NY Times = Junk

[PapaG]

Literally!

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=081023232610.187uwdxs&show_article=1

The New York Times Co. reported a steep drop in third-quarter profits on Thursday, the latest gloomy earnings report in an industry battered by online competition and falling print advertising revenue.

The New York Times Co. said net profit fell by 51.4 percent in the third quarter to 6.5 million dollars, or five cents per share, from 13.4 million dollars, or nine cents per share, in the same period a year ago. ...

Shortly after the release of its results, Standard & Poors said it was lowering the Times's credit rating to "BB-," or junk status, while Moody's Investors Service said it was placing it on review for possible downgrade.

Moody's changed the rating outlook for the company to negative from stable in July. A further downgrade would reduce it to junk status.

 

[MARIS61]

All newspapers are struggling.

The Oregonian slashed staff and is putting out a sliver of it's former self. The drop in advertising, mostly auto ads, has been devastating.

The Oregonian now costs $1.00 here in Beautiful Central Oregon.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

The Columbian is about to go BK . . . if it hasn't already.

 

[PapaG]

Junk.

LOL

 

[istolebillwaltonsbike]

The newspapers have been on decline for years (because of the internet?) and its only going to get worse.

How about a bailout?

@ Media & Money: No Government Bailout For Newspapers; WSJ’s Thompson: Newspapers Already Non-Profit

By David Kaplan - Wed 15 Oct 2008 08:12 AM PST

Given the level of distress throughout the newspaper business these days, maybe the industry should consider lobbying Capitol Hill for a bailout of its own? While it’s safe to say that’s not going to happen, panelists speaking about “old media” at the Dow Jones/Nielsen Media and Money Conference told moderator Harry Hawkes, partner, Booz & Co. Nevertheless, they were willing to entertain the idea.

-- Lee Abrams, SVP, chief innovation officer, Tribune Co.: A bailout would be a terrible idea. If that would happen, newspapers would eventually wind up in worse shape, since they would then focus on this ultra-elite 0.5 percent and would otherwise be unreachable to the mass audience. The best analogy I can think of would be if the government had decided to come in the 1950s to subsidize classical music to counter the emergence of rock music.

-- Jeffrey Stevenson, managing partner/co-CEO, Veronis Suhler Stevenson: [Tongue planted firmly in cheek] We would love that idea. In fact, we would love to help finance a $25 billion plan to help newspapers bridge the digital divide. I don’t think it would work, necessarily, but it would be good for our company.

-- Jeffrey Smulyan, chairman, CEO, Emmis Communications: I don’t see a bailout serving as a basis for a turnaround for the newspaper business. But a not-for-profit model actually could be a good idea for some.

-- Lauren Rich Fine, research director, ContentNext; media professor, Kent State: There’s a lot of really good models out there. There’s no single solution for newspapers, however. The industry will be saved, but a government bailout isn’t going to do it. Having a lot of debt forces you to move a lot faster. I don’t see a return to the previous levels of profitability for newspapers, mainly due to the changes affecting classified advertising. But as Robert [Thompson, managing editor, WSJ/editor-in-chief, Dow Jones] said, newspapers’ individual brands have value. That’s what they have to build on.

-- Best line: On the not-for-profit model, Thompson quipped: ”The newspaper business has actually been non-profit for quite a while now.”

It wouldn't let me post the link for some reason...