Quote: "Online sales and revenues continue to grow at double-digit rates. Our percentage of revenue from online leads the industry (excluding, perhaps, the national papers) and continues to grow."
Yeah, ok, from 60 cents to 78 cents a share. Now that really makes me want to invest. Heck, that and my GM stock and I might be able cobble up enough for a Timmies and a donut (or at least the hole...).
Where will all the angry faced "pundits" go, after all it is Christmas, something they don't believe in albeit, but I worry as to who will hire people that look like these self loathers, yea right, looks good on the liars.
A newspaper executive wanting to put the best spin on his industry will always talk about the growth in online revenue, or he will blame his troubles on the current economic climate. Though technically accurate, these arguments ignore the real causes of doom in the newspaper industry. The main revenue sources for papers have always been advertising, especially for cars, real estate, and retail stores, as well as want ads and subscriptions. Newspapers had a near-monopoly in these areas until the internet came along, and online revenue will never replace that. Now they have Craig's List, Ebay, and all the rest to compete with. It is not a fair fight. Modern newspapers, despite all the layoffs, are burdened with massive overhead that their competitors mostly lack. For those who used to read the editorial page, blogs like this one are infinitely more interesting than the pc rot that newspaper editors call "opinion". The massive drops in print media stock prices make sense given their sinking prospects.
news paper execs are a perfect example of management "stuck on stupid". seen much of this when I travelled to fix production/technical problems, often their own "floor" workers knew what the causes were, but management wouldn't listen to them so I just acted as a conduit for the workers opinions to reach managers.
Why this blog? Until this moment
I have been forced
to listen while media
and politicians alike
have told me
"what Canadians think".
In all that time they
never once asked.
This is just the voice
of an ordinary Canadian
yelling back at the radio -
"You don't speak for me."
homepage email Kate (goes to a private
mailserver in Europe)
I can't answer or use every
tip, but all are
appreciated!
"I got so much traffic afteryour post my web host asked meto buy a larger traffic allowance."Dr.Ross McKitrick
Holy hell, woman. When you
send someone traffic,
you send someone TRAFFIC.
My hosting provider thought
I was being DDoSed. -
Sean McCormick
"The New York Times link to me yesterday [...] generatedone-fifth of the trafficI normally get from a linkfrom Small Dead Animals."Kathy Shaidle
"Thank you for your link. A wave ofyour Canadian readers came to my blog! Really impressive."Juan Giner -
INNOVATION International Media Consulting Group
I got links from the Weekly Standard,Hot Air and Instapundit yesterday - but SDA was running at least equal to those in visitors clicking through to my blog.Jeff Dobbs
"You may be anasty right winger,but you're not nastyall the time!"Warren Kinsella
"Go back to collectingyour welfare livelihood."Michael E. Zilkowsky
And another one bites,
And another one bites,
Another one bites the dust!
Quote: "Online sales and revenues continue to grow at double-digit rates. Our percentage of revenue from online leads the industry (excluding, perhaps, the national papers) and continues to grow."
Yeah, ok, from 60 cents to 78 cents a share. Now that really makes me want to invest. Heck, that and my GM stock and I might be able cobble up enough for a Timmies and a donut (or at least the hole...).
Where will all the angry faced "pundits" go, after all it is Christmas, something they don't believe in albeit, but I worry as to who will hire people that look like these self loathers, yea right, looks good on the liars.
A newspaper executive wanting to put the best spin on his industry will always talk about the growth in online revenue, or he will blame his troubles on the current economic climate. Though technically accurate, these arguments ignore the real causes of doom in the newspaper industry. The main revenue sources for papers have always been advertising, especially for cars, real estate, and retail stores, as well as want ads and subscriptions. Newspapers had a near-monopoly in these areas until the internet came along, and online revenue will never replace that. Now they have Craig's List, Ebay, and all the rest to compete with. It is not a fair fight. Modern newspapers, despite all the layoffs, are burdened with massive overhead that their competitors mostly lack. For those who used to read the editorial page, blogs like this one are infinitely more interesting than the pc rot that newspaper editors call "opinion". The massive drops in print media stock prices make sense given their sinking prospects.
news paper execs are a perfect example of management "stuck on stupid". seen much of this when I travelled to fix production/technical problems, often their own "floor" workers knew what the causes were, but management wouldn't listen to them so I just acted as a conduit for the workers opinions to reach managers.
This will be there end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2bwLOagul8&feature=related