Good gracious - you DO need a lot of nurse-maiding!
>> ... and the site loses money hand over fist,
>
> Care to cite some source for that info? Provide any real data? I
> have a hard time quantifying "hand over fist".
Er - it is precisely because of the absence of quantified data that
the term "hand over fist" was used. But -- the website is still
losing money - quite a lot - according to my source and no - I am not
going to tell you who they are. So take it or leave it.
>
>> and the company is losing money (I think),
>
> You "think"?
mmm - it means - I am not sure, take this statement with a pinch of
salt, which is why the next statement modified it...
>
>> or at least - not doing terribly well - on the newspaper side
>> of things.
>
> I also have a hard time quantifying "not doing terribly well".
Well go and so some research if you want hard numbers. You will have
heard of google?
But just to save your delicate little fingers, how about starting
here...
http://www.gmgplc.co.uk/gmgplc/finance/finrep/pdf/report05.pdf
Note (page 2) that circulation on the Graun has fallen and pre-tax
profits for the group (GMGplc) halved in 2005 to 22.9 from 43.5
million in 2004, despite an 18% increase in turnover. As a group -
interest payments are up by about 90%, mostly on debt acquired in
2004. Cash reserves have fallen. It is true that if you include joint
ventures and associates, the operating profit went up - but the core
business is looking a little sad.
The Graun is notoriously one of the last of the national broadsheets
to move to a smaller format, which is why the move to the Berliner
format was so important. Industry gossip has it that the move has
necessitated page deadlines being brought forward by several hours -
not good for a daily rag.
So, group pre-tax profits down, interest payments up, circulation
falling on the Graun, a late entry into a reduced size format that
has generally benefited competitors. "Not terribly well" seems
reasonable. I can't find the figures I had for the Observer (The
"Sunday Guardian" in effect, although a fine old newspaper in its own
right. ), but my recollection of them is that it, in particular, has
weak finances, despite its recent small increase in circulation. If
you have data for this, do feel free to post it.
>
>> The Times, The Indie and the Telegraph have all moved to a "pay
>> for some content" model.
>
> Exactly what is the "some" content that they charge for?
I am sure people on this list are capable of going and looking for
themselves.
Not everyone needs your level of nurse-maiding.
> Certainly
> not their main daily news content, which is what I thought we had
> all been discussing up to this point.
Well you were wrong.
>> High quality journalism is seriously expensive. Keitai suffer
>> from lack of screen real estate on which to put ads
>
> Really? Is the screen size really that much of a liability when it
> comes to advertising? Do you have any data on that?
You remind me of one of those Japanese whalers earnestly researching
whether or not 50% of whales are female and 50% are male... Yes -
screen size is a liability, no - I don't have figures. If you wish to
go off and research the blazingly obvious, feel free to do so.
>
> I could imagine that a study with real users might just show that
> the screen size helps to give the ads even greater prominence.
Ah - so it is your imagination you reach for for your facts? (And
your memory for your jokes I assume.)
But "greater prominence" is precisely the PROBLEM, I would have thought.
> In a keitai browser the ads are in a single column, and I must
> scroll through them to get to the content I want to read.
YUP! Got it in one.... Congratulations. It is nice to see you have
got hold of the right stick, even if it is at the wrong end....
>
>> and the like making a business model for a keitai-only site
>> rather difficult.
>
> So who was talking about making a businees model for a keitai-only
> site? What I had pointed out was that users now have full browsers
> with which they can view the exact same sites they can view on
> their PC-based browsers.
But they can't - not properly. Oh I don't doubt you can squeeze a
newspaper's site onto a keitai with Opera, just as some dogs can walk
on their hind legs. But it is neither a pleasant nor enjoyable
experience to read. It is also expensive in terms of packets
downloaded - and hence, for many people, price.
>
>> In fact there are very few "web only" general news sites that deliver
>> high quality news reports that is other than a re-write of agency
>> reports, or a rewrite of other "real news organisation's" reports.
>
> So who was talking about "web only" general news sites? Not me,
> that's for sure.
Congratulations. But I was, in part. Because in Japan, English
language newspapers have worse economies of distribution than JP
papers, which makes a "web only" model appealing.
If you were a little less self obsessed you might perhaps realize
that this thread is discussing issues some of which may not have
originally been raised by your good self.
> The two sites I mentioned and the ones you mention above are not
> "web only" news sources. They are the online arms of "real news
> organizations", not secondary sources.
>
Yes, I know. Thank you for that sterling pearl. And? As I recollect
part of this discussion was about news sources in Japan. I quote
from the post that started the thread...
on 27th Dec bill@tsubakimoto.com wrote
<quote>
Are there any more decent English language news sites covering Japan
which don't require payment? JapanToday took their service offline
while they make the transition to the name crisscross:
http://www.japantoday.com/i/
While looking for alternatives I was amazed at the lack of such
sites. It seems there were a lot more imode access-able English sites
with decent content a few years back. Any suggested sites?
<quote />
What used to be called "Japan Today" is a high profile site, mostly
reproducing a Kyodo feed. The "news" part is web only I think.
On re-reading your posts to this thread I am struck by your easy -
not to say facile - recourse to interrogatives. Parroting "do you
have data for that?" rather than engaging with the point being made
is rather junior common room.
chill out old chap.
Nick
Received on Thu Dec 29 09:44:38 2005