So Long Playboy?

Much has been made of the fact that a Sunday edition of the New York Times costs more than a share in the New York Times Company.

They're not the only ones with that problem. As I write this, Playboy Enterprises is selling at a $1.41 a share. I'm not sure of the cover price of the magazine -- their website shows this month's cover without a pricetag -- but I'm sure that it's on sale for a bit more than that.

To make matters worse, they've been losing money like a Wall Street investment bank.

Alas, a business model based on nude pictures of B-stars, fading A-stars, starlets, and the fleetingly notorious -- was bound to fail with the proliferation of the Internet. (Why pay for naked photos when you can get the for free on your PC?) For example, I like to think that I'm a hip and happening guy, but I don't have a clue as to who this month's cover model is. Typical.

I remember back in high school when a friend showed me and a few other friends his stash of Playboys. After getting an eyeful from the photos, I would take a look at the articles. (Really.) I'd ask myself -- who would want to read this stuff? The ads were more interesting.

What's really amazes me is that Hugh Hefner -- what is he pushing 80? -- is still the personification of the magazine. He certainly knew how to monetize female flesh but his time, like leisure suits and bell bottoms, is long gone. Who wants to emulate him? (A guy in his 90s?)

I'm a believer that this recession/depression is a paradigm shifter. A lot will be "destroyed" -- newspapers, banks, automobile manufacturers -- and a lot will be "created." (Who knows what but something will arise from the ashes.)

I can't help but think that Playboy will be part of the former. It won't survive.

There's probably more to be made by hoarding old copies of the magazine than in holding their shares.