If there were champagne corks popping around the office of Conde Nast’s Portfolio on Monday, there might be some wound licking this morning. Yesterday the New York Post declared the magazine “empty.” This morning the New York Observer’s Michael Thomas finds himself disappointed with the magazine. (And, of course, you can read Elizabeth Spiers' devastating take on the magazine here.)
The New York Observer’s take sums up the view of those who are short the magazine:
Nowhere in the 335 pages of this first issue is the merest remnant of what we used to call history and the fascinating—and even occasionally instructive—parallels between past and present. It’s as if our present world sprang whole from the brow of Mammon. Perhaps I’m asking too much intellectually, but what troubles me most about Portfolio is how lightweight it is, despite its physical bulk. This is supposed to be a magazine about business, about making money and losing it, about getting and spending, about honor and thievery. About character and the clues it strews. (There’s a great piece waiting for someone on Steve Schwarzman’s syntax.) And speaking of the Blackstone supremo, how come Jimmy Lee, for a decade the Spirit of Christmas Present to Schwarzman’s Scrooge, isn’t a lead underwriter in the Blackstone I.P.O.? What a nice piece that would make.