Having said that, perhaps there is something to be said for the need to make a precipitous change in direction in order to have a sufficiently radical refocus in what you do. Derek Thompson in The Atlantic compared Newsweek's predicament to that of a 747 flying between two affluent and populous metropolises ('Newsweekly Reader City and Advertiser City') that suddenly enter prolonged recession amidst a mass exodus. And in that context the reality of a huge resource overhead needed to produce a global printed news product must bite you every time you look at the monthly P & L.
But as Thompson goes on to say, in creating a paid, subscriber-only product perhaps they have answered the wrong question. Instead of asking 'how do I publish Newsweek without actually publishing Newsweek, they should have asked 'how do I continue to attract great people to do great work in this media company?'. I've already said my piece about magazines and digital. Whilst there can be little doubt that a weekly news and media title can have been at the sharp end of a change that is affecting just about every print title, I can understand the need to transition revenues and use print editions (even in decline) as 'brand anchors' whilst they "learn to fly a smaller plane or hope somebody is willing to subsidize their 747".
Digital is not going to kill print. But we have entered a period of rapid change without a defined end. As journalist Howard Owens once observed about newspapers, there is no transition, just constant never ending change. And that's the point.