The Gray Lady's Bones Are Showing

Recs

0

This is almost like watching a slow starvation. New York Times' (NYSE: NYT) advertising revenue, already on a steady slide for years, fell another 3.2% in August.

The bad news is nothing new. Let's glance through the negatives, shall we?

  • The News Media Group -- the newspapers -- saw revenue drop by 4.6% in a single month.
  • All-important classified revenue plummeted 20% in the month, as weakness in real estate, help-wanted, and automobile ads took its toll.
  • The hardest-hit entities were the New England Media Group, where ad revenue fell by 9% and the Regional Media Group, whose ad sales dropped by 11.9%. The New York Times Media Group was essentially flat, with a 0.2% increase.

There were still a few bright spots:

  • Internet ad revenue grew by 28.2%.
  • About.com checked in with ad sales up 27.4%.

But my Foolish friends know that, while the latter two percentages are impressive, the absolute amounts involved are dwarfed by those in the sinking traditional newspaper operations.

Times joins other publishers such as Gannett (NYSE: GCI), McClatchy (NYSE: MNI), and  Tribune (NYSE: TRB) in recording virtually unbroken strings of ad-revenue declines. As a result, Times' share price -- which seemed stable in the mid-$20s -- began sliding again this summer, closing yesterday at $20.24. In a little more than three years, shares have shed half their value.

There were more reasons why August turned out to be a downer for Times. Late in the month, Moody's Investors Service cut its rating outlook on the company from "stable" to "negative." The credit rating company cited -- no surprises here -- increased pressure on Times' advertising revenue.

As this journalistic institution steadily decays, it's hard for me to imagine the changes Times will have to make in the next five years to remain viable. I can't envision a Rupert Murdoch springing forth with an attractive offer for the company, as was the case at Dow Jones (NYSE: DJ).

Obviously, the company needs some sort of tourniquet to stem its bleeding, and soon. In the meantime I can only imagine what Times chairman Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., and CEO Janet Robinson would give for just one month of positive numbers.

For related Foolishness:

Like this article? Get our best articles delivered direct to your inbox at no cost. Sign up for Foolwatch Weekly by entering your email below.

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

Be the first one to comment on this article.

Compare Brokers

TD AMERITRADE
more info
ShareBuilder
more info
Power E*Trade

more info
Scottrade
more info
Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 536857, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 11/22/2009 5:20:57 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

The Must-Read Story on Fool.com
An Open Letter to the Federal Reserve

Related Tickers

11/20/2009 4:01 PM
GCI $10.38 Down -0.51 -4.68%
Gannett Co., Inc. CAPS Rating: **
MNI $2.98 Down -0.13 -4.18%
The McClatchy Comp… CAPS Rating: *
NYT $8.65 Down -0.19 -2.15%
The New York Times… CAPS Rating: *

Community: Investing Wiki

Term Of The Hour

Put: A put is an options contract that gives the holder the right, but not the obligation, to sell the underlying asset at a specified price on or before a specified date.

Want to learn more or edit this definition?
Click here to read more!