"Mediasaurus" by Michael Crichton. Google it.
New York Times Running On Fumes
11–20 of 45 posts
Re: New York Times Running On Fumes
#12Re: New York Times Running On Fumes
#13I don't understand the business, it shouldn't take more than 50 writers to write a paper, pay them 100k , that's 5mm sell 500k subcriptions at 50/yr that's 25mm
And that's not counting ads (or printing cost) perhaps they cancel out though
Re: New York Times Running On Fumes
#14I don't understand the business, it shouldn't take more than 50 writers to write a paper, pay them 100k , that's 5mm sell 500k subcriptions at 50/yr that's 25mm And that's not counting ads (or printing cost) perhaps they cancel out though
The NYT has a circulation of 1,077,256. Delivery is anywhere from $3.35 per week to $6.70 per week depending on frequency of delivery. Obviously many people just buy single copies at newsstands. They employ 11,965 people including 350 staff writers.
Re: New York Times Running On Fumes
#15Seems like something Google should actually buy for the content-making-people. Maybe there's just too much debt though, and they can just hire the people directly.
I doubt the people are worth that much. Staff journalists don't vary _that_ much in quality (though editorial standards do) and there's tons of fresh meat coming out of j-school every year.
The most valuable asset that the New York Times has is its brand. Well, that and a big honking New York skyscraper.
Re: New York Times Running On Fumes
#16Alright, time to strap on some plums. Dump the print division entirely, get rid of registration for the front page articles, and start charging for premium content.
Be the first non pornographic pay site to make money.
Or take a leaf out of the London newspapers, and blend news with pornography.
Re: New York Times Running On Fumes
#17I wonder how much their situation would improve by opening up their archive for free and removing the registration stuff? They'd get vastly more page views, and thus more ad revenue. For that matter, if they do go down, what happens to the archive? I hope that something like Wikimedia or the Internet Archive gets access to it, so all that information isn't lost forever.
They'd probably die just as quickly. The problem is likely twofold: 1) Print is expensive. 2) Internet ads don't pay like print ads used to pay. Okay, threefold: 3) Craigslist has killed the classifieds market dead. Newspapers around the world are suffering from these things. It's just acutely sad that the paper of record is no better off than the rest....
Craigslist has killed the classified markets dead x 100. This is huge for newspapers and not to be overlooked.
Re: New York Times Running On Fumes
#18They wont go bankrupt. They are the closest thing to the worlds premier newspaper. If the company was distressed they could sell it in a heartbeat.
Even if it ran at a loss it still has value due to its prestige. Newscorp recently bought the WSJ for 6B when it was in a similar predicament.
Re: New York Times Running On Fumes
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
Be the first non pornographic pay site to make money.
WSJ makes decent money from paid online subscriptions.
NYTimes used to have subscriptions for a lot of their content a year or two ago but figured they would get more if they just had ads instead. I think the WSJ will do the same eventually. Although it is different in that it has a more affluent clientele. Business people pay crazy amounts of money for premium content/data.