On 28 Dec 2005, at 15:05, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
(quoting little me...)
>> or at least - not doing terribly well - on the newspaper side
>> of things.
>
> I also have a hard time quantifying "not doing terribly well".
A pair of links to put you out of your quantificationally challenged
misery... Ah! the joys of google... You really should try it you know.
2004
http://www.guardian.co.uk/values/socialaudit/story/
0,14327,1303764,00.html
<quote>
In the 2003-04 financial year, Guardian Newspapers Ltd reported that
losses had fallen from £7.5m to £6.2m on turnover, up from £216.7m to
£227.5m, a strong performance given the tough commercial and
competitive circumstances under which we operated
<quote/>
2005
http://www.guardian.co.uk/values/socialaudit/story/
0,14327,1603899,00.html
<quote>
Uppermost in our minds was the need to improve costs and revenues in
order to deliver a return on the investment made in the new paper,
which was largely responsible for pushing our operating losses from
£6.2m in 2004 to £48.3m in the financial year ending March 2005.
<quote />
Now - can we get back on topic?
Nick
Received on Thu Dec 29 17:00:23 2005