PDA

View Full Version : More Shocking Newspaper Decline - Internet Knockout



Carlton
03-10-2009, 02:52 AM
The Power of the Internet continues to trounce traditional newspapers.

More Shocking Newspaper Decline (http://premiumdomains.biz/blog/2009/03/more-shocking-newspaper-decline/)

... by premiumdomains.biz :biggrin:

--------------------------------

Browse for quality domains: PremiumDomains.US (http://premiumdomains.us)

mediaadvantages
03-10-2009, 04:21 AM
its going to get worse than this for the newspaper industry. there are about 20 of the top 50 papers in the nation that will making the decision to either file for bankruptcy or going completely digital in the next 18 months. newspaper is on the last leg and they are selling advertising CHEAP. they are trying to get as many dollars as they can before they dump that printing press.

i was in meetings today with some mcclatchey people and they are extremely worried.

Scandiman
03-10-2009, 06:07 AM
i was in meetings today with some mcclatchey people and they are extremely worried.
Yup, McClatchy is headquartered here in Sacramento, it's all over the local news with their new round of lay***s.

Gerry
03-10-2009, 06:14 AM
its going to get worse than this for the newspaper industry. there are about 20 of the top 50 papers in the nation that will making the decision to either file for bankruptcy or going completely digital in the next 18 months. newspaper is on the last leg and they are selling advertising CHEAP. they are trying to get as many dollars as they can before they dump that printing press.

i was in meetings today with some mcclatchey people and they are extremely worried.Totally agree.

Something we discussed here and on other forums perhaps 2 years ago.

I also look for a huge decline in printed magazines and journals to continue. And possibly very rapidly and a steep decline.

Companies wanting to save much needed capital and revenue can scale back a great deal on their printed matter and start pushing their online sites and presence.

My wife and I were discussing this over dinner this evening. After all, do we need to get all this poundage of trash filler on a daily basis? It as if the merchants are trying to remind us they still exists. Nearly everything spoken and sold in these publications are available on line at their site.

This effort would not only do a tremendous justice to the environment and landfills but would also perhaps keep costs down for the postal service.

The down side would be an additional lose of jobs.

Hmm...sound like good brainstorming for my blog.

I have had some decent ***ers (only one .mobi - would not sell for price being ***ered) as well as a few small sales last month on sedo.

Could we see a resurgence of domain purchasing activity along with site building as entities begin to focus more and more on the internet.

Let's hope so.

And .mobi plays well into this. Let's face it - there are more than 4 billion mobile phone subscribers at present. Some of these people would rather starve to death than have to give up their phone.

gogo
03-10-2009, 09:40 AM
heard a mainstream telly thing about this last night... first time I've heard mainstream use of the word monetization.

Amazing how they made it sound as if localised adverts were a sudden innovation requiring highly paid experts. They didn't mention adsense of course.

The interesting bit was how they said that the winners can win big by going big ie international, for example they said the Guardian website's traffic is 1/3 UK, 1/3 US, 1/3 other, and so can attract lucrative US advertisers for US viewers.

gogo
03-10-2009, 05:47 PM
right on cue launched today - Guardian API

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/mar/10/guardian-open-platform

Carlton
03-10-2009, 11:14 PM
right on cue launched today - Guardian API

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/mar/10/guardian-open-platform

Very interesting. I hope some US based news organizations will provide this soon.

dbadt2007
03-11-2009, 08:19 AM
Definitely a defining point for the newspaper industry, including the possibility of them becoming non-profit.

See (Decline in Newspapers Renews Idea of Nonprofits): http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,502984,00.html

PS, Hi everyone been out and about ...but still in the game. (too many projects is definitely cutting way too much into my mobility.mobi time) :)

gogo
03-11-2009, 02:21 PM
more here


The great difference between a king and a peasant is not that one has enough to eat and the other does not. That's important, but it could change, were it not for the really important difference, which is that the king can at any time take away what the peasant has to eat, whereas the peasant has no power against the king. He doesn't even really own the products of his own labours, and he certainly doesn't own the king's snowy waste that he picks over for a few sticks of firewood.
That is where the newspaper business fears it will find itself as it moves online. In the new world, we will all be sharecroppers for Google. In the old days, people paid for their newspapers (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/newspapers). In the future, so far as anyone can see, they will not pay for anything that they do not get direct from advertisers and the function of news is merely to attract people to advertisements. That has always been truer than journalists would like to believe. But in the new wintry world of the internet (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internet), this cold truth forms, like the snow, the background to everything we see.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/11/google-advertising-newspapers

mediaadvantages
03-11-2009, 03:14 PM
What people have failed to realize is the fact that people are still willing to pay for their news and there lots of people who enjoy reading the newspaper. The issue they are facing is very similar to the music industry. When the music industry started to go after people who downloaded illegal music, it cost them more money than what they would win in the lawsuits. So all they did was **** *** the consumer rather than recreate their business plan to satisfy todays habits. The newspapers have done this exact same thing. What worked 20 years ago does not work today for the MASS. I believe the niche publications will still be ok for the reason being, the majority of people who pay for a publication do so because it is an interest or hobby. The newspaper doesn't fit into the same category. Most niche publications also have writers who are EXPERTS in the industry and are very well known. How many writers can you name at your local newspaper??? Would you consider any of them experts in any field besides writing??? I can tell you locally the most known sports writer in my market is an idiot and most people think he doesn't know ****.

The other part that newspapers failed at was marketing. This is coming from someone who has a client that is a newspaper. Over the last 10 years newspapers have seen a decline EVERY year in ad sales and also subscribers. If you had to pick which one is most important, most would say AD SALES because it relates directly to the bottom line. This is true BUT there is a catch. Advertising agencies base media buying decisions *** of rating points or Cost Per Thousands.

Example: If Newspaper X has a daily subscriber base of 100,000 in 2007 and charges $4,000 for a full page ad it would come out to $40 per thousand people reached. The trends have been losing about 5% per year in subscribers. So in 2008 your subscriber base would be 95,000 and ad costs trends tend to go up about 8% so the full page ad would cost $4,320. This makes the cost per thousand people reached at $45.47. If we project the same numbers for 2009 we are looking at 90,250 subscribers and full page ad at $4,665.60 and cost per thousand at $51.70. In summary we have already increased the cost to reach someone by over 25% and we have lost 10% of our total reach.

These papers have spent their marketing budgets targeting advertisers how effective the newspaper can be for selling their products. Nothing wrong with that, but if they would have continued to target subscribers and building that base advertisers wouldn't have left in the first place to look for cheaper ways to reach their audience. I could continue on this for hours but don't have the time. I have analyzed about 20 markets and this same thing has been done in all of them. I have yet to find a market where the newspaper has truly put together a plan to build subscribers. Now its too late because consumers have moved away from the newspaper and it can't be saved. Just like its too late for the music industry to save the cd market. Instead of planning for the future they continue to react.

Scandiman
03-11-2009, 03:26 PM
What people have failed to realize is the fact that people are still willing to pay for their news and there lots of people who enjoy reading the newspaper. The issue they are facing is very similar to the music industry. When the music industry started to go after people who downloaded illegal music, it cost them more money than what they would win in the lawsuits. So all they did was **** *** the consumer rather than recreate their business plan to satisfy todays habits. The newspapers have done this exact same thing. What worked 20 years ago does not work today for the MASS. I believe the niche publications will still be ok for the reason being, the majority of people who pay for a publication do so because it is an interest or hobby. The newspaper doesn't fit into the same category. Most niche publications also have writers who are EXPERTS in the industry and are very well known. How many writers can you name at your local newspaper??? Would you consider any of them experts in any field besides writing??? I can tell you locally the most known sports writer in my market is an idiot and most people think he doesn't know ****.

The other part that newspapers failed at was marketing. This is coming from someone who has a client that is a newspaper. Over the last 10 years newspapers have seen a decline EVERY year in ad sales and also subscribers. If you had to pick which one is most important, most would say AD SALES because it relates directly to the bottom line. This is true BUT there is a catch. Advertising agencies base media buying decisions *** of rating points or Cost Per Thousands.

Example: If Newspaper X has a daily subscriber base of 100,000 in 2007 and charges $4,000 for a full page ad it would come out to $40 per thousand people reached. The trends have been losing about 5% per year in subscribers. So in 2008 your subscriber base would be 95,000 and ad costs trends tend to go up about 8% so the full page ad would cost $4,320. This makes the cost per thousand people reached at $45.47. If we project the same numbers for 2009 we are looking at 90,250 subscribers and full page ad at $4,665.60 and cost per thousand at $51.70. In summary we have already increased the cost to reach someone by over 25% and we have lost 10% of our total reach.

These papers have spent their marketing budgets targeting advertisers how effective the newspaper can be for selling their products. Nothing wrong with that, but if they would have continued to target subscribers and building that base advertisers wouldn't have left in the first place to look for cheaper ways to reach their audience. I could continue on this for hours but don't have the time. I have analyzed about 20 markets and this same thing has been done in all of them. I have yet to find a market where the newspaper has truly put together a plan to build subscribers. Now its too late because consumers have moved away from the newspaper and it can't be saved. Just like its too late for the music industry to save the cd market. Instead of planning for the future they continue to react.
Great points media, a lot of lessons to be learned here. The Sac Bee has clearly made editorial changes to pander to advertisers but the readers don't like it. It's as if the management has forgotten who is their customer... it's the reader, not the advertiser.

gogo
03-11-2009, 03:37 PM
I read before that newspaper cover sales price traditionally covered max 1/5 of the cost of the paper - the rest was adverts. Found that on this interesting site http://medialens.org/

mediaadvantages
03-11-2009, 04:06 PM
I will give you an example of how subscribers relates directly to advertising dollars. This example shows how much money they are losing from a popular retail national advertiser every year. Especially when many national advertisers are pulling these dollars away from print and putting them in new media.

My local paper (i'm staring at the ratecard now)
2007 Sunday Reasership 312,000
2008 Sunday Readership 297,000
2009 Sunday Readership 282,816

In 2007 the cost to insert every sunday for this retailer was $86.50 per thousand. This comes out to $26,988 per weekly ad or $1,403,376 annually.

In 2009 the cost to insert every sunday for this retailer is $89.10 per thousand. They didn't increase these numbers from 08 to 09 for this client. This comes out to $25,198 per weekly ad or $1,310,343 annually.

If you have an average of 20 inserts each Sunday (which is low) you are losing almost $2,000,000 per year JUST ON SUNDAY INSERTS ALONE because of losing subscribers and this doesn't count the loss in average number companies doing inserts or other days of the week. You would think they could figure that out. I have preached this for the last 8 years we have had this client and nothing ever happens. :(

Oh....and keep in mind we are in the #76 Market in size. Just imagine how much the big papers are losing??

Carlton
03-11-2009, 11:47 PM
... So in 2008 your subscriber base would be 95,000 and ad costs trends tend to go up about 8% so the full page ad would cost $4,320. This makes the cost per thousand people reached at $45.47. If we project the same numbers for 2009 we are looking at 90,250 subscribers and full page ad at $4,665.60 and cost per thousand at $51.70. In summary we have already increased the cost to reach someone by over 25% and we have lost 10% of our total reach.Very enlightening example you make there. And the inevitable raising of price forces advertisers to question even moreso "What am I getting for my dollar". This is what has driven advertisers to the internet where return on investment can be somewhat more accurately tracked and controlled.

thebiffenator
03-12-2009, 12:25 AM
my local county newspaper stoped delivery a month ago for Saturadys Newspaper.

Tom
03-12-2009, 12:34 AM
I'm a truck driver for my local newspaper, and I don't understand how they can survive.... newspapers these days are fighting a losing battle. They just can't compete with the internet. Subscriptions are dropping, costs are rising, the reporting sucks, and the newspaper's hardly got anything but ads in it nowadays. Seems like all the news stories in it today are either written by one of about two writers, or is just an AP article.


my local county newspaper stopped delivery a month ago for Saturdays Newspaper.
So did mine actually.

domainitrix
03-12-2009, 01:29 AM
I also look for a huge decline in printed magazines and journals to continue. And possibly very rapidly and a steep decline.



Great thread and posts all around!

Came across this article( dated 8/2008) about the top fashion magazines with steady drop in AD sales going lighter in weight , literally.

It is a different story this year. As September issues begin hitting the newsstands, two-thirds of the 16 top fashion and beauty magazines by number of ad pages are smaller than a year ago. W magazine, also published by Condé Nast Publications, a unit of Advance Publications, has 18% fewer advertising pages. Vogue has 674 pages of ads this year, down 7%, while Hearst's Cosmopolitan is six pages, or 3.2%, lighter.

The Wall Street JournalLink (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121840915130728267.html?mod=2_1567_topbox)