Online audience growth: not a solution to newspapers’ problems?

December 8, 2008

There’s an inter­est­ing look at the prob­lems of news­pa­pers online by Robert Ivan at Seek­ing Alpha, focus­ing on the New York Times. I don’t know about the assump­tions — I’ve seen the cost of the NYT’s news­gath­er­ing put at $200m — and I’ve sim­pli­fied it a little, but here it is:

Des­pite the highest read­er­ship of any news­pa­per in the United States, the New York Times only gen­er­ated $330 mil­lion in online advert­ising in 2007. Total oper­at­ing costs for that same year totaled $2.9 billion.

It is widely repor­ted that total news­pa­per oper­at­ing costs would be reduced by 35% if news­pa­pers elim­in­ated their print product [is that assump­tion really right?]. Using the NYT example … costs could be reduced to $1.9 billion.

Online advert­ising in gen­eral is grow­ing approx­im­ately 12% year over year. The New York Times is fol­low­ing this trend.

NYT online advert­ising rev­enue is pro­jec­ted to be ~$350 mil­lion or $29 mil­lion per month.

The NYTimes.com reaches an aver­age 15.6 mil­lion people per month (quant­cast) and news­pa­per web­sites in aggreg­ate reached 69.8 mil­lion people (naa).

65.4% of NYTimes.com read­ers come from the USA.

NYTimes.com is reach­ing approx. 3.3% of the US pop­u­la­tion (15.6 mil­lion x 65.4%) =10 million/(305 million)

Rev­enue per person:

  • $29 mil­lion month/15.6 mil­lion unique monthly vis­it­ors = $1.87 per unique per month.

Each unique reader is worth $22.40 annu­ally in online advert­ising rev­enue (a far cry from the 1 sub­scriber = $1,000 which is what it was before the arrival of the internet).

The gap to break-even is still a whop­ping $1.55 billion.

If advert­ising rates stay the same, The New York Times needs to raise its unique audi­ence 5.4 times in order to break even. Here is how it breaks down:

  • 5.4 x 15.6 mil­lion uniques per month =
  • 84 mil­lion uniques per month x $1.86 per unique =
  • $158.6 mil­lion per month x 12 months =
  • $1.9 bil­lion annual online advert­ising rev­en­ues = Break Even NOT YET PROFITABLE

Ques­tions for fur­ther exam­in­a­tion or the “Stalin Prob­lem” (reality):

  • Is it unreal­istic for NYTimes.com to grow their national audi­ence reach much more than 3.3% con­sid­er­ing their print audi­ence reach is ~1million or roughly 0.3%?
  • Gen­er­at­ing 84 mil­lion uniques per month would make NYTimes.com the num­ber 5 web­site in the entire world, ahead of Wikipedia.org

Pre­lim­in­ary conclusions:

  • Pur­su­ing online audi­ence growth strategies to grow rev­enue may not be the best way to grow revenue
  • Absent online advert­ising innov­a­tions, news­pa­pers must seek altern­at­ive rev­enue streams to achieve eco­nomic sustainability.

{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Nick Thomas December 8, 2008 at 13:41

Retrenching on online growth strategies cannot be an option, even if those revenues won’t support the current set-up. Those operating costs are the key here. It’s an interesting exercise to eliminate print costs as it reminds us how much the current newspaper business is about the ‘paper’ bit ($1bn) vs the ‘news’ bit ($200m, by your calculation). But what’s the additional $1.7bn that’s not newsgathering being spent on? And how many of the NYT’s headcount of c. 12000 (can someone correct/update that figure) are actually creating content? How does the NYT’s headcount compare to, say, The Guardian?

Reply

2 Adrian Monck December 8, 2008 at 14:03

Well the NYT has an editorial headcount around 1,200 – compare it to the Telegraph with an editorial headcount currently around 500.

And I think his percentage on abandoning print is way out…

Reply

3 Rolv Heggenhougen December 8, 2008 at 16:26

Imagine if the newspapers put an interactive letterhead around all the external emails sent by their employees and then charged companies to advertise in this letterhead.

Companies seem to ignore the single largest online branding/advertising venue available: their own regular external emails. Why not use these emails to market the senders company?

You have a website.
You send emails.

Why not multiply your sales-staff by “wrapping” the regular email in an interactive letterhead?

No other marketing or advertising medium is as targeted as an email between people that know each other (as opposed to mass emails). These emails are always read and typically kept.

Reply

4 Matt Walsh December 9, 2008 at 11:39

Isn’t part of the problem here though the unrealistic manner in which newspaper audiences are measured online which is the basis for advertising CPMs? Imagine if print sales discounted the number of times a reader bought a newspaper and merely reduced them to the status of unique monthly buyer.

Reply

5 Adrian Monck December 9, 2008 at 19:13

Here’s Frederic Filloux on cost structure:

In a typical operation, the biggest costs are industrial ones: around 25%-35% for paper and printing; another 30%-40% for distribution; around 18-25% for editorial; the remaining 10-15% are for administrative and marketing expenditures. It varies from country to country but we can safely assert most of the costs — at least 60% — are industrial in nature.

Reply

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: