Many others have written about their sadness at its passing - I am amazed that it kept going so long. This was due to hard work from its staff and the generosity of its various owners, notably Sir Tony O'Reilly. It was clear from the start that it was underfunded and remained so most of its life. Covering the losses was funding - by the million - but it meant there was never too much expansion.
As managing editor (twice) I saw the figures on a daily basis and they were never good. The failure to buy the Observer in the 90's, which would have led to a merger with the Independent on Sunday, was crucial. That would have transformed the finances (I had a list in my pocket of who would go and who would stay). Some forget that Rupert Murdoch's price war had some of its bullets paid for by The Independent, which put its price up. Those defecting readers never came back. And it is worth noting that without Murdoch winning the battle with the print unions at Wapping there would have been no Independent. The drop in the price of entry was crucial.
But all these tactical errors cannot get away from the fact that, since the double whammy of the recession hitting advertising and the rise of digital hitting circulations, all newspaper businesses have got to turn themselves into media businesses. No one has yet found a way to pay for journalism online which is why most continue with their print versions because they still bring in revenue, albeit at a fast declining rate. Everyone is waiting for something to work.
It seems a long way from the day I went up to the nearest Majestic wine shop from the Independent's City Road office and bought all the champagne they had. The editor announced to the journalists that the circulation had reached its high water mark of 430,000 and overtaken The Times. I have never seen a newsroom get so comprehensively legless so quickly as that night.