You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front Economy
New York Times Co. July revenue falls 10.1 percent
2008-08-27
NEW YORK (AP) -- New York Times Co. said Tuesday that its July revenue from continuing operations fell 10.1 percent this year as advertising revenue slipped 16.2 percent. Overall revenue dropped to $235.9 million in July from $262.3 million in July 2007, the publisher said.

A continuing drop in classified ads and cutbacks in spending by movie studios, car companies and hotels were offset only partially by a rise in revenue from media, financial services, advocacy and health care ads for a net drop of 16.2 percent.

The company's flagship The New York Times paper had 15.3 percent lower ad revenue. At its New England media group, which includes The Boston Globe, July ad revenue dropped 24.5 percent.
Hey, why not raise prices -- that'll fix the problem!
Total online ad revenue rose 0.9 percent in the company's News Media Group, and circulation revenue fell 0.5 percent. The company said its overall Internet revenue rose 2.6 percent with online ad revenue adding 5.5 percent, boosted by gains at its About.com Web site.

For the year to date, total revenue from continuing operations has fallen 6.1 percent to $1.73 billion. The company said online advertising for its News Media Group is rising in August with improvement in display advertising revenue at NYTimes.com.
Posted by:Steve White

#10  Interesting post, Jason. The Taz comment as well. The thing is, the New York Times and other major newspapers have been trending strongly downward for years now such that, if I recall the numbers correctly, the value of the New York Times conglomerate some months ago had sunk to the value of the properties it holds, not even including the value of equipment. Not good, especially given the recent fall in property values accompanying the current mortgage crisis. Clearly you're much better at matters financial than I; would you be kind enough to see if my understanding is anything close to correct?
Posted by: trailing wife    2008-08-27 19:27  

#9  "All the news that's fit to print"
LIKE HELL
"All the news we can twist to OUR ends" is a helluva lot more accurate.
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2008-08-27 16:55  

#8  NYT deserves every dollar they Loose!
Can you imagine they still tout themselves as a Fair Rag!

And you can't tell the Editorial Section from the Newsy Side except that the Newsy Side was even more RADICAL LEFT!

from Potemkin Village, way back....
In 1931, the New York Times correspondent Walter Duranty gave us the Potemkin village, Duranty was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1932. ...
*eeewww* *spit* *bleah*

to Whittaker Chambers "NYT does full blown denial",

the Rosenbergs "NYT does full blown denial",

Kennedy Clan especially John F.
NYT does Camelot in the Maximum Supine position and to this day remains enthralled with the Kennedy Clan.

NYT,
Cuba worship, with a full blown Homo-erotic Love Affair with Fidel Castro.
*eeewww* *spit* *bleah*

Vietnam,
NYT Does a Back Stabbing for over 10 years; CoxSuckers! They Betrayed every USA Serviceman and Servicewoman in uniform.

WaterGate:
Re-Manufactured that political Shenanigan into a Capital Crime against America.
The NYT Hate for Nixon knows no bounds, just like their opposite LOVE for the Kennedy's.

NYT hated Ronald Reagan,
and of course they hated Reagan kicking Castro out of Grenada.

And Panama, NYT didn't approve of RR dislodging that maniac Noriega..

Clarence Thomas:
actively campaigned against him.

ETC. ETC. ETC.

And "All the News ThatÂ’s Fit to Print" *SPIT*
Posted by: Red Dawg   2008-08-27 15:47  

#7  Manolo! Bring me my crack pipe!
Posted by: Pinchy   2008-08-27 13:21  

#6  When I first read this, I wasn't too concerned about the declining online ad growth.

But then I looked a LOT deeper at the data, and now I'm concerned about the long-term future of NYT and other newspaper-based online entities.

I just finished an explanatory and somewhat alarming blog post about it, with charts and graphs and such.

"Why Barack Obama and Blogs Are Killing the New York Times Online" http://is.gd/Ste

Jason Baer
Convince & Convert - Internet consulting for agencies
http://www.convinceandconvert.com
Posted by: Jason Baer   2008-08-27 12:28  

#5  Financially-strapped companies don't have ad dollars to spend.


...wildly without any validation of effectiveness.

If O'man tanks after all the sale and buzz by the usual suspects, I expect a similar review of return on investment created by this environment for the MSM as a whole.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2008-08-27 10:45  

#4  Gannett's was down 12%. This is an industry-wide decline due to the current economic slump. Financially-strapped companies don't have ad dollars to spend. Note that newspaper sales revenues only fell 0.5%.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2008-08-27 09:44  

#3  Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of idiots, charlatan's and bozos.
Posted by: Jack is Back!   2008-08-27 09:34  

#2  Here's a hint from Zimbabwe - printing more paper won't necessarily make it more valuable.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2008-08-27 08:10  

#1  
Posted by: gorb   2008-08-27 03:17  

00:00