I wonder if launching this media outlet is the real purpose of the campaign. It's at least more plausible than the Trump is throwing the election for Hillary conspiracy theory.

He might very well have set up a "heads I win, tails I win more" gambit. If he wins the election, he's president. If he loses, he has 30 million or so passionate customers for his next business venture.

This is definitely the case...but he doesnt even need the new audience or the new venture. His entire empire is built on a name that is getting billions in free press.

The worst thing to happen to a famous brand is not bad press but rather becoming irrelevant and falling out of discussion.

Even if the Trump political brand crashes and burns, the broader trump brand of success and money just gets stronger...

This election was the ultimate win win for Trump.

This is why he can take all the risks he is taking, he has nothing to lose...which is the ultimate trump card!

Edit: spelling correction

I don't buy this. What was the cost--in brand, but also in actual revenue--to losing his role in The Apprentice, losing the Macy's sales, the Miss Universe thing, etc? I expect the backlash has had real consequences.

No doubt starting a cable network is a good fallback position, but I don't buy the idea that this is all according to plan.

More likely, some in his campaign know he's going to lose and are looking for an out, while others (maybe including the candidate) still think he may win.

I don't think you can make judgement calls from short term things like the examples you gave.

His brand recognition is way up throughout the world and my experience tells me that the negative view will not translate into his business brands once his political brand is not front and center.

His businesses are declining in foot traffic https://medium.com/foursquare-direct/how-the-trump-president...

Short term changes have little to do with long term brand recognition and value.

I've studied branding extensively and I think, if he loses, his presidential run will still be a net win for him and his brand once the political fallout falls out of the news cycle.

edit: changes nothing to little

This is spot on. He's building an audience with the presidential bid. After he loses, he'll cry fowl, start an alt-right online news network, and spend the next 4 years complaining of a stolen election. He's enough of a draw to pull talent from The Blaze (Tomi Lahren), Breitbart, Fox News, etc. $1.25M seems like a small gamble for what could be a pretty big payoff.

This is exactly what is happening.

You have the personalities in Trump and Giuliani etc. You have the news content courtesy of Brietbart. You have lifestyle content courtesy of his real estate assets e.g. golf/travel shows etc. And he already owns a TV production company that made the Apprentice.

And don't forget that Lachlan Murdoch is now firmly in charge of Fox News and has always talked about it being less alt-right and more centre-right. This will leave a massive opening for Trump in the alt-right space. The real question is whether Fox will allow it on their global cable platforms.

You also have Roger Ailes advising Trump, if he helps him to get anywhere near Fox News size of audience, they're both big winners.

Ultra-conservative? Not by a long shot. I was a Ted Cruz backer and Trump to me is as bad as Clinton.

Trump isn't conservative. He's a big government populist. Completely different despite him having an 'R' next to his name.

He is about as close to Cruz as Sanders was to Clinton (in terms of policy philosophy.)

By the way, I understand downvotes because I mentioned Cruz in a positive way, however let's keep in mind that we can disagree with economic philosophy and role of government and still be friends!

I want a flat tax and a repeal of FATCA and Cruz was the only candidate that supported that. If some Democrat comes along with that proposal, they'd get my vote too.

FATCA and it's unintended consequences have caused serious harm to many Americans overseas, so that was my primary issue this election.

The only reason I support the RNC this election is because they have FATCA repeal in the platform while the Democrat side both enacted FATCA as wel as expressed support for continuing it.

Here's an article that delves deeper into FATCA if anyone is interested: http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21605911...

As a foreigner, FATCA seems to be a logical reaction to the US system of taxing citizens instead of residents.

If a candidate had proposed to switch to only taxing US residents, plus apply some international pressure to close down tax havens, then I could see the point of repealing FATCA.

> Ultra-conservative? Not by a long shot. I was a Ted Cruz backer and Trump to me is as bad as Clinton.

As bad as Trump is, at least he is not a theocrat.