I agree with the answer to your question. Business news within the local section fits just fine.

But I have to say that when we reduced stock listings from two and a half pages to a half-page a year ago, we got about 800 complaints, more than anything else we've done to the paper. (If we canceled the Bridge column, we might rival that number.)

Your point, though, is right about stocks. We tracked only a handful of cancellations, and our circulation folks believe they came back. The savings on newsprint, of course, was significant and helpful.

Our paper has curtailed stock listings a series of times, but each time got only a handful of angry callers. Maybe a couple handfuls at most. But we're still printing quite a bit more than a half page. I imagine the more you cut, the more calls you should expect.

We killed some TV listings, though, and the phones lit up right away. Cutting comics is hit or miss. And I don't think anyone in their right mind would cut the crossword. It would no longer be safe to go home at night.

Losing any part of the newspaper will inevitably annoy/anger some portion of readers. The important thing is to choose for yourself what to cut and then invest the savings instead of waiting until you're forced to cut.

It's reasonable to cut stock listings and move the local business news back to metro at this point in time. This lets you keep the reporters and maybe use the money for something that draws more readers online and in print than you lost.

I wonder if the answer is found somewhere else in the building. Perhaps advertisers like to be in a section targeting the business reading demographic.

Putting business news within two or more pages of the local section allows advertisers to buy adjacencies. And the small number of advertisers who would want to do that is probably more appropriate to two pages than an entire section.

From what I can tell as a reader, the local business section isn't in high demand. One exception: the weekly business section. At most papers, this comes out on weekends or Mondays when there are no stock listings. At our paper, that's filled with appropriate ads.

I'm advocating killing the daily section that features stock listings, not those weekly sections, which often take a more magazine-like approach. In those cases, I can see an argument for a standalone section because a lot more local news runs in there.

I've been at two papers when they decided to eliminate stocks, and the call volume was significant. I agree with Robinson, though, that the bark had no bite. Angry calls don't mean losing lots of subscriptions, especially when there are fewer competitors offering stocks.

I could care less about stock pages, but losing the business section entirely, I think, could cut back on a very loyal group of readers who want to read about the local business environment. It also cuts back room for some of those positive features readers always say they want (Yeah I know that's mostly crap, but if we lose all feature space, the complaints get more valid).

Of course, if papers ever start zoning by interest, as some have experts have suggested , then losing a business section would be one less zone, and a pretty good one I'm guessing.

First, I love being referred to as an expert. So thanks for that. It's done wonders for my self-esteem already.

Second, I have a question: When these other papers eliminated stocks from their business sections, it sounds like they kept a standalone business section anyway? If so, what did it look like? I can't imagine they had enough for more than a four-pager, and even that would be filled with wire copy.

Third, yes, zoning by interest would preclude any paper from having to take this step at all. In fact, zoning by interest is a way to preserve all of the stock listings and send them to only those people who want it. This more efficient/modern use of newsprint reduces costs so significantly that cutting content isn't needed. Just the opposite: more content is needed.