123 of 124 people found the following review helpful
Although I prefer Forbes, this is still a 'must read',
This review is from: Fortune (1-year)
As an investment professional, I am a voracious reader of business periodicals. I subscribe to and read four major business magazines and three financial newspapers on a regular basis. In rank order among the big three, my favorite is Forbes, then BusinessWeek, followed by Fortune. But don't let that dissuade you from subscribing. Fortune is still a very valuable publication and I try not to miss an issue. What does Fortune bring to the table that still makes it so vital? Several things:
- The most in-depth feature stories among the three magazines. They are thoroughly researched and Fortune works hard to interpret the facts and draw conclusions, as opposed to just aggregating and reporting information.
- More than either of the other two, Fortune will profile prominent executives, giving you a unique window into their philosophy and how they rose to prominence.
- The investing section near the back is always decent and there's a reasonably good focus on technology, both devices and companies.
Why is it my least favorite?
- Fortune clearly has a liberal bias, with frequent articles on employee rights, racial or gender-oriented issues, philanthropic causes such as AIDS, and the general plight of the poor, the elderly, or working mothers. Nothing wrong with that, and some of these articles are eye-opening. But I mainly read business magazines with an eye toward investing, so these types of articles fall outside that scope.
- Yeah, there are too many ads and special advertising sections. It is a necessary part of the world of magazines (or else you'd be paying triple the price for a subscription). But it's still annoying.
Although they seem to be substitutes for each other, Fortune, Forbes, and BusinessWeek each provide something different enough that I see the value in subscribing to all three (and I have been doing so for a decade). If you're looking to go beyond the weekly headlines and want business-oriented articles that don't always have an investment angle, then Fortune seems to be the best bet.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-2 of 2 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Mar 18, 2009 5:49:04 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 18, 2009 5:53:34 AM PDT
With the hogs running Wall Street and most of the economy - can't void white collar contracts for bonuses but boy let's get rid of the auto worker contracts NOW. And the Republicans blaming Fannie and Freddie for the meltdown - WRONG - it was more likely the 70% of mortgages that Wall Street bought at the peak (for years Fannie and Freddie had v. strict lending guidelines) without a care in the world about the value of the underlying assets, I'm so glad you mentioned the liberal bias. And heaven forbid that awoman should be justly compensated - I've never worked in an office where the "secretary" didn't know more about the business that her male boss and she could usually write his letters for him with correct grammar and proper spelling. This opposing point of view is welcome and I shall subscribe. Thanks so much.
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 15, 2010 1:31:21 PM PDT
Rodney writes, "I've never worked in an office where the "secretary" didn't know more about the business that her male boss."
I doubt that's true but if it is, you should ask yourself why you have only worked for badly managed businesses.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›