Skip to comments.Gannett Nov. Revenue Drops 2.1% (Other MSM sinking, too)
Posted on 12/11/2005 7:55:40 AM PST by HonduGOP
Gannett Nov. Revenue Drops 2.1%
Published: December 08, 2005 10:20 AM ET
MCLEAN, Va. (AP) Gannett Co., the nation's largest newspaper publisher and owner of several television stations, said Thursday that revenue fell 2.1% during November compared to last year, as lower advertising demand in its broadcasting group and British newspapers hurt results.
At USA Today, ad revenue dropped 7.7%, as the number of paid ad pages fell to 345 from 412.
Gannett said November revenue fell to $656.6 million from $670.9 million on a pro forma basis, which assumes that all properties the company owned were owned in both periods.
The publisher of USA Today, the largest U.S. newspaper, said newspaper ad revenue in November declined 3.3% from 2004.
Local ad revenue fell 2.7%, classified ad revenue fell 1.8% and national ad revenue fell 8.3% on a pro forma basis, the company said.
The company said broadcasting revenue dropped 3.2% during the month.
good news comes in odd places.
HERE IS MORE BAD NEWS FOR THE MSM!!!
Prudential Downgrades The New York Times Co.
By Jennifer Saba
Published: December 07, 2005 5:54 PM ET
NEW YORK Prudential Equity Research Group downgraded The New York Times Co. to "underweight" from "neutral" because the "fundamentals have been worrisome for some time," wrote analyst Steven Barlow in a research note released today.
The reason: The company is lagging behind its peers, it's offering little guidance for 2006, and its capital expenditures could double. "We have no choice but to recommend investors underweight this stock," the report said.
Year-to-date newspaper advertising and total revenue at the company rose 2%. Excluding About.com, total revenue increased 0.7%.
Prudential was not impressed with the company's November performance, singling out the New England Media Group, which recorded a 2.2% decline in ad revenue.
Additionally, the company explained it was not going to give estimates for 2006, though it admitted the upcoming year will be challenging. "This information was in contrast to surprisingly optimistic forecasts provided by four of the smaller market newspaper publishers so far at the conferences," the report said about this week's media conferences in New York.
The research firm also reduced its 2006 earnings per share estimate from $1.60 to $1.5
LOL!!! THE NEW YORK TIMES IS CONSIDERED "UNDERWEIGHT" NOW!!
Down across the board...great news.
Yes!!!!!!! Bad news for the MSM, bad news for the White Flag DemocRATS and great news for America!
"It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas..."
Boo boo on my part, should have gone to the Abbas article.
And there's nothing they can do about it.
Although lib print is failing faster than conservative
and non-political print, all print media is failing.
If the lib rags move to the left, right, up, down,
they'll just lose more existing subscribers faster
than they can recruit new ones.
> And there's nothing they can do about it.
To reply to my own reply ...
This is one area where the surrendercrats are correct.
They cannot win this war (against the web, the rising
costs of print, and reader revolt), and it's time for
lib media to schedule a retreat with honor (or whatever
today's DNC FAX euphemism is).
Even Barbra Streisand dropped the LA Times like a hot potato. Pass the Pop corn
I belong to the Mid-Atlantic Newspaper Services, Inc. 7.7% is exactly what MANS dropped in November.
good news!!!! Hope they all go under....
Yes!!!!!!! Bad news for the MSM, bad news for the White Flag DemocRATS and great news for America.
This is exactly so. Let the MSM sink.
Simple demographics will doom the New York-Washington propaganda press. Most readers are 50 or older. As they pass on, so will the circulation and ad revenue.
I believe left wing newspapers will find a niche and survive as shreiking moonbat tabloids screaming to the Marxist choir in the big cities. We have a ways to go before the influence of the left wing propaganda press becomes only a minor squeak in the media world.
It's Bush's fault!
Is that true?? I never see the NWP, Wash-Times, or WSJ cited in these stories. What are their numbers?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.