New York Times Seen In Lackluster Ad Trend

Forbes ^ | 2003/11/24/ | Forbes Staff

[Grampa Dave]

New York Times Seen In Lackluster Ad Trend Forbes Staff , 11.24.03, 12:03 PM ET

NEW YORK -

New York Times (nyse: NYT - news - people ) stock softened after a Banc of America Securities research note said the media company and rival Knight Ridder (nyse: KRI - news - people ) finished October on a lackluster note, posting respective ad sales growth gains of just 1.2% and 0.4%.

Bank of America Securities said the color ad page count at the flagship newspaper of Dow Jones (nyse: DJ - news - people ), The Wall Street Journal, is averaging 8.3 pages per day so far this November, which is up from the November 2002 level of 6.8 pages per day. But the securities firm said that earnings risks persist for the newspaper sector overall in the fourth quarter due to weak ad sales.

It noted that although telecoms now offer wireless portability, there have been very few ads for the new service in newspapers. In addition, department stores' ad spending remains soft and is continuing to shift to other forms of media.

Despite its concerns about Knight Ridder's weak ad spending in October, Banc of America Securities reiterated a "buy" rating for it and Tribune (nyse: TRB - news - people ) while maintaining "neutral" ratings on New York Times and Dow Jones. New York Times was down 48 cents at $45.36; Dow Jones, down 1 cent at $49.92; Tribune, up 7 cents at $48.10; and Knight Ridder, up 47 cents at $73.23

[martin_fierro]

[autoresponder]

There you go!

Both are capitalist/freedom oriented!

dem/libs now panicking bigtime and threatening boycotts of Sean Hannitty's sponsors!

I see the leftie print and TV networks losing market fast now

Big 3 TV networks have lost males 18-45 years old, a prime demographic

Katie, Dan, Tom, and Peter

All dressed up with nobody watching them or their sponsors

The party is over

Katie can always go to NPR

NP what?

[ClancyJ]

Well I sure have withdrawn from the movie stars who decide to promote hate for President Bush with their fame.

Why? Purely because the esteem, awe and glamour has been destroyed by their anti-American, hate Bush actions.

I like Bush. He is the kind of person I intend to see as President. Therefore, they do not have the same goals as I do. Why should I wish to watch movies with people in it that are working to destroy this country and turn it over to the U.N. and socialism? There is no awe left, there is not esteem left, there is no glamour.

So - they are merely a two-bit actor in my book and as soon as I see them I get mad because of their actions against this country, the war in Iraq, and my President.

[Timesink]

What's the price for a full page ad, and how much does it cost the WSJ to print it? If the price per ad went down 15% their profits would be about the same.

There is no one price; it depends on what editions you're buying (the whole nation? just a regional edition?), which section, whether you're paying for full color or B&W, possible volume discounts, etc. But in general, a nationwide B&W page costs $172,467.36. A full-page color ad runs $215,584.20. And that price is more than double what it was five to ten years ago, even though the ads back then reached roughly 700,000 more people.

[Timesink]

Schadenfreude

This is the New York Times Schadenfreude Ping List. Freepmail me to be added or dropped.

[Tribune7]

PING

You'll love this one.

[snowrip]

The house of cards continues to tumble down... This must really have the Dims shaking, because the writing on the wall over the last few months spells something even they could all dimly intuit... the eventual collapse of the liberal media.

The question of the day is this: Is the NY Grimes, or any other outlet of the liberal media, smart enough to change their tune and actually begin to publish the unbiased facts?

Methinks not.

[Lancey Howard]

The New York Times is all about propping up the Democrat Party and doing everything it can to assist the Democrat Party in its efforts to belittle and erase traditional America and the traditional family unit, and promote big-government socialism. This means that they need to get Democrats elected, and to facilitate this end their strategy is to subtly drip venom on conservatives and Republicans on a daily basis like water torture. This is their singular focus, every single day.

Thankfully, their time is past. The New York Times is no longer effective in its efforts on behalf of the DNC, and in fact, the former "paper of record" is not even a worthy competitor of "the new media" - - cable news, talk-radio, and the internet. Newspapers as we know them will disappear - - it's inevitable. Good riddance to bad garbage, I always say. (Although I'm fine with the New York Post staying around!)

Regards,
LH

[McGavin999]

I'll be quite happy with the New York Times stocks are on the same level as Salon.com. Then I'll celebrate.

[Grampa Dave]

You posted: "Thankfully, their time is past. The New York Times is no longer effective in its efforts on behalf of the DNC, and in fact, the former "paper of record" is not even a worthy competitor of "the new media" - - cable news, talk-radio, and the internet. Newspapers as we know them will disappear - - it's inevitable. Good riddance to bad garbage, I always say. (Although I'm fine with the New York Post staying around!)"

Just look at their failures with GW this year and how they never got the hate GW mantras on firm ground. I think that they still have power with the liberal lunatics, but they are loosing each day with the moderates.

[Political Junkie Too]

Don't worry. Next year is election year.

When Bush raises $100MM, and Dean raises $75MM, and the DNC raises $50MM, and 34 Senators run for reelection, where do you think all that money is going to go?

It's going to go to ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NYT, LAT, WashPost, etc., in ads, ads, ads.

It's like a money spigot that turns on every two years for the media, like clockwork.

-PJ

[Grampa Dave]

Katie, Dan, Tom, and Peter

All dressed up with nobody watching them or their sponsors

The party is over!

What you posted above, is such a wonderful vision!

[Grampa Dave]

Yep, hopefully some of the conservative news sites will get a fair share of GW's estimated 200 million.

[Grampa Dave]

Their stock will never get that low.

They will be bought out by a richer conservative or liberal competitor. In many ways for the employees and key owners/players, that is a fate worse than going broke.

One day they are somebody. After the buyout, they are irrelevant and excessive and expensive baggage. They will be given a severance package. If they don't accept, they will be fired.

That is what I want to see, people like the Dowdness and Herr Krugman being shedded like fleas and dead hair from a dog.

[Grampa Dave]

You posted, The question of the day is this: Is the NY Grimes, or any other outlet of the liberal media, smart enough to change their tune and actually begin to publish the unbiased facts?

The current history of the left wing mediots show an incredible level of arrogance which is fatal in the business world.

Look at CNN re Fox News. CNN continues to be a vile little Pander Bear for the DNC and the Islamofacists inspite of those panderings driving conservatives away everyday to Fox News, since the 2000 election.

In California, the LA Slimes and the SF Gay Rhonicle continue their daily attacks on GW, support the Islamofascist and now attack Governor Arnold each day. People have been cancelling subscriptions since the 1992 elections of these two arrogant mediot fish wraps.

I see them as arrogant/rabid pit bulls, which are incapable of doing anything but trying more vicious attacks until they are put out of their misery by economics.

[MeekOneGOP]

[Constitution Day]

Excellent! I *knew* you'd get it. ;)

[Copernicus]

Posted to *CCRM