Conde Nast CEO Chuck Townshend tells the Times' Stephanie Clifford that none of the company's other titles will be shuttered, although some may reduce frequency. And the poorly-received decision to kill Gourmet rather than Bon Appétit?
Versus Gourmet, which has a circulation of about 978,000, Bon Appétit was much bigger, at 1.352 million, he said. And the company made higher margins off of the Bon Appétit circulation.What about Gourmet editor Ruth Reichl? The Observer's John Koblin says that, "at least for the moment, it does not appear she'll return to Conde Nast." Boo!"Bon Appétit is a very, very big, broad and powerful circulation machine. It is quite different than many of the properties here," he said. "We generate a very, very high circulation margin – Bon Appétit is one of the most successful" magazines in terms of circulation margin at the company.
In fairness, Gourmet has been slouching towards Bon Appetit - more servicey, more listy, more trendy - for a long time now. It's part of why Saveur was so revered when it arrived on the scene - it struck people as being a lot like what Gourmet used to be: longish stories with beautiful writing that reflected deep research.
Still, it's sad to see it go.
Agreed. I had occasion to compare/contrast Gourmet with an issue of Something Whatever With Rachel Ray two months ago, with the latter clearly being a better read. Big yikes moment.
But more importantly, where will Top Chef get suitably snooty guest judges now?
Which one will remind me that I want to use less water in my Easy Mac rather than more?