The business model he established for the New York Times Company continues to collapse under the feet of Pinch Sulzberger. The very latest revenue figures of the company released just minutes ago [Friday] show that advertising revenue and gross revenue are declining at a rate that cannot be matched by growth in revenues from the expensive internet properties purchased by Sulzberger. Here is the data:NY Times May ad rev at NY Times Media Group off 9.1%
NY Times May Internet ad revenue up 21.4%
NY Times May ad revenue off 8.5%, total revenue off 5.8%Internet revenue growth was able to absorb roughly a third of the decline in the rest of the media properties, including the flagship NYT and other smaller papers (which are generally healthier monopolies than big city dailies, especially those with competition).
A six percent decline in revenue over a year is a serious signal for any company. For the New York Times Company, it demonstrates that the ship is still taking on water, and is listing, with the wet newsprint business outweighing the dry but small internet segment grafted onto the company.
Chart courtesy of "Newsosaur" Alan Mutter (May 29);
Print advertising sales for newspapers appear to be on track to plunge by $2 billion this year, which would make for the worst performance in a decade other than the disastrous period following 9/11.The difference between this projected decline and the one after September, 2001, is that it would occur in an era of economic well being characterized by low unemployment, respectable retail sales (until this nasty April) and record highs in the stock market. The setback, if it materializes, would be unprecedented for an industry that, until recently, has been masterful at increasing its revenues in good times and bad.
A smart industry would fire the marketing "gurus" and start listening to their former subscribers - many of whom frequent sites like this one. Of course, there's little indication that this is an industry that wants to be smarter, or that those former subscribers give a damn about them.
I'm rubbing my hands with undisguised glee!
Good riddance to bad rubbish!
If only we could sever our money from the parasites at CBC!
Their stock chart in the last four years is a thing of beauty for NYT's haters like myself, although you'd probably kill yourself if it was a ski slope. A mystery to them, it went downhill after 9/11.
The sliminess of their race baiting and smear filled coverage of those innocent Duke Lacrosse players has brought them new outrage and cancellations. They just aren't getting it, content and ethics matters.
They can't disappear fast enough.
Looks like Conrad Black unloaded his newspapers just in time, huh? (The National Post was a good read, while he ran it- they can't give that wretched paper away, now............
People are getting tired of the stink from the NYTs a real sewer rag news paper
Imagine how bad it would be if the NYT was audited for bias, like the BBC.
"Bias at the Beeb - official" - "There are some things you do not need an official report to tell you - that John Prescott thinks he is a babe magnet, that President Mugabe is not entirely in favour of white farmers and that Al-Qaeda takes a pretty dim view of the West. The report commissioned by the BBC into itself concluded with something equally blindingly obvious. It said that the organisation is institutionally biased and especially gullible to the blandishments of politically driven celebrities, such as Bono and Bob Geldof. Almost anyone in Britain could have told the BBC that for free, but maybe it’s better to have it in an official report." (Sunday Times)
Good for PM Harper. He told Bonohead to 'take-a-hike'.
Remember PMPM falling for the so-called rock star's baloney ??
If they EVER asked why I am a former subscriber( and have no intent of renewing a print subscription), I would have to tell them it is because:
I detest being preached at without the opportunity of counter argument...
....because I detest being sold political snake oil wrapped up as a "news" article....
...but mostly because I detest a media who are so deeply in bed with the social engineering effete that they must limit the news we see to only that which supports their agendas...which leaves a lot of factual data and news unreported.
In short, I have rejected the old line forth estate because it has devolved from a tool to inform the people and keep them vigilant against errant governanace which damages them to a tool to manipulate the masses and keep them acceptant/ignorant of kleptocracy and aggressive statism.
Well, you do have to admit that they have a beautiful business plan. The plan requires that they have and espouse a liberal bias irregardless of the leanings of their customers.
In the NYT business plan the customer is NEVER right. Therefore it is up to the management, editors and journalists of the NYT to decide FOR the customers that which is actually news, that which is news that should be disseminated to the public, and how that news should be interpreted.
It certainly appears that their take-it-or-leave-it, "let them eat cake" business plan has been a magnificent success. The stockholders should be VERY excited. BRAVO!!!
Well you better not even think of putting it in my cage or i,ll get violent im just libal to poke some eyes out SQUAWK SQUAWK