Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How do you solve the problem of Martha
The Telegraph, UK,Money ^ | August 23, 2003 | Simon English

Posted on 08/22/2003 9:42:54 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife

Her trial is next year, but Martha Stewart's empire has already begun a sentence of poor results, writes Simon English

Anyone who thinks there is no such thing as bad publicity should consult Martha Stewart. It is 20 months since America's domestic goddess - think Delia Smith on rocket fuel - made a calamitous share trade that has ruined her life.

Martha Stewart: her personal legal difficulties have had a catastrophic effect on the business she founded Since then she has faced a barrage of negative press that has driven her underground and which threatens the future of the business she founded.

Last week Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, the media and publishing empire in which she holds a majority stake, recorded its third terrible quarter in the last four.

Profits plunged by 86pc as advertising revenue dried up and the merchandising arm crumbled. The company barely scraped into the black with net income of $931,000 and warned that heavy losses are on the way as the business remains "under pressure" from the founder's legal difficulties.

Martha's morning TV show is being shifted to the post midnight graveyard slot, an indication that viewing figures are down and that advertisers don't want to be associated with the brand.

There is some support from Wall Street but it is not exactly enthusiastic. The best Morgan Stanley's analyst Douglas Arthur could offer is that "things are not bright but they are hanging in there".

The problems began in December 2001 when Martha - like Madonna or Oprah her first name suffices - was told by a stockbroker that her good friend Sam Waksal was selling shares in ImClone Systems, the drug company where he was chief executive.

She followed suit, one day before the US government rejected the company's cancer drug Erbitux, a decision that left ImClone tottering.

Later, investigators found she had altered phone and computer records and placed curious calls to Mr Waksal who is now in jail for securities fraud.

Her claim that she had a standing order to sell ImClone shares once they dipped below $60 has not been corroborated by any official paperwork. In any case, her 3,928 shares fetched $58 each.

Despite the extraordinary furore, the case against Martha looks rather thin. She isn't charged with insider trading, just with lying about the circumstances behind what was, presumably, a perfectly legal stock sale.

In other words, she faces criminal charges for impeding an investigation that couldn't come up with enough evidence to find her guilty of the initial allegation.

One of the charges is that by declaring herself innocent she deceived investors in her own company, an accusation that looks ridiculous and suggests the US Justice Department is straining. The trial is set for January and a prison sentence for obstructing justice is a real possibility.

The US is gripped by the spectacle, asking if the most famous woman in America is really a liar and a crook.

Moreover, can Martha bounce back? Neil Morgan, a business professor at the University of North Carolina, says: "My suspicion is that she can. The question about the company is much more in the air, it has a real uphill battle.

The brand is tied to a person. Even if the case goes away, there is no question she has been parsimonious with the truth, which wipes out the brand value.

"They established this association with Martha, now they are trapped by it. It would be easier to start with a blank piece of paper."

The company's initial attempt to do this is the launch of Everyday Food next month, the first magazine not to feature Stewart's name. It is as likely to succeed in the tough publishing world as any other but most new magazines fail.

Mike Paul, president of New York PR firm MGP & Associates, believes Martha could have made it through the crisis if she had been properly advised.

"Martha the company and the public figure will never be the same again. In the world of reputation management it is sometimes hard to quantify how big a hit you have taken.

She should have come right out and said, 'I made a huge mistake' and described herself as a former stockbroker before everyone else did. Today she is like the wicked witch from The Wizard of Oz crying 'I'm melting, I'm melting'."

By going quiet, Mr Paul believes she created a void to be filled with negative information. "We are a forgiving public when we hear the truth, we are not when we have a lot of doubt," he says.

As the trial date nears, other embarrassing incidents may leak out, making the gap between the image of Martha - an impossible vision of flawlessness - and the real human being ever larger.

Says Paul: "Even though she was known as difficult, she was positioned as a perfect person. People don't want to be shamed. They are saying, I never knew this was the real Martha."

The days when Martha would be invited to lunch with the President of the United States or to sit on the board of the New York Stock Exchange are certainly over.

The list of people pleased by her fall from grace is long. Two unauthorised biographies paint a less then pretty picture of a woman who made enemies as often as she baked cakes.

According to Christopher Byron, the author of Martha Inc, by the mid 1990s Martha's personal behaviour "was the elephant in the room that nobody wanted to discuss". The elephant got bigger.

Just Desserts by Jerry Oppenheimer describes a scheming woman with a ferocious temper who lied about herself and others as a matter of routine.

A National Enquirer headline from 1997 stated: "Martha Stewart is Mentally Ill". She sued, but later dropped the case.

Examples of her frenetic rows and allegedly foul language are likely to be dredged up before long.

None of which proves she is guilty of anything criminal, but all of which seems likely to end the notion of Martha as a chief executive, TV personality, gourmet cook, model, and living embodiment of perfect American womanhood.

In turn, that looks like doom for the business bearing her name. The company's shares have halved, cutting her net worth by at least $400m. The stress has been huge and Martha is beginning to look her age (she is 62). Even if she escapes punishment, retirement may beckon.

Some have accused the SEC and the Justice Department of sexism, asking why the same energy has not been put into pursuing executives at Enron and WorldCom, where the crime was undoubtedly greater.

Martha's misfortune is that while mysterious people at Enron were doing incomprehensible things with energy derivatives, hers was the white-collar crime to which the public could relate. The Kitchen Queen had been accused of insider trading - hold the front page.

People who have never seen her TV show, bought one of her magazines or tried one of her recipes are interested in her fate. Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia was never comparable to Enron in size, but it was more famous and for a long time it was phenomenally successful.

The chief executive, now chief creative officer, sold her gardening, home-making and cooking skills to a loving public who lapped up the whole idea of Martha.

The TV shows advertised the magazines, which advertised the mail order business which sold the cooking and gardening books. It was a synergistic business long before media executives started bandying that word around.

Her success was such that it is some time since she has done any of the menial work that goes into cooking or entertaining - Martha's job was to promote Martha.

If things go badly next January, cooking and cleaning could be back on the agenda in far less pleasant surroundings than Martha is used to.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: imclone; livingomnimedia; marthastewart; wallstreet
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last

1 posted on 08/22/2003 9:42:55 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
I'd marry her in a second!
2 posted on 08/22/2003 9:51:21 PM PDT by RonHolzwarth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonHolzwarth
Are you an older gentleman, wealthy, and able to enjoy the "good things" in life? (Good things are greatly admired by Martha!) She is high maintenance, even with her dwindling millions!
3 posted on 08/22/2003 9:54:27 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife ("Life isn't fair. It's fairer than death, is all.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
She was on the Board of Directors of the New York Stock Exchange ---

She had a responsibility to set the example and guard the chicken house --not to act like the fox.

4 posted on 08/22/2003 9:57:42 PM PDT by gatex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gatex
The article says that the media had to remind the public that she was a stockbroker years ago.

I remembered that the instant when I heard of the questionable stock sale. She should have known that coming forward at once would greatly help her case.

Her stockholders should be asking for her head on a pike!
5 posted on 08/22/2003 9:59:09 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife ("Life isn't fair. It's fairer than death, is all.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
Two tracks here: The legal case and its outcome. The "shunning" and "shaming" that the unfettered Internet facilitates.
6 posted on 08/22/2003 10:05:18 PM PDT by 185JHP ( "All not actually on watch, lay to your racks...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 185JHP
Martha cooked her own goose, and has no one else to blame. If she had just been honest and open, and did a media blitz, no one would care, because all would have been explained.

Americans are a very forgiving bunch, remember. And we always appreciate an honest apology.

But, Martha suffers from an inflated ego, which will be her downfall.
7 posted on 08/22/2003 10:08:38 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife ("Life isn't fair. It's fairer than death, is all.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
"The article says that the media had to remind the public that she was a stockbroker years ago.

I remembered that the instant when I heard of the questionable stock sale. She should have known that coming forward at once would greatly help her case.

Her stockholders should be asking for her head on a pike!"

Ha! You remembered that, and I never even heard it until now. I was actually going to dismiss it until you validated it with this follow-up post. You are right, she of all people should have known better. Not "a good thing".


8 posted on 08/22/2003 10:35:59 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Martha ping!
9 posted on 08/22/2003 10:40:38 PM PDT by Fraulein (TCB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jocon307
She was also a model... like that matters in the grand scheme of things! LOL

The woman wants to be seen as a victim, and that the Feds are being sexist by going after her. In some ways, the fact that she is a woman and a domestic diva, are all that she has going for her.

She is also a ruthless business woman who has ruled her corporation with an iron fist. Throw the book at her!

10 posted on 08/22/2003 10:40:53 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife ("Life isn't fair. It's fairer than death, is all.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
Martha's problem is that she's an egoistic idiot who is too dumb to hold onto the wealth and give up the image. Were she humbler and smarter she'd have "sold" the company months ago, taken her name off it, kept her stake, and changed it over into "I Love Fuzzy Bunnies And Oprah, Inc." It's a bit late now, but she could be have gone to ground, rehabilitated her image, and returned as the icon of...well, of whatever it is of which she's an icon. Style, yes, propriety, hardly.
11 posted on 08/22/2003 10:48:11 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonHolzwarth
You'd be SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO sorry ! She treated her exhusband like a whippingboy cum slave,she's a shrew,an habitual liar, cold as ice, and one of the world's BIGGEST users. That's the kind of woman you want to marry ?
12 posted on 08/22/2003 10:49:23 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jocon307
Not only had she once been an RR, she was an RR for a " BOILER ROOM " , who left the firm, one step ahead of the SEC and the Feds. Almost ALL members of her firm were fined and/or sent to prison.

Now, throw in the fact that she was, whilst selling stock in an insider trading fraud, a member of the board of the NYSE !

13 posted on 08/22/2003 10:53:15 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Fraulein
Thanks for the ping ! :-)

Rather juicy little artcle. LOL

14 posted on 08/22/2003 10:53:56 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
Actually, wasn't all that much of a " model " and her one or two commercials had to be redubbed, because of her irritating, heavily N.J. accented voice and abject lack of acting ability. Now, remember that this was in the late '50s-early '60s, when T.V. commercials weren't all well done and her's certainly were NOT award winning calibre. LOL
15 posted on 08/22/2003 10:56:40 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Oh, I am aware of that nopardons. I remember you from other Martha threads. To anyone and everyone needing dirt on Martha, you would be the ultimate source on FR! :)
16 posted on 08/22/2003 10:59:09 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife ("Life isn't fair. It's fairer than death, is all.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
:-)
17 posted on 08/22/2003 11:02:04 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill
"..she'd have "sold" the company months ago, taken her name off it..."

The company IS her name!
18 posted on 08/22/2003 11:03:43 PM PDT by At _War_With_Liberals
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
How do you solve the problem of Martha

I don't think the song ever really said what the solution was.

Errr, wait - that was "how do you solve a problem like Maria?". Dunno about Martha - six months of eight-hour days working in a soup kitchen might be a good start. Teach her a little humility.

None of that making lace doilies for the guests BS, though - she gets to be in charge of the corned-beef hash and the lime jello. If she behaves and starts acting like a normal human, she can get promoted to the chipped-beef crew.

19 posted on 08/22/2003 11:05:32 PM PDT by general_re (A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: At _War_With_Liberals
I saw an old business mag interview with Martha recently. And they asked her about tying her name so much with the brand of Martha. In other words, Martha Stewart products ARE Martha Stewart. She gave this condescending smile to the reporter and basically said, "that's because I AM Martha Stewart!". It made the reporter cringe.

Her ego truly is her downfall.
20 posted on 08/22/2003 11:07:07 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife ("Life isn't fair. It's fairer than death, is all.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson