The Guardian
topics

Exclusive
Is FiLife Running On Borrowed Time?

  • Comments Comments (View)
  • Text Size: A A

Less than two months after talking up the turnaround at Dow Jones-IAC (NSDQ: IACI) personal finance JV FiLife, paidContent has learned the site’s continued existence is no certainty. It survived the multiple trimmings as Barry Diller cut back on IAC’s portfolio of emerging businesses, but the company is now exploring options that range from leaving it open to a sale or a full shut down. When Ezra Kucharz, president and GM for just over a year, left for CBS (NYSE: CBS) in January, both IAC and DJ credited him publicly with turning around the site and building it to the #4 personal finance site with 4.4 million unique visitors in December. Now both companies are declining comment about the site’s future.

One possibility for IAC could be selling its stake to Dow Jones (NYSE: NWS), which recently bought out SmartMoney partner Hearst. But that’s a well-established brand with an 800,000-circ magazine. Whether DJ would even want to own FiLife outright is unclear—as is whether a deal actually would involve much money. What FiLife does have—more traffic than SmartMoney.com, where personal finance is just one category, and a digital mentality. Is there a way to combine the two?

FiLife has had a bit of a tortured life from its beginning: taking more than a year to move from an idea to a blog, then taking so long to emerge from that status the plans appeared to be dormant. Dave Kansas, brought in from the Wall Street Journal to launch the site, was replaced by online vet Kucharz in late 2008. Adam Wiener, executive editor and VP-content was promoted to GM when Kucharz left, but not given the title of president.

It’s made strides on the editorial side. Just last month FastCompany picked it as the most innovative company in the finance area for using “a Q&A format with a host of social and game-like features to get Americans talking about money. More as warranted—and please feel free to e-mail me if you have details.

Related Stories
Mar 19, 2010 11:15 PM ET

Hourglass

Share

Posted In: Features, Exclusive, Media & Publishing, Online News, Companies, IAC, News Corp., Dow Jones

  • whoindatgarden

    What amazes me is that such companies got funded and not just funded but a whopping $70 million.
    I try and do the math and I seem to come up short every time with regards to how the money was spent.
    Is this a joke or what I wonder where if any there is a Fiduciary responsibility in the part of companies like Disney.
    Moviebeam can't deliver as it has a bad service, whether or not you give the equipment for free or not, the service is just bad and the Business Problem it supposedly tries to solve is not solved.
    Video on Demand has not brought in stellar revenues for Cable companies, Moviebeam is VOD just through the airwaves and the VC firms that invested seem to have either nothing more than a network of connections to have made this bet or lack any insight into the business concept as laid out by Moviebeam.

    Wonder how the technology platform gives this new venture an edge on Netflix/Blockbuster and a plethora of Online Download sites.
    Guess with so few ideas to truly solve the business problem at hand there is tons of money to invest and those investing have taken care of themselves and the next 5 generations to be able to gamble.

The Economics of Content | paidContent Newsletter

Know something we don’t?

Send Us a News Tip

All tips are anonymous and untraced.

Sponsors

Contributors