tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post777675331648837179..comments2023-11-05T06:26:51.316-05:00Comments on Gannett Blog: Earnings | Amid decline, print is still the engineJim Hopkinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16712746705871119746noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post-26412166196927411482011-02-09T13:03:47.554-05:002011-02-09T13:03:47.554-05:00Jim – It all depends on what Gannett wants to “gro...Jim – It all depends on what Gannett wants to “grow,” though you should know newspapers have been playing the revenue assignment game well before the internet arrived. <br /><br />Typically, when a daily and non-daily print buy was bundled, the daily kept the bulk of the money to “maintain” its average rate and revenues. The same goes on now with the digital, though that area has to show growth.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post-35164970176311049322011-02-08T12:39:02.126-05:002011-02-08T12:39:02.126-05:0012:24 This is what I keep wondering. For example, ...12:24 This is what I keep wondering. For example, if Sue's Furniture Store buys a $1,000 print/broadcast advertising contract that includes $200 in "free" online ads, how does that get counted?<br /><br />Is it $1,000 in print only? Or is it treated as $800 for print and $200 for online. Seems to me that a publisher/TV general manager would be awfully tempted to choose the latter, Jim Hopkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16712746705871119746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post-37343285890012713152011-02-08T12:24:32.877-05:002011-02-08T12:24:32.877-05:00...and what part of those gains were from "sh......and what part of those gains were from "shifting" print dollars internally?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post-26669759644861169642011-02-08T00:03:08.250-05:002011-02-08T00:03:08.250-05:00Digital showed great gains in a few years, what pa...Digital showed great gains in a few years, what part of those gains were from acquisitions?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post-54831811742941672262011-02-07T08:19:50.979-05:002011-02-07T08:19:50.979-05:00This is where the meat of the story is... Business...This is where the meat of the story is... Businesses that are leaning into the future don't get "surprised" by market flux. They actually get a pass to make needed changes and fast forward in their strategy. Gannett may or may not pull a Kodak here. <br />Kodak was too wonky and controly on their digital strategy, and really moved too slow while others just zoomed on by. There are Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post-40342364895166222802011-02-06T13:13:30.943-05:002011-02-06T13:13:30.943-05:00Compare current day revenues to 2006 and much shar...Compare current day revenues to 2006 and much sharper declines result, notably with…<br /><br />Print Advertising $5,275,650 vs. $2,710,524 in 2010.<br />Broadcasting $854,821 vs. $769,580 in 2010.<br /><br />Total Revenue in 2006 was $7,847,613 vs. $5,438,678 last year. Losses like this are exactly why profits and earnings per share are now half what they were back then.<br /><br />Gannett can Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post-17335874300010234062011-02-06T10:44:14.231-05:002011-02-06T10:44:14.231-05:00They weeded editors and execs at local properties ...They weeded editors and execs at local properties off corporate over the years, but always charged the local properties for that payroll. The execs enjoyed some of the privileges but local props still footed the CC bills and cars. Pubs are probably the last holdouts, and probably not all pubs anymore. <br />The bigger issue is McLean staffs that are not USATODAY. The structure for the newspapers Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post-32773526658118783572011-02-06T10:38:01.637-05:002011-02-06T10:38:01.637-05:00That spreadsheet demonstrates why Gannett is screw...That spreadsheet demonstrates why Gannett is screwed long term. Print is on its deathbed. Just once I'd like to see Gannett buy and already profitable news website and do something with it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post-21162271873115160222011-02-05T21:46:03.787-05:002011-02-05T21:46:03.787-05:00Print is down nearly 50%.
Employee count probabl...Print is down nearly 50%. <br /><br />Employee count probably down the same.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post-48542220322329676912011-02-05T16:21:06.963-05:002011-02-05T16:21:06.963-05:003:04 Indeed, I could do that. But I don't have...3:04 Indeed, I could do that. But I don't have access to one important piece of data: the number of "corporate staff and execs" over time.<br /><br />It's also a tricky number. There are the Corporate employees in McLean. But I believe publishers, general managers and local site VPs such as advertising directors, are also considered Corporate staff. I once heard that even Jim Hopkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16712746705871119746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8099437767970534324.post-56818948558088730172011-02-05T15:04:45.330-05:002011-02-05T15:04:45.330-05:00Could you do a graph that has all of these element...Could you do a graph that has all of these elements overlay: GCI total employment numbers; total revenue; total profit; total number of corporate staff and execs; share price; number of newspapers and TV stations; revenue of TV; revenue for print; digital revenue; and CEO compensation. <br />All the charts would need to be scaled to sim ratios before you extracted the XY numbers to overlay the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com