"Results at USA Today continue to be impacted by the soft travel and lodging markets. Several categories at USA Today improved during the quarter including automotive, technology and retail. These revenue gains, however, were more than offset by weakness in the travel, entertainment, financial, telecommunications and pharmaceutical categories. Paid advertising pages totaled 544 compared with 527 in last year's first quarter."Our smart reader, Anonymous@12:13 a.m. today, writes: "To me, that means that USAT made less money despite more paid ad pages. (And by the way, how many of those paid ad pages were for Amish fireplace mantles?)"
Earlier: USAT extends wage freeze, adds furlough
Good questions! Do any of the financial experts out there have answers? Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write jimhopkins[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the rail, upper right.
This would suggest heavy ad rate discounting. And it would explain the extension of USAT's unpaid furloughs, even as the community papers have ended theirs.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking house ads. In my experience at another paper, there are days that ads are so low the ad department opts to pad to make a full 8-page section, instead of merging sections. A full-page house ad, as sections get smaller, is the quickest and easiest way to make the sigs work.
ReplyDeleteUSAT may want to give the appearance of healthy advertising by adding house ads, too, especially in the news and business sections, no?
But the report says these are all "paid" advertising pages.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Susan Lavington, Hunke has not made any difference and that Moon was better qualified to lead USAT out of the sales funk they are in.
ReplyDeleteShe mentioned that Gannett corporate marketing and the "executives in the other tower" have really held back USAT from taking advantage of the better economy.
I do not always concur with Susan, but I can see her points and agree that USAT is worse off than before and that there is so much micro-managing from the Gannett executives that we cannot do our jobs with out getting their blessing first.
@4:48 PM:
ReplyDeleteI'd like to know who keeps posting crap about Susan on this blog. I've never heard her say a thing negative about Hunke or "executives in the other tower," and I challenge you to find another senior manager in this company who eats, sleeps and breathes her job like Susan does.
Sounds to me like some weasel has an ax to grind, and anonymous character attacks are the only way s/he can do that. It's just too bad that the blog still permits this tripe to be posted uncensored.
Now and then (and I suppose I'm overdue), I remind people that comments posted here by anonymous readers aren't necessarily 100% accurate -- or accurate at all.
ReplyDeleteOver time, however, the truth eventually comes out. As I grow more comfortable with information I receive in comments, or via e-mail or occasional phone calls, I post items myself, when I feel strongly that I've got the facts nailed down.
This is a messy way of getting to the truth, of course. But anyone who posted information under their real name would be disciplined, and possibly fired.
Finally, I would point out that the 4:22 p.m. poster decries "anonymous character attacks," then calls the earlier poster "some weasel'' -- and does so . . . anonymously.
4:22 PM here.
ReplyDeleteIf I could figure out a way to post under my own name without appearing to be a toady, I would happily do so. I can tell you, however, that if I had as big a grudge against someone as this poster appears to have against Susan, I'd have the balls to tell said person to his face rather than snipe from the interwebs.