Media Industry (Print, Publishing, Digital etc.)

[winston]

by LenaHuat » Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:21 am

Associated Press is cutting its headcount by 10%. The NYT, Chicago Tribune and a number of others are struggling with their bottomlines. I'm wondering if Murdoch really has something up his sleeves?

Many US magazines admitted that Michael Jackson saved them in 2009.

[winston]

by financecaptain » Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:29 pm

Soon it may come to SPH.
Its management is not capable to ride the new world.
Its shares may become extinct too.


Major layoffs at 2 papers

WASHINGTON - THE Washington Times will lay off at least 40 per cent of its 370 employees as part of a major overhaul announced on Wednesday by the financially troubled paper.

In a statement, Washington Times president and publisher Jonathan Slevin said the cuts were part of a strategy to transform the paper from its traditional business model into a 21st century media company. 'We have developed plans to secure our position and advance our vital role in an evolving media marketplace and through challenging economic times,' he said.

Acknowledging the tough times being experienced in the media industry and economy as a whole, Mr Slevin said future plans had to be constrained by 'current marketplace realities.' 'In this regard, the company is aggressively working to achieve efficiencies of scale that must include significant staff reduction of its 370 personnel.'

In a story on its website, the Washington Times said all employees were handed letters advising them that at least 40 per cent of the workforce will be laid off in the coming weeks. The announcement also included a new circulation model under which the paper - owned by Reverend Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church - will be distributed for free to 'targeted audiences in the branches of the federal government as well as at other key institutions.'

Home or office delivery will be available at a 'premium price' while single-copy sales at newspaper boxes and retailers will continue unchanged.

Also on Wednesday, The Miami Herald said it was eliminating 24 posts worldwide and reducing some newspaper production working hours in a bid to survive the economic crisis. 'The move is part of our ongoing effort to ride out this unprecedented period of economic turmoil,' publisher David Landsberg wrote in an e-mail to staff. 'While we are seeing some signs of improvement on the horizon, we expect operating conditions to remain challenging through much of 2010.'

Source: AFP

[iam802]

Publishers coming together to create their own digital platform. Access to customer data is important; hence the need to control the platform rather than rely on 3rd parties like AAPL, GOOG, AMZN etc

===

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-new- ... us-audien/

Condé Nast, Hearst, Meredith (NYSE: MDP), News Corp (NYSE: NWS). and Time Inc. are making it formal: the five publishers are equity partners in a new digital publishing venture with grand designs. They want nothing less than to develop open standards for cross-platform e-reader technology, advertising and digital sales—and they’re going to put their brands behind it. Together, the company says the five represent an unduplicated audience of 144.6 million.

It only seems like we’ve been hearing about a digital magazine consortium for ages, according to John Squires, the interim managing director. “There’s been a lot drum roll for it but it hasn’t been been that long.” After some chatter, the effort came together over the past four months. The Time Inc. vet has been in the mix all along and is now one of the candidates for CEO of the nameless venture being announced this morning. Squires is leaving Time Inc. to serve as interim director while the CEO search is conducted. “Hopefully, I’ll be CEO,” he told paidContent during an interview.

Squires said there are no plans to take on further equity partners but they’re talking to client partners. No numbers from Squires or others involved on how much the five partners are investing. He calls it “enough to give us a good start.” He also isn’t talking about staff size, although he is hiring for a Manhattan office. A company name? That probably will wait until there’s a product.

—Other groups: Squires isn’t stressing over possible competition or complications from others, including efforts that might involve the partners. News Corp. is still working on its own consortium, for instance. “I don’t know that that’s relevant to us. We’ve got an incredible group of companies behind us. We know what we want to produce. ... I don’t think there’s a question of how many. It’s a question of which ones bring the right product to market..”

Four key goals: The venture has four key goals initially:

—Be ready for full-color devices with an application that renders publications “in beautiful form” and in “recognizable” form.

—Develop a platform that can enable that across multiple devices, operating systems and screens.

—Develop a common digital storefront where consumers can easily make purchases and get universal access on any device as they buy digital products from their publisher.

—Work with advertisers to co-develop new advertising forms that Squires expects will be more immersive with the power of digital delivery. “This has the potential to be a new and vastly important branding medium for advertisers, particularly with larger screen devices.”

—Business model: “We want to develop a system providing very attractive commercial terms.” Revenue will come from content and advertising sales plus print sub sales. Squires won’t identify potential clients who have expressed an interest: “I don’t want to fall into that trap.”

—Partners have own projects: As we’ve detailed here, the equity parters already have numerous efforts underway. Two were highlighted last week just ahead of this announcement: Hearst’s Skiff, which plans its own digital newsstand, and platform, and Time Inc’s editorial development of a tablet/e-reader format. Squires doesn’t see it as either-or—or see the other efforts as automaticly being part of this venture. “We’re respectful of those efforts and we’ll look at them in time but we’d like to provide the format and standards.” On the creative side, which Squires says he’s not too worried about for now, “the product that Terry (McDonell at Time Inc.) envisions and that the Wired people envision are very much the projects we want to enable for the industry.” He added: “We’re not trying to develop a new format. We would like to be able to be provision for Terry’s product and help it come alive.”

[millionairemind]

The newspaper is losing the battle, if the survey is anything to go by. Perhaps only Singapore with its state controlled monopoly can SPH survived and thrived for so long.

Newspapers online
The promiscuity problem

Dec 3rd 2009
From The Economist print edition
More bad news for the embattled newspaper business

THE decision to give away newspaper content free online is increasingly viewed as the business equivalent of Eve’s decision to munch on an apple. But any proprietor who wants to undo this error has a problem. If one newspaper starts charging, readers may migrate to those that remain free. If, on the other hand, a lot of papers begin charging at the same time, readers might be jostled into paying. This plan has always seemed optimistic. A study released this week suggests it may be completely wrongheaded.
http://www.economist.com/world/britain/ ... d=15017453

[millionairemind]

With Apple Tablet, Print Media Hope for a Payday
By BRAD STONE and STEPHANIE CLIFFORD
Published: January 25, 2010

Correction Appended

SAN FRANCISCO — With the widely anticipated introduction of a tablet computer at an event here on Wednesday morning, Apple may be giving the media industry a kind of time machine — a chance to undo mistakes of the past.

Almost all media companies have run aground in the Internet Age as they gave away their print and video content on the Web and watched paying customers drift away as a result.

People who have seen the tablet say Apple will market it not just as a way to read news, books and other material, but also a way for companies to charge for all that content. By marrying its famously slick software and slender designs with the iTunes payment system, Apple could help create a way for media companies to alter the economics and consumer attitudes of the digital era.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/26/techn ... ref=global

[iam802]

After Three Months, Only 35 Subscriptions for Newsday's Web Site

http://www.observer.com/2010/media/afte ... ?page=all#

In late October, Newsday, the Long Island daily that the Dolans bought for $650 million, put its web site, newsday.com, behind a pay wall. The paper was one of the first non-business newspapers to take the plunge by putting up a pay wall, so in media circles it has been followed with interest. Could its fate be a sign of what others, including The New York Times, might expect?

So, three months later, how many people have signed up to pay $5 a week, or $260 a year, to get unfettered access to newsday.com?

The answer: 35 people. As in fewer than three dozen. As in a decent-sized elementary-school class.

That astoundingly low figure was revealed in a newsroom-wide meeting last week by publisher Terry Jimenez when a reporter asked how many people had signed up for the site. Mr. Jimenez didn't know the number off the top of his head, so he asked a deputy sitting near him. He replied 35.

Michael Amon, a social services reporter, asked for clarification.

"I heard you say 35 people," he said, from Newsday's auditorium in Melville. "Is that number correct?"

Mr. Jimenez nodded.

Hellville, indeed.

The web site redesign and relaunch cost the Dolans $4 million, according to Mr. Jimenez. With those 35 people, they've grossed about $9,000.

In that time, without question, web traffic has begun to plummet, and, certainly, advertising will follow as well.

Of course, there are a few caveats. Anyone who has a newspaper subscription is allowed free access; anyone who has Optimum Cable, which is owned by the Dolans and Cablevision, also gets it free. Newsday representatives claim that 75 percent of Long Island either has a subscription or Optimum Cable.

"We're the freebie newsletter that comes with your HBO," sniffed one Newsday reporter.

Mr. Jimenez was in no mood to apologize. "That's 35 more than I would have thought it would have been," said Mr. Jimenez to the assembled staff, according to five interviews with Newsday staffers.

"Given the number of households in our market that have access to Newsday's Web site as a result of other subscriptions, it is no surprise that a relatively modest number have chosen the pay option," said a Cablevision spokeswoman.

Nevertheless, traffic has fallen. In December, the web site had 1.5 million unique visits, a drop from 2.2 million in October, according to Nielsen Media Online.

In the short time that the Dolans have owned Newsday, it's been a circus. When they were closing the deal to buy the paper in May 2008, they had their personal spokesman scream at an editor who assigned a reporter to visit the Dolans, seeking comment; there was a moment back in January of last year, when Newsday editor John Mancini walked out of the newsroom because of a dispute over how the paper was handling the Knicks; in the summer, the paper refused to run ads by Verizon, a rival; Tim Knight, the paper's publisher, and John Mancini, the editor, eventually both left.

The paper, which traditionally has been a powerful money maker, lost $7 million in the first three quarters of last year, according to Mr. Jimenez at last week's meeting.

In October, the web site relaunched and was redesigned. One of the principals behind the redesign is Mr. Mancini's replacement, editor Debby Krenek.

To say the least, the project has not been a newsroom favorite. "The view of the newsroom is the web site sucks," said one staffer.

"It's an abomination," said another.

And now the paper is in the middle of a labor dispute in which it wants to extract a 10 percent pay cut from all employees. The cut was turned down by a lopsided vote of 473 to 10, this past Sunday.

Things are bleak in old Hellville, the pet nickname some reporters have established for life on Long Island.

"In the meeting with Terry, half the questions weren't about labor issues, but about why isn't this feature in the paper anymore?" said one reporter. "People are still mad about losing our national correspondents, our foreign bureaus and the prestige of working for a great newspaper. The last thing we had was a living wage, being one of the few papers where you're paid well. And to have that last thing yanked from you? It's made people so mad."

[winston]

Circulation for U.S. magazines slipped more than 2 percent in the second half of 2009. A new report also finds that single-copy sales, which are more lucrative for publishers, dropped more than 9 percent.

Among some of the better-known titles that plunged, according to The New York Times:

"W, down 41.7 percent to about 25,000 for an average issue; Newsweek, down 41.3 percent to about 62,000 (Newsweek had decreased the number of copies on sale, noted a spokesman); SmartMoney, down 37 percent to about 26,000; Time, down 34.9 percent to about 90,000; Good Housekeeping, down 30.7 percent to 395,000; and Redbook, down 30.1 percent to 126,000."

Source: Associated Press

[iam802]

Long article.
----
Washington Post Co. to Sell Newsweek

http://www.newsweek.com/id/237401

[iam802]

A pretty good write up on the imminent death of Le Monde (perhaps a good example of the challenges Publishing industry will face)

Pretty long article.

--------------
Le Monde on The Brink

http://www.mondaynote.com/2010/06/20/le ... onday+Note)

Within two weeks, the French newspaper Le Monde will run out of cash. By this Monday at noon, candidates to the takeover of the most prestigious French daily will have disclosed their offers. By June 28, the staff will vote and make the final decision for the fate of the 66 years-old paper.

More importantly, the newspaper’s independence will be under severe pressure.

Le Monde is the textbook example of the evolution of French press over the last years:
- A steady erosion in readership.
- A lack of budget discipline, made worse by loose governance.
- The core newsroom’s reluctance to support the digital strategy
- The collective certainty the “brand” was too beautiful to fail and that a deep-pocketed philanthropist will inevitably show up at the right time to save the company.
- An difficulty to invest into the future, to test new ideas, to built prototypes, to coopt key talent or to invest in decisive technologies.
- A bottomless investment in the heavy-industry part of the supply chain, in costly printing facilities.
- An excessive reliance on public subsidies which account for about 10% of the industry’s entire revenue. Compared to Sweden, French newspapers have 3 times less readers, but each one gets 5 times more subsidies.

To a large extent, these characteristics are shared by most French newspapers. This could explain the dire situation of the Gallic press. As of today, four major properties are on the block, or urgently looking for saviors:
- Le Monde seeks at least €100m (for a first round).
- Le Parisien, a popular daily, is for sale; although quite good from an editorial perspective, it is not profitable and its family ownership wants to refocus on sports-related assets.
- La Tribune, the n°2 business daily, is looking for a majority investor.
- Liberation is also facing a cash stress.

Le Monde’s situation is by far the most critical and the most emblematic. Here are the key elements : In 2009, the Groupe Le Monde had a revenue of €390m, an operating profit of €2.2m, and a net loss of €25 m. It is crumbling under €100m in debt, the result of a failed acquisition strategy. Its arcane shareholder structure includes Lagardère Group for 17%; the Spanish group Prisa (owner of El Pais) for 15%; the newsmagazine Le Nouvel Observateur for 5%; its staff for 22% and various other entities for the rest. Its main assets are : The daily Le Monde and its weekly magazine; Le Monde Interactif (including Le Monde.fr); three other magazines; and a printing plant. Over the last three years, it looked like this:



................................

[iam802]

Times’ Paid Model: The Unofficial Numbers Come In

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-time ... s-come-in/

The Times’ paid model is just two weeks old but, still, a number of stats came through this weekend - none of them from the horse’s mouth…

First, the meat - some potentially significant first numbers on how successful the paper’s paid websites have been in their first two weeks. There’s no attribution for these, but the fact they’re reported by former Times media correspondent Dan Sabbagh might be some cause for validity…

—Readers registered during free trial period: 150,000.
—Paying subscribers: 15,000 (Sabbagh: “This figure, apparently, is considered disappointing”).
—iPad customers so far: 12,500.

If true, this suggests that 12 percent of Times Online’s pre-wall daily audience created an account during the first-month-free period, then a tenth of them have paid.

The Times spokespeople did not respond to a request for comment over the weekend, but we wouldn’t expect them to comment on such speculation.

The next data set, from Hitwise, got some confusing write-ups in weekend papers (FT.com, Observer), but the bottom line is…

The registration wall, despite being free for a month, resulted in site visits declining by 58 percent. By the time actual payments had been required for a week, visits were down by 67 percent, compared with the old days.

This won’t worry many at the paper, since the whole strategy is about courting fewer, more loyal users. And it’s a darn sight better than the 90 percent drop-off that many, including The Times’ editor, have braced for.

.....

...