<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Is Tim Geithner really one of the 50 Most Beautiful People?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/02/is-tim-geithner-really-one-of-the-50-most-beautiful-people/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/02/is-tim-geithner-really-one-of-the-50-most-beautiful-people/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/02/is-tim-geithner-really-one-of-the-50-most-beautiful-people/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/rumors/" rel="tag">Rumors</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/magazines/" rel="tag">Magazines</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/rants-and-raves/" rel="tag">Rants and Raves</a></p><p><em><img alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.dailyfinance.com/media/2009/03/geithner.jpg" align="right" vspace="4" border="1" />People</em> revealed earlier this week that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner made its closely-watched list of the 50 Most Beautiful People.</p>
<p>Beautiful? Really? 50 Most Beautiful Treasury Secretaries perhaps -- but only because Hank Paulson looks like a rodent and Robert Rubin looks like the dad in that Twister Sister music video. <em><a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/scandal-tim-geithners-brother-is-a-people-mag-vp-2009-4">Business Insider</a></em> found time to do some digging and uncover the makings of a scandal. Joe Weisenthal reports:</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/02/is-tim-geithner-really-one-of-the-50-most-beautiful-people/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Is Tim Geithner really one of the 50 Most Beautiful People?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/02/is-tim-geithner-really-one-of-the-50-most-beautiful-people/">Is Tim Geithner really one of the 50 Most Beautiful People?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Sat, 02 May 2009 15:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/02/is-tim-geithner-really-one-of-the-50-most-beautiful-people/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1534541/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/02/is-tim-geithner-really-one-of-the-50-most-beautiful-people/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>50 Most Beautiful People</category><category>David Geithner</category><category>Hank Paulson</category><category>People magazine</category><category>Tim Geithner</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Zac Bissonnette]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 02 May 2009 15:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Time Warner's magazines, no big year here]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/09/06/time-warners-magazines-no-big-year-here/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/09/06/time-warners-magazines-no-big-year-here/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/09/06/time-warners-magazines-no-big-year-here/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/products-and-services/" rel="tag">Products and Services</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/magazines/" rel="tag">Magazines</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/twx/" rel="tag">Time Warner (TWX)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/marketing-and-advertising/" rel="tag">Marketing and Advertising</a></p><p>The Publishers Information Bureau of <a href="http://www.magazine.org">The Magazine Publishers of America</a> tracks magazine revenue and advertising pages each month. The study covers all major magazines and weekly newspaper inserts.</p>
<p>PIB, as it is called in the industry, takes gross pages and multiplies them by published rates for advertising pages by magazine. So, discounting is not reflected in the numbers. Assuming that the market makes all major magazine discount at about the same rate, the numbers are good from a directional standpoint.</p>
<p>In the period from January to July 2006 compared to the same period in 2005, the larger magazines at Time, Inc. did not do terribly well, and indication that revenue and operating profits at the group may not be strong for the second half of the year. With the costs of postage, ink, and transportation rising, mostly due to higher oil prices, margins will be squeezed unless revenue is rising smartly.</p>
<p>In the seven month period, <em>Sports Illustrated</em> ad revenue was up .9% to $346 million. Ad pages for <em>SI</em> were flat. </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/09/06/time-warners-magazines-no-big-year-here/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Time Warner's magazines, no big year here</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/09/06/time-warners-magazines-no-big-year-here/">Time Warner's magazines, no big year here</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 06 Sep 2006 15:02:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/09/06/time-warners-magazines-no-big-year-here/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/664688/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/09/06/time-warners-magazines-no-big-year-here/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>in style</category><category>InStyle</category><category>people</category><category>people magazine</category><category>PeopleMagazine</category><category>si</category><category>sports illustrated</category><category>SportsIllustrated</category><category>time in</category><category>time magazine</category><category>time warner</category><category>TimeIn</category><category>TimeMagazine</category><category>TimeWarner</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Douglas McIntyre]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2006 15:02:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
