Advertising still dominates the newspaper revenue model. Depending upon the particular country, it is not uncommon to see print dailies getting 70% to 80% of their revenue from advertising. In the early days of the digital era, when business plans were driven by “eyeballs”, everybody hoped to replicate the tried and true print advertising revenue model. Now, the collective hallucination has dissipated; a more down-to-earth vision prevails: publishers willing to preserve high quality (read: costly) journalism recognize they have no choice but getting their users to pay for it, one way another. The pendulum has swung back.
It’s a chicken-and-egg problem. You’ll be able to charge readers if you put yourself in a position to propose exclusive, unique contents. To do so, you’ll have to put together an strong line-up of professionals, as opposed to a blogger army whose output no one will ever pay a dime for.Next questions include: how much to charge ? Is it 10 (dollars euros, pounds), 20 or more? What free-to-pay conversion rate to aim at? Can we shoot for 5%, 10% or more of the overall audience? How does a full digital operation look like?
Let’s dive into numbers for a back-of-the-envelope exercise.
First, assumptions: The following is based on my observations of markets in Europe (France, UK, Scandinavia) and the United states; numbers may vary but I trust none are widely off the mark.
In the print world, costs break down as follows:
Newsroom........................25% Production, printing............25% Distribution....................20% Marketing promotion.............20% Administration..................10% ...............................100%
Now let’s move to a fully digital operation derived from a traditional one in terms of journalistic firepower and standards.
To produce it, we’ll settle for a 200 staff newsroom, with writers, editors, data journalists, information-graphic designers, videographers, etc. We removed the staff working on the dead-tree model. With 200 dedicated people working for an online operation, you can really shoot the for stars. Such a setup costs between $25 and $30 million a year, all expenses included. Let’s settle for a middle $27 million.
Production costs fall sharply as the carbon-based version is gone. The old 45% production and printing line morphs into a conservative 15% for serving web pages and applications. We’ll assume all other costs (marketing, promotion, administrative) remain at the same level.
The cost table now looks like this:
Newsroom...............27M$......40% of the total Production, technical..10M$......15% Marketing promotion....20M$......30% Administration.........10M$......15% Total Costs............67M$
Now, let’s turn to the revenue side.
First: advertising revenue. We assume a real audience of 5 million Unique Visitors per month. By real audience, I mean no cheating, no bogus viewers, reasonable SEM and excellent SEO. People come to the site, stick to it and come back. Each user sees at least 20 pages a month. That’s on the high side. By comparison, Google Ad Planner gives the following page views per UVs:
NYT.........15 pageviews per user and per month (distant paywall) WSJ.........14 (some paid-for section) FT.com......11 (strict paywall) Guardian....14 (free)
20 pages is therefore an ambitious goal. I’m convinced it can be achieved through high-performance recommendation engines (look at what Amazon does in terms of its ability to get people to click on related items).
5 million UVs multiplied by 20 pages views gives (thank you) 100 million PV. Now, let’s assume each page generate a CPM (for several modules) of $20. That’s an average as not all pages yield the same amount: parts of the inventory will go unsold, but pages served to high value, paid-for subscribers will generate twice that amount. This translates into a yearly revenue of $24 million, that is around 5 advertising dollars per visitor per year.
Again: it will vary, but it is consistent with what we see on the market for high quality, branded, publications. (By contrast, even the greatest blogs only yield one or two dollars per user).
Two, subscription revenue. Since our audience is solid and loyal to the brand, we will assume 10% of all readers will be willing to pay. Make no mistake: that is the transformation rate a newspapers such as the New York Times is aiming at (it is currently at 1%, still a long way to go). My take is a general news operation will be price-sensitive, meaning the transformation rate with a $9.99 a month price will be significantly higher than with $15 or $20 per month; by contrast, a specialized publication is less rate-sensitive and can be pricier.
In my model of a general news product, I set the price to $10 a month, which makes the one-tenth conversion rate more realistic. Then, I factor in two items:
- 15% taxes (it ranges from 8% in the US to 20% in France)
- a 13% cost of platform including transaction, database, etc (that’s should be a goal as Google OnePass charges 10%); this line is distinct from the technical costs applied to the entire digital operation.
All of the above taken into account, a digital subscriber paying $10 month will generate a net ARPU of $89 a year for the company. Multiplied by 0.5 million paid-for users (i.e.10% of the global audience), this translates into a revenue of $44 million for digital subscribers.
The revenue table now looks like this:
Advertising......24M$...35% of the total Subscription.....44M$...65% Total............68M$...100%
$68 million in revenue for a cost of $67 million (all numbers rounded), leaves a mere 2% operating margin. Nothing to brag about. It could easily translate into an accounting loss, especially since it will take a while to reach several of these goals: a 10% free-to-paid transformation rate, a high number of pages per viewers, both are several years (of losses) away for many publications.
But these are the only dials I set on the ambitious side; the rest (subscription price, audience), is rather conservative; for instance if you simply set the subscription rate at $12 a month instead of $10 — that is fifty cents per weekday — the operating margin jumps to 13%.
And I also set aside many things I firmly believe in, like keeping some print operation in the form of a compact, high-end weekly for instance (with a staff of 200, it sounds feasible), developing ancillary products such as digital book publishing, etc.
Once again, while I feel my numbers are well-grounded, others will find this little model simplistic and questionable. The simulation is aimed at showing there is a life after the death of the daily print edition. Success is a “mere matter” of persistence.
—frederic.filloux@mondaynote.com
Related columns:
- Analyzing the metered model TweetThe metered model deserves a closer look. One the dirtiest little secrets of the online media business is the actual number of truly loyal readers — as opposed to fly-bys. No one really wants to know (let alone let anyone else know). Using a broad brush, about half of the audience is composed of casual [...]...
- Refining the Model TweetLet’s come back to the business model question. My January 15 column featuring a Simple Model for digital newspapers triggered a number of emails and comments, many questioning my assumptions (my thanks to readers of the Monday Note who take the time to make insightful contributions to the discussion). Let’s see if we can sort [...]...
- Not Dead: The Paid-for Online Model TweetDeath reports of paid-for models on the Internet have been greatly exaggerated. Granted: the network’s genome carries the “free” nucleotide. As in both freedom and free goods and services. Like it or not, its publicly funded origins (universities and the Pentagon) led to the emergence of widely adopted services such as search engines or Wikipedia. [...]...
- Revenue Model Breakthrough? TweetMicro-payments are an old idea, some say a bad fantasy. Chief, we’re rich: I found a way to get a millicent per page view… So far, not much has happened. Unless you look at a tidy, not tiny, little billion-dollar business called iTunes. Three years ago, in February 2006, 1 billion songs served, sold, cashed [...]...
- Advertising (2): fixing an antique model TweetLast week, we addressed the demise of the ad-only model. Solutions won’t emerge overnight, all the more of a reason to start searching. Here are a few leads. (This is the second of two parts, the first one is here) The AdTech conference took place last week, in Paris; the mood there wasn’t exactly a [...]...





9 Comments
I would pay $9.99 per month for nyt.com, $120/yr, but no more. Problem is, they’re asking $195/year. I was one of those Lincoln Continental subscribers last year, and so far for 2012 nobody has insisted I pay, so I haven’t. If they did, I’d say no. Maybe that’s why they haven’t.
What do you mean by “page views”? For digital, there’s no page. The only thing that matters is article views. I look at a lot more than 20 per month. Maybe 10 to 20 articles per day. (The bad news: I’ve trained myself to ignore ads.)
I pay more than $120/year for wsj.com, but it’s worth more to me. The wsj forums are so much superior to nyt, and this matters a lot to me. I want to engage and respond and argue. But nyt still thinks the experience is about skilled reporters communicating one-way with eager readers, who need no interaction with each other. Wrong!
When I open my Firefox browser, first thing I see is iGoogle with news headlines from my leading media: wsj, nyt, al jazeera, bbc, and cnn. Then LinkedIn questions. In that order.
Frederick, you have not discussed in your posts the importance of online interaction with media stories. Every day, I spend time doing what I’m doing right now: responding to articles, posts, essays, and other responders. Media that make this easy, and that host interesting forums that attract intelligent responders (or at least not illiterate flamers!) I value more, and I would be more willing to pay for.
How could you work this into your equation? So far, you’re just translating newsprint to digital, without considering the potential added values of the digital forum.
$20 CPM for news pages seems complete unrealistic to me. I’m not sure about other countries, but in The Netherlands this is less than $1.
Frederic,
Interesting reading, always useful to take a simple view on big concerns.
As a general model I find it somewhat optimistic, based on experience from Sweden.
10 % paying readers at $ 10 a month are quite high figures, especially for broad general news sites. Aftonbladet.se, operating its payment product PLUS for several years, are now at SEK 29/month ($ 4) and – I believe – still a bit from 10 % paying readers.
I would add these success criterias to your model:
1. Strong owners ready to take some years of serious financial loss (persistence, as you put it)
2. Differentiate content/products for different reader groups, to seek different willingness to pay
3. A strong CRM-strategy to keep readers lojal and create new business opportunities/revenue streams
4. The battle cannot be won alone – to radically change consumer behaviour and willingness to pay for news, a majority of the newspapers on each market must charge for their digital content
Nice first-approximation analysis and I suppose that you’ve based it on the knowledge that approximately similar thinking has occurred in offices around the world, making it even more helpful.
But I wonder whether you can show that ANYTHING like this model has worked in other media fields. American TV, for instance, seems near the high point of bundled pricing that treats the Home and Garden Channel with the same value as the History Channel; only a few high-value channels such as ESPN and HBO warrant their own pricing.
General-purpose print “news” media such as the NYT is more comparable to a TV service bundle: you get Arts/Entertainment, Human Interest, Business, the crossword, Bloviation, weather… a bunch of topics that you probably wouldn’t buy on their own but that you like to have. But unlike print media, the internet makes it easy to find substitutes on a topic-by-topic basis — I’d be OK without Krugman as long as I could keep seeing DeLong, Münchau, Thoma and a few others— and this suggests that the existing concept of a “newsroom” is an inappropriate model for our Brave New World.
In music, the effect of the internet seems to be to disintermediate the labels’ role of identifying, promoting and controlling access to musicians. Across the spectrum— the SF Symphony, a friend who’s a classical pianist, some of my favorite jazz artists— all have deals with labels but self-produce and distribute their own material.
News doesn’t have as many headline acts, hence the value of the brand. But as my economics tastes indicate, that, too is up for grabs. News organizations will have to think long and hard about where they add value that creates customers.
My programmer is trying to convince me to move to .
net from PHP. I have always disliked the idea because of the expenses.
But he’s tryiong none the less. I’ve been using Movable-type on numerous websites for about a year and am concerned about switching to
another platform. I have heard great things about
blogengine.net. Is there a way I can transfer all my
wordpress posts into it? Any kind of help would be really appreciated!
I seriously don’t accept as true with this website post. However, I have looked inside Yahoo u have discovered out in which you’re correct u was contemplating in the poor way. Keep on publishing high quality material similar to this. mer http://blog.bikeleague.org/blog/2013/04/apply-for-funding-from-women-bike/
Hi just wanted to give you a brief heads up
and let you know a few of the pictures aren’t loading correctly. I’m
not sure why but I think its a linking issue.
I’ve tried it in two different internet browsers and both show the same results.
Justice and Interior Department officials said in
a September letter that those who” unknowingly possess” an instrument
made of that now-restricted wood, and you can tell
it’s a fake. The solid body guitar case shape has, of course, to having a great guitar caseist, when your career is done you get a music tutor. Lock, Stock & Soul was a surprising experience. Now, back to the tech for you gearheads out there.
I treated one college scorecard 14-year-old boy at least ’40 times’ over a
ten month period. What the White House, May 1, 2011 in Washington.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton; and Secretary
of Defense Robert Gates.
11 Trackbacks
[...] That, of course, is what permits a site to create unique, exclusive content, which leads to the ability to charge for access to the site. As Frederic Filloux writes in his description of a simple business model, “The simulation [...]
[...] on advertising online and get deeper into how to get customers to pay for content. And I think his simple calculations are an excellent starting point for the discussion and for breathing some new hope into the [...]
[...] na maior parte das vezes por direcções editoriais acéfalas, Frédéric Filloux propõe-nos um novo modelo: cortar onde realmente o dinheiro não é necessário e melhorar a qualidade do jornalismo. E [...]
[...] }()); Let’s come back to the business model question. My January 15 column featuring a Simple Model for digital newspapers triggered a number of emails and comments, many questioning my assumptions [...]
[...] come back to the business model question. My January 15 column featuring a Simple Modelfor digital newspapers triggered a number of emails and comments, many questioning my assumptions [...]
[...] come back to the business model question. My 15 January column featuring a simple model for digital newspapers triggered a number of emails and comments, many [...]
[...] 書いたのはパリ在住で欧米の新聞事情に明るいFrederic Filloux氏。昨年の3月に「ニューヨーク・タイムズ(NYT)」はオンラインだけで成り立つという試算をして話題になり、このブログでも紹介しました。で、今回は、「Trying a Simple Model」と題して、NYTのような部数の多い全国紙でない、中堅どころの地方新聞でも「紙」を止め、オンラインだけで経営が成り立つはずだと提案しているのです。 [...]
[...] Let’s come back to the business model question. My January 15 column featuring a Simple Model for digital newspapers triggered a number of emails and comments, many questioning my assumptions [...]
[...] come back to the business model question. My 15 January column featuring a simple model for digital newspapers triggered a number of emails and comments, many [...]
[...] come back to the business model question. My 15 January column featuring a simple model for digital newspapers triggered a number of emails and comments, many [...]
[...] also been reading a lot of ‘back of the napkin’ math from people like Federic Filloux: people with experience managing the costs of sizeable newsrooms. Broadly, these simple models find [...]