To Anon 10: Hit a paragraph return, for crying out loud.
Your post was so painful to read its value is lost.

And yet TC is keeping Juice magazine - what a disaster that book is - the art direction is a disaster. TC has magazines that don't have websites (Good Times - to name one) another example of outdated thinking and no-one planning at the top end. Dinosaurs envision the big picture and kids (20 something media planners) hold the reigns. Not sure that is a combination that will ever work. But truthfully I blame media as a whole - what if all of you had said "no" to the media planners, agencies and their clients when they asked you to drop your ad rates by 70% years ago? What if the industry held the magazines who "claim" circulation and don't actually deliver it accountable. The print magazine industry used to be able to get by because there was no trackable ROI - now there is - how are you competing with the options for advertising that offer tangibility? Where is the synergy between the publishers to fight for your brands - and the industry collectively? There are great magazines out there and these are full of ads and circulation is doing well. TC unfortunately doesn't count many of these amongst their titles. Perhaps all the dollars spent on changing the name from Transcontinental to TC could have been invested in supporting the true need of the company. Marketing and branding isn't just something you sell between your pages TC - it is something you have to actually know how to use to better yourself as an organization - otherwise you don't have anything to offer the industry except failing publications and outdated ideas.

Yup, another good magazine killed off - at least in part - by ad agencies who leave the buying decisions to know-it-all 20-somethings that can't get through the day without earbuds screwed into the sides of their heads. God help us.

For the staff I'm sorry to hear the news. I wish you the best. But now is the time for TC management to do a bit of soul searching. What did you do to promote the magazine. I'm a consumer, and I'm also in the business. While I may not fit the demographic of your audience, I knew NOTHING about these magazines. If you hope to compete in today's market, you need to spend some money. Funny that we in this advertising world don't get this basic understanding.

loved the magazine - so sorry to see it go. Sorry for the team that worked so hard on it.

At this point, finger pointing doesn't really help. People will be looking for work, in a bad job environment. But maybe understanding why will help. I personally believe the blame is much more than the economy. Look around our industry and you'll get the answers. Our talent pool is depleted, and its only getting worse. Agency juniors are making decisions they're not qualified to make. These are the ones buying digital and 'new things' becuase it's the thing to do. They ignore the old ways. Print is seen as old and ineffective. Why? Because it isn't 'cool', and one must be 'cool'.Their mangement allows them to do so, unchecked! Many media reps,the front line people are unsupported a great deal of the time, and few are truly passionate about their product. It's just a job. How many have YOU seen who are truly impressive and professional? Our industry needs to recognize we are lacking in professionalism. Management needs to admit their weaknesses and fix them. I recently sat in a meeting with an agency group of 5. The product they reprsented was automotive. Not 1 owned a car, 2 didn't drive, and they are making the decisions for a national automotive client. Where is the logic??? They make decsions based on what they 'like' and what they think 'works'. How would they know? And clients need to look at what's going on in THEIR agency. Who is determining their future? Profesionals or ego tripping kids who will be gone in a few months. Sadly to yet another agency. Folks, we need to stop closing and start building our industry

Hey WTF were placing a portion of the blame on 20 something year old media buyers who think 40 is the new 80. You only need to look at Chatelaine- Jane F.is doing a fantastic job but she's had to appeal to a younger audience and therefore young media buyers to keep her margins. You won't find menopause or how to deal with ageing parent articles in Chatelaine anymore but these are the kinds of topics women 40+ want to read about. The same 40+ women that will outspend those 30 year old that 20 year old media buyers keep targeting.

Wow, and More had such a successful launch too: Almost too much circulation. Maybe the fact that all the media-buyers are 22 years old (and think of magazines as being their parents' media) had something to do with it.

Very, very sad.

so no magazines for women over 40? ageism lives.

SJ -- what!? Just so I understand, you're blaming the demise on clients and agencies who wouldn't "look at a new property"?
These books were four and five years old, so they're hardly "new."
And look at what's happened in the media world -- and options for media buyers! -- in that period.
I share your concern for the people affected, but isn't it possible that these books were just no longer competitive/viable, or maybe they were not distinct enough in the first place?

Been there, had the pink slip handed to me when our publication went down. I wish the staff the best of luck in getting back up and moving forward. To all those agency and clients who didn't return the calls, wouldn't open their minds and look at a new property, this is what YOU made happen.