, 2003 09:15 PM

Hey the very first person on the "meet the team" page lives in Larchmont... a bit east of W. Hollywood, no?

Posted by: fred ted at November 10, 2003 12:26 PM

fred ted -- Since Larchmont Blvd. doesn't have the decency to continue up to Sunset, I just can't figure out where it really is. So I just assume it's a little South West Hollywood. See? This is why I shouldn't L.A.-based city guides....

Posted by: Matt Welch at November 10, 2003 01:17 PM

Yes, since I toil in these fields....
The problem with entertainment guides is that you don't go to them every day (gee, I just love reading movie schedules); you go to them when you're going out. And that means traffic is light -- as it has been at CitySearch. Advertising is hard to sell (well, it's actually harder to collect) and costly to produce -- as it has been at CitySearch.
What interests me about this is that it appears to be aimed more at outsiders coming in than insiders. And that might be an OK model -- the L.A. travel site -- except that it's not great as that and it's going to be hard for these properties to promote it cost-effectively.
So, in the end, I'm not sure I can divine what they're trying to do. And that's why I'm posting this, because I'm curious to smoke that out.

Posted by: Jeff Jarvis at November 11, 2003 01:34 PM

The content is about as deep as my contact lens case, and Roger Simon is spot-on with the ten-year-old Los Angeles Magazine comparison, where I used to get paid to write similar pithy swill. My question (asks the freelancer) is, should we be understanding that Pike et al chose to suck (for however short a stint; the site can't last) on Gannett's sugar tit, or just livid that they chose to propegate what I've come to think of as doodies with bows. Yes, calling Seipp!

Posted by: nancy at November 11, 2003 01:38 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

= true; } else { document.comments_form.bakecookie[1].checked = true; } //--> /body> e { document.comments_form.bakecookie[1].checked = true; } //--> /body>