This can't keep up much longer. Indeed, were the New York Times'
The first number you need to know is 8.5%. That's how much Times' advertising revenue from continuing operations fell in May. And 5.8% is another one you'll want to be aware of -- total revenue from continuing operations slid by that amount in May. And then there's 9.1%, 8.8%, and 14%: Advertising revenue at the New York Times Media Group, New England Media Group, and Regional Media Group, respectively, fell by those amounts last month. Those declines occurred despite a 21.4% hike in Internet ad revenue, which buoyed each group somewhat.
All the primary types of advertising -- national, retail, and classified -- contributed. And while I don't mean to imply that one month's revenue drop-off constitutes Armageddon for the Gray Lady and her siblings, in reality, this year's fifth monthly slide simply was steeper than its predecessors. Beyond that, it's difficult to envision where the company -- or other newspaper publishers such as Tribune
In the face of these ongoing declines, I have a couple of comments: First, I think it's extremely unlikely that New York Times will move through the rest of 2007, or perhaps far into next year, without some sort of major shareholder upheaval. Recall that in the company's recent annual meeting, Class A investors withheld 42% of their votes for the Class B slate of directors. But because the Ochs-Sulzberger family controls New York Times through its super-voting shares, it's difficult to see how much can be changed without its agreement.
Further, I believe that Fools should stay away from this and other newspaper publishing stocks, despite the yen you may have to get involved in the fallout from the industry's disarray. Yes, yes, I know that New York Times is up about 10% in the six weeks since News Corp.'s
To read up on related Foolishness: