$2 newsstand price for the New York Times? Ouch......

[marmar]

Publishers Tap Readers for Revenue With $2 Newspapers (Update2)
By Greg Bensinger


May 27 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. publishers are betting readers will fork over a few more quarters for their newspaper, one of the few ways they can boost revenue as advertisers cut spending.

New York Times Co.’s flagship newspaper will cost $2 at newsstands as of June 1, a 50-cent increase, and subscription prices also will rise. A.H. Belo Corp. said this month it will consider more increases next year after raising the Dallas Morning News 25 cents to $1 in February.

Price increases at the Washington Post and Tampa Tribune also paid off with higher circulation revenue, a rare area of improvement in an industry that posted declines in advertising and readership in the past year. Ad sales have dropped so low that publishers said they are willing to lose some readers to get more money out of the loyal ones.

“Those rate hikes will continue as long as they can keep pushing them through,” Alexia Quadrani, a JPMorgan Chase & Co. analyst in New York, said in an interview. “Circulation is relatively a positive story, but unfortunately it doesn’t do too much to offset the declining advertising.”

In 2007, readers paid 35 cents for the Washington Post, less than half the current newsstand price of 75 cents, and $1 for the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal, which now costs $2.

Raising prices too far may carry unintended consequences, including driving readers to free news Web sites, said Tom Corbett, a media analyst at Morningstar Inc. in Chicago. Most publications have suffered declining readership as consumers seek more news from the Internet or television. ..............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aLVQaTs1HON0&refer=home

[rocktivity]

1. PLEASE tell me they're talking about the Sunday edition...

x(
rocktivity

[marmar]

2. Daily brother.....

n/t

[Mojambo]

5. Sunday is going up from $5.00 to $6.00. n/t

[onehandle]

9. Ok, that's too much. nt

[Greyhound]

3. It's not the price, it's the content (rather the lack of content).

I won't pay a dime for the fake news/infotainment that passes for American journalism today. I can get the AP releases for free and the rest of it is just corporate propaganda anymore.

Will someone please tell these asshats that you have to pay journalists to find the stories. Shit even Ted Turner knew that and built CNN with the largest network of journalists worldwide, then as soon as the corporate assholes bought his brainchild, the first thing they did was to dismantle the network of reporters and start the endless repetition of wire stories.

BTW, Ted Turner was, and probably still is, one of the biggest assholes on earth, but he wasn't stupid and he knew that you have to actually make something in order to sell it.

[onehandle]

4. That honestly doesn't sound like a lot to me.

But I have computers and an iPhone, so there is little chance I will ever buy a paper again.

[marmar]

6. $2 for a daily newspaper is a bit steep, considering how much less content is in them these days....

...... even in the venerable Gray Lady.

[Captain Hilts]

7. You learn so much more from a paper newspaper. nt

[onehandle]

8. I agree and are old enough to know.

and yet...

I usually do read the Times when I am in NYC. It always magically shows up in my hotel room.

[JI7]

10. i wouldn't want it even if it was free