South China Morning Post cuts management pay, puts staff on unpaid leave

first_imgTopics : Hong Kong’s flagship English-language newspaper, the South China Morning Post, owned by Alibaba Group Holding Ltd, will cut senior management pay and ask staff to take unpaid leave for three weeks, a staff letter obtained by Reuters showed.Chief executive Gary Liu said in the letter the cost cuts were needed because of a 20% fall in revenues in the 2019/20 financial year and a 50% drop in the latest quarter despite more readers amid last year’s protests and the coronavirus outbreak.Liu said “limited” layoffs would take place, salaries would be frozen and he was cutting “almost everything that can be spared” on operations from non-essential travel to the annual company party. “SCMP’s journalists have withstood tear gas, petrol bombs, dangerous confrontations, and exposure to deadly disease, not to mention the countless hours spent pursuing stories that have powered our growth,” Liu said.”But even with resolve and immense audience growth, SCMP’s revenues declined,” he said, adding that the newspaper was heavily reliant on the recession-hit Hong Kong economy.The newspaper reported that the pay of senior management would be cut and staff would be put on unpaid leave. It did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Liu’s letter.From Rupert Murdoch’s News UK to McClatchy’s chain of newspapers across the United States, news publishers are attracting record numbers of readers as people in lockdown seek information, yet advertising revenue has plummeted.The Hong Kong newspaper, which is more than 116 year old, was taken over by Alibaba from Malaysian tycoon Robert Kuok in a $266 million deal in 2015.last_img read more

World Athletics deficits revealed as sport’s long trudge to transparency accelerates

first_img Promoted Content7 Of The Wealthiest Universities In The WorldDisney’s Live-Action Simba Was Based On The Cutest Lion Cub Ever12 Countries With Higest Technology In The WorldCouples Who Celebrated Their Union In A Unique, Unforgettable WayYou’ve Only Seen Such Colorful Hairdos In A Handful Of AnimeWho Is The Most Powerful Woman On Earth?10 Stargazing Locations To ‘Connect With Nature’5 Of The World’s Most Unique Theme ParksMysterious Astrological Discoveries That Left Scientists Baffled8 Best 1980s High Tech GadgetsWhich Country Is The Most Romantic In The World?8 Superfoods For Growing Hair Back And Stimulating Its Growth The mysterious and potentially all-embracing “other” spending category is said to have accounted for $10.9 million (£8.6 million/€9.6 million) – again, a hefty sum. It seems possible that some of the federation’s legal costs might be bracketed in this item, but this can be no more than speculation at this point. The report also suggests that the body’s revenues may have climbed to some $55 million (£43.4 million/€48.7 million) last year, which was, to repeat, a World Championship year. To speculate further, these leaked figures suggest that World Athletics’ revenues over a full Olympic cycle may amount to something in the order of $200 million (£157 million/€177 million). It received $40 million (£31.5 million/€35.4 million) as its share of the broadcasting revenues generated by the Rio 2016 Olympics, down from $45.2 million (£35.6 million/€40 million) for London 2012. This in turn suggests that the subsidy World Athletics receives from the International Olympic Committee in exchange for the sport’s contribution to the Olympic programme amounts to somewhere in the vicinity of 20 per cent of quadrennial revenues. read also:World Athletics set 2030 target to become carbon neutral The leaked figures put the athletics body’s end-2018 reserves at $45.2 million – high enough to indicate that it probably retains a reasonable cushion to help see it through the present coronavirus crisis, notwithstanding the Tokyo 2020 postponement. World Athletics provided a lengthy statement to The Sports Examiner, but told insidethegames it could not comment on the figures themselves. FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmail分享 In 2018, the organisation’s revenues are put at $47.5 million (£37.4 million/€42 million), compared with expenses of $66.8 million (£52.7 million/€59.1 million), to leave an apparent deficit of $19.3 million (£15.2 million/€17 million). In 2017, revenues were said to have amounted to $40.5 million (£31.9 million/€35.8 million) and expenses of $60.1 million (£47.4 million/€53.2 million), an apparent deficit of $19.6 million (£15.4 million/€17.3 million). The figures were obtained by The Sports Examiner, which reports having received a phone call from an unidentified individual claiming to have knowledge of financial information provided to delegates at the Congress in Doha that preceded last year’s World Athletics Championships. Following the recent publication of accounts by the International Modern Pentathlon Union, World Athletics is believed to have been the only remaining Summer Olympic International Sports Federation (IF) for which essentially no financial information was in the public domain. An official of what was then the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) told insidethegames in 2015 that: “The IAAF since its move from London in 1984 is established under the laws of Monaco – see Article One of our constitution – and is not obliged and has never published its audited accounts beyond its national members.” The new report gives a breakdown of 2018 expenses. Administration was said to have accounted for $17.3 million (£13.6 million/€15.3 million) of the $66.8 million (£52.7 million/€59.1 million) total, with events absorbing $16.7 million (£13.1 million/€14.7 million), federation support $10.4 million (£8.2 million/€9 million), development just over $3 million (£2.3 million/€2.6 million) and communications $1.3 million (£1 million/€1.1 million). Costs associated with the Athletics Integrity Unit were put at a substantial $7.1 million (£5.6 million/€6.2 million). Loading… Figures detailing the financial performance of World Athletics have at long last emerged, showing that the body made hefty deficits in both 2017 and 2018.last_img read more