MSM Newspaper Stocks Tank Big in 2005
The "bell weather" indicator that reflects the validity and value of the product a company sells, does not ring up as a positive trend for the MSM in 2005.
Generation Why has a post up with graphs showing the tanking stock values of the NYT, Gannett, Dow Jones & Co, and I mean they are tanking hard (hat-tip) Michelle Malkin
Generation Why
In 2005, the NYT lost 37% of its value ( high of $40.94 to a low this month of $26.14 ) NYT
WaPo dropped in 2005 from a high of $999.50 to a low this month of $716.00 ( a 28% annual drop in value ) although it is slightly up at $770.50 today ( 27% decrease ) WaPo
In fact through 12/2/05, the S&P Publishing Index was down 14.3% vs the overall S&P Index being up 4.4%. That a very nasty lag, and can anyone associated with a newspaper company not understand that the market is screaming at them that their product is "TERRIBLE" and has to "CHANGE".........................
Business Week has an article that forecasts a possible acquisition boom in 2006 of battered newspaper companies. Trends
The STL hometown paper now owned by Lee Publishing did worse than the national average of -14.3%. Lee's stock price dropped 20% from a high of $46.48 to $37.19 today. I think Lee has taken some good steps with the St. Louis Post Dispatch and there are signs that it is moving from an extreme liberal publication to a more balanced paper. It has a long way to go, but there is evidence that positive changes are occurring.
Bottom line on newspaper companies is this: When your product is bad, then it does not sell and your market share drops. Lower sales mean deceased revenue and decreased profit. Lower profit means that your stock price drops and people don't want to own stock in the company. All these things are true of most MSM newspaper companies, and the reason is that they are liberally biased and produce a product that reflects their liberal bias. Until and unless they balance their coverage sales revenue, profit and stock prices will continue to fall.
Its not so much that the New Media is some magical new delivery model. It's more so that in the New Media you don't have to get your news coverage with the same liberal biased filters. The MSM once had a monopoly but that is not the case any longer. Faced with competition that does not have a liberal bias in it's product, the MSM is losing badly. If the MSM does not rid itself of it's liberal bias the negative trends will continue...................................
Generation Why has a post up with graphs showing the tanking stock values of the NYT, Gannett, Dow Jones & Co, and I mean they are tanking hard (hat-tip) Michelle Malkin
Generation Why
In 2005, the NYT lost 37% of its value ( high of $40.94 to a low this month of $26.14 ) NYT
WaPo dropped in 2005 from a high of $999.50 to a low this month of $716.00 ( a 28% annual drop in value ) although it is slightly up at $770.50 today ( 27% decrease ) WaPo
In fact through 12/2/05, the S&P Publishing Index was down 14.3% vs the overall S&P Index being up 4.4%. That a very nasty lag, and can anyone associated with a newspaper company not understand that the market is screaming at them that their product is "TERRIBLE" and has to "CHANGE".........................
Business Week has an article that forecasts a possible acquisition boom in 2006 of battered newspaper companies. Trends
The STL hometown paper now owned by Lee Publishing did worse than the national average of -14.3%. Lee's stock price dropped 20% from a high of $46.48 to $37.19 today. I think Lee has taken some good steps with the St. Louis Post Dispatch and there are signs that it is moving from an extreme liberal publication to a more balanced paper. It has a long way to go, but there is evidence that positive changes are occurring.
Bottom line on newspaper companies is this: When your product is bad, then it does not sell and your market share drops. Lower sales mean deceased revenue and decreased profit. Lower profit means that your stock price drops and people don't want to own stock in the company. All these things are true of most MSM newspaper companies, and the reason is that they are liberally biased and produce a product that reflects their liberal bias. Until and unless they balance their coverage sales revenue, profit and stock prices will continue to fall.
Its not so much that the New Media is some magical new delivery model. It's more so that in the New Media you don't have to get your news coverage with the same liberal biased filters. The MSM once had a monopoly but that is not the case any longer. Faced with competition that does not have a liberal bias in it's product, the MSM is losing badly. If the MSM does not rid itself of it's liberal bias the negative trends will continue...................................
posted by Steve at 6:56 PM
