It's rumored that Google may have its eye on the New York Times.
Most initial reaction is that Google would be crazy tow ant the NYT and its problems. Perhaps true as far as it goes, but the NYT's problems mostly revolve around money and that's the one problem Google can solve.
In return Google can buy a name that still has some credibility (although damaged as of late, due to money problems) that would seem to have a lot of intangible worth for Google. Google, as behemoth as it is, has a little problem of its own. It hasn't been here very long. Linking to a venerable institution like the NYT could help give Google an aura of stability and permanence, which I think it needs to move to the next stage in its plan to take over the world.
Showing posts with label New York Times. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New York Times. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Monday, October 19, 2009
Gray Lady tightens her belt
So the New York Times will eliminate about 100 newsroom jobs.
If the NYT can't hold the line on cuts, it's hard to see who can. This represents about an 8 percent cut, which will definitely result in some noticeable content changes.
If the NYT can't hold the line on cuts, it's hard to see who can. This represents about an 8 percent cut, which will definitely result in some noticeable content changes.
Friday, June 12, 2009
So what now for The Boston Globe?
Employees voted down a proposal for major concessions, so the New York Times Co. said it will declare an impasse and impose 23% pay cuts effective June 25.
A nice, disinterested and detailed analysis is here: http://www.cabot.net/Issues/CWA/Archives/2009/06/Newspaper-Controversy.aspx
It's not clear what the NYT's long-term strategy is to salvage something from this disaster. It's amazing that the Globe had reached this state, really. If the Boston Herald can hold on, somehow, it may emerge as the last man standing in the Boston media market, which is truly stunning. I don't think you could have gotten 1 out of a hundred people to predict that the Herald would outlast the Globe.
The disappearance of the Globe might also be somewhat beneficial, at least in the short term, for some of the major suburban papers such as the Lowell Sun, Lawrence Eagle-Tribune and The Patriot Ledger, all of which compete against the Globe in their own backyards.
It's sad because the NYT's problems with The Globe are truly self-inflicted. It bought The Globe for $1.1 Billion, which was never a rational price. Indeed, it could have paid just half that and still would have found itself with an overpriced possession. Even before things turned south so dramatically recently, the business plan made no sense.
While some may benefit from the Globe's demise, many more will suffer and it won't be good for journalism or the public to lose the Boston Globe.
A nice, disinterested and detailed analysis is here: http://www.cabot.net/Issues/CWA/Archives/2009/06/Newspaper-Controversy.aspx
It's not clear what the NYT's long-term strategy is to salvage something from this disaster. It's amazing that the Globe had reached this state, really. If the Boston Herald can hold on, somehow, it may emerge as the last man standing in the Boston media market, which is truly stunning. I don't think you could have gotten 1 out of a hundred people to predict that the Herald would outlast the Globe.
The disappearance of the Globe might also be somewhat beneficial, at least in the short term, for some of the major suburban papers such as the Lowell Sun, Lawrence Eagle-Tribune and The Patriot Ledger, all of which compete against the Globe in their own backyards.
It's sad because the NYT's problems with The Globe are truly self-inflicted. It bought The Globe for $1.1 Billion, which was never a rational price. Indeed, it could have paid just half that and still would have found itself with an overpriced possession. Even before things turned south so dramatically recently, the business plan made no sense.
While some may benefit from the Globe's demise, many more will suffer and it won't be good for journalism or the public to lose the Boston Globe.
Friday, April 24, 2009
High stakes game of chicken?
The New York Times insists that it will hold fast to a May 1 deadline to wrest concessions from unions at the Globe or the paper may shut down. A lot is at stake for both sides, but one thing is clear. whatever the outcome the Globe as we knew it is dead. Either the Times will shut it down, or the unions will agree to concessions that will fundamentally alter the kind of paper The Globe is. The $20 million in wage and rule concessions demanded will necessarily affect quality in a direct and noticeable way.
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/04/24/times_intends_to_enforce_deadline/
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/04/24/times_intends_to_enforce_deadline/
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Kindling the newspaper
Well, I'm about two weeks into the Kindle New York Times experience and I really don't see any significant downside to the device as a newspaper consumer.
Navigating the headlines is a little clumsier than it needs to be, but it's still easier than handling a broadsheet newspaper would be. I don't read the paper during a commute, but if I did I would definitely find the Kindle easier to use on a bus or train. Using the Text to Speech function even makes it possible to "read" the newspaper while driving. (The Kindle has the ability to take headphones).
The newspaper is "delivered" every morning to my nightstand and I'm able to start reading in bed as soon as I get up. Better than home delivery. Even if the news carrier gently placed the paper on my doorstep (instead of tossing it at the end of the driveway while driving past) I'd still have to go downstairs and open the door to the elements.
About the only significant capability the Kindle version of the NYT lacks are many photos and charts. I think that the Kindle still falls short of replacing a graphics and photo-heavy publication such as Sports Illustrated or Smithsonian, but it's hard to consider this merely a temporary state of affairs that will probably abate by the time the Kindle 3 or Kindle 4 or whatever it's called rolls out in a few more years.
From the point of view of the NYT, though, the Kindle creates an entirely new dynamic because it's a subscriber-pays model instead of an advertiser-pays model. It's hard to see how any subscriber-based payment model can replace the kind of revenue that advertiser-paid print was bale to generate.
Indeed, I can't see any particular advantage an outfit like the NYT derives from its size in this new environment other than the brand value. This is not insignificant, but it may also be insufficient.
Navigating the headlines is a little clumsier than it needs to be, but it's still easier than handling a broadsheet newspaper would be. I don't read the paper during a commute, but if I did I would definitely find the Kindle easier to use on a bus or train. Using the Text to Speech function even makes it possible to "read" the newspaper while driving. (The Kindle has the ability to take headphones).
The newspaper is "delivered" every morning to my nightstand and I'm able to start reading in bed as soon as I get up. Better than home delivery. Even if the news carrier gently placed the paper on my doorstep (instead of tossing it at the end of the driveway while driving past) I'd still have to go downstairs and open the door to the elements.
About the only significant capability the Kindle version of the NYT lacks are many photos and charts. I think that the Kindle still falls short of replacing a graphics and photo-heavy publication such as Sports Illustrated or Smithsonian, but it's hard to consider this merely a temporary state of affairs that will probably abate by the time the Kindle 3 or Kindle 4 or whatever it's called rolls out in a few more years.
From the point of view of the NYT, though, the Kindle creates an entirely new dynamic because it's a subscriber-pays model instead of an advertiser-pays model. It's hard to see how any subscriber-based payment model can replace the kind of revenue that advertiser-paid print was bale to generate.
Indeed, I can't see any particular advantage an outfit like the NYT derives from its size in this new environment other than the brand value. This is not insignificant, but it may also be insufficient.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Boston Globe to close !!!??!
Wow, this is unexpected, even by someone as gloomy as me.
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/04/04/times_co_threatens_to_shut_globe_seeks_20m_in_cuts_from_unions/
Interestingly enough, this story appears on the Globe's Web site and is very direct and candid. Usually corporate media stories that are self-referential are also rather deferential. I would interpret this as meaning the situation is as serious as a heart attack and contains less than the usual amount of posturing.
I've wondered for a while if the Boston Herald's long-term business strategy is to outlast the Globe and end up the surviving paper in Boston by default. I don't believe the Herald is burdened by much debt and indeed, may have much less than the industry average after getting about $225 million a few years ago when it sold its suburban newspaper chain.
It won't be surprising if Boston ends up as a one-newspaper town. Most similar sized cities are. But it would be surprising if that newspaper ends up being the Herald!
There were many reasons to be wary of the Times purchase of the Globe. Boston and New York have been rival cities for centuries. Just as the Red Sox and the Yankees have a long-standing rivalry, the NYT and the Globe were major rivals for years before the NYT brought the competition to an end by buying the Globe. Many wondered if the New York-based newspaper executive suite would really have the interests of the Globe at heart and the way this episode is playing out validates those concerns.
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/04/04/times_co_threatens_to_shut_globe_seeks_20m_in_cuts_from_unions/
Interestingly enough, this story appears on the Globe's Web site and is very direct and candid. Usually corporate media stories that are self-referential are also rather deferential. I would interpret this as meaning the situation is as serious as a heart attack and contains less than the usual amount of posturing.
I've wondered for a while if the Boston Herald's long-term business strategy is to outlast the Globe and end up the surviving paper in Boston by default. I don't believe the Herald is burdened by much debt and indeed, may have much less than the industry average after getting about $225 million a few years ago when it sold its suburban newspaper chain.
It won't be surprising if Boston ends up as a one-newspaper town. Most similar sized cities are. But it would be surprising if that newspaper ends up being the Herald!
There were many reasons to be wary of the Times purchase of the Globe. Boston and New York have been rival cities for centuries. Just as the Red Sox and the Yankees have a long-standing rivalry, the NYT and the Globe were major rivals for years before the NYT brought the competition to an end by buying the Globe. Many wondered if the New York-based newspaper executive suite would really have the interests of the Globe at heart and the way this episode is playing out validates those concerns.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Grey Lady starts cutting
The New York Times will be engaging in layoffs and is cutting salaries by 5% "temporarily."
At least one analyst says good luck with that: http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-new-york-times-finally-bows-to-reality-2009-3
At least one analyst says good luck with that: http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-new-york-times-finally-bows-to-reality-2009-3
Monday, January 5, 2009
Sign of the future
The "Grey Lady" herself, the New York Times, will start selling ad space on its front page.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/business/media/05times.html?_r=1&ref=media
Back in the day this was a common practice. Front page ad space was always premium space, but starting in the early 20th Century newspapers began moving ads off the front page for aesthetics and professionalism.
Given the NY Times decision I would expect nearly every other newspaper in the country to quickly follow suit.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/business/media/05times.html?_r=1&ref=media
Back in the day this was a common practice. Front page ad space was always premium space, but starting in the early 20th Century newspapers began moving ads off the front page for aesthetics and professionalism.
Given the NY Times decision I would expect nearly every other newspaper in the country to quickly follow suit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
