is it possible that you may be some of those same people who have been asked to leave or were compelled to resign? Could it be possible that Entrepreneur is finally getting rid of the excess baggage that their non-progressive ex-editor was hanging onto with her controlling, puppeteer's strings? Could it be remotely possible that AV uncovered and reinforced the fact that Entrepreneur was extremely over-staffed? Hmmm... makes you wonder, doesn't it?

As another "Anonymous" previously mentioned, Emag "bringing on editorial staff with no business journalism background," indicates Emag's execs are making poor decisions (or are unable to attract or pay higher quality candidates). If Emag was known in the industry as a high quality business publication, it would have attracted several high quality business journalists for its editorial openings. So is Shea panicking and making changes just for the sake of making changes? I think Shea's numerous legal battles, management style, and ultimate destroying of a once prospering business, make him the Al Davis of magazines. It is laughable and quite telling that Emag sends out press releases proclaiming that, "Entrepreneur Media Inc. is the premier content provider for and about entrepreneurs," while being unable or unwilling to hire editors with any sort of a background in entrepreneurs.

Welcome everyone to the theater of the absurd! Come right in, sit down and enjoy the show. First up, Scott whats-his-name. Scott will impress you with his masterful use of keyboard diarrhea...writing about things that are only pertinent to himself. (reality check Scott--you got your butt kicked years ago and it's GNAWING at you like an infected boil on your ass. Do everyone a favor--move on. At the very least, stop writing your drivel. NO ONE CARES...honestly). Next up, we have sour grapes. SG is a small, small man who likes to wear rose colored glasses, play in a pretend world and will take all his toys home if he thinks you are being mean to him. Reality check to Sour Grapes--Entrepreneur is now a SHELL of its former self. EMI put all its eggs in the "We're selling the company" basket. They allowed the best and brightest people to walk out the door...without so much as batting an eye. People with 20+ years dedicated to the company made very difficult decisions when it became obvious that the company executives cared more about what to have for lunch than addressing a key member of the team who decided to leave the company. And for you to now call them "excess baggage" reinforces your infantile leadership skills. NO successful organization leads this way! You will find this out soon enough when someone else comes in and takes your toys...and your rose colored glasses. And now, for our grand finale, we give you Entrepreneur...The Magazine. Started in the 1970s, it's had an incredible run. One of the great dames of the small business market. The magazine gave us 30 years of practical, useful information on how to start, manage and grow our businesses. Take a good look at her--because it's her swan song. If current management has their way, in three years, the only place you'll be able to find this lady is in the archive section of your local library. That's our show--have a safe trip home or wherever your final destination may be.

Anonymous "A Night at the Opera" sure is brave when cloaked by a website! If no one cares about Scott Smith's efforts to save the word entrepreneur and small entrepreneurs from Shea's gang of attorneys, then how come Shea has spent over 10 years and over $1 million dollars trying (unsuccessfully) to stop him (while simultaneously laying off staff due to financial reasons)? Anonymous obviously cares big time and is highly frustrated that Scott won't give up like most small entrepreneurs are forced to do when attacked by brand name bullies such as Shea. But like with Shea and his followers, small entrepreneurs aren't the priority for Anonymous. Self-preservation and self interests are their main concerns. Anyone who writes that Emag "gave us 30 years of practical, useful information on how to start, manage and grow our businesses," is either purposely omitting or ignorant of Emag's fraudulent history. Even Emag's previous editor had to admit under oath that Emag was founded by a dishonest man, and that Emag has a history of misleading and taking advantage of its readers, and for at least the first decade, was an unprofessional and unethical publication that lacked editorial standards. Noticeably, the secretive Anonymous is unable to defend Shea's ridiculous claims of owning the word entrepreneur or Shea's attacks against small entrepreneurs. So for those failingly trying to defend Shea or Emag's fraudulent history, investigative journalist Upton Sinclair said it best when he said: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz