An important fact is being lost in the current debate over the future of newspapers. Some 40 years ago when computers began replacing the expensive composing rooms at newspapers, their profit margins have risen from five to 20 percent of gross. So 20 percent became the baseline and the minimum expectation of owners.
By contrast the average among companies in the United States is seven percent. Greedy people on Wall Street and private owners recognized their papers as cash cows. Meanwhile readers slipped away and replacements headed for the tube.
Many papers have churn rates of up to 20 percent. That means they lose 20 percent of their readers each year and must get new ones to fill the hole. They are running just to stay even, but still chain operators want their 20 percent.
So instead of using part of their margins to save their businesses they blame their competitors and anyone else handy. The next time you hear about newspapers having trouble remember it is not TV, the internet, or radio: the fault is in the mirror.
I know. I owned one newspaper and ran others. Others know too. Here’s what Hollywood billionaire David Geffen thinks: ”Geffen has said he would buy the Los Angeles Times with his own money and would be happy with a five percent return on investment, far below the 20 percent return the Los Angeles Times earns for the Tribune Company now.”
Consequences of what Bill's describing include this barely comprehensible job ad for newspaper staff:
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/wri/210438409.html
Posted by: Martha Bridegam on September 21, 2006 4:36 PMOne acronym: RICO
Posted by: D Mitchell on September 21, 2006 5:34 PMThank you. More facts and perspective in that paragraph than I ever get in a newspaper these days. My partner and I canceled our NYT and Boston Globe subscriptions earlier this year. We don't miss them at all.
Posted by: Michael on September 22, 2006 11:19 PM