New York Times Price Hike: Daily, Sunday Edition Prices Both Go Up

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - New York Times Price Hike: Daily, Sunday Edition Prices Both Go Up stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

MICHAEL LIEDTKE | 05/ 5/09 06:28 PM | AP

I Like ItI Don’t Like It

The New York Times is raising its newsstand prices for the third time in less than two years as a severe advertising slump forces readers to shoulder more of the costs of producing newspapers.

With the latest changes announced Tuesday, individual copies of The New York Times on Mondays through Saturdays will have doubled to $2 since July 2007.

The upcoming increase, effective June 1, will boost the Times' weekday price by 50 cents, or 33 percent, from the current price of $1.50. The Times, which has the third-highest U.S. circulation on weekdays, increased the weekday price by 25 cents during each of the previous two summers.

The New York Times also is raising the price for its Sunday edition, which is the nation's top-selling newspaper on that day. Sunday's national and Northeast editions will cost $6, an increase of $1. In the New York area, it will cost $5, also a dollar more.

Home delivery rates aren't changing for now. That means most of the Times' readers won't be affected by the June 1 increases because home delivery accounts for nearly two-thirds of the newspaper's weekday circulation and more than 70 percent of the Sunday circulation.

But the Times isn't ruling out an increase later this year, newspaper spokeswoman Diane McNulty said. The Times had raised its home delivery prices around the same time it increased newsstand prices in 2007 and 2008.

Raising the prices of newspapers is risky because it threatens to drive away readers, particularly as the Times and most other newspapers give away their stories on the Internet. The recession also has made many consumers more frugal.

But many newspapers have shown willingness to see circulation fall as long as they keep the readers most coveted by advertisers.

Story continues below
advertisement

Among other things, the Times and other newspapers have been cutting back on discounted and third-party sales. The thinking is that readers willing to pay higher prices could end up being more valuable to advertisers because they are presumably more affluent and more engaged with newspapers.

The average sales of 395 daily U.S. newspapers, including the Times, tracked by the Audit Bureau of Circulations fell 7.1 percent from last year during the six months ending in March, the biggest decline on record.

The New York Times' weekday circulation averaged 1.04 million during the six months ending in March, a drop of more than 3 percent from last year. Before the 2007 price increase, the Times' weekday circulation stood at 1.12 million.

Although many factors are behind the circulation drop, both USA Today, the nation's largest weekday newspaper, and The New York Post have blamed higher prices for recent declines in their circulation.

Despite the erosion, the circulation revenue of the Times and other newspapers is still higher that a year ago because the remaining readers are paying more. Higher prices helped lift the first-quarter circulation revenue at The New York Times Co. and McClatchy Co., which owns The Miami Herald and 29 other daily newspapers.

The flurry of price increases underscores just how much the shifting financial landscape has shaken newspaper publishers.

For decades, newspapers were able to rely on steady increases in their ad revenue to cover most of the cost for gathering the news, printing the information and then distributing the copies. A reliable flow of advertising is one reason the Times was able to go from 1999 to 2007 with just one increase in the cover price of its weekday edition.

But ad revenue has been crumbling throughout the newspaper industry for the past three years, forcing newspapers to lay off workers, reduce wages and look for new ways to make money.

So far the revenue gains from higher prices haven't been nearly enough to overcome the advertising drought.

The New York Times Co., which also owns The Boston Globe and 16 other daily newspapers besides its flagship publication, lost $74 million during the first three months of the year as its ad revenue plunged 27 percent from last year. Circulation revenue edged up by 1 percent.

With its newspaper prices rising and ad sales sagging, circulation accounted for 38 percent of the Times Co.'s first-quarter revenue. Most newspaper publishers still rely more heavily on advertising.

The advertising downturn has sent seven publishers with daily newspapers into bankruptcy protection since December and triggered the closure of the Rocky Mountain News in Denver.

The New York Times is raising its newsstand prices for the third time in less than two years as a severe advertising slump forces readers to shoulder more of the costs of producing newspapers. With t...
The New York Times is raising its newsstand prices for the third time in less than two years as a severe advertising slump forces readers to shoulder more of the costs of producing newspapers. With t...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
107
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)

Raising the price is bad enough. The even sadder truth is how the paper has been SHRUNK in every way. Fewer sections, smaller sections, even smaller pages! Goodbye New York Times... you and your fellow newspapers are nothing but a historical footnote now!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:38 PM on 05/05/2009

HAHA Why don't they just raise it to $10 an issue and close down today! I love how one of the arguments of the "save the newspaper" crowd is that we need newspapers to provide all these diverse voices in a democracy. Well.... how many people in this democracy are going to afford almost $80 a MONTH or almost $1,000 a YEAR for a newspaper!! How democratic of them! For a LOT less, you can get hundreds of channels on tv, or sat radio, or the internet and get a LOT more diversity of opinion that the Times. I read the Times and I like it, but there is only so much I'm going to pay for it. If you can't produce a paper for less than 2 dollars (or less than 6 on sunday), then you really don't have any reason to publish it. Goodbye newspapers­.. it's been real!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:35 PM on 05/05/2009
- NHBill I'm a Fan of NHBill 16 fans permalink
photo

Georgie may not be a marketing major but the point is well made. People will only pay so much for stuff. When your ISP is slamming you for $50 a month or a triple play for $99, there is nothing left for the NYT!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:46 PM on 05/05/2009

How much is the internet worth if the newspaper web sites shut down because the companies that own them go bankrupt?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:20 PM on 05/05/2009

Next we'll hear that they will accept $4 in food stamps for a Sunday paper.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:27 PM on 05/05/2009
- dhfsfc I'm a Fan of dhfsfc 6 fans permalink

The Sunday NYT puzzle is not worth $6.00.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:24 PM on 05/05/2009
- Budokan I'm a Fan of Budokan 201 fans permalink
photo

That's some high priced fish wrap.

http://kennethmarkhoover.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:16 PM on 05/05/2009

Interesting. Demand for the NYT - to which I have a subscription - declines.
Demand declines and The LAW of supply and demand dictates that price should decline.

YET...what occurs?

The price is increased!!! BY 33%

How is that for your economic law of bullcrap!???

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:09 PM on 05/05/2009
- NHBill I'm a Fan of NHBill 16 fans permalink
photo

They might as well shoveled dirt on themselves.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:46 PM on 05/05/2009
- yodaveg I'm a Fan of yodaveg 19 fans permalink
photo

Before you start dancing on the Times's grave, remember that this site is an aggregator. When the original news content sources like the Times finally disappear, all that will be left here is opinion. Hardly a nutritious diet of information.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:43 PM on 05/05/2009
- NHBill I'm a Fan of NHBill 16 fans permalink
photo

Yo! Hopefully talent will find a way. There is money to be made if you can be a credible source. The question is can an individual writer survive without the rapidly shrinking teat of mother print.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:50 PM on 05/05/2009
photo

Not all original news contents is provided by bunglers on the same level as the Times' management.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:20 PM on 05/06/2009

When this Rag Finally Dies, make it a Golden Nail as the Last in the Cofin, so Spiecial! . can't wait!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:35 PM on 05/05/2009
- xansam I'm a Fan of xansam 20 fans permalink

bye bye NYT, you aren't doing a good enough job to spend that kind of money

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:27 PM on 05/05/2009
- Pucker I'm a Fan of Pucker 2 fans permalink

I'm actually starting to buy the NYT in newsstands, out of pity.

On one hand, I am very content with reading everything online (for free). On the other, I can't imagine life without the NYT in a stack of paper.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:15 PM on 05/05/2009

After carelessly losing over $3 billion dollars on stock buy backs and on the Globe I guess the Times - instead of booting out Sulzberger - is going to make the customer pay for their costly and ignorant mistakes.
But meanwhile Sulzberger remains head of the ship he's sinking rapidly..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:15 PM on 05/05/2009
- SoCalNick I'm a Fan of SoCalNick 79 fans permalink
photo

They NEVER LEARN!

Punish your LOYAL Customers who stuck by you to make up for your not keeping the others happy.

No Wonder so many of our companies need welfare.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:07 PM on 05/05/2009

$6 ? I think of the e-trade babies laughing over that. Paying $O.O6 would be more equivalent to its worth.
By the way, do they still include the environment wrecking blue plastic bag with delivery?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:44 PM on 05/05/2009

Shhhhhhhhh!

All the content is still free on the Internet.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:40 PM on 05/05/2009
photo

I think it is always great business to raise the prices on things no one wants.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:19 PM on 05/05/2009
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect