How is it that MH has fostered so much subversion and anger contrasted with the fake image that Cengage is a progressive, contemporary dynamic software enterprise with the world's greatest CEO? Yet, the complete opposite is projected here in this anonymous forum. How much intimidation and indoctrination is really occurring within the cult of Cengage?
18 replies (most recent on top)
Don't be foolish. Unlimited A) does not address the affordability issue and, B) did anything but show "great initial results."
First off, all Unlimited does is offers students a limited eBook access for $120 per semester. Ebooks are generally priced at $35-55.00!!! Where on earth is $120 considered a "bargain"? Actually, there is one scenario where Unlimited actually IS a bargain: in situations where the Prof. is using a $300-400 Cengage textbook. THEN (and only then) can Unlimited legitimately be called a success.
"But Unlimited can cover all of a students classes! It is a one-time fee!" Sure. How many college students are taking two or more classes where Cengage is in use? A tiny fraction, that's how many. And even for those students, Unlimited = $60 eBook access, still higher than the industry average for eBooks. Remember, Cengage only holds 18% market share.
On the revenue drop, that was far from unexpected. The entire industry knew that exact implosion was coming – anyone who can do MATH saw the implosion coming – because it is the only possible result one can expect of a scheme like Unlimited. The only thing CU accomplished was to turn base $250-350 Cengage adoptions into base $120 adoptions. That result - steady unit sales + revenue plummet - was the only possible result the day CU was announced!
How is it that no one at CU has ever been able to put that math together - including you, it seems?
The Cengage future is very clear cut at this point: merge with McGraw Hill or shrink into oblivion.
Hansen gave us a rather shocking glimpse into his thinking during the last investor call, in which he imagined a near-future where every campus in the U.S. will have one sales rep - and the one thing that sales rep will be tasked with selling is Unlimited. Here we have an industry humming along with traditional print adoptions, OER and Inclusive Access, and then we have a disconnected and obviously ill-informed CEO so out of touch he STILL feels that CU has been an "unqualified success" - even as revenues continue to plummet and giant portions of the company are jettisoned to maintain the balance sheet and sate investors.
Unbelievable.
ajgk It’s obvious you’ve spent a lot of time in one of the Boston indoctrination pods....congratulations, your reeducation is complete, have a sip of kool aid and enjoy your unemployment.
I've worked for Cengage in the Boston HQ for 5 1/2 years and interacted with Michael Hansen often. Nothing but sincerely wonderful things to say about him. Senior Management did a great job of communicating with All employees. The Cengage Unlimited plan showed great initial results but unexpected drop in revenue this year caused reduction of force. I unfortunately was laid off but truthfully believe in the company and the direction it's following. It is, in fact, the only way to address affordability issue
A lot of bad reviews disappear. I think Cengage complains that they are somehow not representative or trolling and they are removed by Glassdoor. There are also a lot of suspicious 5-star “Cengage is most greatest company of all times!” reviews that probably come from Ukrainian troll farms.
Regarding the post that says Glassdoor allows companies to purge bad reviews: not according to their posted policies. But I agree that Hansen seems a master at manipulating Glassdoor in all allowable ways.
It's beyond clear that the majority of professors and students prefer print. It's how professors are used to teaching and students prefer to learn. There is a mountain of data over the years that supports this, and is not likely to change. What I don't understand is why none of the Declining 3 publishers have pivoted to offering lower cost textbooks alongside their digital offerings. It would not be difficult to do, and would not add much incremental production costs. Why do they refuse to acknowledge what customers have been screaming at them for years?
Textbook publishing is not a contracting market. Enrollments are down slightly right now but that is due to the economy. They will bounce back up again with the next recession, they always do.
Cengage, McGraw and Pearson are contracting. That much is true.
But for everyone else out there- the OER folks and the independently-owned publishing houses and the start-ups out there - business is booming and it is like publishing in 1989 all over again!
The Big Three price themselves outside of acceptable bounds and then turned around and offered "solutions" like Unlimited and forced Revel ("sorry folks, we don't sell print anymore!") that are ill-aligned with faculty desires. Their self-inflicted loss is everyone else's gain. There are tons and tons of publishing reps out here in the U.S. still making $30, 40, 50,000 bonus checks every year. They just don't work for one of the Big Three.
Pearson, McGraw and Cengage are not "the industry" much as they hate to admit that. Those people - meaning the people posting here - like to believe that their losses have simply vaporized. Ceased to exist. That is an incorrect notion. Their losses simply became gains for the rest of us.
@12eRrWNp-7ahn This is correct. Textbook publishing has gone from a mature to a contracting market, and leadership knows that growth is not possible. They can't say this out loud, but all of their actions the past couple years point to a strategy of retrenchment. Reducing the workforce and closing physical locations lowers your expenses and either steadies or boosts profitability. Merging with McGraw is an acknowledgement that there isn't room for 3 large publishers anymore. It's all about managing the decline while still squeezing out a profit.
No one cares enough about these companies to halt a merger. It's going to to go through. Best to accept this and prepare accordingly. Bankruptcy is highly unlikely. The reason Cengage went under the first time is that private equity investors foolishly overvalued the company and pressured management to produce growth that was impossible for even a well managed company in good circumstances. Right now they are managing the debt load by cutting where they need to.
Nah. The merger will go through. Also you look closely at the latest financials, Cengage is not in bad shape. It is kicking off a 40% or so Ebitda, which is very good.
Cengage will be fine taking revenue backwards. As long as profit is there, thats all that matters. Many of us came up in the days when it was all about growth and market share.
Cengage (at least as we know it) will NEVER grow again. Neither will Pearson, or MGH. The market is contracting. There is no way to raise prices. (Thank you genius executives over the last 40 years who saw raising prices 6% like a rite of spring.)
At this point, it is all about protecting profits. And there are pretty much two ways to do that.
- Cut cost
- Reduce workforce
No one wins here except MH and a select few. You are better of spending your time finding a new career versus hoping for his demise because its not going to happen. Bad people dont always lose and this is an example.
The longer the DOJ approval of the merger takes, the less likely it will happen. If it doesn’t, Cengage will file bankruptcy again, and none of us will get severance. We’re better off getting laid off now, while we still have the money to pay severance.
@Enough Hate . . . You DO realize that the Glassdoor awards are fake, right? Cengage HR composes enough five-star reviews (that all say exactly the same thing) to outweigh the real reviews and Cengage carries an annual corporate subscription which allows them to purge reviews that are not to their liking.
It is all fake - all of it. Two years ago, Cengage was struggling to make a three-star rating on Glassdoor. Within THREE MONTHS they miraculously jumped a star and a half and a year after that they were winning "awards" thanks to fake employee posts and votes.
They teach critical thinking in those textbooks you produce and sell. Perhaps it is time you read one or two of them.
Yes, it will be very difficult for McCengage to purchase another fake "Best CEO EVER!" award to feed Michael's ego.
Once he's CEO of McGraw it may be voted a top workplace to work, just like "miserable" Cengage is. LOL
@12eRrWNp-5otw –They're confident once the two organizations merge that all the Cengage redundancies will have already been noted and removed, he'll then get to work with his little minions in slashing McGraw like he did Cengage making it a miserable place to be employed but still squeezing enough revenue out of of it to keep the investors sated.
CEO of the year, voted top workplace and he has been named CEO of the new McGraw by confident investors. Yeah, he's really doing a terrible job.
Whenever anyone at the cengage cult is exposed to the truth or facts they call it hate...
Any mo–n can get into Forbes.
Basically, the PR image is bought and paid for nonsense. Cengage is a failing sorority house filled with the fatty rejects from the other sororities who didn't want them. That's your answer.