Comments on: Crunching the New York Times numbers

By: dispatches from TJICistan » Blog Archive » Palin and the silence of the turkeys

Thu, 27 Nov 2008 02:35:49 +0000

[...] UPDATE … The editorial board of the New York Times is worried. As well it might be, considering that the Times is being fed head-first into a bankruptcy machine. [...]

By: More major media in the tank? What does it all mean? « Future Tense

More major media in the tank? What does it all mean? « Future Tense — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:50:49 +0000

[...] to Comments Reuters blogs’ Media File (”Where Media and Technology Meet”) offered more evidence of major media transitions (November 21, 2008): The New York Times Co’s announcement on [...]

By: Ila

Ila — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 05:26:30 +0000

Rule #1 in the newspaper business: FIRST, have something to sell. Nobody wants to pay for advertising when there’s no circulation. Why do you think Rupert Murdoch is rich? Tear the thing apart, write some stories, and beef up circulation. You don’t have to BE Rupert Murdoch; just don’t be what everyone else is selling. Then go after someone other than Van Cleef and Arpels, Blue Cross, and car dealers as advertisers. There are lots of businesses out there. You’re WELCOME!

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 00:41:42 +0000

When saying the share price two years ago was $49, it would have been helpful to let us know the current share price for comparison purposes (if we didn’t know the cost of the Sunday or daily paper offhand). For what it’s worth (not very much), it closed on $5.34 on Friday.

By: Joseph

Joseph — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 22:33:56 +0000

Frankly, as the owner of a company who has advertised in the NYTs in the past, but choses to advertise elsewhere now, the death or bankrupcy of the Times causes me no pain. I never felt like I received the value I should have given the cost of the ad.

At one time, I suppose, it was hip to advertise in the Times, but most people who buy my products don’t read or subscribe to the Times, and frankly, don’t like it’s editorial policies.

By: Robert MacMillan

Robert MacMillan — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 20:05:35 +0000

Thanks Joshua, I’m painfully aware of the ad revenue situation being meaningful — and the debt and the circulation revenue that’s going up with price increases (not copies sold) and a host of other things.
Yes, I wrote it backward. I will fix it.

By: Joshua

Joshua — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 18:43:51 +0000

“# The ratio of the cover price of the Sunday edition of the Times to the share price is under 2:1.
# The ratio of the daily cover price to the share price is under 5:1.”

First of all, this is extremely sloppy — you’ve got your ratios backward.

Second, it’s meaningless - ad revenue is the big issue, not newsstand sales.

By: Robert

Robert — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 17:53:22 +0000

What conspiracy, Bill? It’s just thinking out loud. I’ll cop to dimwitted. I’m a reporter, not the guy who’s going to solve the NYT’s problems. If you have some thoughts, why not share them here? Or, if they’re realistic, just go tell the Times. I’m sure they pay consultants.

By: Newt

Newt — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 15:33:10 +0000

What?? You mean the NYT isn’t a candidate for bailout $? Maybe on 1/21/09 they will be.

By: Left, Right and Centered » What Should I Do?

Left, Right and Centered » What Should I Do? — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 13:13:44 +0000

[...] Buy a copy of Sunday’s New York Times or 2 shares of stock? [...]