"Better with Ringier than with Springier".
Advertising and media experts on the collapse of the merger
Advertising and media experts on the failed mergerIndependence, manageable company size and roots in the cultural environment of the products - these are the characteristics that are desired from a Swiss media company today. The WerbeWoche survey "Are you relieved or disappointed about the failed deal between Springer and Ringier?" leaves no doubt about this.Springier or Ringspringer? - The deal did not go through. And that's a good thing. Over the past few months, we have been shown on several occasions where excessive expansionist ambitions can lead. Only Michael Ringier will know the real reasons for breaking off negotiations with Springer anyway, so it is pointless to speculate what would have happened if or if not. Perhaps the whole thing is also a good opportunity for him to reorganize his company, rearrange responsibilities and give new impetus to his traditional market with renewed vigor.
I'm not talking about protectionism. But it is more important for a publisher than for any other entrepreneur to be embedded in the cultural environment of their product. It doesn't matter whether I drive an Italian, a Japanese or a French car. But whether I read "German" or "Swiss" must remain a choice. Of course, there are also many titles in the press landscape that are not dependent on such roots. I'm talking about titles that thrive on proximity and inner understanding. The culture and identity of such magazines and newspapers must be rooted in their readership, because it is their values that are at stake.
When part of the fourth estate is to be sold abroad, it gives pause for thought. I have been thinking about the balancing act between business optimization and entrepreneurial and socio-political ethics. I have been thinking about the importance of diversity and the trend towards simplicity. My gut tells me that Switzerland is better off with Ringier than with Springier.
A merger of Springer and Ringier to form Europe's largest press company would certainly have opened up interesting prospects for all parties involved. From an entrepreneurial point of view, however, only a genuine merger would have made sense. Cross-shareholdings with mutual minority positions usually do not lead to the hoped-for results.
In the event of a merger, Axel Springer Verlag, as the clearly larger partner, naturally had to lay claim to leadership. It is understandable that the Ringier family of publishers would have thought very carefully about the associated, at least partial, relinquishment of their own independence, and would ultimately have rejected it. Both publishing houses have the potential to move successfully into the future, even if they go their separate ways.
One more comment, however, on the whining of some Swiss politicians in the run-up to the merger talks: it is not fitting for Switzerland, with its close international ties, to point with pride to the foreign commitments of its own publishing houses such as Ringier or Edipresse, while at the same time talking about the threat of "cultural shocks" if investments were to flow in the opposite direction. Axel Springer Verlag has held a majority stake in the HandelsZeitung publishing group since 1999. Our publishing and editorial autonomy has not been affected in any way since then, and no changes have been made to the management of the publishing and editorial teams.
I would have liked Ringier to have acquired a substantial stake in Springer. It would have been tragic if Springer had absorbed Ringier in a merger. In general, I don't really care who produces my cigarettes or shoes. But getting my political, economic, social and local information from a foreign company would leave me with a questionable feeling. In this respect, Ringier's decision in favor of independence, rootedness and credibility is definitely to be welcomed.
In these times, the focus of every company is no longer necessarily on being large, but on being profitable. Consequently, the core issue of a merger is probably to localize synergies primarily on the cost side and less on the revenue side. In principle, I welcome strong media that concentrate on their core competence and do not succumb to the ambition of wanting to write media history. In this sense, I am more relieved than disappointed.
Survey: Daniel Schifferle
I'm not talking about protectionism. But it is more important for a publisher than for any other entrepreneur to be embedded in the cultural environment of their product. It doesn't matter whether I drive an Italian, a Japanese or a French car. But whether I read "German" or "Swiss" must remain a choice. Of course, there are also many titles in the press landscape that are not dependent on such roots. I'm talking about titles that thrive on proximity and inner understanding. The culture and identity of such magazines and newspapers must be rooted in their readership, because it is their values that are at stake.
When part of the fourth estate is to be sold abroad, it gives pause for thought. I have been thinking about the balancing act between business optimization and entrepreneurial and socio-political ethics. I have been thinking about the importance of diversity and the trend towards simplicity. My gut tells me that Switzerland is better off with Ringier than with Springier.
A merger of Springer and Ringier to form Europe's largest press company would certainly have opened up interesting prospects for all parties involved. From an entrepreneurial point of view, however, only a genuine merger would have made sense. Cross-shareholdings with mutual minority positions usually do not lead to the hoped-for results.
In the event of a merger, Axel Springer Verlag, as the clearly larger partner, naturally had to lay claim to leadership. It is understandable that the Ringier family of publishers would have thought very carefully about the associated, at least partial, relinquishment of their own independence, and would ultimately have rejected it. Both publishing houses have the potential to move successfully into the future, even if they go their separate ways.
One more comment, however, on the whining of some Swiss politicians in the run-up to the merger talks: it is not fitting for Switzerland, with its close international ties, to point with pride to the foreign commitments of its own publishing houses such as Ringier or Edipresse, while at the same time talking about the threat of "cultural shocks" if investments were to flow in the opposite direction. Axel Springer Verlag has held a majority stake in the HandelsZeitung publishing group since 1999. Our publishing and editorial autonomy has not been affected in any way since then, and no changes have been made to the management of the publishing and editorial teams.
I would have liked Ringier to have acquired a substantial stake in Springer. It would have been tragic if Springer had absorbed Ringier in a merger. In general, I don't really care who produces my cigarettes or shoes. But getting my political, economic, social and local information from a foreign company would leave me with a questionable feeling. In this respect, Ringier's decision in favor of independence, rootedness and credibility is definitely to be welcomed.
In these times, the focus of every company is no longer necessarily on being large, but on being profitable. Consequently, the core issue of a merger is probably to localize synergies primarily on the cost side and less on the revenue side. In principle, I welcome strong media that concentrate on their core competence and do not succumb to the ambition of wanting to write media history. In this sense, I am more relieved than disappointed.
Survey: Daniel Schifferle
