back to article Hugh Hefner makes private offer to Playboy shareholders

Hugh Hefner, 84-year old founder of Playboy wants to buy back the company and take it private, with a bit of help from the bank. Actually Hefner said he's got backing from Rizvi Traverse to buy back the group for £120m. The investment group is "highly confident ample financial resources will be available to complete the …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Stevie Silver badge
    Thumb Up


    Ah, the legacy!

    And the breastacy and shapely bottomacy too!

    I approve.

  2. Robert Moore
    Paris Hilton

    Paper based Pr0n?

    They have 1.5 Million subscribers.

    What I wouldn't give for that list. 1.5 million people who are not tech savvy enough to realize you can get all the free pr0n you want on the internet. Now there is a valuable list.

    Paris for obvious reasons.

    1. D@v3

      free interent p0rn is all well and good

      but maybe they buy it for the articles?

  3. Combat Wombat

    Poor Hugh

    I would have thought the grumble mags would be pressing someone to open up their tablets to grumble mag apps.

    I am sure there is a huge market out there, especially for the easy to clean off Ipad.

    Its sad that Jobs is so anti porn, especially after that survey that showed that iphone buyers were also the biggest buyers of sex toys.

    I mean there is a massive untapped market of chronic wankers out there !

    Yeah...mines the one with the playboy symbol on the pocket

  4. John Savard Silver badge


    They published the essays by Arthur C. Clarke that later formed his "Profiles of the Future". They published stories by Ray Bradbury and Ian Fleming. They interviewed Norman Mailer and Barbra Streisand.

    I cannot, however, envisage Playboy returning to its past glories no matter who is in control of it.

    Not so much because of the amount of porn on the Internet, but because its niche - something that is at once tasteful and yet does accept titillation as one of its purposes - has been rendered hard to comprehend, at least in the United States, as a consequence of the rise of feminism. In other cultures, Playboy's desperate fight to be taken seriously because male sexuality has never been delegitimized in those cultures as much as in the United States.

    The "kind of man that reads Playboy", according to the advertisements for advertisers, might indeed have read it in 1963 - but since even reading Playboy is a furtive pleasure in today's climate, the less tasteful stuff drives it out much as crack cocaine drove out the powder that some claimed wasn't even addicting when they're both illegal.

    Given that certain retail outlets in the U.S. have levelled the playing field by banning Maxim from their shelves along with Playboy, going after Esquire's turf won't work either.

    Byte had its day, and Wired is filling its niche quite well; that's probably how far Playboy would have to be reinvented to be relevant, to be about something entirely different from beautiful women - as different as computers.

    Maybe Harry Pearson could use a source of new investment capital? Music Lover: Entertainment for Golden Ears? After all, expensive hi-fi equipment was part of the Playboy lifestyle... and Playboy has an annual Sex and Music issue, so they acknowledge music satisfies a significant drive as well.

    1. fred #257

      Once upon a time...

      ... it was indeed possible to say "I read it for the articles" and stand a small chance of being believed. Well, maybe one could optimistically imagine there was a chance of being believed.

      I guess JS's analysis is right. That's a little sad, in a way.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019