My Last “I AM SO RIGHT” Post
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Mediapost has an article saying that it’s official: 2005 is the worst year for newspapers since the last ad industry recession.
How did Homer Simpson say it? "I AM SO SMART! S-M-R-T!"
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:24 am
Not saying I don’t agree with you, but for every financial analyst who’s bearish on the newspaper industry (like Peter Appert, the Goldman analyst cited in the article), there are analysts who are more optimistic (like Bill Drewry from Credit Suisse or Lauren Fine from Merrill Lynch). The question is, has there been a long-term secular shift in the publishing industry; more simply, is there something that has dramatically changed the business of making money from newspapers, and changed it for good? I would point to the amount of cash advertisers are pouring into new media — online advertising, SEO, viral campaigns, et al… — as a shift that has changed substantially that business, and its up to the executives to respond accordingly (which some are doing better than others). In my view, newspaper companies should be given another fiscal year to demonstrate whether or not they can profit long-term from new media’s entrenchment.
November 7th, 2005 at 1:22 pm
It’s impossible at this point to think newspapers aren’t being bested in several permanent ways.
Certainly the classified ad game is done. The NYTimes Job Market section this weekend was 1/2 a page of text and about 7 more of classified ads. Does anyone posting one of those ads really believe I am going to read any of them? I suppose if I didn’t own a computer, but then why are Wall Street firms posting in these venues? Inneffective habit? The pages will continue to dwindle.
It’s far easier to search craigslist, monster.com, etc. for jobs, real estate, and all manner of services and products, than to bother with the Times.
What’s worse for The Times is that their attempt (now more than five years old) to place their jobs ads online is a failure…it’s a terrible site (difficult to use). Could they turn this around? Maybe. But small papers, like the Village Voice and NYPress, have already suffered mightily and permantently. Expect close-downs, rollups and re-targetting of core audiences. The Voice real estate site is nice, actually, but’s it’s no match for its competitors.
November 7th, 2005 at 1:22 pm
It’s impossible at this point to think newspapers aren’t being bested in several permanent ways.
Certainly the classified ad game is done. The NYTimes Job Market section this weekend was 1/2 a page of text and about 7 more of classified ads. Does anyone posting one of those ads really believe I am going to read any of them? I suppose if I didn’t own a computer, but then why are Wall Street firms posting in these venues? Inneffective habit? The pages will continue to dwindle.
It’s far easier to search craigslist, monster.com, etc. for jobs, real estate, and all manner of services and products, than to bother with the Times.
What’s worse for The Times is that their attempt (now more than five years old) to place their jobs ads online is a failure…it’s a terrible site (difficult to use). Could they turn this around? Maybe. But small papers, like the Village Voice and NYPress, have already suffered mightily and permantently. Expect close-downs, rollups and re-targetting of core audiences. The Voice real estate site is nice, actually, but’s it’s no match for its competitors.
November 9th, 2005 at 12:18 pm
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/.....484af87be8